VakAttack

The idea that "not Trump's policies" is the same thing as "open borders" is just a false equivalency.

Seems wise.

Gonna be a long 9 months of the pointless back and forth of polls.

I'm an adult. And bad at video games, lol, which is why I used the excuse of being an adult. Three kids kills my free time, lol, I literally can not wait for Kansas City. I used to be good at video games!

Again, you're just fighting strawmen. My point is that they're killing the bill without having seen it, not that they have to agree to it sight unseen. However, I'm also pointing out that the reason they're vocally killing it is simply because Trump (and apparently they) are perfectly fine letting this get worse for actual American citizens to try to help Trump's electoral prospects. Where did they say what you're claiming?

Nope. You said he campaigned on open borders. He did not. You're just making things up. So there was a problem before? You agree with that?

***ducking** nailed it, there's been no issues at the border until just this year, as a matter of fact, everybody has really loved it nad hasn't been talking about it for years.

It's NOT the right answer. That's my point. There is a bipartisan coalition literally right now trying to do something, and the House, at the behest of Donald Trump, is killing it. The bill LITERALLY IS NOT EVEN AVAILABLE TO BE READ yet, and you're judging it based off what other people are claiming it will do.

So you're argument is that he ran on open borders, but didn't do it, and his lack of opening the borders is destroying the border security? Or that the article you're citing is lying, and he did open the borders, but also we should take their representations about his campaign at face value despite their lies?

Even if I take what you posted at face value, which I don't, the literal second sentence in that article contradicts nearly everything you're arguing.

I promise you can find information for yourself. https://www.bushcenter.org/catalyst/immigration/hollifield-immigration-reform https://www.sir.advancedleadership.harvard.edu/articles/immigration-reform-yes-its-complicated-but-we-can-change-it-if-we-dont-look-away https://www.elpasotimes.com/story/news/2023/10/16/heres-why-legal-immigration-is-so-difficult/71203821007/

Because the law in the area of immigration are incredibly complex, and often contradictory, due to administrations going back and forth. Part of this current bipartisan negotiation involves (according to the negotiators) streamlining the system. Great. And EOs in this area are extremely ineffective, as Trump found out. The law is too complex, contradictory, and ripe for multiple different challenges, which means nothing happens and the problem just sits there and worsens. Something passed by Congress and signed into law is MUCH more effective in general and especially in a circumstance like this.

Which would then be challenged dozens times and be enjoined from happening, which is why EOs shouldn't be used for extremely complicated issues and why Republicans have wanted the things being discussed to be done but, now that they're getting it, lots of them don't want it because they perceive it might help Biden politically or hurt Trump's election chances. Thank you for perfectly illustrating both your own ignorance and the point.

Just a fundamental lack of understanding of how our government is designed. If Biden could do it, so could Trump. Why didn't he? Because it's not as simple as you say it is.

No. Flattered, but no thanks. He did not, this is just a talking point you're regurgitating without anything to back it up. I did, for the first time in my entire life, vote for a Democrat for president in 2020. I can't remember every vote ever, but I'm pretty sure it was my second vote ever for a major office that was a Democrat. He did not. How do you know what I asked for? You're just arguing about things for the sake of arguing. Also, yes, there is clearly a problem on the border NOW. That doesn't mean there has always been a problem on the border. Captain Straw Man! Possibly, because I'm in Florida and all the Republicans here are insane. All in all, you're arguing like a 5 year old on this topic. It's akin to if, hypothetically, your house caught fire because your wife smoked and you refused to do anything about it because "it's her fault, and I told her not to smoke." As has been mentioned previously, this a problem that goes back decades and all previous administrations had failed to find a solution. Including under Trump, whose policies mostly curtailed LEGAL immigration and really didn't have much effect at all on ILLEGAL immigration. https://www.cato.org/blog/president-trump-reduced-legal-immigration-he-did-not-reduce-illegal-immigration https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/03/02/how-border-apprehensions-ice-arrests-and-deportations-have-changed-under-trump/ https://www.factcheck.org/2021/03/the-facts-on-the-increase-in-illegal-immigration/ https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-02-02/trump-didn-t-actually-accomplish-much-on-immigration?embedded-checkout=true This is just false. I know you struggle with basic civics understanding and, like, object permanence, but when legislation starts appearing or being discussed, it didn't just happen yesterday. It's typically the results of months or years of negotiating.

For anyone thinking about going, I can't recommend it enough. Great time, basically a wrestling festival.

Who's gonna be there?

It's also worth noting that there ARE Republicans trying to work on this issue. James Lankford is among the most conservative members of either house of Congress by voting record, and he's out here explaining how these changes to law and policy are needed, but because Donald Trump has said he wants it to fail to enhance his campaign, many people of that political persuasion are perfectly comfortable with it. Literally choosing party over country.

And, as usual, it falls apart upon the slightest pushback, with Trump's lawyer herself already backing off the allegations. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-lawyer-alina-habba-makes-backs-conflict-allegation-e-jean-carrol-rcna136424

Ahhh, yes, the rare 2 hour knee injury. He finished that match, yes? And the only match he was too hurt for was the David Carr rematch? What an unfortunate coincidence!

I know, I know, everybody remembers, the whole Cornell team got injured after they all wrestled two duals earlier that day.

Nah, he's right.

Ok....but that's an argument without a point.

Ifs and buts. WHY should the seeding have been different? Labs had one loss that season, to Starocci, the 1 seed. Foca had one loss, to the two seed. Foca's bes in-season win was, looking at it, Cade Devos? Labriola won the CKLV by beating Lewis, at the same event where Foca lost to him. Labriola had wins over Nelson Brands, multiple wins over Ethan Smith from Ohio State, and beat Cade Devos (Foca's best win) by a bigger margin of 4-0. There wasn't a realistic reason why Foca should have been seeded over Labriola or Lewis.

Gomez is a tremendous wrestler and lots of fun...but it feels like there's just always something that happens. Snake-bitten. I'd guess it happens again, I say we get Lovett over Henson in the finals.