Mexican Invasion
See other Mexican Invasion Articles
Title: Game Change: Trump Consults with Sen Jeff Sessions on Immigration Strategy
Source:
Breitbart
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern ... sions-on-immigration-strategy/
Published: Aug 15, 2015
Author: Julia Hahn
Post Date: 2015-08-15 08:45:02 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 3362
Comments: 33
In what may be the most important development in the 2016 Presidential race to date, Donald Trump has announced, and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)’ office has confirmed, that the GOP front-runner is consulting with the Alabama Senator in crafting his immigration plan for the future of America. The real estate mogul’s announcement will send shock waves through Washington D.C. and all across primary states. Trump, whose campaign has focused primarily on issues of immigration and trade, has seen a meteoric rise since entering the race, with throngs of supporters across the country rocketing him to the top of every single poll, despite an extraordinary effort of establishment Republicans to take him down. Republican pundits have lobbed every imaginable accusation at Trump. Yet these same pundits, while seemingly furious at the man, have demonstrated no similar concern, angst, or passion about the dissolution of our southern border, the rampant exploitation of guest-worker programs, the collapse of middle class wages, and the growing illegal immigrant crime wave. Sen. Sessions, Chairman of the Senate’s Immigration Subcommittee, is widely regarded as the gold standard on immigration. Sessions has also become the intellectual thought leader in the Republican Party on appealing to the blue collar voters who have been abandoned by their political leaders. For instance, Sen. Sessions recently led the fight against Obamatrade, issuing one in-depth report after another about its effects on working families. The Washington Post reports: Donald Trump will unveil a series of position papers in early September, he said in an interview Friday, beginning with a plan to address immigration policy that was crafted with the counsel of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), a favorite of conservative activists and an outspoken border hawk… Sen. Sessions’ spokesman Stephen Miller told The Post: Senator Sessions enjoyed the opportunity to speak with Mr. Trump. The senator believes the defining issues in 2016 will be how to earn the trust of struggling workers, and how to develop trade and immigration policies that serve their interests. Trump told The Post that he holds the Alabama Senator in extremely high regard: “I like him… Tough guy. I like that. We have a similar thought process.” Indeed, Sessions is well-known for his no-nonsense cross examinations, including his subtle yet devastating unraveling of Lorreta Lynch and his hard-hitting exchanges in the Budget Committee before Republicans gave the gavel to leadership-ally Sen. Mike Enzi. Sessions’ esteemed reputation on immigration is indeed well-earned. Sessions led the fight to stop the immigration expansion effort of 2006 and 2007, before leading the charge to derail the 2013 Gang of Eight bill. Following the 2007 implosion of McCain-Kennedy, the donor class has spent unprecedented sums of money and organizational resources to try to pass legislation that would combine amnesty with a massive increase to record yearly immigration levels. According to a 2013 report from the Sunlight foundation, between 2007 and 2012, lobbying groups spent more than $1.5 billion to pass immigration expansions. The centerpiece of the establishment donor class’s immigration push was the selection of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) as the bill’s chief salesman. In the early days of the Gang of Eight push, when many conservatives were afraid to speak out against Rubio, Sen. Sessions began what started as a lonely one-man fight against the bill– issuing fact-checks on every false statement issued by Rubio’s office [See just few examples here, here, and here]. As The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank wrote of Sessions’ solitary charge while the bill was being marked up in committee: The wiry Southerner is on a one-man crusade to undo the compromise drafted by the Gang of Eight (four of whom, two Democrats and two Republicans, are colleagues on the committee). He has dominated the four days of hearings to “mark up” the bill. As of midday Monday, he had spoken for two hours and 56 minutes — far longer than the second-place [Chairman] Grassley (2:24) and third-place Chuck Schumer of New York (1:38). As the Los Angeles Times reported Sen. Sessions– in his outspoken crusade to stop the Gang of Eight bill– collected more hours speaking on the Senate floor than any other Senator in 2013, including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY): Though some of his Republican colleagues made marathon stands on the Senate floor in 2013, it is Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) who has the distinction of logging the most speaking time, according to estimates from a C-SPAN Video Archives analysis. Sessions spoke for more than 33 hours this year,the congressional cable network reports. Ultimately, Sen. Sessions succeeded in uniting the conservative movement against the Gang of Eight bill, sending the bill crashing in flames in the House and subsequently stopping Eric Cantor’s plan to pass the same bill in chunks–culminating in the historic loss of the former-House Majority leader at the hands of Congressman Dave Brat (R-VA). If Trump outlines immigration policy specifics along the lines of what Sessions has articulated, polling data suggests that it will not only position Trump to perform well in the Republican primary, but also in the general election. As Breitbart News reported in 2014, prior to the midterm elections, the National Republican Senate Committee (NRSC) polled several of Sessions’ immigration messaging items and had the Senator hold a conference call for candidates prior to the historic midterm gain. The poll conducted by the NRSC produced remarkable findings: Paragon Insights, a little-known firm that is on the NRSC’s payroll, asked respondents whether they would support a GOP Senate candidate who said ‘Immigration policy needs to serve the interests of the nation as a whole, not a few billionaire CEOs and immigration activists lobbying for open borders.’ Likely voters approved by a 71-16 margin. Women supported the sentiment 73-14, higher than men… Obama’s opponents supported it 82-12, but even Obama supporters gave it 61-21 nod. Liberals supported it 59-21. Most surprising, self-identified Hispanics supported it 66-21. Another question measured support for the idea that ‘The first goal of immigration policy needs to be getting unemployed Americans back to work – not importing more low-wage workers to replace them.’ Like the other question, the response was enthusiastic. Likely voters: 70-18 in favor. Men: 67-20. Women: 73-17. Liberals: 54-29. Independents: 70-15. Whites: 72-16. Hispanics: 59-32. The most important point, underscored by the polling data but often lost in media labels, is that Sessions’ immigration philosophy and strategy is fundamentally grounded in principles that poll well with moderates, liberals, minorities, and the American electorate at large. The consultant class has never understood the immigration issue: for them, immigration messaging is primarily based in vague references to border enforcement in the primary, followed by general election support for large-scale immigration that turns off blue collar voters and women voters the GOP needs to win. The hallmark of the Alabama Senator and former-prosecutor’s approach to immigration strategy has been his evidentiary, prosecutorial style. Sessions has developed a reputation for putting out lengthy policy proposals with in-depth references to academic research. For instance, at the beginning of the year, Sessions released an immigration handbook, a content-rich 25- page document for incoming freshmen Congressmen and women. The handbook provided a roadmap documenting the collapse of interior enforcement, the rampant abuses of the H-1B visa by large corporations, and the record issuances of green cards that is pulling down wages. To stitch together the case that unprecedented flows of immigration are devastating wages and putting American middle class dreams out of reach, Sessions cites analysis from Harvard Professor George Borjas, Georgetown professor Eric Gould, Howard University’s Ron Hira, UC Davis’s Norm Matloff, as well as raw data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau. Following Microsoft’s announcement that it was firing 18,000 workers, Sen. Sessions took to the Senate floor to expose Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and Sheldon Adelson for continuing to push for more H-1Bs and cheap labor while laying off American workers. As far as I am concerned, so far as I can see, those three billionaires have three votes. An individual who works stocking the shelves at the grocery store, the barber, the doctor, the lawyer, the cleaners, the operator, and the person who picks up our garbage are every bit as valuable as they are. I know who I represent. I represent the citizens of the United States of America, and I am trying to do what is in their best interest. And… what may be good for Mr. Adelson and Mr. Microsoft and Mr. Buffett is not always in accord with what is good for the American people. I know that… [and] I am going to push back. In his now-famous immigration speech on the Senate floor last year–known as his Masters of the Universe speech, in which he directly took on billionaire and immigration expansionist Mark Zuckerberg, Sessions declared: One of the groups that have joined the chorus of special interests demanding executive action on immigration is FWD.us, run by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg… Well, the “masters of the universe” are very fond of open borders as long as these open borders don’t extend to their gated compounds and fenced-off estates… The job of elected officials is to answer to the people who sent them to Washington — not to scorn them, not to demean them, not to mock them, and not to sell their jobs and dreams to the highest bidder. In response to this story, Sen. Sessions’ spokesperson told Breitbart News, “The key to winning in 2016 is proving to the working men and women of the country that you will serve their needs– not the needs of the political class– first and always.” Donald Trump has long been a conservative favorite for his tough stance on immigration and trade and his message that we need to bring jobs back to the United States of America and put the needs of the American people first. A continued emphasis on this message and consultation with Sen. Sessions will send a resounding signal to millions of blue collar American voters across the country that a vote for Trump may be their best chance at regaining control over their collapsing economic futures. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: cranky (#0)
Trump is a multibillionaire. He gives to politicians on all sides, and therefore he has access to politicians on all sides, and has had such access during all of the time that he has been building up to his campaign. The notion that Trump is some neophyte who knows nothing about anything is foolish. Real estate development on a massive scale anywhere requires heavy, continuous contact with, and work with, politicians and government as well as contractors, unions, caterers - everything and everyone. Donald Trump is better connected than Jeb Bush. Why? Because Bush TAKES money from people, and COMPETES for resources with other politicians, but Trump GIVES money to politicians, and IS the resource politicians seek. Trump is a very formidable foe who probably can call every Senator in Washington and be put through immediately. This has been true for years. He's going to win the nomination, and he's going to win the election.
Marked down for posterity. I'm sure you're wrong here.
When it comes to the general, and you have a choice between Trump/Rubio, or Biden/Warren, you will go vote for Trump, because you will consider the alternative, and you will hold you news and vote for the guy who will "avoid the worst".
It'll be Hillary vs JEB! with Hillary the winner. Mark that down. On second thought, it may be JEB!
On second thought, it may be JEB! Hillary will be out before the end of the year, replaced by Biden. Jeb will never catch up with Trump. It will be Biden v. Trump, and Trump will win. But if the Republicans play procedural tricks to block Trump, then it will be President Biden. None of the other Republicans can defeat the Democrats.
You were talking about VP candidates. Sessions would be an awesome VP. Go Donald.
You're being quite dumb in thinking Trump would choose the traitor pussy Rubio. Especially since you just read he is consulting with Sessions.
Rubio is Bush't mini me. Tell us Vic one position of Rubios that is different then Bushes.
Positionally, he is a young Latino man - the only one the Republicans have of prominence - and Trump will be getting attacked for being "racist" because of his tough immigration stance. Rubio shores him up on that flank. Positionally, Rubio is the "Young Turk" (Young Spic?) of the Republican Establishment, and the Establishment will be losing big with Trump as nominee, so they NEED somebody in the mix to reflect THEIR interests. Rubio is the only one Trump will ACCEPT. Those are the positions that will count: battlefield positions, not political positions. Rubio will be running for Veep. The VP has no positions, or mind. He is the second banana to the President. The President sets all of the policies. For his loyalty, the Veep can look forward to a good shot at being President, if the President is popular and successful. On the other side, Biden will be exhibit A of the power of the Veep's office to take over the top position. Rubio will be about 50 when it's his turn, after 8 years of Trump. It's his clearest shot at the office, it's the best the GOPe can hope for, and he's Trump's best bet. All of that is positional. Veeps are not elected because of their former policy positions. They are elected because of who is at the top of the ticket. Trump/Rubio will be facing Biden/Warren. Biden is old. You would rather have President Trump than President Warren, and a President Warren is a distinct possibility, due to natural causes. Trump won't die in office, so Rubio will actually have to WIN election. Trump is a dealmaker. Rubio gets him something he wants, it placates the GOPe, and most conservatives who will be unhappy with the pick will still vote for Trump, to avoid the worst. That's why it will be Trump/Rubio. Rubio''s political positions are irrelevant. His tactical position on the battlefield is what will count.
Especially since you just read he is consulting with Sessions. Rubio's positions on immigration don't matter. Trump will be the head of the ticket and setting all of the policy. Rubio will abandon his positions to publicly support Trump, when it comes to the match up.
Sessions is a good man. But he belongs in the Senate.
So I was right you can't tell us one difference. Go look back and what Trump said about your pussy Rubio. You are thinking that Trump thinks like an establishment candidate. I'm done wasting my time on your Trump/Rubio wet dream. establishment candidate. I'm done wasting my time on your Trump/Rubio wet dream.
Look how "establishment candidate" was added to my post. I wonder if windows 10 has bugs or is somewhat incompatible with this software. It also adds a couple of letters sometimes before words. Weird.
If you use the "Preview" button and proof your post/reply you won't be looking like such a retard. Edit: p.s. There is also that "Edit" feature to make corrections to your reply, 'tard.
No, I told you a lot of differences: battlefield positional differences, strategic differences. What I said was that the policy opinions of the Vice President don't matter, especially on issues that the President focuses on and has already worked out long before the Veep ever gets the chance to step up. Trump will have a good immigration policy, he'll put it in place early, and by the time Rubio can run for President himself, Trumps policy will have changed the landscape, been largely successful. Rubio will not go in and undo what works. Likewise, in 8 years, the health care disaster will have been addressed by Trump with a national market for insurance, and that will work pretty well. Trump will probably get to nominate two or three justices to the Supreme Court I'm his 8 years. And there - and only there - will his pro-life sincerity being tested. If he nominates three pro-life justices, there will be 6 certain pro-lifers on the court, and perhaps Alito already is one, and Roberts, faced with the question and with a majority on the pro-life side, may remember he's a Catholic and that Roe is a bad decision juridically, and vote to kill it. That won't stop abortion, but it will start to roll it back. We know we will never get that with the GOP Establishment. We know that Huckabee and Santorum are never going to be the nominees. So I have to take a chance on Trump's sincerity in his change to pro-life. Jeb killed Terri Schiavo, proving that when it comes down to it, he's not going to be pro-life. Rubio didn't do anything like that. I don't know where Rubio stands on pro-life or what he's done. He's a young impressionable Republican and will probably be sucked into the GOPe vortex if he matures there. Under Trump, Rubio will be shaped into something better. Trump is a game changer for everything. Go Trump.
So Trump gets away with a long history of being a big flaming lib because...facts don't matter, policy doesn't matter, and all conventional politics just evaporate in the face of his awesomeness? Man, are you in for a letdown.
Are you kidding? How can you be so ignorant? Alito is rock solid, comparable to Thomas and Scalia. Roberts is the weak sister.
Man, are you in for a letdown. What does being "A big flaming L:in" mean? He supported single payer health insurance. So do I. He no longer does, but now he's advocating a national market. I don't like that as much as single payer, but it probably will work. Certainly it's better than status quo or Obamacare. Trump has been pro-life, by his words, for many years now, at least two Presidential cycles. That's all we have to go on for any of them…except that with the GOP we also have their record of naming pro- choice judges, and with Jeb we've got the death of Terri Schiavo. Trump is more believable to me. What other policies? Trump opposed the Iraq War. Now even Jeb and Rumsfeld oppose the Iraq War. I was with the French: we didn't declare war - this will end badly. And it did. So, Trump was right. He favors a strong military, like all the rest. I do not. I think that we're doing to ourselves what the USSR did to itself. I favor a strong nuclear deterrent, and minimal conventional forces, and I want those out of the rest of the world and on the Mexican Border. Trump and I don't agree on armed forces. But then, nobody agrees with me on that but the angels. Where else is Trump a "big flaming lib"? "Morals oissues"? I do not care what people do as long as they don't do it in the street and disturb the horses. I tolerate conservatives who are obsessed with these things because I want to save the babies, but I personally don't care, and I'm more comfortable with a leader who doesn't care either. So Trump is better on that business than the rest of the field. Where else? I can't think of anything else. I'm eager to hear what Trump has to say in his policy prescriptions. Already I agree with him on health insurance, and I agree with him on the Border, and I agree with him on starting over with Iran on this nuclear business, and starting with our four people held over there. I agree with him that issues are solved by negotiations, not point papers. On social issues, I care that he will appoint pro-life justices. The rest, don't care, never did.
Alito is rock solid, comparable to Thomas and Scalia. Alito has not ruled on an abortion case since becoming a Supreme Court justice. The sole criteria by which I judge Supreme Court justices is how they rule - outcome. If they rule wrong,. what they did in the past and who they say they are is irrelevant. Alito is not "rock solid" on abortion. He's a Republican. They are always to be doubted on the subject until they irrevocably commit by a written decision. He hasn't done that yet. I'm hopeful. Roberts has twice upheld Obamacare with its abortion provisions. Of course he didn't face abortion directly. You need four justices to grant cert on an abortion case. Right now there are two, or maybe three - IF Alito is really solid. If Trump appoints a pro-lifer, there will be four, and cert will be branded, and Roberts will be flushed out. Also, in this era of politics of personal destruction, investigations and impeachments, Supreme Court justices have been left alone too much. They're men and women with the same faults as all others, and they need the same sort of scorching scrutiny, not just when they're trying to get on the court, but especially afterwards. The Supreme Court is political. We should stop pretending that it isn;t, and go after judges for their corruption and conflicts of interest. But it needn't come to that if Trump gets in and packs the court with pro-lifers.
You mean, you and Trump both support the Republican plan.
A New York liberal who declared himself pro-choice and even pro-partial birth abortion? You're delusional.
It ain't the Republican plan, hoss. I sat and watched the Republicans during the Obamacare debate, and since. The only Republican plan on healthcare is what Romney did in Massachussetts, and that's Obamacare. The Republicans didn't offer a grand counter plan. When Obama brought forth Obamacare, the Republican behavior was simply "NO!" NO! Block it all. Nothing! Nowhere! The Republicans didn't advance a plan. A Republican here or there, like Trump, may have had a thought, but that isn't what the Republicans DID. The Republican fruit, what they actually DID, was disavow their own Republican's health plan (Romneycare), and then propose…NOTHING. Status quo. They said: first we have to kill Obamacare, then maybe we'll come up with something. We must have universal health insurance. That is a given. Republicans did not, and still do not, accept that given. Therefore, they were defeated. And will continue to be defeated. Trump has publicly spoken about how single payer is good, but a common market in health insurance will solve the problem. It's him. The Republicans did not contribute that to the public discourse, other than through him. The Republican plan is no universal healthcare. And that's because Republicans are bone stupid.
You're delusional. He changed his mind. I was pro-choice, didn't care, when I believed that God was the forces of nature. I am pro-life because God grabbed me by the face so I know he's actually a HE, not an IT. With clear knowledge of God, the clear knowledge of the sanctity of life was obvious, which is why I simultaneously became pro-life, anti-death penalty, anti-war, anti-imperialism, and against the heavy police state and very abstemious about eating meat. They are all different facets of the same issue. I changed my mind because of the intervention of God. Trump says he changed his mind about abortion. I have read what he has said about his change of heart on the matter. He changed his mind many years ago, and what he has said ever since coincides with that change of mind and reflects a change of heart. I believe him. If he screws me on this and appoints pro-aborts to the Supreme Court, then I will have been duped by yet another Republican. They've duped me so many times before that I should not be surprised if ANYBDOY who runs as a Republican proves to be a liar. But I believe Donald Trump. In part, I believe him because so many Republicans are screaming that they hate him and he's not a Republican. When the liars and fools hate you, and you seem to be reasonable, it must be because you ARE reasonable, and the liars and fools are once again doing what they do best: lying and being foolish. I think Trump is sincere. I know that the Republicans who have a chance at the nomination aren't.
I don't think he will ever get the backing of the RNC or the big donors. And I don't think he can win the primary without either, let alone neither. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
That's because you haven't paid attention. I'm trying to think of a Republican running for office since 2008 who is not in favor of nationalizing competition in healthcare plans. I can't think of a single one. They all campaign on it.
And I don't think he can win the primary without either, let alone neither. You will be pleasantly surprised as things play out. Trump will get the backing of both when it's clear he is the strongest horse.
Given the software has been in place for many years without this issue, I would say the very likely cause of this is Windows 10.
I doubt that very much. Controlling a POTUS is secondary to advancing their agenda, as far as the NWO crowd is concerned. They want the illegal invaders in America more than they need a president. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
They want illegal invaders. You don't. And Trump just helicoptered into the heart of the Iowa State Fair and declared that his policy is to deport them all. Trump is going directly to the people and offering policies that make HIM a plebiscite on immigration. He's going to win, and nobody is going to be able to resist him on immigration, because that is HOW he is going to win.
The odds are against it. BTW, Rubio is largely considered to be Zuckerberg's personal Senator and Zuckerberg wants open borders unlimited migration/immigration (except the around the land he owns). Rubio isn't the kind to bite he hand that feeds him. He's hitched his wagon to Zuckerberg and he'll do what Zuckerberg tells him to do. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Trump's a billionaire too, and Trump will be in the White House - a much stronger horse than Zuckerberg. Trump can give Rubio a clear path to the Presidency. Given the chance, under those circumstances Rubio will trade up from Zuckerberg to Trump.
I'm not sure how. According to this guy, running as a sitting VP isn't really much of an advantage. Besides, Trump isn't a career party hack and that's exactly what Rubio aspires to be. There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Trump is a leader, and he is successful. He brings his people along and trains them pretty well. As his Veep, Rubio will be at the elbow of a very successful and very popular President. Trump, for his part, will groom Rubio. Rubio will be his "apprentice", and bask in some of the glow of Trump's triumphs. Trump is not a clannish guy. He works with a lot of different people and he's pretty open. With The Donald, what you see is really what you get, but you have to watch him to really SEE what you're seeing, because he is master negotiator. Rubio is young, and he's still impressionable. He is an idealist who wants to do great things. Trump is interesting because at 69 he's still an idealist himself. He's a billion and a celebrity. Rubio will be in thrall to Donald Trump, and will be very happy to wrap himself in the Trump mantle. And because Trump will be a very successful two-term President, Rubio will be like Poppy Bush was in 1988: the heir apparently. People wanted another term of Reagan, and they'll want another term of Trump. Rubio will offer them that, and they'll leap to him. He won't be the Veep coming out of a normal presidency. He'll be an exceptional Veep coming out of the most exceptional Presidency of the last century, one of the most exceptional ever. He'll be elected in a landslide and, if he's not a self-willed old fool like H.W. Bush was, Rubio will actually continue along Trump's path and continue the policies that the people will so like about Trump. H.W. Bush lost because he gained power and changed everything. That's why it'll be different for Rubio. Once Rubio adjusts to the Trump reality, he'll be a good guy.
#2. To: Vicomte13, Fred Mertz (#1)
He's [Trump] going to win the nomination, and he's going to win the election.
#3. To: Fred Mertz (#2)
Marked down for posterity. I'm sure you're wrong here.
#4. To: Vicomte13 (#3)
#5. To: Fred Mertz (#4)
It'll be Hillary vs JEB! with Hillary the winner. Mark that down.
#6. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
#7. To: Vicomte13 (#3)
Trump/Rubio
#8. To: All, vicmonte13 (#7)
The centerpiece of the establishment donor class’s immigration push was the selection of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
#9. To: A K A Stone (#8)
Tell us Vic one position of Rubios that is different then Bushes.
#10. To: A K A Stone (#7)
You're being quite dumb in thinking Trump would choose the traitor pussy Rubio.
#11. To: A K A Stone (#6)
Sessions would be an awesome VP.
#12. To: Vicomte13 (#9)
#13. To: pinguinite (#12)
establishment candidate.
#14. To: A K A Stone (#13)
(Edited)
#15. To: A K A Stone (#12)
So I was right you can't tell us one difference.
#16. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
Trump is a multibillionaire. He gives to politicians on all sides, and therefore he has access to politicians on all sides, and has had such access during all of the time that he has been building up to his campaign. The notion that Trump is some neophyte who knows nothing about anything is foolish.
#17. To: Vicomte13 (#15)
and perhaps Alito already is one
#18. To: TooConservative (#16)
So Trump gets away with a long history of being a big flaming lib because...facts don't matter, policy doesn't matter, and all conventional politics just evaporate in the face of his awesomeness?
#19. To: TooConservative (#17)
Are you kidding? How can you be so ignorant?
#20. To: Vicomte13 (#18)
He no longer does, but now he's advocating a national market. I don't like that as much as single payer, but it probably will work. Certainly it's better than status quo or Obamacare.
#21. To: Vicomte13 (#19)
But it needn't come to that if Trump gets in and packs the court with pro-lifers.
#22. To: TooConservative (#20)
You mean, you and Trump both support the Republican plan.
#23. To: TooConservative (#21)
(Edited)
A New York liberal who declared himself pro-choice and even pro-partial birth abortion?
#24. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
He's going to win the nomination
#25. To: Vicomte13 (#22)
I sat and watched the Republicans during the Obamacare debate, and since.
#26. To: cranky (#24)
I don't think he will ever get the backing of the RNC or the big donors.
#27. To: A K A Stone (#13)
I wonder if windows 10 has bugs or is somewhat incompatible with this software.
#28. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
Trump will get the backing of both when it's clear he is the strongest horse.
#29. To: cranky (#28)
#30. To: Vicomte13 (#29)
He's going to win
#31. To: cranky (#30)
Rubio isn't the kind to bite he hand that feeds him. He's hitched his wagon to Zuckerberg and he'll do what Zuckerberg tells him to do.
#32. To: Vicomte13 (#31)
Trump can give Rubio a clear path to the Presidency.
#33. To: cranky (#32)
I'm not sure how.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]