President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
The Trump administration will now require people seeking green cards to leave the United States during the application process — a sweeping change that could upend the lives of hundreds of thousands of people seeking the right to legally and permanently live and work in the US.
This is to get rid of a loophole where people enter the US on temporary visas with no intent on staying but then apply for a green card. This lets them side step the consular processing that was originally intended. The original intent of applying for a green card was from abroad. The administration is not doing this to be mean, they are just trying to tighten things up. Hopefully people will think twice about circumventing the normal process in the future.
This is to get rid of a loophole where people enter the US on temporary visas with no intent on staying but then apply for a green card. This lets them side step the consular processing that was originally intended. The original intent of applying for a green card was from abroad. The administration is not doing this to be mean, they are just trying to tighten things up. Hopefu
Seems like a solution in search of a problem.
If they are already legally here with a temporary visa why can't they stay here waiting for a green card to be approved?
Sounds like Trump IS doing it to be mean.
This is to get rid of a loophole where people enter the US on temporary visas with no intent on staying but then apply for a green card. This lets them side step the consular processing that was originally intended. The original intent of applying for a green card was from abroad. The administration is not doing this to be mean, they are just trying to tighten things up. Hopefu
So, you're just not going to address the whole Elway thing at all? WEAK.
Seems like a solution in search of a problem.
If they are already legally here with a temporary visa why can't they stay here waiting for a green card to be approved?
Sounds like Trump IS doing it to be mean.
It’s really just trying to keep the green card process aligned with the original framework. Trump wants these people to go through their home country consulate rather than burdening our consulate. There are a lot of inefficient processes that have been ignored through the years. I see this as a good thing having a President willing to do something about it. The anti-Trump contingent in here is too quick to assume Trump is just trying to be a jerk.
Why do you say that? What I said is true.
Do you feel bad for the guy who defrauded people for millions?
I think they all should stay in prison.
Then don't say stuff that makes people think you're ok with it.
Why do you say that? What I said is true.
Do you feel bad for the guy who defrauded people for millions?
I think they all should stay in prison.
Are you going to tell us how you rediscovered your password? Are you retiring the Elway account?
Are you going to tell us how you rediscovered your password? Are you retiring the Elway account?
Mongi be like lmao these idiots thought Elway wasn't me.
4real
It's more important because it's successfully aimed at people who didn't realise they were doing harm
As for these rest. I disagree its those who support division and polarisation with the personal attacks on and ostracization of huge swathes of people who are a problem. That is nothing to do with PC language.
The outcome of 10 years of progressives playing morality police is the the very successful revival of nationalism and nationalist-adjacent conservatism.
And I mean... why not. If we're going to have morality police, morality laws and indignant outrage about improper behavior, we mights as well go for the original. Either will be just as hypocritical.
the problem is that people vote for them. Demanding policies and abilities is considered bad somehow. Nothing else will ever matter much if we keep voting for people we don't want.
I mean, those ARE the people you want. People who have no opinions, say as little as possible about real issues and never rock the boat.
Anybody else will fail next week's ideological purity test, and you will proceed to debate which qualities a future choice of leader should hold.
The outcome of 10 years of progressives playing morality police is the the very successful revival of nationalism and nationalist-adjacent conservatism.
And I mean... why not. If we're going to have morality police, morality laws and indignant outrage about improper behavior, we mights as well go for the original. Either will be just as hypocritical.
I disagree. It's been doing **** all about political problems while supporting polarisation that are the main factor within our control. That and capitalism as we know it being in it's death throws and a few other things outside our control.
I mean, those ARE the people you want. People who have no opinions, say as little as possible about real issues and never rock the boat.
Anybody else will fail next week's ideological purity test, and you will proceed to debate which qualities a future choice of leader should hold.
bollocks. I want people with serious policies based on good principles and reality.
Please try harder, Mr. Strawman.
I suppose it's "hate speech" in the same sense that when your doctor urges you to eat less fat and eat less sugar so you won't die prematurely is "hate speech."
Expressing a desire for someone to spend eternity in Hell would certainly be hateful.
If we presume that the advice is given in a professional manner and with sufficient acknowledgement that nutritional science is hardly perfect, then a doctor that offers you a opinion diet is simply a medical professional speaking from available evidence.
If he was arguing that legumes are the devil's food and that people who enjoy beans are destined to go to hell, then he is just being a busybody.
The outcome of 10 years of progressives playing morality police is the the very successful revival of nationalism and nationalist-adjacent conservatism.
I won't pretend to be an expert about the entire world, but in the U.S., morality policing certainly is not the exclusive province of progressives. Right-wing morality policing has been around for my entire life.
It's an odd turn in the conversation as I'm deep in the pc camp and minimally in the morality police camp.
I agree with T_D that the morality policing from some on the liberal/left is a divisive/polarizing disaster. it's just not much if anything to do with being PC.
I won't pretend to be an expert about the entire world, but in the U.S., morality policing certainly is not the exclusive province of progressives. Right-wing morality policing has been around for my entire life.
You will hear no argument from me about that. Conservative morality and norms making its way into law and government has shaped life, expression and art for a long while, and in my personal opinion that has very often been for the the worse.
What is peculiar is seeing progressivism taking the same route. What used to a movement that stood for freedom in arts and expression and pushing boundaries and exploring humanity without a filter has morphed into a mob-like tendency to demand that everything it finds objectionable is sanitized.
I don't know if the motivations are similar. On the conservative side it seems to be the longing for a past that never existed, and on the progressive side it seems to be fear of the future. However, as phenomena both seem to be rooted in distrust of others to the point where they feel compelled to govern expression.
It's an odd turn in the conversation as I'm deep in the pc camp and minimally in the morality police camp.
I agree with T_D that the morality policing from some on the liberal/left is a divisive/polarizing disaster. it's just not much if anything to do with being PC.
I use the term "movement" very purposefully. This is not really about about personal preference as much as it is about aggregates and net outcomes. Most of us can be part of this, even though we do not think of ourselves in this way. Perhaps in some instances a few individuals can be so instrumental in their influence that we could talk about them as singular cases.
It's an odd turn in the conversation as I'm deep in the pc camp and minimally in the morality police camp.
You are treating these things as entirely distinct. They overlap quite a bit imo, especially when it comes to language usage.
