• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gas lighting raised to an art form. What's wrong with this statement?

They aren't DACA eligible. Do I get a prize?
 
They aren't DACA eligible. Do I get a prize?

Close! And totally accurate in a normal universe. But your answer is much too complex. Think more obvious.
 
It seems Cardinal has learned a new phrase.
 
I really don’t think Trump knows what DACA is.
 
Customs and Border Service arrests on the southwestern border fell 24% in 2017 which corresponds with a significant drop in illegal aliens crossing the border.

More Mexicans are crossing the border — to leave the US.

Again, like Mr. Peanut, a totally true statement, but nowhere near obvious and simple enough.

There must be a voice in you that's telling you the answer, but it's so obvious and basic you're afraid you'll sound stupid if you say it out loud.
 
Well, any incoming now don't qualify for DACA protections.
 
Well, any incoming now don't qualify for DACA protections.

Yes, because DACA only applies to children who've been here since 2007. Still much to complex and intelligent, though.

Remember, gaslighting is the theme of this thread, and this tweet was used as the example to illustrate how effective it is even when we know perfectly well that the person utilizing it is a liar.

So think with the naivete of a child who isn't trying to impress anybody with their intelligence.
 
This morning, Trump tweeted this:

"These big flows of people are all trying to take advantage of DACA. They want in on the act!"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/980451798606602241

So what's wrong with this statement?

I'll go out on a limb here and guess that your point is: Trump campaigned as being anti-DACA/DAPA but is now for expanded DACA/DAPA so that he can trade it for congress funding the Great Wall of Trump that he also had promised would be paid for by Mexico.
 
I'll go out on a limb here and guess that your point is: Trump campaigned as being anti-DACA/DAPA but is now for it so that he can trade it for congress funding the Great Wall of Trump that he also had promised would be paid for by Mexico.

Holy ****, that is a million times more complex than my point.

What would a six year old answer?
 
Holy ****, that is a million times more complex than my point.

What would a six year old answer?

Sorry, I don't think like a six year old. I suppose that's up YOUR alley.
 
Yes, because DACA only applies to children who've been here since 2007. Still much to complex and intelligent, though.

Remember, gaslighting is the theme of this thread, and this tweet was used as the example to illustrate how effective it is even when we know perfectly well that the person utilizing it is a liar.

So think with the naivete of a child who isn't trying to impress anybody with their intelligence.

Seemingly having cornered that perspective, and none of the rest us being quite that naive, why not just tell? Have anything to do with it being April fools day, its really saying the exact opposite? :lamo:lamo:lamo
 
Sorry, I don't think like a six year old. I suppose that's up YOUR alley.

And yet a six year old's straightforward approach and honesty is needed to unravel this little mystery. Thinking with any level of complexity or nuance actually makes it more difficult, not less. Also, your insults haven't brought you any closer to the answer.
 
And yet a six year old's straightforward approach and honesty is needed to unravel this little mystery. Thinking with any level of complexity or nuance actually makes it more difficult, not less. Also, your insults haven't brought you any closer to the answer.

shrug...

Not trying to get closer to YOUR answer. I'll leave the six year old answer to you.
 
I don't know the inticasies of the laws there, but I know Spanky and you keep saying it's simple. Guess, but is that anyone coming now aren't "dreamers" they are just 'un documented'?

If you're thinking "intricacies," then you're trying way too hard. Your answer is absolutely accurate, but needs to be reduced down even further.

Trump's tweet contains a premise, and it's one that's so blindingly, obviously wrong, that the person reading it adopts that premise without even being aware of it. The premise is too wrong, and if it's the President who is making that premise and your rebuttal is too simple, you may doubt your own grasp on reality and assume it's you who missed something along the way.

One person in this thread did get it, though.
 
Last edited:
I have got a different take on this. Regardless of your political views and what you do or don't think of DACA...did the American people deserve this today? There are a ton of people that are Americans that care about DACA one way or the other. Did they not deserve to just one day, one Easter Sunday to not be pulled and pushed and tugged and bent by this lunatic in the WH? But NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

The reporting is that he had the vehicle he was in pull over so he could make that tweet. Happy Easter!

I am happy to report that IMO, come Nov this year and likely come Nov 2020, the American people are just going to say, "You win Donald. We are now finally exhausted. Now get your miserable rear end out of here and out of our lives!"

As to the issue itself, kicking those 700,000 DACA recipients out would be about the most anti-business move he could make, worse than tariffs by a country mile.

And good luck blaming the dems if you do start deporting them Donald. You have zero cred on this issue. Come to think of it, you have zero cred on just about any issue I can think of.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom