• 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!

Trump's own family benefits from birthright citizenship. Zero Conservatives think this is hypocrisy.

Zalatix said:
1. Xelor already did that, but you know this already. This is nothing but a pathetic attempt at denying reality.

2. See #1. Plus Trump's own family is made of anchor babies. Four of his five children were born to immigrant mothers.

3. You have no power to dismiss jack ****, boy. What I say stands true and uncontested by you... least of all you. Russian women are having anchor babies and their kids would be denied citizenship under Trump's proposal. Neither are remotely contestable. So yeah, I'm playing the race card, and I will never, ever back down, because I am right and you are dead wrong. Try me. See how far you get trying to dismiss me, LOL. I will outlast you. Brutally. To call me aggressive is to vastly understate just how forceful I will be about this.
Click to expand...

That isn’t what an anchor baby is. If one of the parents is an American citizen then the child is entitled to American citizenship regardless of what country they are born in. An anchor baby is a baby born to an illegal immigrant or to a visitor with a temporary visa on US soil in which neither parent is a US citizen.
 
Last edited:
Zalatix said:
You have the same relationship with the facts that Denise Richards has with Charlie Sheen. You literally drove the delusion scoreboard to infinity and rolled it back over like a Nintendo game. Talk about pathetic? LOL you couldn't argue your way through thin air. It's like I'm talking to a 2d cartoon character.

All you've got is "but the Democrats did it." You can't even take responsibility for anything.
Click to expand...
Nice....you blathered like 4 completely disjointed comments that TRIED their very best to be a pathetic attempt at a personal attack and didnt touch the arguments once.

Pathetic. Weak. Typical.

Buh bye.
 
americanwoman said:
BS, if this was truly something Trump really deeply had such a huge issue with, so much so that he wants to actually change the constitution, he would have put a stop to it happening right under his nose at his properties.

It's like a huge gun control advocating hard to change the 2A while looking the other way while a ton of guns are sold at his properties. But THAT would be different, eh?
Click to expand...

1. According to Trump, he won't be changing the Constitution.

2. Trump isn't responsible for legal activities in a property that he sells to another person. As a seller of property, he has no legal power to prevent that activity.

In any case, if he is able to end birthright citizenship...which he seems to be pretty serious about doing...that currently legal activity will then become illegal...thereby stopping it.
 
Mycroft said:
1. According to Trump, he won't be changing the Constitution.

2. Trump isn't responsible for legal activities in a property that he sells to another person. As a seller of property, he has no legal power to prevent that activity.

In any case, if he is able to end birthright citizenship...which he seems to be pretty serious about doing...that currently legal activity will then become illegal...thereby stopping it.
Click to expand...

He's not selling property, Russians are renting his condos in order to have babies so they can get dual citizenship so much so that the condos are actively marketed for that purpose and sell packages for expecting mothers including birthing options. Now for someone who is so serious about doing ending birthright citizens he does not seem to care that it happens at his own properties.
 
americanwoman said:
He's not selling property, Russians are renting his condos in order to have babies so they can get dual citizenship so much so that the condos are actively marketed for that purpose and sell packages for expecting mothers including birthing options. Now for someone who is so serious about doing ending birthright citizens he does not seem to care that it happens at his own properties.
Click to expand...

Again...is this illegal use of those properties? Should he discriminate against the "renters", as you say, by refusing to rent to them? Sounds like you think he should be inviting lawsuits.

And yet, you ignore the effects if he is successful in ending birthright citizenship...which is to effectively end the ability of those who are marketing the condos and services.

I really don't see what you have a problem with?
 
americanwoman said:
He's not selling property, Russians are renting his condos in order to have babies so they can get dual citizenship so much so that the condos are actively marketed for that purpose and sell packages for expecting mothers including birthing options. Now for someone who is so serious about doing ending birthright citizens he does not seem to care that it happens at his own properties.
Click to expand...
Oh come on now everyone (especially Mycroft LOL) knows that these Russian women are coming to have babies here just so they can drop them off and go back to Russia. What parent wouldn't do that... I mean in the universe of conservative "thinking"...
 
VanceMack said:
Nice....you blathered like 4 completely
Click to expand...
And here you come with your mindless, juvenile drivel. Wipe that drool from your chin. Neither of you have put forth a single argument, nor are you capable of doing so.

Get lost, troll.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
That isn’t what an anchor baby is. If one of the parents is an American citizen then the child is entitled to American citizenship regardless of what country they are born in. An anchor baby is a baby born to an illegal immigrant or to a visitor with a temporary visa on US soil in which neither parent is a US citizen.
Click to expand...
You honestly think these Russian women are having babies here just to go back to Russia? You're joking, right? The whole point is to stay here and raise their kids here. That's an ANCHOR BABY.

I'm already done with your intentional lies. Bye, felicia!
 
The 14th amendment was designed so that slaves would be recognized as American citizens. It was never intended as a way for foreigners to come here for the sole purpose of having children who would become citizens. The law as it stands serves only to encourage this practice and should be changed. However, an EO is not the way to do it.
 
veritas1 said:
The 14th amendment was designed so that slaves would be recognized as American citizens. It was never intended as a way for foreigners to come here for the sole purpose of having children who would become citizens.
Click to expand...
Literally the wording of the Constituion allows "foreigners to come here for the sole purpose of having children who would become citizens." Literally the wording framed to STOP foreigners from doing this, was floated, considered explicitly, and then DROPPED from the wording of the 14th Amendment.

So stop perpetuating these lies.
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

By ending birthright citizenship, I'd say Trump is saying something quite pointed to companies who use his properties to make money off of Russian families. In effect, he's telling them they are out of business.
Click to expand...

:lamo Like he's going to do this.

He's just trying to make his base wet themselves in joy before the voting. If you read the thread, it's working very well.

Donald Trump declares 'I love the poorly educated'

Just Trump blowing more smoke up the base's rear.
 
Last edited:
Zalatix said:
Oh come on now everyone (especially Mycroft LOL) knows that these Russian women are coming to have babies here just so they can drop them off and go back to Russia. What parent wouldn't do that... I mean in the universe of conservative "thinking"...
Click to expand...

I really don't care that they come here to have babies like that and I don't even care they specifically go to Trump tower to do so but I am not the one out there trying to amend the constitution so that can't happen. Donald Trump is and yet he looks the other way at that activity going on in his properties and in his own life.


If they would just take a quick look at the articles posted they would see Instagram is lit up with Russian mothers living it up in Miami and bragging about their anchor babies. Like I said I don't care, they are the ones that have to twist themselves up to somehow make it seem like Trump isn't a hypocrite for acting like birthright citizenship is such an important issue while turning a blind eye for it being marketed as an incentive to rent his condos.
 
Zalatix said:
You honestly think these Russian women are having babies here just to go back to Russia? You're joking, right? The whole point is to stay here and raise their kids here. That's an ANCHOR BABY.

I'm already done with your intentional lies. Bye, felicia!
Click to expand...

I said nothing of the sort. I was replying to your comment that Trump’s family is made of anchor babies. It isn’t and I was explaining why.
 
Zalatix said:
1. Xelor already did that, but you know this already. This is nothing but a pathetic attempt at denying reality.

2. See #1. Plus Trump's own family is made of anchor babies. Four of his five children were born to immigrant mothers.

3. You have no power to dismiss jack ****, boy. What I say stands true and uncontested by you... least of all you. Russian women are having anchor babies and their kids would be denied citizenship under Trump's proposal. Neither are remotely contestable. So yeah, I'm playing the race card, and I will never, ever back down, because I am right and you are dead wrong. Try me. See how far you get trying to dismiss me, LOL. I will outlast you. Brutally. To call me aggressive is to vastly understate just how forceful I will be about this.
Click to expand...

1) Except there is no evidence that Trump is "bringing" Russian women to have babies on US soil at his property. There is evidence that Trump properties (among other residential buildings) are rented from building condo owners and the real estate companies to (or through) SVM for their clients. There is no evidence that Trump directs or even benefits from these rentals.

2) The overwhelmingly common understanding of a typical "anchor baby" is a child born in the US to illegal alien mothers. An alterative broader understanding also include a child born to a short-term temporary "tourist" visitor to the US.

However, no commonly understood definition includes a child born in the US to a legal immigrants, or to those with permanent residency, or a naturalized US citizen.

Therefore, how many of Trumps children are anchor babies? None?

3) It is true that Russian women coming to the US for the purpose of having a baby with US citizenship should be considered an anchor baby, although it is impossible to know whether or not (as in any anchor baby case) the purpose is to obtain legal immigration rights for the mother at a later date.

And it is true that Trump's stance would prevent such citizenship (as it should).

And finally, it is true that this a possible instance of the Buffett rule for explaining his tax stand: as long as the current rules for making money are in effect, he will play by the rules and profit from it. However, that does not mean he can't advocate a new set of rules that he thinks is fairer, even if it would make him less money.
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

By ending birthright citizenship, I'd say Trump is saying something quite pointed to companies who use his properties to make money off of Russian families. In effect, he's telling them they are out of business.
Click to expand...

Bet the EO only includes poor people.
 
apdst said:
All the more reason for you to support putting an end to birthright citizenship.
Click to expand...

Yeah.

That way, anybody who challenges the donor class can have their citizenship revoked.
 
Zalatix said:
Literally the wording of the Constituion allows "foreigners to come here for the sole purpose of having children who would become citizens." Literally the wording framed to STOP foreigners from doing this, was floated, considered explicitly, and then DROPPED from the wording of the 14th Amendment.

So stop perpetuating these lies.
Click to expand...


Do you have a link to this information? I would like to see it.
 
Zalatix said:
Trump is bringing Russian women to have babies on US soil at his properties.

Zero Conservatives think this is wrong, because these immigrants are white and the whole purpose of Conservative immigration policy is to bring in white immigrants and bolster their GOP base.
Click to expand...

So you agree with Trump? Get rid of birthright citizenship.
 
Mycroft said:
1. Please provide evidence that Trump is bringing Russian women to have babies on US soil at his properties. For example, provide evidence that the Trump family is actively advertising to Russian women for this purpose.

2. How do you square Trump's determination to end birthright citizenship with your contention that he is taking an active part in bringing Russian women to the US for that purpose? Do you contend he is deliberately damaging his own family fortunes?

3. Your race card is dismissed. Fact is, these Russian women have no intention of staying in the US. The GOP base isn't bolstered...especially when you consider that the number of Russian women who are taking part number in the hundreds...not in the millions as is the case with illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...

The problem and distrust of Trump's prattling on about this issue is that he puts the focus on the poorer and the browner, much like he attacked border crossers (brown) and not visa-overstayers (not so brown), even tho both are illegals. Trump has used race consistently in his political history, from birtherism to babies. Pretty obvious.
 
Zalatix said:
Trump is bringing Russian women to have babies on US soil at his properties.

Zero Conservatives think this is wrong, because these immigrants are white and the whole purpose of Conservative immigration policy is to bring in white immigrants and bolster their GOP base.
Click to expand...

I think I'll nominate this post for most braindead of the month. "The whole purpose of conservative immigration proposals" vary, but none of them include bringing in whites to bolster their GOP base. You see, immigrants of any color tend to vote for the party that promises the most welfare-state entitlements, and sometimes keep those loyalties for generations. In fact the only social process know to make people more conservative is long-term assimilation and advancement to the middle class (see Kevin Phillips). As long as the immigration bucket is kept full, that can't happen.

Hence, there is no voting block reason to push for Russians, Bulgarians or any other eastern Slavic barbarian cultures. I'd happily ship them back, along with the majority of others of other nationalities.

Of course, there are some immigrants from some countries that might help Republicans - such as Cubans, South Vietnamese, Poles, Baltic State citizens, and Venezuelans. However this has nothing to do with race, it has to do with their national experience with "hyper-Democrats", aka socialist welfare-states. That alone makes them anti-communist and anti-democrat.
 
Zalatix said:
Trump is bringing Russian women to have babies on US soil at his properties.

Zero Conservatives think this is wrong, because these immigrants are white and the whole purpose of Conservative immigration policy is to bring in white immigrants and bolster their GOP base.
Click to expand...

TDs bull****. Trump is SEEKIGN TO END IT.


Der...umm...duh...


More asinine silliness from the logic-challenged left...
 
Zalatix said:
But Russians having anchor babies in America is different because

well

because

um

because MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN you damned socialists

or something
Click to expand...

Then Democrats should be praising him, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom