• 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!

Is relocating illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities/states a good idea?

Is relocating illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities/states a good idea?

  • Total voters
    89
Nickyjo said:
Because it was an absurd illegal vindictive scheme. Right up there with Trump's hateful Disneyland comment, tho to be fair it wasn't his idea. And it wasn't Democrats that choked on this. Even Republicans couldn't stomach it.
Click to expand...

Correction: Trump seems to be warming to the idea. This is could be a "Make my Day" thing for the cities. Just try it, Donald. I can see reporters on the the buses, interviewing mothers who saw their sons killed and themselves threatened, the liberal groups in cites organizing to cope with the idiot's actions, the neo-Nazis showing their support for the president, the lawsuits against ICE... You know, just another chaos at airports disaster or kids in cages disgrace brought to you by Dictator Don.
 
Time for the fake "bleeding heart" liberals to put up or shut up.

Send em all to liberal areas.
 
Thanks, watched Godfather III again last night.
 
joko104 said:
Yes, of course. Why would any Democrat oppose this?
Click to expand...

They wouldn't, they would embrace it. What better place is there for illegals that have to be released than sanctuary cities.
 
X Factor said:
Ultimately l agree with you. It’s fun and funny to think about but, in the end, it would validate sanctuary cities in a way and make it more difficult to enforce current immigration laws.
Click to expand...

While that may be true you have to consider that if we do put all the illegals in sanctuary cities then we can build walls around those cities instead of on the border where it seems to be more of a legal hassle. We can call the construction a "shovel ready project" and everyone will love it.
 
Trump wants a ready supply of cheap labour near his business establishments.
 
Moon said:
No, because they will still be consuming resources that would be better allocated to citizens and legal residents.
Click to expand...

Then I would suggest they give up their status as a sanctuary city if they don't want the illegals. However them being a sanctuary city they hang out the sign "Your Safe With Us" And the illegals come a running. They provide housing, jobs, meals, health care, and anything they want. All expenses paid. Perfect place to send illegals, they will be taking care of.

What really needs to happen is for the government to fix the stupid immigration laws that have led to this no-win situation.
Click to expand...

Never going to happen, the Dems hate Trump over country. They will never give him a victory.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Trump wants a ready supply of cheap labour near his business establishments.
Click to expand...

Not as much as the Democratic Party does because they want that everywhere in the USA.
 
Have you ever looked at a map of all the sanctuary cities? They are deep democratic strongholds. And it is their representation in Congress that are often open border supporters and find borders to be inhumane. They are the ones that refuse to address our broken immigration system when it comes to asylum that is causing this crisis at the border encouraging this massive influx of people from Central America. So since they feel so strongly about allowing illegals to pour in, let their cities, their constituents pick up the tab to educate all these children, care for their healthcare needs, and provide them all with shelter and food. Because the rest of the country that are not sanctuary cities, counties and states are tired of the burden being put on their school districts as well as other expenses. Most school districts are funded through property taxes and people are tired of their taxes constantly being raised to pay for all of this. So those who want it, let them pay for it.
 
americanwoman said:
I have no problem with illegal immigrants that are only looking for a better life and I do live on the same block as more than a few. I think for the most part illegal immigrants are good citizens who want to live a good life and are family oriented, just like many of us.

I am just uneasy of the idea of using those people, who are actual human beings, as political tools of revenge against another political opponent.
Click to expand...

Interesting that you are now writing one of the talking points of Trump.
 
joko104 said:
Explain how it is "illegal."
Click to expand...

Glad to see you concede absurd and vindictive. Immigration service is in charge of the care of migrants. Placing undue burdens on cities is probably actionable. The migrants have a right to apply for asylum. If transporting them to the cities is seen to prevent that, especially if seen as retaliation for a policy decision by the cities, there's another lawsuit. May be budgetary issues as well, I assume, as presumably the migrants would need transportation back to the border, or immigration judges scattered to the cities.

But we now have the president talking about using the military to detain the migrants in camps, also in possible violation of the law. That is, until we move on to deal with the next of the maniac's musings.

Ah, wasn't it all simpler when he just projected hate towards Muslims?
 
How about instead they be released on Liberty Island - and then go thru the same process immigrants used to go thru since that is what most Democrats said was great about the USA in the USA. That means immigration officers would do a summary medical exam and then decide whether the person can stay or not in general. If not, the person is held until deported. The decision of the immigration officer after about 3 or 4 minutes is final and can not be appealed. Oh, and the person has to be white.

What about that? Is that a great idea or what? That's when most Democrats say the USA had great immigration policies.
 
Nickyjo said:
Glad to see you concede absurd and vindictive. Immigration service is in charge of the care of migrants. Placing undue burdens on cities is probably actionable. The migrants have a right to apply for asylum. If transporting them to the cities is seen to prevent that, especially if seen as retaliation for a policy decision by the cities, there's another lawsuit. May be budgetary issues as well, I assume, as presumably the migrants would need transportation back to the border, or immigration judges scattered to the cities.

But we now have the president talking about using the military to detain the migrants in camps, also in possible violation of the law. That is, until we move on to deal with the next of the maniac's musings.

Ah, wasn't it all simpler when he just projected hate towards Muslims?
Click to expand...

Glad to see you think it is a fantastic and legal idea.

Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and hundreds of other Democrat officials could be called as witnesses for Trump to confirm that the more immigrants a city receives, the better and more prosperous the city becomes. Drop a million illegal migrants in San Francisco and it would therefore become the best and richest city in the country, if not the world - and tax income rolling in like crazy - according to the Democratic Party. Nancy Pelosi would be thanking them all for coming to her District.

So how would this "burden" the city? According to the Democratic Party it would make the city rich and vastly better.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Time for the fake "bleeding heart" liberals to put up or shut up.

Send em all to liberal areas.
Click to expand...

You can bet if he does it we will mobilize to do our best. We'll even quote scripture to support our actions, just to make the right wing crazy. Half of us, that is. The rest of us will be in court suing his ass. Go ahead, Donald, make our day. Chapter one: chaos at airports after your inaugural. Chapter two: kids in cages. Maybe the third time is a charm.

Jeb Bush was right. He's become a chaos president.
 
tres borrachos said:
11 percent, actually. Not very tiny.

USDA ERS - Ag and Food Sectors and the Economy
Click to expand...

Of course, to get that figure you have to consider all jobs at McDonalds, Taco Bell, Arby's and Golden Corral to be agricultural jobs. BTW, nice touch by tossing in food and beverage service jobs to boost about 3% of US agricultural (farming, forestry and fishing) jobs to over 10% of jobs. Perhaps you will next assert that truck drivers should be included since they deliver food and beverage products or at least purchase some of them.
 
Nickyjo said:
You can bet if he does it we will mobilize to do our best. We'll even quote scripture to support our actions, just to make the right wing crazy. Half of us, that is. The rest of us will be in court suing his ass. Go ahead, Donald, make our day. Chapter one: chaos at airports after your inaugural. Chapter two: kids in cages. Maybe the third time is a charm.

Jeb Bush was right. He's become a chaos president.
Click to expand...

What a crock!

You liberals want illegals mowing your grass, but not so much for neighbors.
 
americanwoman said:
True but illegal immigrants are majority in the farming industry.

These U.S. industries can't work without illegal immigrants - CBS News



screen-shot-2018-06-25-at-4-09-55-pm.png
Click to expand...

Yep, but being a (slight) majority in of US farming jobs (about 3% of total US employment) is still only about 1.5% of total US employment. The other 3.5% of US jobs that are filled by illegal immigrant labor are not farming jobs.
 
joko104 said:
Change "next few years" to "many years from now, if ever" and your statement is accurate.
Click to expand...

Having an asylum hearing date scheduled (delay is now about 700 days) is obviously not the same as showing up for, much less, prevailing during that hearing.
 
A place calling itself a "Sanctuary" seems like a PERFECT place to send the people they claim to be a "sanctuary" for.



But liberals like brown people about as much as ted kennedy liked windmills. NIMBY
 
Manc Skipper said:
Trump wants a ready supply of cheap labour near his business establishments.
Click to expand...

Hmm... is that why he had to veto a mandatory E-Verify bill? Perhaps, Trump is not alone in wanting that cheap labor which dare not complain about unsafe/unsanitary working conditions.
 
X Factor said:
Attaching poll.
Click to expand...

I voted that it is a great idea! It is a stellar idea! It is the most incredibly stupendous idea I have seen any Right Winger come up with yet!

Move all of the 12 to 20 million illegals to sanctuary cities, DO IT, DO IT NOW, TODAY!

Then come the 2020 Census that will go a long way to possibly shifting more House seats to Blue dominated areas.

Woo Hoo!
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Of course, to get that figure you have to consider all jobs at McDonalds, Taco Bell, Arby's and Golden Corral to be agricultural jobs. BTW, nice touch by tossing in food and beverage service jobs to boost about 3% of US agricultural (farming, forestry and fishing) jobs to over 10% of jobs. Perhaps you will next assert that truck drivers should be included since they deliver food and beverage products or at least purchase some of them.
Click to expand...

Nice touch? I assume you're saying that to the US government. That isn't my document. It's theirs. Why would I add in something about truck drivers to their document?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom