Okay, what can we realistically expect from a Trump presidency?

[giblets]

People still care about something Jane Fonda did fifty years ago?

[Aeson]

no. you see what you've done here is that you've not understood what i've said, and instead of asking me what i mean, you've substituted your own interpretation and decided that that is what we're talking about. let's not go down that road again, please.

You are the one who is misunderstanding what is being said. I am not saying you are saying these things should be done, I'm saying what you are saying cannot be done and that the situation is different than what you think it is ... giving you the constitutionally possible methods by which it can be done to illustrate why it would be such a cluster****.

I know you want to pretend that 10+ million people can be deported in a nice, orderly fashion. The problem is the methods you have described to accomplish that simply do not work. The only options open to bypass the courts would not even be supported by most of Trump's base, let alone establishment Republicans. One is a constitutional amendment, which requires 66% of both houses of Congress. Republicans, assuming they all went insane, still couldn't push it through without bi-partisan support. An amendment to bypass habeas corpus will not happen in the time-frame Trump is talking about. (And likely never would happen.)

That leaves Marshal Law as the only way to bypass habeas corpus. Again, Trump's own base wouldn't support Marshal Law, establishment Republicans wouldn't, and of course neither would Democrats or Independents.

people who have a right to live and work in the US, whether they be citizens or legal immigrants, surely have a way to prove the same. so they would be asked to produce this proof within a certain (short) time period. if this is really difficult (and i don't think it is; it isn't in other countries), then perhaps an ID card could be introduced for legal immigrants/temporary workers, which they would be required to carry with them. as for deportation, if someone suspected of being an illegal immigrant fails to prove their right to live/work, then they get deported to their country of origin. as you say, it may be necessary to get the courts to rubber stamp such decisions, but this needn't take long; it doesn't elsewhere.

As became clear later in the thread, you are simply wrong about the situation in the US both in regards to who has IDs, and how politically feasible a national ID is.

Trump's own base and party would fight the hardest against a national ID!

a beggar coming to US would increase its GDP; he would not make it richer, though, nor raise its standard of living. the same is true of many legal immigrants to the US, particularly those who come from mexico and central america, who are normally poorer, less educated, etc. than the native population and therefore require more social support. illegal immigrants are likely to be poorer and less educated still; and i suspect that the main factor is a lack of education. they do, as you say, pay sales taxes and property taxes, and some even pay income taxes and SS contributions, although since they normally earn very low wages, the amount paid must be quite modest; moreover, most work for cash with no taxes paid, and their employers also do not pay payroll taxes and suchlike.

i'm pretty sure that illegal immigrants send their children to school, require medical treatment in some form or another and use various other taxpayer funded services; indeed i remember reading about cases to with illegals fighting to obtain or maintain access to college grants and similar, and it seems that many are able to receive such benefits despite not being entitled to them. it is well known in europe that far from being a net positive to public finances, illegal immigrants, and third world immigrants in general, are big drains on them. i find it hard to believe that the same is not true of the US.

this goes against all the evidence from europe and the UK, which is clear about the negative effect that both legal and illegal migrations has on working class wages and conditions. it is also, frankly, obvious that increasing supply at the bottom end of the labour market decreases the price of that labour.

Immigration is a well accepted economic benefit. Illegal immigration is actually more beneficial (to citizens, purely economically) in as much as they are unable to avail of public services.

Comparing Europe with it's vast social safety net to the US where illegals get little to nothing in return for their work is ridiculous.

You are also ignoring that the net effect of educating children of illegals ... who tend to be citizens because if you're born in the US you are a citizen ... is positive.

well of course i agree with that, which is one reason i suggested that a crackdown on illegal immigrants could be combined with reforms to the legal immigration system. i don't believe that anything that can be seen as 'rewarding' illegals can or will be done, however.

The last thing Rs want is 10 million more legal immigrant minority voters.

[onodera]

People still care about something Jane Fonda did fifty years ago?

GT's old.

[Elok]

I bounce all over the place in my thoughts re: OP, since there's not enough data to support any given conclusion yet. Current possibility being entertained: a general strengthening of the right wing, as the Left tears itself apart in recriminations following defeat w/ no clear successor to the obviously discredited Hillary. The current wave of NMP protests fizzles, as it becomes clear that they do more harm than good with the largely apathetic American public. Alll Trump has to do to disarm them is not be Hitler. Nobody likes riots or shop-looters.

A slight rolling back of culture war victories follows--no more tgs getting potty preference, a stalling of orientation protection movements, further abortion restrictions--but nothing really alarming. The most odious wing of the religious right, unfortunately, recovers some of the influence it gambled on Trump. Trumpism embraces a modest degree of economic protectionism, but doesn't make the mistake of pushing too hard too fast. We wuvs Russia now, but otherwise continue our general program of bombing everything that displeases us and/or a morally repugnant patron state. The economy continues to be stalled, but Trump's supporters are content because liberalism is in disarray.

That's another possibility.

[Grandpa Troll]

GT's old.

Yes one day you may also join this club

I care because I lost friends and family, we served because it was our duty,honor and privilege, for Jane Fonda to think she spoke for all Americans is wrong.

Anyhoo......take care

Gramps

[C0ckney]

leaving aside all the autistic nonsense nonsense about habeas corpus and constitutional amendments, which no one has mentioned except you, we come to the meat of the issue.

I know you want to pretend that 10+ million people can be deported in a nice, orderly fashion.

that isn't quite what i said (quelle surprise), but in any case, under obama's presidency around 2.5 million people were deported, so it's clearly possible to deport significant numbers of people without too much trouble. perhaps the particular things i have suggested may not be feasible (although they work elsewhere), but that doesn't mean that the existing system couldn't be expanded and sped up.

Immigration is a well accepted economic benefit. Illegal immigration is actually more beneficial (to citizens, purely economically) in as much as they are unable to avail of public services.

Comparing Europe with it's vast social safety net to the US where illegals get little to nothing in return for their work is ridiculous.

You are also ignoring that the net effect of educating children of illegals ... who tend to be citizens because if you're born in the US you are a citizen ... is positive.

yeah OK, i think we can conclude from this that you don't know what you are talking about. try googling 'illegal immigrants and welfare' and then maybe we can continue this discussion.

[Kidlicious]

I don't think the protests are going to stop because the protestors get smart elok. I'll make a bet if you like.

[Kidlicious]

There is a rumor that anti-BLM sheriff, David Clarke may be appointed head of the DHS. Trump has to do something about the conflict between BLM and law enforcement. Black men are going to continue to be shot, and protests will continue.

[giblets]

So... shoot fewer black men?

[Kidlicious]

So... shoot fewer black men?

Fewer black men are already being shot. You know that is not going to satisfy BLM. It's all about race baiting and opportunism.

[Aeson]

leaving aside all the autistic nonsense nonsense about habeas corpus and constitutional amendments, which no one has mentioned except you, we come to the meat of the issue.

You claimed it could be done without the courts being involved. SCOTUS has already ruled on this, you cannot deny habeas corpus to illegal immigrants. You don't understand the issue if you think you didn't bring up habeas corpus. The court system has to be involved barring an amendment, at least one more justice being replaced (on top of the empty seat), or martial law. That is just reality. You can't just hand-wave and throw out your bigoted personal attacks and change reality.

that isn't quite what i said (quelle surprise), but in any case, under obama's presidency around 2.5 million people were deported, so it's clearly possible to deport significant numbers of people without too much trouble.

That's in 8 years, and are the low hanging fruits (eg. easiest to catch and deport). Trump is going to do far more than that ... his lowest number is 2 million in the first year. The hypothetical we are discussing is about 11 million, where they all get deported.

perhaps the particular things i have suggested may not be feasible (although they work elsewhere), but that doesn't mean that the existing system couldn't be expanded and sped up.

You can't get around habeas corpus without one of the options I've given you and you've rejected.

yeah OK, i think we can conclude from this that you don't know what you are talking about. try googling 'illegal immigrants and welfare' and then maybe we can continue this discussion.

The only legal way that illegal households get welfare is through having US citizen children. Even your right wing anti-immigration think tanks that will show up in articles you think support you about "illegal immigrants and welfare" admit that.

You think government support for US citizen children living in poverty is a bad thing? You want to deport their parents? WTF?

Immigration is a net benefit to the economy of the US. This isn't even an interesting question anymore, it's as plain as day. It will become more and more of a net benefit as workforce participation rates continue to fall due to baby boomers retiring. WE NEED MORE WORKERS, NOT FEWER!

Deporting them all is going to be terrible for the US economy. Sure ... deport the criminals. But most of them are hard working and do jobs that most Americans wouldn't even consider taking. Every one of those hard working people you deport will hurt the US economy. It will break up families and/or deport citizens. It is simply an ugly, stupid policy that goes against economic growth, prosperity, and any morality worth a damn.

[Aeson]

C0ckney ...

How do you deal with illegal immigrants who have US citizen children? You are deporting the parents. Do you deport the children too (unconstitutional, horrible morally) or make them effectively orphans (horrible morally)?

[Alexander's Horse]

I'm expecting to see Celebrity Apprentice *LIVE* from the Oval Office

[Thoth]

C0ckney ...

How do you deal with illegal immigrants who have US citizen children? You are deporting the parents. Do you deport the children too (unconstitutional, horrible morally) or make them effectively orphans (horrible morally)?

I don't see anything wrong with deporting the kids along with the parents. (Assuming ofc that it's OK to deport the parents) It's a rather bizarre loophole that the parents are exploiting. I don't really see how someone who is in the country illegaly can have children that are considered citizens.

[Aeson]

I don't really see how someone who is in the country illegaly can have children that are considered citizens.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." - 14th amendment to the US Constitution