Trump says he's thinking about pulling ICE from California

originally posted by: FredT

Thankfully those red area are int he minority and ironically need immigration to make the agriculture work.

Right, because California is doing swimmingly by suckling at the teat of progressive policies.

If your saying the state does not deserve Federal aid and it should all be pulled out then the state should STOP paying federal taxes of which it gets back less than it gives. I'm game. based on population and GDP, its a viable solution IMHO.

But I didn't say that at all. In fact, I plainly and directly stated the exact opposite immediately before the portion of my comment that you quoted (but conveniently left out).

Here, I'll quote myself: "I do, however, feel that [Trump] would definitely be failing to apply and enforce the laws of the federal government equally if he did this."

Laws and law enforcement should be equally applied across all state lines, regardless of the asinine and illegal policies of some governing bodies (yes, it's illegal to knowingly house or otherwise aid illegal immigrants' entry into this country...you don't need a SCOTUS ruling to understand that).

Its interesting thought some have bought into his rhetoric that immigrants are illegals...

No, what is interesting is that you conflate "immigrant" with "illegal immigrant," and we all, including Trump, know the difference and use the different terms accordingly.

Don't conflate two separate issues and then try to use that conflation to demonize those with whom you disagree.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Again, if it was a punishment that the people were unprepared to endure, they would have voted for bigger bastards-I mean people who would have enforced the immigration policies you are worried about. Clearly the majority of people really do not give a toss whether ICE are in the area or not, regardless of what small extra it costs.

Maybe pull out ICE,declare the California government in rebellion and Take over California with the military under the NDAA authority? Then arrest their leadership and try them for treason.

DP

a reply to: TrueBrit

So, basically what you're saying is that you know better from your seat across the pond than people who have lived and have extremely close familial ties with people living in the state who know and discuss what's happening first-hand.

I don't care if you use some arbitrary means of gauging what is and is not an acceptable cost to the citizens of California, the bottom line is that you have a simplistic view of this problem and lack an understanding that would give you actual perspective on the problem.

But please, by all means, pretend that the majority-rules way that we elect State and lower public officials means that the state doesn't get punished, nor its citizenry. If you have ever spent more than a day in California, you would understand that progressivism isn't just a political ideology, it's tantamount to a religion and culture in large, coastal California cities, and these cities are the ones that end up voting in these progressive people and their policies. Hell, these are the places that keep people like Maxine Waters in office in Congress without a second thought, so if you're pretending that most people who vote in California do so on the basis of sound logic and reason instead of what amounts to a religious belief, you have no clue about that which you are speaking.

Literally none.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I think you are misunderstanding the political demographics of California. The higher populations in the urbanized city vote the democrats in to office. They really do not have the same experience regarding illegal immigrants. The phrase out of sight, out of mind...applies aptly.

Rural areas often are left without a voice. It is too expensive to live in the city for many, let alone for an illegal immigrant. They tend to find their way to the poorer rural communities who will have to tackle the brunt of the additional costs.

Unfortunately, this is seen all across America. It is a two way street though. Rural people vs urban city dwellers live in two really different worlds and definitely have very different concerns.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

No, what I am saying is that you are, because of your proximity to the situation, failing to see the wood for the trees here. The State is its people. The majority of them are NOT being punished for anything, they elected people who would ensure things are as they are, rather than electing people who would stop them from being as they are, and they keep doing it, which is why much of the rest of America seems to view the region and its people with some sort of wary disdain.

You do not have to like it, but you do have to accept that "the people" are not being punished. SOME of them are in a situation they do not appreciate, but that is hardly the same thing. If the majority of people in California had voted for anti-immigration candidates, and things were STILL as they are, if the situation were being FORCED on the majority of voters, then you would have what could reasonably be called, a point. As it is, you seem to be ranting about the fact that voting works at all, leave alone working the way it does.

a reply to: TrueBrit

You can claim what you want, but sometimes it matters to be in the woods so that you have a better understanding of how the trees are affected. You may think that your panoramic view is best, but when you are too far away to see the fungus and cancer affecting the trees beneath the canopy, you have no real idea what's going on.

CynConcepts says it perfectly in explaining what you're missing:

originally posted by: CynConcepts
a reply to: TrueBrit

I think you are misunderstanding the political demographics of California. The higher populations in the urbanized city vote the democrats in to office. They really do not have the same experience regarding illegal immigrants. The phrase out of sight, out of mind...applies aptly.

Rural areas often are left without a voice. It is too expensive to live in the city for many, let alone for an illegal immigrant. They tend to find their way to the poorer rural communities who will have to tackle the brunt of the additional costs.

Unfortunately, this is seen all across America. It is a two way street though. Rural people vs urban city dwellers live in two really different worlds and definitely have very different concerns.

The democratic process is absolutely not a perfect way to vote, and when it consistently allows the echo chamber of larger urban areas to overwhelm the voices of others for decades on end, if you can't admit that this is a problem--even if there is no perfect solution--then your argument is not intellectually honest nor logical in any way.