monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

The full spray is yet to come but the **** is hitting the fan now.

He put his autograph on pictures of deceased relatives?

YouGov specialises in market research through online methods. The company’s methodology involves obtaining responses from an invited group of Internet users, and then weighting these responses in line with demographic information. It draws these demographically-representative samples from a panel of 5 million people worldwide including over 800,000 people in the UK.[14] As YouGov's online methods use no field-force, its costs are lower than some face-to-face or telephone methods.
Accuracy[edit]

YouGov has claimed that its opinion polls are most accurate when compared to its competitors and in particular that its online methodology is more accurate than traditional polling methods.[15] Critics have argued that, as not all of the public have access to the Internet, online samples cannot accurately reflect the views of the population as a whole.[16] YouGov counters that they have a representative panel and they are able to weight their data appropriately to reflect the national audience that they are aiming to poll.[17]

This article is a somewhat long read, but the historical background info, and the perspective it provides, more than justifies the time of anyone wanting to fully understand the situation.

This article is whining about a past written by revisionist historians.

Is that the same people who sanitize the bible?

Nonsense. The President is, in the matter at hand on the Mexican border, merely enforcing existing law - as it is his sworn duty to do.

Unfortunately this law and some subsequent legal decisions have created a system rife with contradictions. These issues have long been both apparent and much discussed by lawmakers and commentators. However throughout the past three Presidential Administrations, no constructive action has been taken to address these issues. Instead we got through by the conscious action of past Presidents to avoid enforcing inconvenient elements of the law. President Obama at least acknowledged that by issuing an Executive order, extending the Non-enforcement of law in the so-called Dreamers matter.

The President has made offers to Democrats for bipartisan action, clearly indicating the issues that are critical to him and those on which he is willing to compromise with them. So far he has been rebuffed at every turn by cynical Democrat leaders in the Senate, who refuse to accept their legislative responsibility for the sorry state of the law and, instead prefer to take what they perceive to be political advantage out of a contrived situation which also existed under President Obama and which they conveniently chose to ignore now.

And in conclusion, let me just say that it might seem odd but is true, there is surely no Canadian more eager than I to see Trump up on a platform as tanks and missiles and marching soldiermatons and there's huge flags and it will be wonderful.

...because Trump is INSISTING on changing and lowering LEGAL immigration on any bill he’d sign.

I hope the Democrats keep resisting that.

...because Trump is INSISTING on changing and lowering LEGAL immigration on any bill he’d sign.
I hope the Democrats keep resisting that.

blatham wrote:

And in conclusion, let me just say that it might seem odd but is true, there is surely no Canadian more eager than I to see Trump up on a platform as tanks and missiles and marching soldiermatons and there's huge flags and it will be wonderful.

With a certain amount of shame, I have to admit this is not an area in which we can compete with North Korea. Their chorography is just awesome.

US military plans migrant tent camps amid Trump crackdown

A draft memo obtained by Time magazine outlines plans to build "austere" tent camps to house 25,000 migrants.

The memo says the camps would be built on abandoned airfields in California, Alabama, and Arizona.

Another camp near San Francisco is being designed for as many as 47,000 people, the memo says.

The US military said on Thursday it had been asked by the government to get ready to house up to 20,000 immigrant children.

The Navy memo estimates the force would spend $233 million (£175m) to run a facility for 25,000 people for six-months.

maporsche wrote:

...because Trump is INSISTING on changing and lowering LEGAL immigration on any bill he’d sign.

I hope the Democrats keep resisting that.

Why? What information to you have to indicate that either a higher or lower number of legal immigrants would be best for our country?

Something like 90% of economists will tell you that immigration is a huge net positive for the economy.

layman wrote:

Why? What information to you have to indicate that either a higher or lower number of legal immigrants would be best for our country?

Something like 90% of economists will tell you that immigration is a huge net positive for the economy.

The Bishop in question, I believe is Bishop Michael Curry, the presiding head of the Episcopal church in the United States.

Quote:

blatham wrote:

And in conclusion, let me just say that it might seem odd but is true, there is surely no Canadian more eager than I to see Trump up on a platform as tanks and missiles and marching soldiermatons and there's huge flags and it will be wonderful.

With a certain amount of shame, I have to admit this is not an area in which we can compete with North Korea. Their chorography is just awesome.