Should Trump Resign Over "Hellhole" Comment?

[Starlight]

I don't understand why people in general seem to take these Trump comments so seriously.

I could hardly care less about them - they tell us zero about Trump I didn't already know.

[shunyadragon]

Well you gotta admit it’s very Trumpesque hyperbole.

Someone is hedging white lies with there fingers crossed behind their backs.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/12/politics/senators-trump-comment-tom-cotton/index.html

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republcain, was also part of the Oval Office sitdown. He suggested in a statement Friday that the President had said something questionable, but Graham did not directly say Trump had used the term "shithole" to describe African countries.

However, Republican Sen. Tim Scott, the junior senator from South Carolina, told the Charleston Post and Courier that Graham told him the reported comments are "basically accurate."
"If that comment is accurate, the comment is incredibly disappointing," Scott told the newspaper.
However, Republican Sen. Tim Scott, the junior senator from South Carolina, told the Charleston Post and Courier that Graham told him the reported comments are "basically accurate."
"If that comment is accurate, the comment is incredibly disappointing," Scott told the newspaper.

© Copyright Original Source

[Cow Poke]

Well you gotta admit it’s very Trumpesque hyperbole.

I gotta?


OK

[Starlight]

Overwhelming majority of immigrants want to implement the same stupid social policies that they left

I doubt this is true. It varies widely.

Often when then there is a surge of migration from a particular country it is because people are wanting to escape that country's policies. (e.g. When Cuba became communist, a lot of the wealthier Cubans fled to America because they were anti-communist.)

Polling in the US fairly consistently shows Muslims in the US as one of the most socially liberal groups in the country.

they are interested in money, not america's core founding principles.

This is probably the most true of Mexican immigrants to the US. Given it is relatively easy for Mexicans to fly between the US and Mexico, depending on relative economic conditions in the two countries, large numbers of Mexicans will move to whichever of the two countries they find it easier to get work in.

But while US conservatives might object to Mexicans for various reasons (taking jobs, bringing drugs, committing crime, being brown, using welfare programs, not speaking English, voting democrat illegally etc), your original charge of "want to implement the same stupid social policies that they left" doesn't really apply at all to Mexicans and other central/south Americans who make up the bulk of immigrants to the US. That is a charge you would really only level at Muslims, who don't make up a significant amount of US immigration, and furthermore Muslims who settle in the US tend to be extremely liberal since they want to get away from the conservative countries they left.

Either you put an end to mass migration or you can kiss basic rights like freedom of speech goodbye.

My country has had immigration levels about 3 times higher than the US for the past decade or so. I personally disapprove of such a high immigration rate and think our immigration rates should be lowered and that immigration should be prioritized for countries that are culturally similar to ours. However, I haven't observed any level of evidence that would support your bizarre claim that mass immigration impacts rights like freedom of speech. I am not sure I understand what you see as the logic of that claim.

[Darth Executor]

I doubt this is true. It varies widely.

Often when then there is a surge of migration from a particular country it is because people are wanting to escape that country's policies. (e.g. When Cuba became communist, a lot of the wealthier Cubans fled to America because they were anti-communist.)

Polling in the US fairly consistently shows Muslims in the US as one of the most socially liberal groups in the country.

Social liberalism is about as far from America's founding principles as you can get. So thanks for proving my point.

However, I haven't observed any level of evidence that would support your bizarre claim that mass immigration impacts rights like freedom of speech. I am not sure I understand what you see as the logic of that claim.

Your country doesn't support freedom of speech to begin with so why would that change just because you let in immigrants who also don't support freedom of speech. The US is the only country in the world that does.

[Starlight]

Social liberalism is about as far from America's founding principles as you can get.

True I guess - the race based slavery of America's founding is far removed from modern social liberal principles.

Your country doesn't support freedom of speech to begin with... The US is the only country in the world that does.

[Darth Executor]

True I guess - the race based slavery of America's founding is far removed from modern social liberal principles.

I was actually being generous, you don't even understand what free speech is or why it's important so there really is no way for you to reasonably support it.

[Starlight]

I was actually being generous, you don't even understand what free speech is or why it's important so there really is no way for you to reasonably support it.

You should seek psychiatric help. I'm serious. Go make an appointment right now.

[Jedidiah]

He should resign simply for being an idiot.

Have you resigned from your job?

[RumTumTugger]

Except for Paul Ryan believes the reported remarks are accurate: http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/12/politi...ion/index.html

Was Paul Ryan in the room if not why do you believe him over those that were there.

[RumTumTugger]

Paul Ryan is not "everybody from both parties".

He wasn't even in the room

[shunyadragon]

Was Paul Ryan in the room if not why do you believe him over those that were there.

I believe Paul Ryan has reliable sources.

Someone is hedging white lies with there fingers crossed behind their backs.

Source: Source: [url

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/12/politics/senators-trump-comment-tom-cotton/index.html][/url]

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republcain, was also part of the Oval Office sitdown. He suggested in a statement Friday that the President had said something questionable, but Graham did not directly say Trump had used the term "shithole" to describe African countries.

However, Republican Sen. Tim Scott, the junior senator from South Carolina, told the Charleston Post and Courier that Graham told him the reported comments are "basically accurate."

"If that comment is accurate, the comment is incredibly disappointing," Scott told the newspaper.

© Copyright Original Source

[Teallaura]

He is appealing to his racist bigoted basest of the base. As indicated by the responses so far.

Really? I wouldn't have thought you were part of his base.

[Teallaura]

Largely, it's the governments we don't like, not the people. There's a significant difference though I don’t imagine Trump makes it.

Although, there used to be a very large number of industrial semi-skilled jobs that many of these immigrants could get on with. No any more with the advent of globalisation and automation.

The ideal situation is that the "hellholes" become better and more attractive places to live and work, so that people don't want to leave. But that requires seismic changes in the way that global politics and economics works.

I agree with most of this but global politics can't solve local issues - if it could, America would have made the world all cozy long since. But while we can and should provide aid in many matters, we can't expect significant change until the people themselves change it.

Should we let folks starve? Of course not. Should we provide the escape valve for inept and corrupt governments or systems of government to avert political unrest - no.

Sometimes the best thing is to let people decide for themselves to fix the mess.

[Teallaura]

I was there a number of times in the early 80's, and it's obvious that, at one time, there was quite a bit of tourism. We stayed in a hotel in Cap Haitian that I can only describe as "a bad Motel 6 without hot water", but, again, at one time, it appears to have been a luxury hotel. It even had a large swimming pool with a "swim up bar".

Here is a pretty good (IMOHBAO) assessment of Haiti's plight, including the fact that it was pretty much a French colony of slaves, harshly ruled. What's puzzling is why the Dominican Republic, sharing the same island, seems to have "gotten it", but Haiti is still Haiti.

Anecdotally, there just seems to be an overwhelming "live for today" and don't worry about tomorrow attitude. That was evident when we brought some farm specialists from Waco, doing the rabbit / manure / farming thing, producing rabbits for meat, using their waste for fertilizer, etc. The very first night we were there, Haitians broke into the storage facility and stole all the rabbits, cooking them and eating them the next day. An "immediate feast" with no planning for future.

Um, in the early eighties, you still had famine issues in Haiti, right? While I agree with the thrust here, people who are hungry aren't good candidates for 'wait for later'.