Tulsi Gabbard: ‘I Don’t Support Open Borders … Without Secure Borders, We Don’t Have a Country’

[AzogtheDefiler]

Which candidate supports this?

"There would be no guards, no fencing, and no impediments of any kind. Anyone who wants to cross the international boundary — for any reason, and with whatever intent — could do so. It would be like it was before May 28, 1924, the date that the U.S. Border Patrol was formed: Come one, come all."

By contrast, almost all the Democratic presidential candidates — including Booker, Castro, Sen. Kamala Harris, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren – are on the record in favor of increased funding for secure borders, having responded affirmatively to the Washington Post survey question “Do you support increased border security funding, including new screening equipment at ports of entry and additional resources to process the recent increase of asylum seekers?”

"Open borders" is a Trump trap: Media must do better

They all raised their hands in terms of free healthcare for illegals. Do you think that would reduce the number of illegals that would try to sneak in here? As Yoda would say, logic you lack. Stupid you are.

As long as there are jobs, they will come. No one can survive here on a little bit of food stamps and health care, which they would get anyway at the local Emergency Room.

I agree. Hence we need serious reform.

 

[pknopp]

Which candidate supports this?

"There would be no guards, no fencing, and no impediments of any kind. Anyone who wants to cross the international boundary — for any reason, and with whatever intent — could do so. It would be like it was before May 28, 1924, the date that the U.S. Border Patrol was formed: Come one, come all."

By contrast, almost all the Democratic presidential candidates — including Booker, Castro, Sen. Kamala Harris, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren – are on the record in favor of increased funding for secure borders, having responded affirmatively to the Washington Post survey question “Do you support increased border security funding, including new screening equipment at ports of entry and additional resources to process the recent increase of asylum seekers?”

"Open borders" is a Trump trap: Media must do better

They all raised their hands in terms of free healthcare for illegals. Do you think that would reduce the number of illegals that would try to sneak in here? As Yoda would say, logic you lack. Stupid you are.

As long as there are jobs, they will come. No one can survive here on a little bit of food stamps and health care, which they would get anyway at the local Emergency Room.

I agree. Hence we need serious reform.

It isn't going to happen. The markets will not hear of it and they run the country now.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Which candidate supports this?

"There would be no guards, no fencing, and no impediments of any kind. Anyone who wants to cross the international boundary — for any reason, and with whatever intent — could do so. It would be like it was before May 28, 1924, the date that the U.S. Border Patrol was formed: Come one, come all."

By contrast, almost all the Democratic presidential candidates — including Booker, Castro, Sen. Kamala Harris, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren – are on the record in favor of increased funding for secure borders, having responded affirmatively to the Washington Post survey question “Do you support increased border security funding, including new screening equipment at ports of entry and additional resources to process the recent increase of asylum seekers?”

"Open borders" is a Trump trap: Media must do better

They all raised their hands in terms of free healthcare for illegals. Do you think that would reduce the number of illegals that would try to sneak in here? As Yoda would say, logic you lack. Stupid you are.

As long as there are jobs, they will come. No one can survive here on a little bit of food stamps and health care, which they would get anyway at the local Emergency Room.

I agree. Hence we need serious reform.

It isn't going to happen. The markets will not hear of it and they run the country now.

Amending the 14th Amendment would go a long way.

 

[pknopp]

Which candidate supports this?

"There would be no guards, no fencing, and no impediments of any kind. Anyone who wants to cross the international boundary — for any reason, and with whatever intent — could do so. It would be like it was before May 28, 1924, the date that the U.S. Border Patrol was formed: Come one, come all."

By contrast, almost all the Democratic presidential candidates — including Booker, Castro, Sen. Kamala Harris, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren – are on the record in favor of increased funding for secure borders, having responded affirmatively to the Washington Post survey question “Do you support increased border security funding, including new screening equipment at ports of entry and additional resources to process the recent increase of asylum seekers?”

"Open borders" is a Trump trap: Media must do better

They all raised their hands in terms of free healthcare for illegals. Do you think that would reduce the number of illegals that would try to sneak in here? As Yoda would say, logic you lack. Stupid you are.

As long as there are jobs, they will come. No one can survive here on a little bit of food stamps and health care, which they would get anyway at the local Emergency Room.

I agree. Hence we need serious reform.

It isn't going to happen. The markets will not hear of it and they run the country now.

Amending the 14th Amendment would go a long way.

No it wouldn't. It would simply keep those born here illegal. They aren't going anywhere. At least if they are legal they can get legit jobs and pay taxes.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

They all raised their hands in terms of free healthcare for illegals. Do you think that would reduce the number of illegals that would try to sneak in here? As Yoda would say, logic you lack. Stupid you are.

As long as there are jobs, they will come. No one can survive here on a little bit of food stamps and health care, which they would get anyway at the local Emergency Room.

I agree. Hence we need serious reform.

It isn't going to happen. The markets will not hear of it and they run the country now.

Amending the 14th Amendment would go a long way.

No it wouldn't. It would simply keep those born here illegal. They aren't going anywhere. At least if they are legal they can get legit jobs and pay taxes.

I disagree. Many come here, have a kid and that kid becomes a citizen and their anchor to stay here. Ratifying that amendment would end all of that.

 

[pknopp]

As long as there are jobs, they will come. No one can survive here on a little bit of food stamps and health care, which they would get anyway at the local Emergency Room.

I agree. Hence we need serious reform.

It isn't going to happen. The markets will not hear of it and they run the country now.

Amending the 14th Amendment would go a long way.

No it wouldn't. It would simply keep those born here illegal. They aren't going anywhere. At least if they are legal they can get legit jobs and pay taxes.

I disagree. Many come here, have a kid and that kid becomes a citizen and their anchor to stay here. Ratifying that amendment would end all of that.

They still aren't going to leave. Their job is here.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I agree. Hence we need serious reform.

It isn't going to happen. The markets will not hear of it and they run the country now.

Amending the 14th Amendment would go a long way.

No it wouldn't. It would simply keep those born here illegal. They aren't going anywhere. At least if they are legal they can get legit jobs and pay taxes.

I disagree. Many come here, have a kid and that kid becomes a citizen and their anchor to stay here. Ratifying that amendment would end all of that.

They still aren't going to leave. Their job is here.

Oh I agree but it may dissuade new ones from arriving.

 

[pknopp]

It isn't going to happen. The markets will not hear of it and they run the country now.

Amending the 14th Amendment would go a long way.

No it wouldn't. It would simply keep those born here illegal. They aren't going anywhere. At least if they are legal they can get legit jobs and pay taxes.

I disagree. Many come here, have a kid and that kid becomes a citizen and their anchor to stay here. Ratifying that amendment would end all of that.

They still aren't going to leave. Their job is here.

Oh I agree but it may dissuade new ones from arriving.

As long as the jobs are here, they are coming.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Amending the 14th Amendment would go a long way.

No it wouldn't. It would simply keep those born here illegal. They aren't going anywhere. At least if they are legal they can get legit jobs and pay taxes.

I disagree. Many come here, have a kid and that kid becomes a citizen and their anchor to stay here. Ratifying that amendment would end all of that.

They still aren't going to leave. Their job is here.

Oh I agree but it may dissuade new ones from arriving.

As long as the jobs are here, they are coming.

We need to change that too.

 

[pknopp]

No it wouldn't. It would simply keep those born here illegal. They aren't going anywhere. At least if they are legal they can get legit jobs and pay taxes.

I disagree. Many come here, have a kid and that kid becomes a citizen and their anchor to stay here. Ratifying that amendment would end all of that.

They still aren't going to leave. Their job is here.

Oh I agree but it may dissuade new ones from arriving.

As long as the jobs are here, they are coming.

We need to change that too.

Not to be continually redundant but we will not. Business runs this country and business wants the cheap labor.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I disagree. Many come here, have a kid and that kid becomes a citizen and their anchor to stay here. Ratifying that amendment would end all of that.

They still aren't going to leave. Their job is here.

Oh I agree but it may dissuade new ones from arriving.

As long as the jobs are here, they are coming.

We need to change that too.

Not to be continually redundant but we will not. Business runs this country and business wants the cheap labor.

Therein lies the problem

 

[pknopp]

They still aren't going to leave. Their job is here.

Oh I agree but it may dissuade new ones from arriving.

As long as the jobs are here, they are coming.

We need to change that too.

Not to be continually redundant but we will not. Business runs this country and business wants the cheap labor.

Therein lies the problem

Exactly and anyone that wants to address it gets labelled as a "Socialist". (The problem is bigger than immigration)

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Oh I agree but it may dissuade new ones from arriving.

As long as the jobs are here, they are coming.

We need to change that too.

Not to be continually redundant but we will not. Business runs this country and business wants the cheap labor.

Therein lies the problem

Exactly and anyone that wants to address it gets labelled as a "Socialist". (The problem is bigger than immigration)

Oh I agree. A lot of hypocrisy in our govt

 

[Terri4Trump]

Ah, Grass Hopper....seems only ONE so far shows any signs of sanity.....but, being a DemonRAT with that attitude means that you will never get to be the candidate nor would you be asked to be the VP running mate of a ABNORMAL nominee!

------------

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), running for the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination, says she opposes open borders and plans pushed by fellow Democrat candidates that are “essentially open borders.”

During an interview with Dave Rubin, Gabbard said that unlike some of her Democrat colleagues, she opposes open borders and the agenda to invite the world’s migrants to the United States through various incentives.

The interview went as follows:

RUBIN: So immigration, I think there’s a general sense that the candidates, the Democrats are basically trying to outdo each other for open borders, something like that … do you think that’s a fair way to start the question and … where do you sit on that?

GABBARD: I think it’s fair … I don’t, I don’t support open borders. Without secure borders, we don’t really have a country. And while some of the other Democratic candidates will say, ‘Well, open borders, that’s a conservative argument and that’s not really what’s being advocated for,’ if you look at some of the practical implications of some of the things they are pushing for, it is essentially open borders.

I think there are a few things we got to do when we’re talking about immigration reform. One is we’ve got to have secure borders. This is not Trump’s wall from sea to shining sea. It’s about seeing again what makes sense. I look at things from a practical, objective-oriented standpoint; I’m a soldier. So I look at, secure the borders, what’s our objective. In some places, it may make the most sense to have a wall or some kind of other physical barriers in place; in other places it won’t make sense. So you use technology and you use all the other tools that you have ultimately to accomplish that objective of security at the borders.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Watch "Rigged Debates, Media Smears, & Taking On The DNC | Tulsi Gabbard | POLITICS | Rubin Report" on YouTube

Then why the fuck is she a Democrat

 

[pknopp]

Ah, Grass Hopper....seems only ONE so far shows any signs of sanity.....but, being a DemonRAT with that attitude means that you will never get to be the candidate nor would you be asked to be the VP running mate of a ABNORMAL nominee!

------------

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), running for the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination, says she opposes open borders and plans pushed by fellow Democrat candidates that are “essentially open borders.”

During an interview with Dave Rubin, Gabbard said that unlike some of her Democrat colleagues, she opposes open borders and the agenda to invite the world’s migrants to the United States through various incentives.

The interview went as follows:

RUBIN: So immigration, I think there’s a general sense that the candidates, the Democrats are basically trying to outdo each other for open borders, something like that … do you think that’s a fair way to start the question and … where do you sit on that?

GABBARD: I think it’s fair … I don’t, I don’t support open borders. Without secure borders, we don’t really have a country. And while some of the other Democratic candidates will say, ‘Well, open borders, that’s a conservative argument and that’s not really what’s being advocated for,’ if you look at some of the practical implications of some of the things they are pushing for, it is essentially open borders.

I think there are a few things we got to do when we’re talking about immigration reform. One is we’ve got to have secure borders. This is not Trump’s wall from sea to shining sea. It’s about seeing again what makes sense. I look at things from a practical, objective-oriented standpoint; I’m a soldier. So I look at, secure the borders, what’s our objective. In some places, it may make the most sense to have a wall or some kind of other physical barriers in place; in other places it won’t make sense. So you use technology and you use all the other tools that you have ultimately to accomplish that objective of security at the borders.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Watch "Rigged Debates, Media Smears, & Taking On The DNC | Tulsi Gabbard | POLITICS | Rubin Report" on YouTube

Then why the fuck is she a Democrat

How far would she get as an anti-war pro-universal health care Republican?

 

[jasonnfree]

Ah, Grass Hopper....seems only ONE so far shows any signs of sanity.....but, being a DemonRAT with that attitude means that you will never get to be the candidate nor would you be asked to be the VP running mate of a ABNORMAL nominee!

------------

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), running for the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination, says she opposes open borders and plans pushed by fellow Democrat candidates that are “essentially open borders.”

During an interview with Dave Rubin, Gabbard said that unlike some of her Democrat colleagues, she opposes open borders and the agenda to invite the world’s migrants to the United States through various incentives.

The interview went as follows:

RUBIN: So immigration, I think there’s a general sense that the candidates, the Democrats are basically trying to outdo each other for open borders, something like that … do you think that’s a fair way to start the question and … where do you sit on that?

GABBARD: I think it’s fair … I don’t, I don’t support open borders. Without secure borders, we don’t really have a country. And while some of the other Democratic candidates will say, ‘Well, open borders, that’s a conservative argument and that’s not really what’s being advocated for,’ if you look at some of the practical implications of some of the things they are pushing for, it is essentially open borders.

I think there are a few things we got to do when we’re talking about immigration reform. One is we’ve got to have secure borders. This is not Trump’s wall from sea to shining sea. It’s about seeing again what makes sense. I look at things from a practical, objective-oriented standpoint; I’m a soldier. So I look at, secure the borders, what’s our objective. In some places, it may make the most sense to have a wall or some kind of other physical barriers in place; in other places it won’t make sense. So you use technology and you use all the other tools that you have ultimately to accomplish that objective of security at the borders.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Watch "Rigged Debates, Media Smears, & Taking On The DNC | Tulsi Gabbard | POLITICS | Rubin Report" on YouTube

Then why the fuck is she a Democrat

Because she's a decent human being and the democrats are the only ones who will do good for the average person. You belong with the right wing, you being a judgmental low life and all.

 

[The Purge]

Ah, Grass Hopper....seems only ONE so far shows any signs of sanity.....but, being a DemonRAT with that attitude means that you will never get to be the candidate nor would you be asked to be the VP running mate of a ABNORMAL nominee!

------------

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), running for the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination, says she opposes open borders and plans pushed by fellow Democrat candidates that are “essentially open borders.”

During an interview with Dave Rubin, Gabbard said that unlike some of her Democrat colleagues, she opposes open borders and the agenda to invite the world’s migrants to the United States through various incentives.

The interview went as follows:

RUBIN: So immigration, I think there’s a general sense that the candidates, the Democrats are basically trying to outdo each other for open borders, something like that … do you think that’s a fair way to start the question and … where do you sit on that?

GABBARD: I think it’s fair … I don’t, I don’t support open borders. Without secure borders, we don’t really have a country. And while some of the other Democratic candidates will say, ‘Well, open borders, that’s a conservative argument and that’s not really what’s being advocated for,’ if you look at some of the practical implications of some of the things they are pushing for, it is essentially open borders.

I think there are a few things we got to do when we’re talking about immigration reform. One is we’ve got to have secure borders. This is not Trump’s wall from sea to shining sea. It’s about seeing again what makes sense. I look at things from a practical, objective-oriented standpoint; I’m a soldier. So I look at, secure the borders, what’s our objective. In some places, it may make the most sense to have a wall or some kind of other physical barriers in place; in other places it won’t make sense. So you use technology and you use all the other tools that you have ultimately to accomplish that objective of security at the borders.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Watch "Rigged Debates, Media Smears, & Taking On The DNC | Tulsi Gabbard | POLITICS | Rubin Report" on YouTube

Then why the fuck is she a Democrat

Because she's a decent human being and the democrats are the only ones who will do good for the average person. You belong with the right wing, you being a judgmental low life and all.

You mean more taxes, free borders and putting the mandate back on Obozo care....give away more money to terrorist enablers.....YOU are a complete and utter moron

 

[Terri4Trump]

Because she's a decent human being.........

LOL. Democrats are baby-killers, socialists, and promoters of the sexual perversions of faggots and transgenders and the rest of the freaks. Decent? Democrats are evil. They are also exactly the same as Nazis.

QUOTE FROM ANOTHER THREAD:

NAZI = Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei
or, "National Socialist German Workers’ Party"

Funny, I don’t see a lot of Germans in the Republican Party but I see plenty of Socialists in the Democrat Party.
In fact, not only do I see plenty of Socialists in the Democrat Party, but I see plenty of Socialists in the Democrat Party who want to be able to murder an entire class of people (abortion) just like Hitler did, and who violently attack people in the streets who disagree with them, just like Hitler did. Plus, I see plenty of Socialists in the Democrat Party who want to teach junk science about the human race (transgenderism) just like Hitler did. AND NOW their antisemitism has also percolated to the top in recent months.

As was recently noted in another thread NAZI's have taken controll of the Democratic party !!! Demonazi's !! :

• Democrats are no different from Nazis from their strong arm tactics, to their roving blackshirts in the streets, to their murder of millions of innocent people in Planned Butcherhood death camps, to their embracing of socialism (Hitler always spoke of national socialism), to their willingness to squash free speech and other rights, and to their embracing of junk science on human beings (like transgenderism), the Democrats are EXACTLY like Nazis.

There is no denying the sameness of Democrats and Nazis. We deny it at our own peril, just as the Germans did

 

[flacaltenn]

She should defect and replace Pence.

Because the party is OPENLY changing the rules on the fly to discourage her -- she's an EXCELLENT candidate for an Independent run where she can be FREE from party control and be herself... I'm hoping she's pissed enough to consider that in 2020....

She would be perfect for the Green Party and could be a serious candidate...

She's not a Greenie.. And they would not support her because she's not gonna follow their agenda.. I've worked with the Green Party on ballot and debate access issues and they have a platform that would be hard for a moderate Dem to support...

She is not Libertarian in my opinion, so she would have to go full independent which is harder than going third party...

Wish the Reform party was not defunct...

Actually going Independent is MUCH EASIER than getting a 3rd party nomination.. There are NO PRIMARIES to waste resources and time on... And due to the lousy patchwork of election laws, independents DONT NEED as much to qualify for the General Election ballots. The states look at Independents as a de facto party...

Just a FEW (maybe 4 or 7) in Congress would make a world of difference in bringing INTELLIGIENT free speech to that Dem-Rep infested body.. And we WILL GET THERE... The numbers from Gallup are crossing the 50% line of active voters that declare themselves as Independents.

The end is nye for the warring tribes who are only interested in gaining and maintaining the power... Just look at the actual "health" of the 2 arrogant parties today....