They are liking Trump!

60% of voters here are in favor of Trump's travel ban. I guess Dude had it all wrong---again:

While President Trump faced major backlash for his first travel ban announcement, a new Politico/Morning Consult Poll reveals a majority of U.S. voters support the ban.

The survey showed that 6 in 10 voters back the ban of visitors from six Muslim-majority countries.

And what's more, the poll shows the policy could be more popular when it's detached from Trump.

60 percent of voters said they support the "new guidelines" for visa applicants with the question not having any reference to Trump or his executive orders.

I approve of his travelban 100% it's for the best and puts america first and keeps us safer.

After a week of much needed R & R in Maui it is nice to return and find the top post to be complete B.S., thanks Glen.

Posting Politico's fake news story eh? Take a closer look and you will find that Politico's survey was not about Trump's original ban but it was about what the Supreme Court put forward.

Makes for a great headline, but Godzilla attacks Tokyo also makes for a great headline.

Here is what the poll actually asked, "Do you approve or disapprove of the new guidelines which say visa applicants from six predominately Muslim countries must prove a close family relationship with a U.S. resident in order to enter the country.?

These guidelines are not Trump?s policy, but a requirement, a change from the language of the original ban imposed through a per curium order of the Supreme Court.

>After a week of much needed
>R & R in Maui
>it is nice to return
>and find the top post
>to be complete B.S., thanks
>Glen.
>
>Posting Politico's fake news story eh?
>Take a closer look and
>you will find that Politico's
>survey was not about Trump's
>original ban but it was
>about what the Supreme Court
>put forward.
>
>Makes for a great headline, but
>Godzilla attacks Tokyo also makes
>for a great headline.
>
>Here is what the poll actually
>asked, "Do you approve or
>disapprove of the new guidelines
>which say visa applicants from
>six predominately Muslim countries must
>prove a close family relationship
>with a U.S. resident in
>order to enter the country.?
>
>
>These guidelines are not Trump?s policy,
>but a requirement, a change
>from the language of the
>original ban imposed through a
>per curium order of the
>Supreme Court.
Does it mean stay the f#ck out?

"Republicans overwhelmingly back the restrictions, the poll shows. Eighty-four percent of GOP respondents support the ban, while 9 percent oppose it. But the policy is also popular among independent respondents: 56 percent support it, compared with 30 percent who oppose it. Democrats tilt slightly against the ban, with 41 percent supporting it, and 46 percent in opposition."

It was one of two polls and both showed more approval after the court ruling. I am getting tired of winning.

>After a week of much needed
>R & R in Maui
>it is nice to return
>and find the top post
>to be complete B.S., thanks
>Glen.
>
>Posting Politico's fake news story eh?
>Take a closer look and
>you will find that Politico's
>survey was not about Trump's
>original ban but it was
>about what the Supreme Court
>put forward.
>
>Makes for a great headline, but
>Godzilla attacks Tokyo also makes
>for a great headline.
>
>Here is what the poll actually
>asked, "Do you approve or
>disapprove of the new guidelines
>which say visa applicants from
>six predominately Muslim countries must
>prove a close family relationship
>with a U.S. resident in
>order to enter the country.?
>
>
>These guidelines are not Trump?s policy,
>but a requirement, a change
>from the language of the
>original ban imposed through a
>per curium order of the
>Supreme Court.

Thanks for the travel log high roller. How many starving kids and abortions could that trip have paid for?


http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/User_files/4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg

Classic LOL

Congratulations girls, all the court did was approve the prior Obama "pause" of 2011. Get excited, you don't have much else to spread your legs for.

So Lil Kim has an ICBM, nice job tiny hands, impotent at home and abroad.

>Congratulations girls, all the court did
>was approve the prior Obama
>"pause" of 2011. Get excited,
>you don't have much else
>to spread your legs for.
>
>
>So Lil Kim has an ICBM,
>nice job tiny hands, impotent
>at home and abroad.


It's a putty cause people like forthedong spread their legs wider and much more frequent.

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/User_files/4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg

... it is funny watching her and her sisters tinkle their pretty pink panties over.
http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/User_files/4abc76ff29b26fc1.jpg

FW has been spreading his or it's legs for Obama the past 8 years and will always be a bent wrist liberal to the point of falling off the cliff.

RELH

ftw is nothing more than a fat shaved p#ssy on the keyboard.

Well the last few months proved how bad we need this ban didn't it? look at how many americans were killed by people coming from those nations while the ban was held up in courts. thank the orange god for our salvation. I forget now, can you post that number of how many they killed again for us?



Yeah america loves him. Charlie says WINNING!!



https://wdef.com/2017/07/06/trumps-disapproval-rating-nears-60-percent-in-new-polls/









Stay Thirsty My Friends

It doesn't matter. We don't need any more Muslims here. They are raping women in public in Germany because that is AOK in the Muslim handbook. You need to get past the PC and get on board of the anti Muslim train.

We don't need anymore people of any superstition here. period.

I asked how many americans have been killed, or raped by muslims Trump's ban would have kept out since it was proposed. I'm waiting.


The anti muslim train is the anti US constitution train. you clowns boarded that one years ago but I never will.









Stay Thirsty My Friends

Who cares and they have zero constitutional rights until they get here.

"It doesn't matter. We don't need any more Muslims here. They are raping women in public in Germany because that is AOK in the Muslim handbook. You need to get past the PC and get on board of the anti Muslim train."

Ahhh...nativism, so original, the same things were said about the Irish and the Italians.

Practice chanting this Glen, "Luggenpresse!".

http://inthepastlane.com/category/quotes-histquote/

https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-11...ty-previous-generation-mediterranean-migrants

Yes, the courts and most people including Republicans and Independents supported Obama's ban then and now, so please tell me what does that have to do with Dear Leader? How does re-implementing Obama policy make people like Dear Leader?

Yes I am a nativist when it comes to the religion of peace. They do not adapt well to a democratic republic. We will all know how much the masses appreciate Trump in the next two elections. So far your side has not won anything using the hate Trump slogans.Maybe Obama and Hillary can campaign for your candidates. I will be taking bets from you and Dude next year before the mid terms.

"They do not adapt well to a democratic republic."

Glen, there are currently 3.3 million people that identify themselves as Muslims in the United States. It's obvious that you have no statistical data to back up such an assertion, again, this is the whole "feelings" agenda that is so prevalent in the Republican Party.

On the other hand we can do like Germany and France did about 20 years ago and start letting many thousands of Muslims into the country. Of course in 15-20 years we may start having the Jihad attacks on the scale that both of those countries have been having if we listen to FTW and his fellow libs who fail to learn from history's lessons.

RELH

Ummm, yeah, where exactly do you think our 3.3 million muslims that currently reside in the United States came from RELH?

Muslims have been apart of this country long before our independence from England. 292 Muslim soldiers fought in the Civil War. The highest-ranking Muslim officer in the Union Army was Captain Moses Osman.

I realize facts are difficult at best for you to follow, but the fact is we have allowed tens of thousands of Muslims entry and citizenship into our country annually for last 70 years.

WOOOOOOOW...., 1 in 3.6 billion, I don't like those odds. some scary chit right here. I think I'm going to go full republican and hide under my bed.



http://www.politifact.com/californi...oull-be-killed-terror-attack-america-refugee/











Stay Thirsty My Friends

Yes FTW we have allowed a small portion of Muslims into this country as compared to France and Germany. How many incidents have we had involving home grown Muslims killing non Muslims in our country. Do you really want to increase that by allowing much more in here? Never mind the last question. You are that plain stupid just to be politically correct like your fellow liberals.

RELH

Where does it say in the constitution you can discriminate based upon religion and the fact you're chicken chit?

I'll ask again, had Trump's ban been in place since he proposed it how many americans would have been saved?















Stay Thirsty My Friends

Dude it only takes a few radicals like this one to inflame Muslim believers into a Jihad to kill non believers. Only stupid idiots like you ignore that problem.

RELH
____________________________________________________________

Controversial Muslim activist Linda Sarsour gave a fiery speech last weekend where she said fellow Muslim-Americans do not have to ?assimilate? and blasted Trump administration policies, even suggesting that resisting those policies could count as a ?form of jihad.?


Sarsour?s remarks came at the annual Islamic Society of North America convention in Illinois. Sarsour, who was a lead organizer in the Women?s March after President Trump's inauguration, slammed the new administration, specifically referring to the president's executive order to temporarily ban travel from six predominantly Muslim countries.


?Why are we so afraid of this administration and the potential chaos that they will ensue on our community -- and we already saw their potential when they come out every few weeks with Muslim ban one, Muslim ban two, Muslim ban three. They are relentless, they are persistent and consistent, and want to see how much we as a community can endure and want to see who our friends are and how hard we're going to fight back against this administration,? Sarsour said, adding she is ?outraged? when she ?wakes up in the morning? and remembers ?who is sitting in the White House.?

The Supreme Court decided last week that much of the 'ban' could be enforced, while the high court prepares to take up the case in October.



Sarsour's criticism went beyond the ban, as she blasted "fascists" in the White House.

?I hope that we, when we stand up to those who oppress our communities, that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad,? Sarsour said. ?That we are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East or the other side of the world, but here in these United States of America where you have fascists, white supremacists, and Islamaphobes reigning in the White House.?

The term 'jihad' can be defined and interpreted in different ways. According to Merriam-Webster, jihad can be defined ?a holy war on behalf of Islam as a religious duty,? or the more innocuous ?personal struggle in devotion to Islam especially involving spiritual discipline.? The dictionary also defines jihad as ?a crusade for a principle or belief.?


In an interview with The Washington Post on Friday, Sarsour said she was advocating ?solely for peaceful, nonviolent dissent.? As Sarsour has faced some critical coverage for the speech, her Twitter page as of Friday was filled with tweets from defenders saying she only referred to jihad as a ?struggle.?


Sarsour had been praised by the Obama administration for her advocacy work and had campaigned for Bernie Sanders. But she's also faced criticism from women's rights advocates for her defense of sharia law and other positions.

Further, she stirred more controversy in her speech last weekend by calling out her ?favorite person in the room? -- Imam Siraj Wahhaj, whom she described as a ?mentor, motivator, and encourager.? Wahhaj appeared on a list of unindicted co-conspirators in the 1993 World Trade Center bombings.

In the speech, she said the ?number 1, top priority? was to ?protect and defend? the Muslim community and suggested assimilation should not be a goal.

?It is not to assimilate and to please any other people or authority,? Sarsour said. ?Our obligation is to our young people, and to our women, and to make sure our women are protected in our community and our top priority, even higher than those priorities is to please Allah, and only Allah.?

Where in the constitution does it require assimilation?


Muslims are required to follow our laws, nothing more. just like everyone else.


I don't need anymore ragheads here. or beaners. or gooks or anyone else. and I wish the door had been shut a long time ago, before you came. but since I respect the constitution it tells me ragheads have the same rights as anyone else I accept and respect it. give it a try and maybe your blood pressure will come down. 1 in 3.6 billion ain't that bad I'm here to tell you , those are pretty good odds of survival. ya think?



so when you get back to me on how many americans Trump's ban would have saved we can assess this matter based on facts.














Stay Thirsty My Friends