Yes, Trump, a billionaire that doesn't pay his workers and cares about us, has a solution to our national debt.

President Barack Obama, although he did have flaws and had to make some very drastic decisions in his life when he was in office is still missed by a majority of people because he did show a sense of empathy and followed through most reasonably with his declarations from the Marriage Act for same-sex marriage and to Obamacare for families. Former POTUS Obama told the public to not be blinded by an arrogant person who is on top and has always been on top. He acknowledged Trumps' indecency towards people who have worked for him and how he does not pay him, and how he constantly changes statements repeatedly. Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, has written in her books on “appealing” to the small minds by deception for personal benefit.

In the video titled "Trump’s many proposals for paying off the national debt" by JM Rieger from The Washington Post, Trump addresses issues in a very dictator-like manner. Trump is educated enough to acknowledge that we do have a lot of imports and taxation's of Chinese imports could greatly benefit us repaying debts to many countries, as well as China that holds the most. The dictator ideology begins to show more when he mentions why we were in Iraq and that their Oil could've solved a $15 trillion deficit, and he speaks on Iraq as if it's just there, for grabs, with no concept of it being a nation or foundation for people, which peaks into his personality. Further on he speaks of energy companies, then climate agreements for factories overseas that "take jobs and money" when they’re just privately-owned business working off-shores for cheaper wages with less strict laws, and again we are fed what we want to hear.

As usual, he blames Obamacare, which is just another name for healthcare, but he appeals to the masses, primarily the surprisingly overwhelming conservatives of which some do not know the difference and speaks of reform/replacement of it as if that will help the people or even, in turn, the nation. It's "1st Grade business," he says, to whatever interpretation that can mean.

On the topic of treating people unfairly, Trump received a great amount of backlash when he said, "I hate to tell you, but you're throwing our budget out of whack," whilst in Puerto Rico during their Hurricane calamity. Trumps amazing immediate follow-up post the backlash as if nothing happened, stated, "I always worry about the deficit but what are you going to do you have a hurricane you have to take care of the people," which really goes to show there is no empathy, but merely a matter of how far can I go and how do I act based on the cause and effect.

Finally the most "brilliant" plan our current POTUS has come up with; "Printing more money." Just like the ideology of "1st Grade Business," this has a ridiculous resemblance to that of the hyperinflation that occurred in Germany, and we all know the aftermath of that.

Critically Assessing A Classmates Utopia Ideologue.

Before assessing a classmates point of view, I must acknowledge the fact I am an immigrant born overseas and raised overseas in many different places from Northern Africa, and France, and finally residing in the United States of America, and I hold a moderate stance on many political discussions.

My fellow classmate, Christian Briones has a very positive leftist ideology in his topic of "The Land of the Free." While I do agree with the fact that my friend makes valid arguments in the sense that people deserve the opportunity to have new lives, to escape from their problems, and to make a better place for their families to live in, I must disagree on immorality to prevent someone from coming in or getting sent back.

As ruthless as it may seem, and although if I was on the other side of the spectrum I'd only naturally be arguing from an opposing point of view I do know for a fact the process of obtaining a visa and trying to come in to America let alone stay in there is ridiculously hard and people devout their life savings for a chance at it. It comes to honest dismay that not everyone belongs here, and before the thought of me having no right to say that comes in to play. It's in the sense that once we create a "Land of the Free," it will become exactly that, once we make very loosely constructed guidelines to entering into America and staying here, those with bad intentions may stir up chaos and this will eventually lead to major discrepancies in wealth, increased racism, and possibly, a more chaotic nation.

What I do believe is necessary, is for slight reform to those that are able to come into America. A more logical unbiased approach and not one of which someone's story must reach national news in order for them to have the ability to come in. The reason America is so great and grand and the reason everyone wants to come into it is that unlike what I've experienced overseas with the culture shock, it is better. When people that have grown accustomed to poverty and different norms, it will drastically affect us if we allow them to walk on it.

With the current administration there is a factual indication of racism and bias, however, it's not only "our president," which people fail to see because we are so caught up in media and eat up whatever is entertaining and tossed at us. For people to make change for a nation closer to a utopia, it is a necessity to rather than just state opinions, but to take action and attempt to achieve roles and status to help society for the better good, or to end up watching from the sidelines like the rest of us, enjoying what we have, but with a conflicted feeling on the inside because we would rather it be us than them.

President Donald Trump is a Subtle Fascist.

       On Oct 30, 2018, The Washington Post published an article by John Wagner, titled; "Trump eyeing executive order to end birthright citizenship, a move most legal experts and top House Republican say runs afoul of the Constitution." During our last post, we discussed the coming campaign for re-election set by Trump and how he's pushing the immigration agenda dialogue again to have more leeway towards staying in office for a second term. In this article, Trump is "to sign an executive order that would seek to end the right to U.S. citizenship for children born in the United States to non-citizens." Although Trump does make a point that we are in fact "the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 95 years with all of those benefits," I must disagree with him with the fact that putting this into place would violate the jurisdictions set by our constitution.

       The thing to put to notice that Trump said which would give a new definition to the concept of checks and balances is Trump realizing and saying, "I can do it just with an executive order.” Not only is this reform to the constitution crazy, but his assertion of power is beginning to reflect that of a dictatorship if he can do such a thing with just an executive order. I do think however this would be a valid cause for immediate impeachment if he attempts to overturn the pillars that our foundations have been set on. Although there are many things that do need reform in our constitution in order to advance with the times, I do believe it is a necessity to see these things out as a whole government with the input of the people rather than to attempt to reform it all because one person feels a certain way, possibly awakening another era of fascism. The analogy between Trump's actions and fascism may seem stretched out, but it's not, because as these actions begin to be accepted by the masses, the slowly allow themselves to be controlled by a dictator.

Illustration by David Horsey

Is Donald Trump going to build a wall or is it a campaign ruse?

     On Oct 19, 2018, The Washington Post published an article by David Nakamura, Josh Dawsey, and Nick Miroff, titled; “‘Close the whole thing!’: Border tensions boil over as Trump’s frustrations grow.” The Trump administration has really put the focus back into immigration policies as of late and seems to be targeting control of the conservative which won them the POTUS status as midterm elections near. A quote from the article states; “In the summer, the president was so upset by the border numbers that he proposed sealing the entire 1,954-mile U.S.-Mexico border, including shuttering legal ports of entry, blocking trade flows and halting tourism and travel, according to the senior administration officials” It’s quite interesting how there had been major hype towards building a wall and spending a substantial amount of money to segregate a people instead of attempting to fund for better education and prosperity in low-income areas. The rise of this ideology of segregation once again was a reminder of many Americans with moderate and left-wing ideologies what could become modern-day slave ideology once again, and it especially became pronounced when videos surfaced of homeland security using brute force to separate good people, also known as, “drug-dealers” and “rapists” by conservative America, being separated from their children and families in public places such as their homes or outside of churches.

     The article is left-leaning as it points out that Trump constantly blames Democrats for causing such problems for the Department of Homeland Security. There are also many arguments again in an attempt to portray the Democratic Party at fault for the ongoing problems occurring inside the white house with accusations towards the former President Barack Obama and his administration for characterizing “stopping illegal immigration as a willingness problem.” At the end of the day, this is more of a matter of what the people want to hear. Those that are in America and aren’t fleeing from their problem areas are not in favor for immigrants, let alone illegal immigrants bringing their problematic ideologies to America and tainting it, and at the end of the day selfish America has spoken its mind in the past and will continue to do so if the nation is more for spending notable assets on segregation of people instead of assimilation of diversity in a great nation.

Brett Kavanaugh Topics Will Always Lean Towards A Side

     On Oct 4, 2018, USA Today published an article by reporter, Caroline Simon, titled; 'I thought this was a country where women’s rights mattered': Protesters storm Washington again over Kavanaugh. Brett Kavanaugh, a Supreme Court nominee has been held a public job interview for the whole nation to see. In this job interview there have been numerous allegations against him involving sexual harassment suits, judgement on morality, and consistent questioning about his personal life. The whole article is pretty biased because of how many perspectives from feminist ideologies the author Caroline Simon uses. The sources are very negative as they are views from many pro-women's rights people as they always look for the bad and agree with the worst scenario possible. Majority modern day feminism does call out many problems and concerns with the existing patriarch, but at the same time there is the agenda that may cause innocent people at times to lose their livelihood for.

     The author is only an intern for USA Today, but based on her past stories on her feed her ideology is very one sided women's rights activism orientated. The whole argument towards women's rights is a valuable argument, but although I hold moderate standings towards situations like this, the overall standpoint is completely bias, so it is obviously going to be against Kavanaugh, and I would not see this as a reliable source, but I would read it just to see the other sides point of view. At the end of the day the ongoing articles are majority biased because you will always lean towards one side when speaking on such a controversial topic, and whether it is stated or not, sources that are used will always lean towards one topic.

A sexual-harasser as a Supreme Court Judge, or a false accusation?

On Sep 18, 2018, USA Today published an article by reporter, William Cummings, titled; Senators 'failed' in 1991, Anita Hill says. But she thinks they can do better this time. This article brings to attention a prominent topic of sexual harassment of women in society and government thanks to the evolving state of information. Anita Hill, a female college professor, sat in Supreme Court in 1991, was humiliated publicly for being a victim of sexual harassment by an all-male judiciary committee, and lost her case. Hill’s case is similar to the case of Christine Blasey Ford, in which both accusers where nominees for the Supreme Court; Anita Hill to Clarence Thomas, and Christine Ford to Kavanaugh, along with how the accusers waited so long before they were able to voice themselves.

Many overlook Fords accusation of a harassment from 35 years ago, and many side with her. I personally believe this will go in favor for Ford because Anita’s case has brought wide spread attention and women are being taken more seriously in today’s society than they were back then. This article is a good read for anyone with concerns about women falsely accusing men of rape over the media.

Welcome to IPAP: Immigrants Perspective on American Politics!

Hello everyone!

I can't wait to rant about my experiences and reflect on America politics here! Also, I find it comical how most youth get their news primarily from tweets or memes, so I'll try to keep it entertaining;