Will the issues you care about be priorities for a Trump-family run RNC?

[temporal1]

It’s impossible to determine anything from statistics when the parameters are changed.

Example:
Too many arrested for marijuana use?
Legalize marijuana! Poof! Problem “solved”.

[Ken]

He is lying about crime. The fact of the matter is that violent crime has been falling in this country since the pandemic spikes in 2020 and 2021. The cities that have experienced the biggest surge of immigrants have not seen increases in crime.

I will stop short of calling you a liar, but this is an exercise in the most extreme of sophistry, Ken. The reporting of crime has fallen off a cliff since 2020; in places like San Francisco, the police aren't even willing to take the time to take a report of a theft or car-break in. Actual crime on the street is much worse now than it used to be. Some of us have actual lived experience in places like SF and NYC and remember what it was like in the early 2000s, the mid-2010s, and now, and can easily see that it's gone up.

To the contrary. And immigrants are Less likely to commit crimes than citizens. Those are all facts. But you will only hear the opposite from Trump.

This is another rather extreme exercise in sophistry (ignoring the fact that every single illegal immigrant is already a criminal). It is obvious when immigrants move in to an area and suddenly crime goes up. This happens, over and over. A good example is Hazleton, PA (see https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metr ... statistics ), where a variety of crime (including theft) significantly inceased as the existing population got displaced with illegal aliens and other migrants.

If you're going to accuse someone else of lying, then the least you could do is try to speak truth yourself.

If you think Trump is telling the truth about immigration and about Biden's policies then I have a bridge to sell you. Grace used the word "lie" to describe how Democrats portray Trump. I'm simply pointing out that when it comes to Trump, accusations are always confessions and anything you want to criticize Democrats of doing applies doubly to Trump. That is probably the iron law of Trumpism right there.

I'm not going to bother finding a whole bunch of crime states to prove the point. But Yes, in fact, crime has dropped in most cities around the country since the pandemic and it isn't because they stopped reporting it.

Also, the majority of people you are calling illegal immigrants are not, in fact illegal. They are here legally while awaiting asylum hearings. The fact that Congress at the urging of Trump has failed to expand the immigration court system to speed that process up is why we have so many clustering in our cities.

Finally it is true that immigrants commit violent crime at lower rates than non-immigrants. Look if up if you don't believe me. The reason for that should be obvious to you. most immigrants are trying to keep a low profile, because they know any violations are likely to get them deported. Teenagers or young criminals who are American citizens have no such fear.

[Josh]

Also, the majority of people you are calling illegal immigrants are not, in fact illegal. They are here legally while awaiting asylum hearings. The fact that Congress at the urging of Trump has failed to expand the immigration court system to speed that process up is why we have so many clustering in our cities.

This is the equivalent of sovereign-citizen arguments that someone hasn't actually broken any laws when they get pulled over for speeding, etc.

[Josh]

It’s impossible to determine anything from statistics when the parameters are changed.

Example:
Too many arrested for marijuana use?
Legalize marijuana! Poof! Problem “solved”.

There was a situation a while back where the amount of funds for government assistance was based on the number of children receiving free school lunches.

Someone came up with the bright idea to vastly expand the amount of children eligible for free school lunch, and then presto - the "child poverty" rate was a lot higher, and they qualified for more funds.

[ohio jones]

It’s impossible to determine anything from statistics when the parameters are changed.

Example:
Too many arrested for marijuana use?
Legalize marijuana! Poof! Problem “solved”.

There was a situation a while back where the amount of funds for government assistance was based on the number of children receiving free school lunches.

Someone came up with the bright idea to vastly expand the amount of children eligible for free school lunch, and then presto - the "child poverty" rate was a lot higher, and they qualified for more funds.

It's surprising how many funding programs are tied to the free lunch metric. FCC's Universal Service Program for Schools and Libraries (E-rate) that provides telecom and internet infrastructure and hardware is one that I've dealt with a bit.

[Robert]

My priorities:

1. National debt and deficit.
I don't think he will do much about it.
2. Abraham Accords
I think he will get them back on track if he is elected.
3. Immigration
Trump will address this but most likely not how I would want it done.

[Ken]

It’s impossible to determine anything from statistics when the parameters are changed.

Example:
Too many arrested for marijuana use?
Legalize marijuana! Poof! Problem “solved”.

There was a situation a while back where the amount of funds for government assistance was based on the number of children receiving free school lunches.

Someone came up with the bright idea to vastly expand the amount of children eligible for free school lunch, and then presto - the "child poverty" rate was a lot higher, and they qualified for more funds.

One again, you are wrong about something. This is simply not true.

I was curious if you might be right so I actually looked up the income thresholds for free and reduced lunches. They are 1.30% and 1.85% of the Federal poverty line in 2024 as you can see right here: https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/fr-022024

Going back in time the same exact formula was used in 2010: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... 9-6806.pdf
In 2000, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... 0-8205.pdf
and in 1995 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... 5-5633.htm

which is 29 years ago and as far back as they had the old annual notices posted to the USDA web site.

So for at LEAST the past 29 years the USDA has used the same identical formula for determining eligibility for free and reduced lunches. Probably because that formula is in the 1966 Child Nutrition Act which established the formula and Congress has never changed it.

There was some additional funding for school lunches as part of the pandemic relief measures passed during the last year of the Trump Administration and I think some states simply waived the thresholds and made free lunches available to all students. Most of that has now expired, But no one has changed the standard USDA formula that has been in place for decades, which is the one used for poverty calculations.

[Josh]

It’s impossible to determine anything from statistics when the parameters are changed.

Example:
Too many arrested for marijuana use?
Legalize marijuana! Poof! Problem “solved”.

There was a situation a while back where the amount of funds for government assistance was based on the number of children receiving free school lunches.

Someone came up with the bright idea to vastly expand the amount of children eligible for free school lunch, and then presto - the "child poverty" rate was a lot higher, and they qualified for more funds.

One again, you are wrong about something. This is simply not true.

No, I'm actually right about this. Your information is simply out of date.

[Ken]

There was a situation a while back where the amount of funds for government assistance was based on the number of children receiving free school lunches.

Someone came up with the bright idea to vastly expand the amount of children eligible for free school lunch, and then presto - the "child poverty" rate was a lot higher, and they qualified for more funds.

One again, you are wrong about something. This is simply not true.

No, I'm actually right about this. Your information is simply out of date.

This is the formula for free and reduced lunch eligibility that the USDA just published for NEXT YEAR. Straight from the USDA web site: https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/fr-022024

That is as up to date as it is possible to be. That is for the 2024-2025 school year which hasn't even happened yet. The actual Federal Register notice announcing next year's thresholds was published February 20, 2024 which is less than a month ago and they only publish them once a year: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... -03355.pdf

It is IDENTICAL to the formula that has been in place since at least 1995 (Clinton's first term in office) and probably long before. Go ahead and compare them. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... 5-5633.htm

You must be reading some sort of right-wing misinformation off Twitter or something, if you think it is otherwise.

[temporal1]

My priorities:

1. National debt and deficit.
I don't think he will do much about it.
2. Abraham Accords
I think he will get them back on track if he is elected.
3. Immigration
Trump will address this but most likely not how I would want it done.

i like your response. It fits the OP, i think. i’ll try to follow this pattern.