Charlie Kirk explains why Blompf isn’t “anti-immigrant”:

If President Trump was anti-immigrant, then why does his new immigration plan not decrease the overall number of immigrants we take in each year?



Pro-America and Pro-Immigrant should be synonyms.



The difference:



Republicans want them to come legally



Democrats want lawlessness — Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 17, 2019

If you had to put a dollar figure on four years of mainstream conservatism, how much is it worth to you? Is mainstream conservatism worth $1,000 a month to you? My answer is no. #HumanityFirst pic.twitter.com/eWsXu1rg7N — EMPEROR ‘KINGFISH’ WHITEPILL (@CptBlackPill) May 16, 2019

Tormud doesn’t need Brienne, Charlie Kirk or the GOP:

Tormund is out here FLOURISHING without brienne. He left her raven on read. pic.twitter.com/FSp7bzniVJ — bigwoman who (@devinnodude) May 16, 2019

Interesting.

I’ve been told by Blompf supporters that I have to vote for the GOP in 2020 because of immigration. Why should I vote on the basis of immigration when the Trump administration is making no effort to reduce legal immigration and when illegal immigration is at a record high?

If the rationale for voting for the GOP is reducing immigration inflows, then it has failed spectacularly. It’s even worse than that because the Kushner plan doesn’t even propose to curb legal immigration. It’s not like there is a border wall, a ban on sanctuary cities or even deportations to make up for it either. We have gotten virtually nothing on immigration out of the Trump administration.

Note: What is the opportunity cost of mainstream conservatism?

If I was getting paid $1,000 a month for the last six months since the 2018 midterm elections, I would have $6,000 to show for my vote. What do we have to show for the last six months of the GOP Congress? Israel annexing the Golan Heights? Criminal Justice Reform? Regime change in Venezuela?