… they understand there's a roadblock and they are the roadblock,"
That's why we voted for them. And that's all they need to understand.
Besides, I hate this language. The word "roadblock" infers an impediment to forward motion. The Republican constituency does not consider higher taxes, stifling regulation and greater dependence on statists to be forward motion. Just the opposite, and rightfully so.
It is true however that the Republican establishment in Washington sees immigration as a major reason they lost. And they will no doubt waste their time and future political capital chasing it down.
I would caution against that assertion though. A study by some Manhattan Institute muckity-muck concluded that 75% of Hispanics vote D for the same reasons that a whole lot of other D-voters vote D. Only 25% saw immigration as the key.
But doesn't that relly confuse the issue as it pertains to the technology labor market? As it pertains to us? Are we really seeing a massive influx of South Americans in technology, or pressure thereof?
"I moderated a panel with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton...yadda, yadda..."finishing each other's sentences"..yadda, yadda.
So this certainly adds to the “the-fix-is-in” argument but more curious is what your average out-of-work American software engineer has to say about this:
..."for every H1b visa, six new jobs are created."
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.