***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[RustyShackleford]

My stance on immigration is a lot like my stance on most issues, especially criminal justice reform

People greatly underestimate the about of money and effort it will take to have a functional immigration system.

It would take tens of billions a year on top of what is being spent

So everyone just runs to their corner and discuss the topic framed in a way that represents their general ideology.

 

[TooOlfForThisIsh]

Immigration laws are already pretty tough, not sure how much tougher they can get. Play on the ignorance of folks to the process I guess. You could legit just say something that's already happening and surprise them.

Yeah, no politician has ever gone broke betting on the Xenophobia of the average American - Democrat or not.

The administrative state is woefully underfunded to enforce the tough laws we already have. But I’m sure things will get much better here if we act even more hostile to the refugees our global policies have helped create.

 

[kvsm23vs24]

De Santis got a chance against Trompas? Dudes following is growing.

 

[rexanglorum]

Turns out Desantis was for affirmative action this whole time

DeSantis comes off as an even bigger scumbag.

If you believe or want to believe that systems of oppression simply don’t exist and each individual is just an island, totally unaffected by things like history, economics, or society, I’d disagree with you but ok, at least you’re consistent.

By contrast, DeSantis is acknowledging that some people do belong to groups and those groups are adversely affected by social powers beyond their control.

By extension he’s arguing that gay people and black people AREN’T subjected to adverse social forces beyond their control.

Moreover, he believes that black, disparate outcomes are caused by large scale individual deficiencies among gay and black people.

 

[rexanglorum]

Got his money's worth fundraising I suppose

 

[rexanglorum]

Time will tell but it seems like John Fetterman is good at politics.

He’s good at advancing up the ranks, he was good at winning a Senate race in a purple State, and he’s good at looking left wing while not pissing off reactionary interests. So in that respect, he’s great at politics, at least in the short run.

But let’s think about what his blood libel against migrants will do or contribute to over the next 10, 20, 50 years. Sure, telling regressive whites, who live that their woes can be blamed on Mexican and Central American, gives you a short-term boost with working class whites. But what about the future?

Mexican and Central American voters generally have a long memory and the level of betrayal is massive among a lot of politically active members of those groups.

That voting bloc also has a long memory on immigration (they aren’t single issue voters but immigration is a sensitive issue, for obvious reasons). Eventually, those elderly “blue dog” Dems will die off and be replaced by a younger, browner, more ideologically left cadre of voters (if Gen Z scares you politically, wait until an even more alienated and generation of iPad kids age into the franchise). At that point, American national politics will look like that of California right now.

And I’m sure you’re well aware that in the 1990’s, the massive increase in immigration to border States, forced Republican and Democratic Parties in those States to make choices. The Texas GOP choose a more pragmatic and humane approach. The California GOP choose to be maximally anti Latino immigrant. The California GOP today is less a party and more a giant, rent seeking, special interest group.

Stabbing migrants in the back could cause the national Democratic Party to meet that same fate over time. Moreover, the territorial integrity of the United States will be jeopardized. A declining empire, where vast swaths of it blame other racial and territorial tranches of fellow American citizens for their woes and that’s just the intra party strife? A civil war, dissolution, or the US existing in name only could be on the horizon, if we stretch out the timeline.

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Let’s look at Fetterman’s own career path. If he wants to become president, what bloc within the Democratic coalition would he have in a fight for a nomination? Obviously, he’s not getting many people who voted for Bernie. Can he win over black voters, I doubt it and even then it’s hard to see him winning with the margins that Obama, Clinton, and Biden got. His left wing cosplaying and somewhat pro union stances will scare away the affluent, white professional class who backed Biden and Obama. Could he get a majority of women’s votes? Again doubtful, there will be women running for office who can own the reproductive freedom issue.

So what would Fetterman have in 2028? Oh an on going beef with a powerful and ever growing constituency who won’t forget his betrayal of migrants. That’s what he’ll have.

So it really all depends on what timeframe we’re talking about in determining if he’s really good at politics or not.

 

[05fordgt]

Gollum wasn't having a good day Lots of hand gestures & double talk, but he still doesn't have anything

 

[osh kosh bosh]

But let’s think about what his blood libel against migrants will do or contribute to over the next 10, 20, 50 years. Sure, telling regressive whites, who live that their woes can be blamed on Mexican and Central American, gives you a short-term boost with working class whites. But what about the future?

Blood libel?

Can you please point to a John Fetterman quote on illegal immigration that you would call blood libel.

Sure, telling regressive whites, who live that their woes can be blamed on Mexican and Central American, gives you a short-term boost with working class whites. But what about the future?

1. Do we have any evidence that Black, Latino, or Asian Pennsylvanians are particularly friendly towards illegal immigration?

2. Can you point to a John Fetterman quote that telling white " their woes can be blamed on Mexican and Central Americans"

maybe I missed something but these are the quotes im familiar with.

these seems a long way a way from your paraphrases.

Mexican and Central American voters generally have a long memory and the level of betrayal is massive among a lot of politically active members of those groups.

That voting bloc also has a long memory on immigration (they aren’t single issue voters but immigration is a sensitive issue, for obvious reasons). Eventually, those elderly “blue dog” Dems will die off and be replaced by a younger, browner, more ideologically left cadre of voters (if Gen Z scares you politically, wait until an even more alienated and generation of iPad kids age into the franchise). At that point, American national politics will look like that of California right now.

I don't know how anyone can look at Donald Trump's continued improvement with Latino voters, and the erosion of Latino support for Democrats and conclude.

that some light tough on boarder talk is going to be the some massive political liability.

This vaunted long memory lasted all of 4 years as many warmed to Trump.

Stabbing migrants in the back could cause the national Democratic Party to meet that same fate over time. Moreover, the territorial integrity of the United States will be jeopardized. A declining empire, where vast swaths of it blame other racial and territorial tranches of fellow American citizens for their woes and that’s just the intra party strife? A civil war, dissolution, or the US existing in name only could be on the horizon, if we stretch out the timeline.

Is it possible for Politian to stab a non citizen in the back?

I think you're rhetoric is so overheated. no one is stabbing any one in the back.

if there is going to be an improvement in the America's immigration system, it's going to come via a deal made between Democrats.
The republican party will never do a grand bargain because they want the wedge issue.
So if you want to help undocumented people, you will need to win the Senate. and you will need some purple state Dems to compromise with.

personally id be in favour of 100x-ing the amount of immigrants,
but the voters of Pennsylvania seem to disagree. you have to contend with this reality.

the answers can't be give up on the senate for 20 years and hope, the political opinions of 16 year old's stay frozen in amber until they are voting age.

 

[Brownstone]

I have heard time and time again Nikki Haley sing this corny trope about how Trump was the right president for that time or the right time or whatever nonsense.

Can someone ask her the basic follow up of why he was good for then and not for now? Aside from the fact that she's running?

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[TooOlfForThisIsh]

Mexican and Central American voters generally have a long memory and the level of betrayal is massive among a lot of politically active members of those groups.

There was a time, even somewhat recently, that I would have agreed wholeheartedly with this sentiment. Latinos (correctly) saw anti-immigrant rhetoric as thinly veiled attacks on their culture and themselves.

But whiteness is a hell of a drug.

I think the long and changing history of Latin-American immigration to the US leads to the need for considerably more nuance when it comes to discussion of immigration and the descendants of immigrants.

Fifth, fourth, even second generation Latinos are increasingly seeking to distance themselves from the newer batch of those seeking a better life.

Some of this might be attributable to the three decade shift from Mexico to Central and now South America. “Latino” has always been reductive and I’m not sure Chícanos have as much affinity towards Venezuelans as they would Mexicans.

Some is probably the allure of Whiteness and the willingness that Euro-Americans in the border areas and north have had to increasingly accept reactionary Mexican-Americans as “real” Americans.

And of course some of it is probably just old fashioned reactionary instincts by people who have found their way into more security than their immigrant ancestors.

I suspect it may be too early to suss out what the mixture of motivation might be, and it’s definitely hard to predict what that means in terms of future voting behavior. But suffice to say, anti-immigrant rhetoric doesn’t seem to be the vote-killer that it might once have been with Mexican-Americans.

 

[DLF]

A reminder that cnn and other mainstream media channels get directions from the state dept on what stories to push and what stories to sweep under the rug.

Since we are not in favor of war with Iran, cnn and others have conveniently put the news of Iran seizing a US oil ship (that they had stolen before from Iran) and taken it back to Iran at the very bottom of the website and likely will not be covered on tv.

If war was desired, it would have been front page and they would have done a story on each of its crew members and shown their kids on tv etc.

Another story swept to the side is the ICJ GENOCIDE trial on our best and most beloved ally Israel.

 

[1995]

 

[DLF]

Anti-Semite Hamas pro trumper alert:

 

[RustyShackleford]

Anti-Semite Hamas pro trumper alert:

I don't think using Corbyn is the slam dunk you think it is.

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

Florida’s Book-Banning Crusade Has Found Its Next Target: Dictionaries

A law signed by Ron DeSantis last year has led one school district to remove three publishers’ dictionaries, while another removed classics like Paradise Lost and East of Eden, for their descriptions of “sexual conduct.”

www.vanityfair.com

 

[IATT]

 

[DLF]

War with Yemen is likely commencing in the next 12 hours

 

[DLF]

Aren’t we so sick of winning?