Biden is way behind Trump with voters on border issues so any argument that this has been an effective strategy seems wishful.
Its the same old thing. Moving to the right doesnt help you because if being shit to immigrants appeals to you you'll just vote GOP anyway. The rest of us get to sit here and listen to him talk about how much he wants to work with the guy who's immigration comments he once called Hitlerish.
We have discussed this so much. Along the TX border at least, this is not true at all. Border Bullshit is a strong wedge issue and Dems had some real losses in the Hispanic vote in TX border districts. A progressive Dem lost a seat held by Democrats for over a hundred years down there and she's going to need to fend off the border "issue" if she wants a shot this time. Talking TX-15 here, where two Hispanic women will be on the ballot and the Republican is painting herself as a moderate who's hardline on border bullshit.
Immigration wedges the Democrats. You can fucking see it in all the threads here where it comes up. Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party! The border bill is toast, take a breath and let him make the GOP look like fools for a minute. We can all pivot back to stronger ground on the economy and abortion rights in a couple of weeks, because I guaran-fucking-tee you the entire reason we're talking about the border is because Republicans need an issue that isn't abortion they can run on.
Don't give it to them.
I wish you would have phrased it in a less paternalistic/insulting way towards forumers who have legitimate grievances with the democratic party.
I don't want to minimize the grievances! Part of being in a coalition is not agreeing on everything but still doing what's necessary to retain your seat at the table. Democratic weakness due to small numbers of progressive no-shows in a mostly moderate district directly results in a Republican majority in the House. So if your grievances are enough to really have this issue wedge you out of the caucus, and you're willing to be part of the reason why the GOP House is in the majority, then that's that.
But if it's not enough to get you to quit, and you're willing to recognize the political reality despite your personal feelings and help places like TX-15 turn back blue, then it's important to not get baited into the wedge. That's all I'm saying. Hispanic moderates outnumber progressives along the TX border, but we need both groups in order to win and this issue has already cost seats.
It is extremely off putting to have matter is life and death, often to the people involved, reduced to wedge issues.
If politics didn't matter it wouldn't divide people. Don't get your back up about the terminology! It's an issue, and it drives a wedge into the caucus because of how important it is. If you let that happen, you will not get any influence on this issue when it matters (i.e. when a Democrat sets the House agenda) and you also won't get to influence other things that matter very much (because your caucus won't have control of the House).
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
They are literally talking about reviving it but with worse stuff right now.
Where?
I am not going to relink a news article I know you have seen.
It's a legitimate question, aside from the Tweet styro linked this morning, I don't see that anyone has linked any articles or sources in this thread since the middle of last month and I have honestly no idea what you are even talking about us having seen.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
They are literally talking about reviving it but with worse stuff right now.
Where?
I am not going to relink a news article I know you have seen.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
They are literally talking about reviving it but with worse stuff right now.
Where?
I am not going to relink a news article I know you have seen.
The last news article in this thread was linked back on the 14th of February, over two weeks ago.
Biden is way behind Trump with voters on border issues so any argument that this has been an effective strategy seems wishful.
Its the same old thing. Moving to the right doesnt help you because if being shit to immigrants appeals to you you'll just vote GOP anyway. The rest of us get to sit here and listen to him talk about how much he wants to work with the guy who's immigration comments he once called Hitlerish.
We have discussed this so much. Along the TX border at least, this is not true at all. Border Bullshit is a strong wedge issue and Dems had some real losses in the Hispanic vote in TX border districts. A progressive Dem lost a seat held by Democrats for over a hundred years down there and she's going to need to fend off the border "issue" if she wants a shot this time. Talking TX-15 here, where two Hispanic women will be on the ballot and the Republican is painting herself as a moderate who's hardline on border bullshit.
Immigration wedges the Democrats. You can fucking see it in all the threads here where it comes up. Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party! The border bill is toast, take a breath and let him make the GOP look like fools for a minute. We can all pivot back to stronger ground on the economy and abortion rights in a couple of weeks, because I guaran-fucking-tee you the entire reason we're talking about the border is because Republicans need an issue that isn't abortion they can run on.
Don't give it to them.
I wish you would have phrased it in a less paternalistic/insulting way towards forumers who have legitimate grievances with the democratic party.
I don't want to minimize the grievances! Part of being in a coalition is not agreeing on everything but still doing what's necessary to retain your seat at the table. Democratic weakness due to small numbers of progressive no-shows in a mostly moderate district directly results in a Republican majority in the House. So if your grievances are enough to really have this issue wedge you out of the caucus, and you're willing to be part of the reason why the GOP House is in the majority, then that's that.
But if it's not enough to get you to quit, and you're willing to recognize the political reality despite your personal feelings and help places like TX-15 turn back blue, then it's important to not get baited into the wedge. That's all I'm saying. Hispanic moderates outnumber progressives along the TX border, but we need both groups in order to win and this issue has already cost seats.
It is extremely off putting to have matter is life and death, often to the people involved, reduced to wedge issues.
If politics didn't matter it wouldn't divide people. Don't get your back up about the terminology! It's an issue, and it drives a wedge into the caucus because of how important it is. If you let that happen, you will not get any influence on this issue when it matters (i.e. when a Democrat sets the House agenda) and you also won't get to influence other things that matter very much (because your caucus won't have control of the House).
It should be the opposite of off-putting.
When someone says your a matter that can kill you is irrelevant and should be ignored it is off putting. That is just how people work. You cannot reasonably ask someone to sacrifice their life in a casual manner.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
They are literally talking about reviving it but with worse stuff right now.
Where?
I am not going to relink a news article I know you have seen.
It's a legitimate question, aside from the Tweet styro linked this morning, I don't see that anyone has linked any articles or sources in this thread since the middle of last month and I have honestly no idea what you are even talking about us having seen.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
They are literally talking about reviving it but with worse stuff right now.
Where?
I am not going to relink a news article I know you have seen.
The last news article in this thread was linked back on the 14th of February, over two weeks ago.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
They are literally talking about reviving it but with worse stuff right now.
Where?
I am not going to relink a news article I know you have seen.
The leader of the party does not have ultimate control in our political system. That is a difference between ours and yours. See how Speaker Johnson is unable to keep the bill dead despite needing Republican votes.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
Don't do the Some Guy On A Forum thing, holy shit.
Look at the link. Do you think progressives should disagree with her stance? Do you think they should stay home despite her stance, and cost her the ability to vote for it?
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
Don't do the Some Guy On A Forum thing, holy shit.
Look at the link. Do you think progressives should disagree with her stance? Do you think they should stay home despite her stance, and cost her the ability to vote for it?
Why are you turning "this Biden policy is stupid and destructive" into "should local dems vote for this local politicians"?
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
Don't do the Some Guy On A Forum thing, holy shit.
Look at the link. Do you think progressives should disagree with her stance? Do you think they should stay home despite her stance, and cost her the ability to vote for it?
Yes, because the border is perfectly secure. All the hype about drugs and sex trafficking are overblown when it's no worse than at any other border. All democrats should have dismantling ICE as part of their platform and fixing the Border Patrol to be less racist.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
Don't do the Some Guy On A Forum thing, holy shit.
Look at the link. Do you think progressives should disagree with her stance? Do you think they should stay home despite her stance, and cost her the ability to vote for it?
Yes, because the border is perfectly secure. All the hype about drugs and sex trafficking are overblown when it's no worse than at any other border. All democrats should have dismantling ICE as part of their platform and fixing the Border Patrol to be less racist.
You can’t honestly be trying to argue that the border is “perfectly” secure. What data are you basing this on?
“Some guy on a forum” is how issues get decided. We all yak about it and vote accordingly and tell our friends to vote accordingly. This plays out over all social media and in-person interactions. So one guy isn’t important but all the guys together are important! Like the way one vote isn’t important but if every socialist gets mad and stays home over immigration, Democrats lose.
I'd love open borders too, but it's never going to happen so long as the median voter is like +20 R on immigration. The point isn't win to over conservative voters, it's to try and convince independents that you're taking the border seriously because our media sucks and accepts Republican framing of every issue.
The problem is because the media sucks you never get the political credit for adopting the shitty position of most voters. And you have that shitty position, which your most engaged partisans know about and are displeased by.
Democrats have maneuvered their way into an incredible place where they get punished for policy positions they don't actually have/adopt. So you don't get the benefits of the policy position while being punished politically for doing so because nobody knows what's happening because Horse Race incentives mean actually informing anyone about what's going on is not what the media is interested in. In that context they should just do the right thing, but that requires totally changing their frame on media. Incidentally they also need a relentless media operation independent of the fucking New York Times.
Opposite applies to Republicans, whose platform is so insane nobody believes you if you describe it to them accurately until they actually enact it, like with Dobbs.
3. Democrats showed they can defend themselves on immigration.
This race was dominated by GOP attacks on immigration. Republicans spent more than $8 million on campaign ads in this race, a huge number for a special congressional election. They hammered Democrat Tom Suozzi on immigration on the airwaves. Republican Mazi Pilip even held rallies near a makeshift tent city in Queens that houses migrants.
It's been a hot-button issue in New York with red-state governors busing migrants who crossed the border illegally to cities run by Democrats, including New York. New York Mayor Eric Adams has criticized the Biden administration on border security, calling on it to do more. Biden gets just a 29% approval for his handling of the issue, and Republicans have a 12-point advantage on which party would do a better job with it, according to the latest NPR poll.
So it's understandable that Republicans would want to try to use it. But Democrats showed they can defend themselves on this issue – by tacking to the middle. Suozzi said the border needed to be secured, called for a bipartisan compromise and supported the bipartisan congressional deal that was scuttled by Trump and the hard right. Pilip came out against the bill.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
Don't do the Some Guy On A Forum thing, holy shit.
Look at the link. Do you think progressives should disagree with her stance? Do you think they should stay home despite her stance, and cost her the ability to vote for it?
Yes, because the border is perfectly secure. All the hype about drugs and sex trafficking are overblown when it's no worse than at any other border. All democrats should have dismantling ICE as part of their platform and fixing the Border Patrol to be less racist.
For sufficiently narrow values of "any other border", sure. I feel like the Swedish/Norwegian drug trade is pretty minimal all in all. I'd be willing to put five bucks on the bet that less blow crosses the northern US border than the southern one, thought the majority of it probably still comes in via boat. Anyhow, yes to the first question? Or the second, or both?
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
Don't do the Some Guy On A Forum thing, holy shit.
Look at the link. Do you think progressives should disagree with her stance? Do you think they should stay home despite her stance, and cost her the ability to vote for it?
Why are you turning "this Biden policy is stupid and destructive" into "should local dems vote for this local politicians"?
Because I want to dial down from the general to the specific as both an effort to highlight the actual impact of immigration as a wedge issue on actual specific voting districts, and because I think TX-15 is a great district to use as an example of a progressive Dem trying to win while the Republican is using immigration to peel off moderate hispanic voters. I don't think progressives have any answer to the politics at play in this district, or to the very real part of the coalition that is both hispanic and hostile to the the most progressive immigration position.
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
Unfortunately, it's reversed -- Dems were starting to bleed support because voters felt Biden and the Democrats weren't taking the border seriously enough. Dems tacking to the middle and trying to find bipartisan solutions is an attempt to win back voters they were starting to lose. Just to reiterate from earlier, this isn't just happening in America. Left-aligned parties in Europe are bleeding support badly to this issue. It's why those parties have started to tack to the right on immigration, because this issue is incredibly effective at turning voters away from those parties.
“Some guy on a forum” is how issues get decided. We all yak about it and vote accordingly and tell our friends to vote accordingly. This plays out over all social media and in-person interactions. So one guy isn’t important but all the guys together are important! Like the way one vote isn’t important but if every socialist gets mad and stays home over immigration, Democrats lose.
As the media becomes increasingly fractured "some person you know" is increasingly becoming where people get their "news" (in reality, vibes) about politics from.
Like fuck, how many people have had their views shaped and their knowledge gained from forums and social media and all that other shit.
“Some guy on a forum” is how issues get decided. We all yak about it and vote accordingly and tell our friends to vote accordingly. This plays out over all social media and in-person interactions. So one guy isn’t important but all the guys together are important! Like the way one vote isn’t important but if every socialist gets mad and stays home over immigration, Democrats lose.
As the media becomes increasingly fractured "some person you know" is increasingly becoming where people get their "news" (in reality, vibes) about politics from.
Like fuck, how many people have had their views shaped and their knowledge gained from forums and social media and all that other shit.
Yup, like how many people on this very forum and even in this very thread have basically said "Yeah I used to lean this way but discussions on this forum brought me around on X".
I know at least several active posters voted for Republican presidential candidates and I'd be surprised if even one remaining person in D&D is even considering voting Trump.
Stop letting the GOP wedge you out of the caucus in the middle of the Biden admin doing a judo reverse on their entire party!
What, the fuck, is this?
The Biden admin is in the middle of reversing this narrative on this issue to make the GOP look like idiots while not actually doing anything that progressives would be upset with, because the bill is likely dead. It's going to be spiked as an issue in November if they can pull it off, and we shouldn't get in the way of that.
Honestly Im a little baffled that anyone thinks like this. West Wing B plot stuff.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
Don't do the Some Guy On A Forum thing, holy shit.
Look at the link. Do you think progressives should disagree with her stance? Do you think they should stay home despite her stance, and cost her the ability to vote for it?
Yes, because the border is perfectly secure. All the hype about drugs and sex trafficking are overblown when it's no worse than at any other border. All democrats should have dismantling ICE as part of their platform and fixing the Border Patrol to be less racist.
For sufficiently narrow values of "any other border", sure. I feel like the Swedish/Norwegian drug trade is pretty minimal all in all. I'd be willing to put five bucks on the bet that less blow crosses the northern US border than the southern one, thought the majority of it probably still comes in via boat. Anyhow, yes to the first question? Or the second, or both?
The majority of the drug trade comes from legal ports of entry. If you want to combat that look to Portugal. They have had wild success last I checked in on them, and I feel like it would be huge news everywhere if they had failed at their experiment.
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
Unfortunately, it's reversed -- Dems were starting to bleed support because voters felt Biden and the Democrats weren't taking the border seriously enough. Dems tacking to the middle and trying to find bipartisan solutions is an attempt to win back voters they were starting to lose. Just to reiterate from earlier, this isn't just happening in America. Left-aligned parties in Europe are bleeding support badly to this issue. It's why those parties have started to tack to the right on immigration, because this issue is incredibly effective at turning voters away from those parties.
Then you have to accept that the people you lose are the people you lose. I am too competent to be a political strategist on this, but not nearly competent enough to be an expert. It is just the reality that you can't reasonably be mad at people for looking out for themselves.
Which means that if progressives want them to tack back to the left they need to make them lose more votes for tacking to the right.
But this topic is particularly tough when you compare where progressives have positioned themselves compared to even moderate voters.
I dont expect Dems to offer open borders. I do expect them to make a meaningful distinction between their position on immigration and the GOP's.
I would argue that the GOP don’t want more resources in terms of judges and other workers that would improve processing and speed up the review/approval process at all.
“Some guy on a forum” is how issues get decided. We all yak about it and vote accordingly and tell our friends to vote accordingly. This plays out over all social media and in-person interactions. So one guy isn’t important but all the guys together are important! Like the way one vote isn’t important but if every socialist gets mad and stays home over immigration, Democrats lose.
As the media becomes increasingly fractured "some person you know" is increasingly becoming where people get their "news" (in reality, vibes) about politics from.
Like fuck, how many people have had their views shaped and their knowledge gained from forums and social media and all that other shit.
Yup, like how many people on this very forum and even in this very thread have basically said "Yeah I used to lean this way but discussions on this forum brought me around on X".
I know at least several active posters voted for Republican presidential candidates and I'd be surprised if even one remaining person in D&D is even considering voting Trump.
Not even talking about that. More basic shit like "I just saw this news on twitter".
Which means that if progressives want them to tack back to the left they need to make them lose more votes for tacking to the right.
But this topic is particularly tough when you compare where progressives have positioned themselves compared to even moderate voters.
I dont expect Dems to offer open borders. I do expect them to make a meaningful distinction between their position on immigration and the GOP's.
I would argue that the GOP don’t want more resources in terms of judges and other workers that would improve processing and speed up the review/approval process at all.
Improving processing speed is immediately undermined by giving the executive broad powers to flat deny entry in the first place
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
Unfortunately, it's reversed -- Dems were starting to bleed support because voters felt Biden and the Democrats weren't taking the border seriously enough. Dems tacking to the middle and trying to find bipartisan solutions is an attempt to win back voters they were starting to lose. Just to reiterate from earlier, this isn't just happening in America. Left-aligned parties in Europe are bleeding support badly to this issue. It's why those parties have started to tack to the right on immigration, because this issue is incredibly effective at turning voters away from those parties.
Then you have to accept that the people you lose are the people you lose. I am too competent to be a political strategist on this, but not nearly competent enough to be an expert. It is just the reality that you can't reasonably be mad at people for looking out for themselves.
Reading the forums for many years, I think I've come to realize that this is the fundamental divide in most of the forum discussions: whether something is moral or just vs winning electorally. I agree with you --there is no moralistic argument for handling immigrants and asylum seekers with anything other than the utmost compassion and dignity. Lanz is absolutely correct when they say that our immigration system is rooted in historical and systemic racism. That it enables and empowers cruelty and bigotry.
But morality arguments aren't necessarily winning ones electorally. I wish America were a better place. I wish voters were better people. But they aren't. We have to deal with the polity we have, not the one we wish we had. If Democrats embrace open borders as a policy they are going to get destroyed up and down the ballot.
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
Unfortunately, it's reversed -- Dems were starting to bleed support because voters felt Biden and the Democrats weren't taking the border seriously enough. Dems tacking to the middle and trying to find bipartisan solutions is an attempt to win back voters they were starting to lose. Just to reiterate from earlier, this isn't just happening in America. Left-aligned parties in Europe are bleeding support badly to this issue. It's why those parties have started to tack to the right on immigration, because this issue is incredibly effective at turning voters away from those parties.
Then you have to accept that the people you lose are the people you lose. I am too competent to be a political strategist on this, but not nearly competent enough to be an expert. It is just the reality that you can't reasonably be mad at people for looking out for themselves.
Reading the forums for many years, I think I've come to realize that this is the fundamental divide in most of the forum discussions: whether something is moral or just vs winning electorally. I agree with you --there is no moralistic argument for handling immigrants and asylum seekers with anything other than the utmost compassion and dignity. Lanz is absolutely correct when they say that our immigration system is rooted in historical and systemic racism. That it enables and empowers cruelty and bigotry.
But morality arguments aren't necessarily winning ones electorally. I wish America were a better place. I wish voters were better people. But they aren't. We have to deal with the polity we have, not the one we wish we had. If Democrats embrace open borders as a policy they are going to get destroyed up and down the ballot.
I'm not at all arguing for inhumane treatment of immigrants and asylum seekers, although I broadly would say that even in what is mostly an echo chamber of this thread / forum there are very different ideas what is humane or inhumane.
But acting like people concerned about winning electorially have no moral arguments isn't just reductive - it's simply wrong. Utilitarianism is a thing. There are strong moral arguments that allowing a second term of President Trump when it can be prevented is in and of itself immoral with the level of harm across the board Trump in the White House represents to immigrants, not to mention <waves at everything else>.
Which means that if progressives want them to tack back to the left they need to make them lose more votes for tacking to the right.
But this topic is particularly tough when you compare where progressives have positioned themselves compared to even moderate voters.
I dont expect Dems to offer open borders. I do expect them to make a meaningful distinction between their position on immigration and the GOP's.
I literally linked you to a Democrat with a meaningful distinction from her Republican opponent and yet
and yet
Im not playing this game where when we talk about Bidens policies and Dem leadership's actions you switch to the policy platform of someone running for TX-15
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
I don't mean this to be offensive, but I really can't think of a way to word it without there being some risk of offending you. If the Republican plan is to get Democrats to throw away their coalition, and you're stating that leaving the coalition is on the table for you, then you're following the Republican plan.
If progressive voters become disillusioned to the point that they don't vote due to party actions based on a narrative set mostly by the Republicans, then not only will we lose the White House, but we'll also have a lot of downstream political losses. One big issue I see with the current Dem party is that we focus too much on the WH/Congress to the detriment of local politics, which is an area that Republicans have been making major inroads on.
It's why I approve of Biden's current narrative. Not only is it based on the truth, but it shows that even if Republicans are handed everything they demanded, they will still refuse.
Which means that if progressives want them to tack back to the left they need to make them lose more votes for tacking to the right.
But this topic is particularly tough when you compare where progressives have positioned themselves compared to even moderate voters.
I dont expect Dems to offer open borders. I do expect them to make a meaningful distinction between their position on immigration and the GOP's.
I literally linked you to a Democrat with a meaningful distinction from her Republican opponent and yet
and yet
Im not playing this game where when we talk about Bidens policies and Dem leadership's actions you switch to the policy platform of someone running for TX-15
Which means that if progressives want them to tack back to the left they need to make them lose more votes for tacking to the right.
But this topic is particularly tough when you compare where progressives have positioned themselves compared to even moderate voters.
I dont expect Dems to offer open borders. I do expect them to make a meaningful distinction between their position on immigration and the GOP's.
I literally linked you to a Democrat with a meaningful distinction from her Republican opponent and yet
and yet
Im not playing this game where when we talk about Bidens policies and Dem leadership's actions you switch to the policy platform of someone running for TX-15
Dem leadership is spending money to support politicians that have progressive positions. Sorry it feels like a game to you, I wonder if that's something members of the thread will find offputting!
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
Unfortunately, it's reversed -- Dems were starting to bleed support because voters felt Biden and the Democrats weren't taking the border seriously enough. Dems tacking to the middle and trying to find bipartisan solutions is an attempt to win back voters they were starting to lose. Just to reiterate from earlier, this isn't just happening in America. Left-aligned parties in Europe are bleeding support badly to this issue. It's why those parties have started to tack to the right on immigration, because this issue is incredibly effective at turning voters away from those parties.
Then you have to accept that the people you lose are the people you lose. I am too competent to be a political strategist on this, but not nearly competent enough to be an expert. It is just the reality that you can't reasonably be mad at people for looking out for themselves.
Reading the forums for many years, I think I've come to realize that this is the fundamental divide in most of the forum discussions: whether something is moral or just vs winning electorally. I agree with you --there is no moralistic argument for handling immigrants and asylum seekers with anything other than the utmost compassion and dignity. Lanz is absolutely correct when they say that our immigration system is rooted in historical and systemic racism. That it enables and empowers cruelty and bigotry.
But morality arguments aren't necessarily winning ones electorally. I wish America were a better place. I wish voters were better people. But they aren't. We have to deal with the polity we have, not the one we wish we had. If Democrats embrace open borders as a policy they are going to get destroyed up and down the ballot.
I'm not at all arguing for inhumane treatment of immigrants and asylum seekers, although I broadly would say that even in what is mostly an echo chamber of this thread / forum there are very different ideas what is humane or inhumane.
But acting like people concerned about winning electorially have no moral arguments isn't just reductive - it's simply wrong. Utilitarianism is a thing. There are strong moral arguments that allowing a second term of President Trump when it can be prevented is in and of itself immoral with the level of harm across the board Trump in the White House represents to immigrants, not to mention <waves at everything else>.
Apologies here, I wasn't careful enough with my words. I wasn't trying to argue that folks who disagree with open borders are immoral or don't see a different morality in harm prevention through the electoral process. That is absolutely a valid moral stance.
Which means that if progressives want them to tack back to the left they need to make them lose more votes for tacking to the right.
But this topic is particularly tough when you compare where progressives have positioned themselves compared to even moderate voters.
I dont expect Dems to offer open borders. I do expect them to make a meaningful distinction between their position on immigration and the GOP's.
I literally linked you to a Democrat with a meaningful distinction from her Republican opponent and yet
and yet
Im not playing this game where when we talk about Bidens policies and Dem leadership's actions you switch to the policy platform of someone running for TX-15
Dem leadership is spending money to support politicians that have progressive positions. Sorry it feels like a game to you, I wonder if that's something members of the thread will find offputting!
So I bring up a complaint with the way the President js behaving and you use a random local campaign platform of someone who is not Biden as a shield against that criticism. Whatever this is it isnt particularly rational.
This give away the farm approach to immigration is bad policy and bad politics.
Gnizmo you're hearing "this issue is irrelevant and should be ignored" and that is not anything like what I'm saying.
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
I don't mean this to be offensive, but I really can't think of a way to word it without there being some risk of offending you. If the Republican plan is to get Democrats to throw away their coalition, and you're stating that leaving the coalition is on the table for you, then you're following the Republican plan.
If progressive voters become disillusioned to the point that they don't vote due to party actions based on a narrative set mostly by the Republicans, then not only will we lose the White House, but we'll also have a lot of downstream political losses. One big issue I see with the current Dem party is that we focus too much on the WH/Congress to the detriment of local politics, which is an area that Republicans have been making major inroads on.
It's why I approve of Biden's current narrative. Not only is it based on the truth, but it shows that even if Republicans are handed everything they demanded, they will still refuse.
Yes it is. The problem is you are assigning the blame at the wrong end. I am not going to leave the coalition because Republicans are meanies who want me out. I absolutely will if Democrats decide that they do not value my life enough to protect and cast me out of the coalition. Democrats have the power to not do things to alienate the base. They make their choices, and so do we.
Little in most situations. In this one it is working out the starting point of a problem and thus the point that needs to be resolved. You cannot reasonably ask people to sacrifice themselves for your betterment. Democratic actions are what has put members of this board into that position and discussion.
Posts
If politics didn't matter it wouldn't divide people. Don't get your back up about the terminology! It's an issue, and it drives a wedge into the caucus because of how important it is. If you let that happen, you will not get any influence on this issue when it matters (i.e. when a Democrat sets the House agenda) and you also won't get to influence other things that matter very much (because your caucus won't have control of the House).
It should be the opposite of off-putting.
It's a legitimate question, aside from the Tweet styro linked this morning, I don't see that anyone has linked any articles or sources in this thread since the middle of last month and I have honestly no idea what you are even talking about us having seen.
Except I literally corrected you on what is actually going on in the House with that bill.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/02/29/congress/jeffries-stay-the-course-house-senate-foreign-aid-ukraine-00144083
There's the same link again showing that they are in fact not reviving the deal bill but worse. Jeffries is currently explicitly saying he refuses to do that.
The last news article in this thread was linked back on the 14th of February, over two weeks ago.
When someone says your a matter that can kill you is irrelevant and should be ignored it is off putting. That is just how people work. You cannot reasonably ask someone to sacrifice their life in a casual manner.
I happily will. I don't like being asked questions that have a clear answer to the person asking them. https://www.axios.com/2024/02/29/house-republican-ukraine-aid-discharge-petition
The leader of the party does not have ultimate control in our political system. That is a difference between ours and yours. See how Speaker Johnson is unable to keep the bill dead despite needing Republican votes.
OK I guess? If you think this position sucks and you want her to lose, a great way to do it would be providing air cover for progressives ghosting her in November.
If progressives drop out of her campaign its not because of some guy on a forum but because of things exactly like youre defending. This is just so fuckin bizarre dude.
Like how on earth could you look at US politics and think what Biden is doing it going to negate attacks from Republicans on immigration?
There is an issue here of humanity, and there is an issue here of politics. The overlap is significant, and both circles also include a lot of other equally critical issues, including abortion and civil rights, all of which suffer when you leave the caucus over immigration. So don't get baited into leaving the caucus over immigration, because everything else suffers when you do.
Don't do the Some Guy On A Forum thing, holy shit.
Look at the link. Do you think progressives should disagree with her stance? Do you think they should stay home despite her stance, and cost her the ability to vote for it?
What you are trying to say is not as important as what the other people hear. It is a fundamental fact of this life, and this forum as reflected in the rules. I am trying to get you to hear how it sounds. Because right now you are asking a huge thing as if it were spotting you some money for lunch.
This is something people on this board have repeatedly struggled to identify with, and get very angry when it is pointed out. I am trying to keep it short because I don't like being the star of a thread, and certainly don't want to be one that isn't actually relevant to me. The more stuff that is sacrificed this way the smaller the coalition will become. Not because people are wrong, but because they want to survive. There is no point in voting for a party that isn't fighting to ensure, at the bare fucking minimum, your right to survive.
This issue probably won't get me to leave the coalition. It will make me grumpy and less enthusiastic to vote which can cause problems. I certainly am not going to be able to talk about how good the party is in good faith to others so I won't try.
The Republican play is to get the Democrats to throw their coalition piece by piece to the wolves, and it is working! If we reduce this down to who can get the bigger plurality then Republicans win by having so many white cis straight people. If we keep taking care of the members then there are more of us than them. Stronger together. That means fighting for everyone even when it is difficult.
Why are you turning "this Biden policy is stupid and destructive" into "should local dems vote for this local politicians"?
Yes, because the border is perfectly secure. All the hype about drugs and sex trafficking are overblown when it's no worse than at any other border. All democrats should have dismantling ICE as part of their platform and fixing the Border Patrol to be less racist.
You can’t honestly be trying to argue that the border is “perfectly” secure. What data are you basing this on?
While I don't disagree in general, there is anecdotal evidence that Republicans torpedoing the border deal swung some independents and right-leaning voters in the NY special. https://www.npr.org/2024/02/14/1231301104/new-york-special-election-results-santos-suozzi-pilip
Because I want to dial down from the general to the specific as both an effort to highlight the actual impact of immigration as a wedge issue on actual specific voting districts, and because I think TX-15 is a great district to use as an example of a progressive Dem trying to win while the Republican is using immigration to peel off moderate hispanic voters. I don't think progressives have any answer to the politics at play in this district, or to the very real part of the coalition that is both hispanic and hostile to the the most progressive immigration position.
Unfortunately, it's reversed -- Dems were starting to bleed support because voters felt Biden and the Democrats weren't taking the border seriously enough. Dems tacking to the middle and trying to find bipartisan solutions is an attempt to win back voters they were starting to lose. Just to reiterate from earlier, this isn't just happening in America. Left-aligned parties in Europe are bleeding support badly to this issue. It's why those parties have started to tack to the right on immigration, because this issue is incredibly effective at turning voters away from those parties.
As the media becomes increasingly fractured "some person you know" is increasingly becoming where people get their "news" (in reality, vibes) about politics from.
Like fuck, how many people have had their views shaped and their knowledge gained from forums and social media and all that other shit.
Yup, like how many people on this very forum and even in this very thread have basically said "Yeah I used to lean this way but discussions on this forum brought me around on X".
I know at least several active posters voted for Republican presidential candidates and I'd be surprised if even one remaining person in D&D is even considering voting Trump.
The majority of the drug trade comes from legal ports of entry. If you want to combat that look to Portugal. They have had wild success last I checked in on them, and I feel like it would be huge news everywhere if they had failed at their experiment.
But this topic is particularly tough when you compare where progressives have positioned themselves compared to even moderate voters.
I dont expect Dems to offer open borders. I do expect them to make a meaningful distinction between their position on immigration and the GOP's.
Then you have to accept that the people you lose are the people you lose. I am too competent to be a political strategist on this, but not nearly competent enough to be an expert. It is just the reality that you can't reasonably be mad at people for looking out for themselves.
I would argue that the GOP don’t want more resources in terms of judges and other workers that would improve processing and speed up the review/approval process at all.
Not even talking about that. More basic shit like "I just saw this news on twitter".
Improving processing speed is immediately undermined by giving the executive broad powers to flat deny entry in the first place
Reading the forums for many years, I think I've come to realize that this is the fundamental divide in most of the forum discussions: whether something is moral or just vs winning electorally. I agree with you --there is no moralistic argument for handling immigrants and asylum seekers with anything other than the utmost compassion and dignity. Lanz is absolutely correct when they say that our immigration system is rooted in historical and systemic racism. That it enables and empowers cruelty and bigotry.
But morality arguments aren't necessarily winning ones electorally. I wish America were a better place. I wish voters were better people. But they aren't. We have to deal with the polity we have, not the one we wish we had. If Democrats embrace open borders as a policy they are going to get destroyed up and down the ballot.
I literally linked you to a Democrat with a meaningful distinction from her Republican opponent and yet
and yet
I'm not at all arguing for inhumane treatment of immigrants and asylum seekers, although I broadly would say that even in what is mostly an echo chamber of this thread / forum there are very different ideas what is humane or inhumane.
But acting like people concerned about winning electorially have no moral arguments isn't just reductive - it's simply wrong. Utilitarianism is a thing. There are strong moral arguments that allowing a second term of President Trump when it can be prevented is in and of itself immoral with the level of harm across the board Trump in the White House represents to immigrants, not to mention <waves at everything else>.
Im not playing this game where when we talk about Bidens policies and Dem leadership's actions you switch to the policy platform of someone running for TX-15
I don't mean this to be offensive, but I really can't think of a way to word it without there being some risk of offending you. If the Republican plan is to get Democrats to throw away their coalition, and you're stating that leaving the coalition is on the table for you, then you're following the Republican plan.
If progressive voters become disillusioned to the point that they don't vote due to party actions based on a narrative set mostly by the Republicans, then not only will we lose the White House, but we'll also have a lot of downstream political losses. One big issue I see with the current Dem party is that we focus too much on the WH/Congress to the detriment of local politics, which is an area that Republicans have been making major inroads on.
It's why I approve of Biden's current narrative. Not only is it based on the truth, but it shows that even if Republicans are handed everything they demanded, they will still refuse.
Which game are you playing, then?
Dem leadership is spending money to support politicians that have progressive positions. Sorry it feels like a game to you, I wonder if that's something members of the thread will find offputting!
Apologies here, I wasn't careful enough with my words. I wasn't trying to argue that folks who disagree with open borders are immoral or don't see a different morality in harm prevention through the electoral process. That is absolutely a valid moral stance.
So I bring up a complaint with the way the President js behaving and you use a random local campaign platform of someone who is not Biden as a shield against that criticism. Whatever this is it isnt particularly rational.
This give away the farm approach to immigration is bad policy and bad politics.
Yes it is. The problem is you are assigning the blame at the wrong end. I am not going to leave the coalition because Republicans are meanies who want me out. I absolutely will if Democrats decide that they do not value my life enough to protect and cast me out of the coalition. Democrats have the power to not do things to alienate the base. They make their choices, and so do we.
Little in most situations. In this one it is working out the starting point of a problem and thus the point that needs to be resolved. You cannot reasonably ask people to sacrifice themselves for your betterment. Democratic actions are what has put members of this board into that position and discussion.