Post New

Today, according to new polling more than two year after the inauguration of president Biden, six out of ten republicans still say the election was illegitimate. That's down from 71 percent in January 2021. And 36 percent still thinks there's solid evidence the election wasn't legitimate. [NOTE: suggestions there is evidence of the election fraud claim have been debunked scores of times by scores of observers.]

And that's the legacy of Trump: victimhood.

Weeks before the election he was convincing his supporters that 'the-only-way-we-can-lose-is-if-it's-a-rigged-election'. And he never stopped, steadfastly refusing to admit defeat, blocking the smooth transition of power central to a functioning democracy, tossing out excuse after excuse, some contradictory, and always making himself the victim of a deep state conspiracy, fraudulent mail-in ballots, election workers with thumb drives that cast votes for Biden, voting machine irregularities, and something, something Hunter Biden.

For Trump, it doesn't matter. He's never cared which theory you believed about how his 2020 loss wasn't actually a loss, any more than he cared which narrative about the Russia interference story was the one that convinced you the whole thing was fishy. Trump treats excuses the way Starbucks treats stores; it doesn't matter if two of them trample on one another as long as he's making a sale.

Jeebus, six out of ten republicans are still deluded.

But hey, looking on the bright side, on inauguration day 2020 it was seven out of ten republicans. The question though is this: did 10 percent actually see the light or did they only get to the point where they don't want to admit to pollsters that they still believe the unbelievable?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/05/24...

That is Trump's "Art of the Deal" in a nutshell, enter a contract, renege, and renegotiate. Honor nothing.

Trump didn't ruin the county.
liberalism did.

We didn't used to have open-air drug markets in our biggest cities. We didn't used to have a wide open border and floods of illegal immigrants. We didn't used to have institutions that targeted private citizens; we used to have institutions that people trusted.

No more.
To paraphrase one of the worst Presidents of all time You built that with every sneering dismissal of accurate criticism of every bad decision liberalism ever made. You built that by electing a string a Power-First, pandering corrupticrats who've made millions in public office.

You built that. Congrats.

Lol. Reactionaries.

Trump was a symptom of what you people have been destroying for half a century.

He wasn't the cause of it, he was the symptom.

Sadly (or hilariously spending on me mood) you people won't change course.

J

We didn't used to have open-air drug markets in our biggest cities.

Mostly we still don't.

We didn't used to have a wide open border and floods of illegal immigrants.

We still don't. That was addressed earlier this week. It's a made-up talking point. Lots of people want to get in (including Russians, now), but they're having to wait in Mexico.

We didn't used to have institutions that targeted private citizens; we used to have institutions that people trusted.

Can't comment without more context.

FWIW, Obama is ranked #12 all time for POTUSes. I think he was the best POTUS in my lifetime (60 years), but it wasn't a very competitive field (Nixon, the Bushes, Trump, and I was never particularly enamored with Kennedy).

He was both symptom and cause.

He won because he was a symptom of simmering anger. Anger about various things, often made-up by Fox (and similar). But apparently a lot of white supremacists came out from under their rocks because they were hearing what they have always thought. Trump didn't create that, but he tapped into it.

After he won, and then lost, that was him destroying America. A peaceful transfer of power (for 250 years) suddenly wasn't peaceful. That's on him.

Mostly we still don't.

That's true. The open air drug marts are all in blue cities.

We still don't. That was addressed earlier this week.

Umm, that was not addressed at all. That Mexico is pushing people away from the border to make the pictures look better doesn't hide the fact that we've have an EXPLOSION along the southern border for two years now. No amount of gaslighting from the White House is going to change that.

Can't comment without more context.

Okay.

FWIW, Obama is ranked #12 all time for POTUSes.

LOL. That's amusing.

And by the way, if there's no flood of illegals at the border, then how come Adams and others are complaining?

The open air drug marts are all in blue cities.

I've been in a few blue cities, including Seattle earlier this month. There are pockets of homeless, and -likely- addicts. But a "mart"? No. They were openly using, but I didn't see any carts or folding tables displaying product. I would agree that it's a bit unnerving walking to the rail sometimes. But the problem has always been there, it was just better hidden in the past. Out of sight, out of mind.

I will also say that our drug policies in this nation have never been very good. Not within my living memory. It costs money for treatment programs, and mostly the money isn't there. And not all treatment programs are equal.

Umm, that was not addressed at all.

Yes it was. My sources were not the White House. John Oliver summarized it in a sometimes-humorous manner, but you can chase down all of his sources if you like (e.g. NPR). Other links were provided by a few posters (including me). Biden may actually make things worse for wanna-be immigrants/asylum-seekers with some of his actions. The border is not now, nor will it be in the near future, open. That's false talking point.

Yes, more migrants crossed as Title 42 ended. But that doesn't make them legal. All that has changed in simple terms is that there aren't any COVID/pandemic restrictions in place. They still have to have legal claim to be here, or they'll be deported.

LOL. That's amusing.

Yeah, I'd put him in the top 10. But CSPAN (that bastion of liberal thought) rates him at 12.

The flood waxes and wanes. Right now it appears to be waxing. That doesn't mean the border is any more open than it has been. The rules for staying here are basically the same, so any "illegals" that are caught will be deported. That hasn't changed. There are perhaps more asylum seekers, but that isn't illegal to request asylum. In fact, that is entirely legal. And we have a procedure they have to follow.

We have not thrown open the gates. Not even close. Nor should we (in case you were wondering about my position). We do need some serious immigration reform, but we aren't likely to get that for a long time (if ever).

I've been in a few blue cities, including Seattle earlier this month. There are pockets of homeless, and -likely- addicts. But a "mart"? No.

Marts? Yes.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-05-2...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12119789/...

Including the second link because mysteriously the LA Times doesn't seem to mention the open air drug dealing.

oard President Aaron Peskin asked Breed whether she would support his request for better coordination among local and regional agencies to put an end to drug-dealing.

Officials agreed to reconvene at City Hall to complete the rest of the meeting where Mayor Breed welcomed 'the opportunity to work with the board on shutting open-air drug dealing down'.


Mayor Breed vowed to crack down on the city's open-air drug market and police will now be able to arrest people shooting up in broad daylight

The majority of drug overdose deaths in San Francisco involved males in the Tenderloin district, where open-air drug use is rampant among its soaring homeless population

.

Mayor Breed alluded to the pilot program during Tuesday's board meeting and said she was 'proposing changes to our state law, and we will be enacting local programs to try to end this disruptive behavior.

'What do we do about those who are struggling with addiction on our streets and they refuse services?' she added.

'Because as much as shutting down drug markets, it's also about making it clear that problematic behavior will not be tolerated on our streets.'

'
Peskin released a statement on Tuesday evening and said the city has the 'resources right now to close down the open-air drug supermarkets'.

He also pointed to the violent woman who threw a brick at the open hearing as a demonstration of the city's disorganization.

'If we can't guarantee everyone's safety when the mayor and her security team are present'we have lost control of our public realm,' Peskin said.

'And that is our shared mission: to regain control of all of our public spaces, so that they are safe and clean for everyone always.

'We simply can't defend this status quo and we must continue to demand change.'



And again, if the border is not a problem, why are Kathy Hochul and Mayor Adams screaming?

And again, if the border is not a problem, why are Kathy Hochul and Mayor Adams screaming?

I didn't say they border is not a problem. It has been for decades. I said it is not "open". Enforcement is just as vigorous as ever.

That meme was popular when Obama was POTUS, even though during his administration records numbers of deportations occurred (much to the consternation of many factions of the Dem party). I don't know Biden's numbers, but I do know he hasn't made any substantial changes in policy that would affect the ability to cross-over or remain (other than letting Title 42 expire as the pandemic is "over" (even though it really isn't, but we're stuck with COVID forever now, and at least hospitals aren't slammed anymore)). What changes he has made has arguably made it more difficult, not less.

And I looked up terms...you (and the media, and academia) are using "open air" differently than I was. I was thinking "farmer's market" style. It isn't really that. It's public places where users know they can get supplies at certain times. Closing those is probably a good idea, but they won't really go away. They'll just be in alleys, and revert more to person-to-person again. The larger issue still remains.

But, yeah, walking from the rail to Pike Market, there were pockets of people who were laying against buildings completely stoned. And the Tenderloin in SF has similar, and tents on some sidewalks. Rousting those people doesn't really solve the problem, it just makes them move somewhere else.

This was a decent write-up. https://popcenter.asu.edu/content/drug-dealing-ope...

They still have to have legal claim to be here, or they'll be deported. - 1pg

-------------------

You are simply deluding yourself. Many (most) are being released with no vetting or paperwork because the border patrol does not have room to physically house them while they await "processing". Those that are processed are given a court date in four or five years that they are supposed to show up for. They are then handed a bus or plane ticket and shipped through the country. But the court they are supposed to show up in is in Texas. The point is we do not control the border in the sense that unlimited numbers are let in. Even if some or many are stopped and sent back, there still is no limit on the number allowed in. Then of course the got-aways are a whole other problem. Border control is more than handing a welcome bag and a court date to all who show up at the border.

That meme was popular when Obama was POTUS, even though during his administration records numbers of deportations occurred - 1pg

---------------

Good. But the dimensions of the problem lie in how many are allowed in, not how many are deported.

Those seeking asylum are released with a court date. Yes. And most of them show up to the court. Those NOT seeking asylum are not released in the country.

Numerous links, but this seemed a good summary of your complaint, and the actual facts.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/factchecking-cla...

The authors said: 'If we limit our analysis to only nondetained cases, we still find a high compliance rate: 83% of all respondents in completed or pending removal cases attended all of their hearings since 2008. Moreover, we reveal that 15% of those who were ordered deported in absentia since 2008 successfully reopened their cases and had their in absentia orders rescinded.'

Lots more at the link. Missing a court date is automatic deportation. And since they don't want that, they usually show up.

Missing a court date is automatic deportation. - 1pg

You got to be kidding, apprehension must precede deportation. See sanctuary cities and demoralized and underfunded ICE agents.


Then there is this. Not Fox but saintly NBC,


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/nearl...

Nearly 600,000 migrants who crossed the border since March 2021 were released in the U.S. with no immigration court dates

... more at link


Other links I did not include had headlines that some immigrants received court dates up to ten years in the future. Ten Years!

We have a problem whether you see it or not. Just admit it, you are entirely happy with unlimited access to our country by anyone choosing to follow the process even when you know the process is a sham. Is there any limit to how many we should let in in your view of things?

We have a problem whether you see it or not.

Yes, we do. I have said so many times.

Just admit it, you are entirely happy with unlimited access to our country by anyone choosing to follow the process even when you know the process is a sham. Is there any limit to how many we should let in in your view of things?

No, I'm not. The system we have is far short of ideal, but it's the system we have. Until Congress gets off their butts and fixes the system. But they don't seem to be incentivized. They're more interested in spouting rhetoric.

Among other problems, I see people getting in without medical screening, illegal workers being exploited and having no recourse (because they'll get deported), the possibility that terrorists could slip in (doesn't seem to have happened yet), "anchor babies" once they are here, DREAMERS, critical agriculture work not getting done (Americans won't do it), and more. I have said repeatedly that we need some sort of migrant visa for temporary workers. We actually have such, as I linked a week or two ago, but it has problems. We need a better asylum system.

Just building a wall and saying "done!" isn't nearly enough.

Among other problems, I see people getting in without medical screening, illegal workers being exploited and having no recourse (because they'll get deported), the possibility that terrorists could slip in (doesn't seem to have happened yet), "anchor babies" once they are here, DREAMERS, critical agriculture work not getting done (Americans won't do it), and more. I have said repeatedly that we need some sort of migrant visa for temporary workers. We actually have such, as I linked a week or two ago, but it has problems. We need a better asylum system. - 1pg

Agree but I note nowhere do you mention putting a lid on how many we allow in each year. And vetting needs to be more than a medical check. It needs to include do they possess skills we deem as necessary to import in order to improve the American economy. When an immigrant comes here, works hard and sends 75% of his income back to support his family in his home country, that is noble but not supportive of the American economy.

When it comes to jobs Americans won't do, that is on the employers. Thought experiment - lets assume that all the immigrants doing jobs American won't do suddenly went away. Would the agricultural businesses, restaurants and hotels just throw up their hands and declare "that's it" and go out of business? I think not. If they tripled their wages rates, I would bet some Americans would come forward to perform that work, especially if we curtail the free money rocking chair welfare system that provides an income to able bodied people who could and should be working. Yeah the employers would raise their prices. So we Americans will have to pay $4 for a head of lettuce that used to cost $2. That direct cost is better than the indirect cost of housing, schooling, medical attention, crime and law enforcement, etc that is spent today via tax collection.


Just building a wall and saying "done!" isn't nearly enough.

Agree but it is part of the solution. We need to be resonably assured that when we deport a felon, he stays out. Right now we have deportees that have returned five and six times. There is no deterrent to behaving badly once you are in.

Most Americans wouldn't do the work for anything the farmers could offer. If they offered enough to get American workers, they probably would go out of business. Here's just one article I found:

https://modernfarmer.com/2021/09/midwest-farmers-f...

'If you're not able to find people,' Nielsen said, 'either you do it yourself or you exit that part of the industry.'

When an immigrant comes here, works hard and sends 75% of his income back to support his family in his home country, that is noble but not supportive of the American economy.

Sure they do. They are the bottom rung of the ladder. All the rungs above benefit. Farmers continue to farm, people get their lettuce, interstate commerce happens. Maybe even international commerce. Those specific workers may not spend most of their income domestically, but that's not the extent of the economic activity that results from their labors. Also, those that bother to get phony IDs end up paying taxes for benefits they will never see (e.g. FICA...or whatever it's called now). That is an injustice to them, but benefits us.

Thought experiment - lets assume that all the immigrants doing jobs American won't do suddenly went away. Would the agricultural businesses, restaurants and hotels just throw up their hands and declare "that's it" and go out of business?

Many would go under. That which can be off-shored, would be (you can ship produce...we do it all the time). The economic calamity that would result would be horrendous. Might even trigger a new Depression. I'm not a macro-economist, but removing a key part of any workforce results in bad things. Textiles and steel mostly went bye-bye because Americans are too expensive as a labor force.

Even we (the 1poorfamily) have adjusted our behaviors as service wages have gone up. I don't envy service people, and I don't begrudge their increased wages. They deserve them. But I'm not going to a Brazilian steakhouse at $47 per person. I can no longer eat enough to justify that cost. 1poorkid probably could, but all the old people couldn't.

We need to be resonably assured that when we deport a felon, he stays out. Right now we have deportees that have returned five and six times. There is no deterrent to behaving badly once you are in.

There's no way to do that. Once they leave our borders, we have no control over them. So they can come right back if they like. And, yes, there are people that are repeatedly caught and deported. Felon or not. No plan, including any of my ideas, has been devised to address that -of which I am aware-. And the data show that most undocumented persons don't commit crimes of violence. It makes the headlines when they do, but the vast majority are trying to keep their heads down so they go unnoticed and can pick your lettuce for you.

Also, for context, 1poorlady is Asian. We did things the right way. Totally legal every step of the way. So, yes, I resent it when folks try to cheat. It took over a year to get her here, and several more years before she could test for citizenship. But I also am not in the habit of denying reality, and the reality is that they are going to come here. It would behoove us to have a workable system where we know who is here, where they are, and what they are doing. Right now we don't have that.

And that doesn't even get into asylum seekers. Like the Russians fleeing Putin's war, or refugees in Africa fleeing their warlords as their countries get torn asunder, or the Syrian refugees. In those instances we should be part of a global community taking our share of them in.

I don't specify a number because it would be arbitrary. I have no data on how many people need help, and what other countries can do to help also. But we do have caps. 1poorSIL has been waiting for years for her application to come up, and it still hasn't. It could be another 10 years precisely because there are caps. Also, there are "preferences" for people from different regions, different familial relations, etc. I spent so many years filling out forms, I know our legal immigration process pretty well. (Humorous anecdote...I had ARAG at my job. I tried to use them for some immigration questions. I knew more than the lawyer assigned to me. I canceled ARAG the following plan year.)

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.