Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (37) |
Author: commonone   😊 😞
Number: of 84357 
Subject: Re: Another Monster Jobs Report
Date: 06/11/24 4:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 11
Dope1: Again, you guys can chant this, but literally nobody in the conservosphere was going "Yay! A bipartisan border bill! Wow! How cool!"

Not when the leader of the republican party, now a convicted felon, told republicans to kill it before even reading the bill.

Dope1: The root issue here is that you guys really do believe that this bill was a great thing, don't you?

You have a habit of incorrectly telling people what they think or believe.

Many democrats were unenthused about a bill that did not address the status of Dreamers but were willing to accept considerably less than they would otherwise for a few reasons: 1.) the bill would implement necessary changes to address a chaotic border crisis; 2.) the bill ended the practice of 'catch and release,' a perpetual thorn in their side -- migrants who tried to cross the border illegally would be detained immediately, with their asylum claims decided while they were in detention. People would be removed immediately within 15 days if they failed their asylum claim interviews; and 3.) migrants who come to the U.S. border at official ports of entry would be diverted to a new "removal authority program" in which they would have 90 days to make their initial asylum interviews. Those migrants would not be released into the interior of the U.S., either; they would either be detained or kept under government supervision.

In short, the bill would have made significant improvements at the border, changes endorsed by the National Border Patrol Council, the Chamber of Commerce, and the very conservative Wall Street Journal editorial page.

But the convicted felon Donald Trump wants as much chaos at the border as possible. Like he said at his rally in Las Vegas: "I don't care about you. I just want your vote."

And to stay out of prison.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to commonone here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (37) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community