Building on your third paragraph...
by El Kabong (2024-02-26 18:27:44)

In reply to: I'm not disgusted.  posted by manofdillon


...many folks have warned against a President Trump unfettered by not having to face the voters again, and what he'll do as a result.

What about Biden? As he gets older and dottier and much more able to be influenced by his younger, more leftward staffers, what makes you think he's going to tack any more towards the center than he already hasn't? The minute the election is over and he's victorious, any thoughts of improving the border are going right out the window. The aforementioned unconstitutional wealth transfer will switch into high gear. This guy has a legacy to pursue and damned if he ain't gonna do it no matter what anyone says


I think Biden's going to get worse
by manofdillon  (2024-02-26 19:00:21)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

But none of my policy disagreements with Biden are worse than having a President who is a malignant narcissist with no respect for any provision of the Constitution, with no concern about anything or anyone other than his own narrow self-interest, who thinks murderous dictators are tough and strong and NATO is dumb. Hell yeah the border will get worse under a second Biden term. I'm sure there will be more student loan shit I don't like. That can be corrected by better policy in the future. We'll still have a country and functioning democracy. Trump threatens just about every democratic and Constitutional norm that has made this country work for almost 250 years. Biden wants to pursue a legacy, Trump wants to tear the whole thing down for his perceived personal benefit.


Can it?
by El Kabong  (2024-02-26 19:14:56)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

I struggle to think of a fiscal policy implemented during a Democratic administration that has ever been walked back.

Trump is a shitshow, no doubt. Show me an actually moderate Democrat and I may be convinced to show up Election Day.


Welfare Reform in the 90s? *
by manofdillon  (2024-02-26 19:55:40)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply


Which the (D)'s didn't want in the first place *
by El Kabong  (2024-02-27 11:12:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply


Seems like a strange critcism if you support the parties
by wpkirish  (2024-02-27 12:19:09)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

finding ways to work together find compromise to improve things.


I do support that
by El Kabong  (2024-02-27 15:40:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

And the minute the (D)'s didn't need the (R)'s, welfare reform vanished.


Wealth transfer
by vermin05  (2024-02-26 18:34:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

WTH are you smoking. Pretty sure Biden has promised to not change taxes on people making less than 400k. Besides unless the democrats win a 2/3rds majority in the Senate (which they won’t) it’s just not happening. The 2017 tax law sunsets next year, and going back to the previous regime is political suicide. It may be tweaked but the next Congress is going to have to renew it.


College tuition *
by El Kabong  (2024-02-26 19:16:35)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply


Agree.
by ndsapper  (2024-02-26 20:05:40)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Politically, such a strange move in an election year. Bought votes he already had. The only thing I can figure is he figured he couldn’t alienate the working class (let alone those who worry about individual responsibility or the negative effects of the debt) any more, so screw it.


Did Trump improve the border? I must have missed that
by sprack  (2024-02-26 18:33:15)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

For every fear of what Biden would do, what Trump would do is either be incompetent or downright damaging to democracy.

The man tried to overthrow a free election. How anyone not in the MAGA cult could consider voting for the guy is a mystery for the ages.

Someday a non-Trump Republican will be president, probably sooner than later, and could reverse every one of those wealth transfers and the like even if they got through Congress in the first place, just as Richard Nixon reversed a whole lot of LBJ's Great Society initiatives.


Where I disagree is with the idea of a non-Trump Republican.
by IAND75  (2024-02-26 19:09:03)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

I presume you are implying a return to a more traditional Republican Party and candidates. The name may remain, but the Republican Party of the 20th century is dead and gone. The hard right MAGA Republicans have taken over large swaths of state governments. The grass roots of the Republicans is MAGA.

There may be a new more traditional conservative party that develops, but it will take time to grow to sufficient size to win the White House.

Demographics will play a large role in the power and positions of the parties, but that will also take some time.

I think for the next several cycles we are looking at an ever more hard right MAGA dominated Republican Party vs the Democrats. Whether they move further left or are moderated by an influx of previously center right Republicans remains to be seen.


I think Trump's terrible as noted in my two posts above.
by manofdillon  (2024-02-26 19:08:57)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

But the problem at the border has exploded since Biden came into office. It's a statistical fact that illegal border crossing have skyrocketed since Biden assumed office, as discussed by such notable right-wing publications as the New York Times. It's certainly too complex of an issues to pin entirely on Biden, but he's the man in charge and has been slow to act and failed to effectively lead on the issue. In part I think because he's afraid of the left wing of his party, and in part because I think he's too old to effectively lead. Hell, his staff was too fricking afraid to roll him out for the softball pre-Super Bowl interview.


But there was a negotiated solution giving Republicans
by sprack  (2024-02-26 20:48:29)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

the most concessions they'd likely ever see, certainly more than they'd gotten in decades (as evidenced by the far left being against it), with the support of 24 Republican senators, and Trump killed it.

You can't blame that on Biden. He was all set to sign it.


See below, I don’t.
by manofdillon  (2024-02-26 20:54:24)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Biden ignored the problem and let it become a crisis. When he finally proposed something Republicans failed to act in a serious and good faith manner.


Here is what I dont understand. I will agree he was slow to
by wpkirish  (2024-02-26 19:18:59)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

act. However, once he did act he agreed to much of what the Republicans wanted and did not even demand anything for dreamers. The immigration items they asked for will actually help speeed up the asylum process. In return they asked for aid to Ukraine. Israel and relief funds for Gaza.

In other words they acted like any administration in the last 200 years. Republicans then blew up the deal. The Speaker has now flipped his position on the Biden's authority to unilaterally solve the border.

As Adam Kinzinger wrote in the piece I linked before the current version of the Republican party is not a serious political party that is interested in governing it is a party interested in power.

https://adamkinzinger.substack.com/p/the-gop-is-not-serious-about-the?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1910658&post_id=141201339&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=nufly&utm_medium=email


I agree.
by manofdillon  (2024-02-26 19:56:40)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Biden waited too long and let the problem become a crisis. But Republican are not serious or good faith actors.


And lied about it not being a crisis for 3.5 years and
by krudler  (2024-02-27 12:11:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

had his messengers (some on this board) repeat the lie.


To me, the allowance for up to 5k per day is a nonstarter.
by krudler  (2024-02-26 19:47:33)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

I have not seen any real analysis that suggests we can absorb >1.8M additional illegals per year, and the problems we're seeing today based on a fraction of that amount being sent by the administration and Texas to some of our larger cities supports that. I honestly think reinstating the remain in Mexico policy is the right thing to do (it seems Biden is contemplating that), as it's clear a large majority of the people are not seeking true asylum, but just better opportunities. I do have a soul and can sympathize with them, but we're having real and significant issues absorbing this level of mass migration.


Great, so we got nothing but the status quo
by sprack  (2024-02-26 20:52:08)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Once upon a time in this country we had the concept of "compromise" to get things done.


Which status quo specifically? The one Biden inherited
by krudler  (2024-02-27 12:00:03)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Day 1 or the status quo after he rescinded dozens of executive orders that horribly exacerbated the problem? To play this game where this was just a mess Biden inherited at this point is either intellectually dishonest or lazy. He specifically said he wanted these people to "surge to the border", then made it so they could all get in by rescinding remain in Mexico, then had his administration lie for years that there was no real crisis. He had control of the legislative branch for a couple years but didn't change anything, but certainly rescinded any EAs that made it less chaotic. Also the vast majority of busing or "planing" of migrants has been executed by the federal government, not Texas or other states.

And again, where is the analysis that we can absorb another 1.8M people per year in addition to the legal immigration we have?


Can we stop with the 'illegals talk'?
by Kali4niaND  (2024-02-26 19:58:56)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Asking for asylum is a legal process. While the numbers are certainly a problem, individuals requesting asylum are decidedly not 'illegals'. While some people may be crossing the border illegally, most of the problem is with a broken asylum process that doesn't allow us to remediate asylum claims quickly enough.


No, we can't and I won't. Words have meaning. Asylum
by krudler  (2024-02-27 12:01:45)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

is very specific, and has very specific conditions. We have seen from the data that the majority of the illegals who even bother to show up at their court hearings are not here for real asylum, just better economic opportunities, thus illegals.


Don't you live in Michigan?
by ACross  (2024-02-27 16:09:57)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Are Canucks pouring across the bridge from Windsor?


No we can’t. 80% are bogus claims and illegal clowns (link)
by airborneirish  (2024-02-27 09:59:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply


the article refutes the headline
by DBCooper  (2024-02-27 11:52:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Asylum has been granted in about 40% of the nearly 700,000 asylum cases that have been decided since 2000. Immigration judges in that time frame approved about 30% of the applications, or about 420,000 cases, filed by people in deportation proceedings after arriving at the border or after being apprehended within the U.S.

In fiscal year 2022, immigration judges decided 52,000 asylum cases; about 46% of people were granted asylum. The approval rate was closer to 39% for those who applied for asylum as a defense against deportation.

"I acknowledge that I misspoke. The number is closer to 30% or higher," Johnson told PolitiFact.

It’s important to note that just because people are not granted asylum does not mean they do not have a valid claim. Experts have previously told PolitiFact that cases can be denied because of procedural reasons, or because immigrants don’t have legal representation and aren’t able to effectively argue their case.

me: So its more like 40-50%. Certainly doesnt ruin your overall point Im sure. I think the worst part is that it takes 6 fucking years to process a claim. Thats nuts!


You understand though that asking for asylum is what
by Inigomontoya  (2024-02-26 20:10:29)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

everyone is doing that is crossing from the southern border. The vast majority are leaving their countries for the social services and economic opportunity in the US. These aren’t defectors from the former communist bloc countries.

The vast majority of these people aren’t leaving their countries because of political persecution.

It is massive migration of people leaving 3rd world countries for social services and economic benefits because they know when they get to the border they will not be denied entry.


How was killing the Senate bill helpful on that score? *
by sprack  (2024-02-26 20:56:15)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply


A process that would allow entry for
by Inigomontoya  (2024-02-26 21:24:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

“Asylum” seekers and just work thru a process doesn’t sound great to me.

3.5 years into Biden’s term he’s trying to do something (and I don’t think a good plan) after saying there was no problem, crossings claimed to be low, that really doesn’t sit well with me.

Biden and his administration has been playing a much more damaging game with their border policy in my opinion.


Isn’t that what we’ve been doing forever?
by Kali4niaND  (2024-02-26 22:13:56)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Apply for asylum and have your claim adjudicated. That’s how the process has always worked, I think.

The problem is that the number of asylum seekers has outstripped our ability to handle the volume.


Why has that volume increased? When they were previously
by Inigomontoya  (2024-02-26 22:43:33)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Interred there were screams of abuse. When Texas was trying to stop the influx the Biden administration interfered.


Simple. While campaigning Biden made a series of
by krudler  (2024-02-27 12:15:09)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

very public statements encouraging illegal immigration, and then backed that up by rescinding a number of EAs that made things less chaotic, and then actively interfered with essentially any measures the states took to counteract the chaos. All while telling us to not believe our lying eyes about the crisis unfolding. Truly Orwellian.


Why did it increase under Trump? *
by wpkirish  (2024-02-27 12:43:16)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply


It increased one year under Trump, then got
by krudler  (2024-02-27 12:48:42)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

back down to or below historical averages. Biden then proceeded to undo all the EAs that were helping to keep it trending down Day 1, then lied about the border for the last 3 years. The levels it has achieved under Biden are not even comparable to what we saw under Obama or Trump. Also one of the few things Trump didn't lie about was a crisis at our border.


So,you prefer brutish treatment of asylum seekers?
by Kali4niaND  (2024-02-27 09:40:43)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

I'm no expert, but I believe Covid certainly made conditions worse in the Central American triangle, while also suppressing migratory behavior pre-2021. We have upheaval in Venezuela and the middle east. People are looking for safe havens to raise their families.

Can we take them all? No. A compassionate response to their travails should be a thorough vetting at the border, with non-asylum seekers being sent home, and an expedited asylum process so legitimate candidates can be accommodated, up to our capacity to handle them.

Not barbed wire in the Rio Grande.


I guess that’s where we fundamentally disagree. There are no
by Inigomontoya  (2024-02-27 10:23:51)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

“non-asylum” seekers. No is showing up and saying I just want to join my extended family in the US get a job. Just check the asylum box.

The solution of show up at the border and/or cross illegally, request “asylum” and then be allowed to stay effectively indefinitely is simply a terrible process and is no solution.






Again, without it you get the status quo
by sprack  (2024-02-26 21:31:40)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Which is worse?

I don't think people quite understand how the bill went way beyond any concessions the Democrats agreed to in the past, and likely they won't give in the future.

Yet another example of insisting on perfection and getting nothing because of it. And in the bargain Putin might roll over Ukraine.

Great, just great.


Again, which status quo? The one Biden inherited or
by krudler  (2024-02-27 12:10:18)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

the one he created with his EAs? Also how is accepting 1.8M more people (in addition to the legal immigration we have every year) sustainable? Would be good to see that analysis. This is a nonstarter and Biden knew it.


WTF difference does it make?
by sprack  (2024-02-27 16:13:57)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

Do you want any kind of solution or not? It was right there for the taking.


Yes and changing that requires an Act of Congress at least
by wpkirish  (2024-02-26 20:55:20)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Cannot reply

in this bill there was / is money for lawyers and judges to speed up the processing of claims.

I think a recognition of the fact that is who most of the people crossing are would lead to a better opportunities to deal with the problem.