All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[PwrdOn]

The problem with the caravan is about how they're coming to the country. I believe we should not encourage families to walk from Central America to the United States in order to make asylum claims that are more likely than not to be rejected.

I'm open to proposals about how to change the legal immigration system to take in more people from Central America, and if anyone thinks we should just establish an ad hoc policy accepting caravans/ making it much easier to gain entry through asylum claims, that should be stated and argued.

The people in the caravan are just doing what Republicans have claimed they wanted prospective migrants to do all along - stop trying to sneak across the border and find a legal way in. Walking in large groups is the only way they can do this safely, if you are really concerned about this then we could just fly them all here for a fraction of the cost of deploying troops at the border to pose for the cameras.

The fundamental reality is that Americans are entirely dependent on cheap immigrant labor, and because the second generation quickly assimilates into the mainstream and has no more desire to do dirty low-paying jobs than any other American, this means we have to constantly bring in new workers from further and further afield to fill those roles. The GOP's "solution" to this is basically to try and create a permanent servant class who will never be able to attain equal status, and are so paralyzed by fear of arrest and deportation that they will never agitate for their rights. Ironically, this kind of policy would accelerate the demographic shifts that conservatives are always fearmongering about because employers could bring in cheap foreign workers en masse without any fear that their children will one day become competitors for wealth and influence. Just look at some of the Arab countries, where the citizens are outnumbered many times over by migrant workers who endure appalling working conditions and have no outlet to press for better treatment.

[Mister Mets]

No to being “nice”. We need someone who won’t flinch and will punch the bully in the mouth as it were.

Republicans felt the same way. This is how the party chose Trump.

Except the GOP does have a group ideology that they are willing to fight tooth and nail for, Dems will always lose in the long run if they do not fight for something with equal passion. Do you want to lose or do you want to win? Because the Obama Clinton methods got us right wing Supreme Court, how did playing soft ball help Merrick Garland?

I think neo liberal ideas are bad, just criticizing idividuals is pointless, if I think the ideas themselves are bad. Why should I vote for a Dem over a third party if you want to run diet Republicans rather then real Progressives?

This is why the Clinton machine will always fail:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MAbab8aP4_A&t=244s

They want to bring calculators to a war.

How would playing hardball have helped Merrick Garland? Democrats did not have control of the Senate.

The people in the caravan are just doing what Republicans have claimed they wanted prospective migrants to do all along - stop trying to sneak across the border and find a legal way in. Walking in large groups is the only way they can do this safely, if you are really concerned about this then we could just fly them all here for a fraction of the cost of deploying troops at the border to pose for the cameras.

The fundamental reality is that Americans are entirely dependent on cheap immigrant labor, and because the second generation quickly assimilates into the mainstream and has no more desire to do dirty low-paying jobs than any other American, this means we have to constantly bring in new workers from further and further afield to fill those roles. The GOP's "solution" to this is basically to try and create a permanent servant class who will never be able to attain equal status, and are so paralyzed by fear of arrest and deportation that they will never agitate for their rights. Ironically, this kind of policy would accelerate the demographic shifts that conservatives are always fearmongering about because employers could bring in cheap foreign workers en masse without any fear that their children will one day become competitors for wealth and influence. Just look at some of the Arab countries, where the citizens are outnumbered many times over by migrant workers who endure appalling working conditions and have no outlet to press for better treatment.

The majority of asylum claims are ultimately rejected, so it's not a legal way in.

If we were to fly in the caravan, there would be requests for similar services later, so it wouldn't resolve the current problem. There are many people in Central America who would love plane tickets to the United States.

No one in the GOP is advocating a permanent underclass. The main arguments about how to handle illegal immigration are to increase deportation, or to encourage illegal immigrants to leave.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/romney-...f-deportation/

There are moral arguments for a different immigration policy, but it shouldn't be done with an abuse of the asylum policy or with anything that encourages people to join this underclass within the United States.

[PwrdOn]

The majority of asylum claims are ultimately rejected, so it's not a legal way in.

If we were to fly in the caravan, there would be requests for similar services later, so it wouldn't resolve the current problem. There are many people in Central America who would love plane tickets to the United States.

No one in the GOP is advocating a permanent underclass. The main arguments about how to handle illegal immigration are to increase deportation, or to encourage illegal immigrants to leave.

What law did you break if you apply for asylum but are denied?

And obviously the GOP wouldn't dare advocate for a permanent immigrant underclass, because they know that their base would turn on them over that. But the people setting the policy know that deportation won't work because, at the end of the day, somebody has to do those jobs and it's abundantly clear that white Americans have no interest in doing so regardless of wage. The GOP knows this, and continuing to use immigration as a wedge issue means that they can keep the base distracted while benefiting from cheap labor and never having to come up with a coherent policy that addresses the problem.

Frankly I think Americans have deluded ourselves into this myth of the rugged, self-reliant blue collar average Joe that we ignore the uncomfortable reality that most of us simply aren't suited for hard labor. Even if offered high wages and generous benefits, most of us would still refuse because those jobs are seen as too demeaning and most of us would never last a day at any rate. The ONLY reason that immigrants tolerate this is the hope that if they just work hard and keep their mouths shut then their children will never have to work those jobs and can become entitled snowflakes just like all of the other American kids.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Who would comically think that in 2018 , Axl Rose makes more sense on twitter than the President ? Yes folks....a guy who once dove off a stage to attack a fan for recording a show logically posts better online than the guy we have in charge.

[Malvolio]

Educated guess:

You are a white, cis het male.

How close am I?

Of course he is. That's why, just like Susan Sarandon, he would survive another four years of Trump. So would I, most likely. But there are a lot of Black and brown people who won't. But "The Overlord" doesn't care as he long as he keeps making the good the enemy of the perfect.

[ed2962]

Who would comically think that in 2018 , Axl Rose makes more sense on twitter than the President ? Yes folks....a guy who once dove off a stage to attack a fan for recording a show logically posts better online than the guy we have in charge.

Er...Axl, the same guy that that wrote a song about "immigrants and faggots" and "police and niggers"? And I say this as a guy that at one time owned that record on vinyl...( and I have no problem talking about GnR's influence on 80's rock).

I'm just saying whatever points I'll give him as front-man as an artist in a rock band (and whatever pass I'll give him otherwise), he doesn't get those same points as a political social figure. Certainly not as a a someone more moral than the current POTUS.

[The Overlord]

Republicans felt the same way. This is how the party chose Trump.

How would playing hardball have helped Merrick Garland? Democrats did not have control of the Senate.

.

Depends, could Obama have gotten away with a recess appointment? That's debatable I suppose:

https://newrepublic.com/article/1387...-supreme-court

Here's the thing, how are Republicans playing by the rules? It seems as the GOP goes out of its way to the game to system and Democrats let them do it to preserve norms Republicans do not respect? How was any of their actions towards packing the court with conservatives based on good faith? How is what Kemp did Georgia respecting the norms of the system?

The GOP does not act in good faith, they do everything they can to game the system and Democrats let to preserve some norms the Republicans do not respect. How is a contest fair if the rules only apply to one side? If Dems do not develop the ''take no prisoners'' attitude the GOP has, they will always be at a disadvantage.

[Gray Lensman]

Of course he is. That's why, just like Susan Sarandon, he would survive another four years of Trump. So would I, most likely. But there are a lot of Black and brown people who won't. But "The Overlord" doesn't care as he long as he keeps making the good the enemy of the perfect.

I thought it was supposed to be the other way around - making perfect the enemy of good.

[The Overlord]

Of course he is. That's why, just like Susan Sarandon, he would survive another four years of Trump. So would I, most likely. But there are a lot of Black and brown people who won't. But "The Overlord" doesn't care as he long as he keeps making the good the enemy of the perfect.

So what's your argument, that was okay for Clinton to vote for the Iraq war because she plays lip service to gay rights and I'm a cis white male? That's stupid, do think to be fair of me to ask whether you care more about yourself than people who died in the Iraq war? Of course not, because its unfair premise, what evidence do you have that I or Bernie Sanders do not support trans or gay rights? Where is your evidence? Does Clinton paying lip service to gay rights absolve her of her status as a war hawk and how do you know Bernie would not have won the election if he was chosen instead of Clinton? She also pushed for that war in Libya, how did that work? If you want to accuse me of selfishness, I can play that same game, I would rather not though because that be unpleasant.


Maybe Clinton would have if she had not been a corporate indentured neoliberal and Trump hammered her all the time about that or she bothered to campaign in Wisconsin and Michigan? I am sorry, but Trump was a defeatable candidate, she lost due to her own flaws and repeating these same mistakes is political suicide. If she was as a safe choice as she made herself out to be, she would have won, she lost because he was a flawed candidate. Trump hammered the fact her husband signed NAFTA all the time and what did she say in response? Nothing.

And I am not making ''perfect the enemy of good'' I am demanding good above stagnant mediocrity. If the system is flawed, maintaining the status of quo of a military industrial complex and prison industrial complex and dressing it up with lip service to fighting for gay rights (11th-hour convert) and structural racism (look at the ''law and order'' policies she and her husband supported) is not acceptable to me and its not unreasonable to demand better. Frankly even the 2 party system itself needs to be questioned.

I am willing to be pragmatic to serve a larger goal, Clinton pragmatism in the service of nothing, sometimes you have to bold gambit to accomplish something, playing it safe all the time is not always good.

It may seem like I am rehashing the 2016 election, but I am in fact asking a question that is relevant to the future, do we want to fix the underlining problems in society or just put another band-aid on it? I think all with all the problems I have seen lately, the US needs a massive change, not just a band-aid. The Democrats need from top to bottom, from Presidental races to local D.A and sheriffs races, need to fight hard for all progressive causes and have it be policy heavy, not just lip service.

[Tami]

Scott is trying to impound all the voting equipment to keep it from being used to count votes.

BREAKING: In Florida Gov Scott's campaign has now filed a motion to seize (impound) the voting equipment in Palm Beach and Broward Counties. http://bit.ly/2OFTz2u I suppose his last stunt--to send in state law enforcement didn't work out as expected (hint: they found no fraud).

Twitter Link

[Powerboy]

Who would comically think that in 2018 , Axl Rose makes more sense on twitter than the President ? Yes folks....a guy who once dove off a stage to attack a fan for recording a show logically posts better online than the guy we have in charge.

In the 1980s television show, "The Fall Guy", one of the lines in the theme song was, "They'll never make me President..." Every time I think of that line now, I think, "Weeeeeell, that may not be true anymore. And, frankly, a Hollywood stuntman/ bounty hunter as president of the United States would be an improvement.

[4saken1]

How would playing hardball have helped Merrick Garland? Democrats did not have control of the Senate.

This actually reminds me of something I was thinking about the other day......I wonder what reasoning McConnell would use to confirm a Supreme Court Justice nominee should one come up in 2020.

[Tuck]

Why do you think there has to be a choice between supporting gay marriage or trans rights and a 15 dollar min wage and socialized medicine, why are those things in conflict?

Because Occupy Wall Street spooked the donor class.

[PwrdOn]

Meanwhile, sitting GOP Senator Cyndi Hyde-Smith (appointed to replace Thad Cochran) has a runoff election against Democrat Mike Espy in Mississippi in a few weeks.

Today, while speaking with a cattle rancher donor, she said, "If he invited me to a public hanging, I'd be in the front row."

A reminder, for those who don't know their history, that Mississippi is noted as one of the most notorious locations where African Americans were lynched in public. Also, Hyde-Smith's opponent, Espy, is African American.

Ah the dreaded November Surprise.

Another reminder though, is that Mississippi was also the first state to elect a black Senator, and this is a great opportunity for all of the decent folks there to try and make history again.

[The Overlord]

This actually reminds me of something I was thinking about the other day......I wonder what reasoning McConnell would use to confirm a Supreme Court Justice nominee should one come up in 2020.

He will be brazen about it and confirm a new justice regardless, do you think he is going to be fair? Republicans enforce these rules on others and break them on a whim.

I will say regarding my previous argument if you had a choice between a neoliberal Democrat like Clinton and reactionary like Trump, you should obviously vote for vote for Clinton if you are progressive, that being said I do not think she would address some of the problems Sanders highlighted and I think Sanders is better on policy than Clinton and he is more willing to change things for the better then she was.

Because Occupy Wall Street spooked the donor class.

That's what I thought.