politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Hello! Okay so, one, she didn't say that. The quote was:
There's also a quote that's a little closer, from this pretty good article about the rally where this all happened:
So, she's not claiming she's tougher on border policy than Trump is, but it is fair to say she is pivoting to a "border security" narrative. In order to explain why she wants to pass a border bill, it is necessary to explain what is actually going on at the border. Because our media is shit, almost no one knows; I suspect she's pivoting to "border security" as a narrative because she's being attacked from the right on it, and because something genuinely does need to be done, and she wants to lay the groundwork for making the attempt. But anyway. What is happening is that there are two big problems in immigration in this country:
There's also a problem that the whole agency in charge of the border police is for the most part made of racist people, but that one is unfixable unless Harris can fire the whole agency en masse and then find 40,000 people who want to be immigration police who are not racist. So, unfixable. The other two problems do have legislative solutions, but the Republicans blocked anything Biden did, even when he tried promising to do some cruel or racist things as a compromise in order to get them to also agree to some badly needed things (mostly, increasing ICE funding so they can at least house the people they have in better conditions, and increasing the number of judges to process cases so people don't wait for a year before their case is heard).
And, any time a Democrat tries to do anything about any of this, e.g. reducing the rate of people allowed to come across the border, or increasing the number of judges to reduce the backlog, or increasing funding for ICE, everyone on the left as far as I can tell thinks they're just being cruel on purpose for no reason and gets really mad.
So, OP: What should the Democrats do? You are (edit ~~angry~~) attacking them because they are talking about border security and trying to fix this mess. What should their messaging be instead (since you seem angry about this particular messaging, which again, you kind of have a point about "tough on the border" being a callous message in addition to feeding into the false media narrative)? And, what their legislative action?
No, no, you're wrong! The media bias fact checker bot gave it a credibility rating of "high", so the headline must be right!
/s
And Left-Center!
Amazing how anything left of stormfront is "left" something
At first I was thinking it was a perception issue on my part and I was realizing something. Then it said the AP, Reuters, and the damn Internet Archive were "Center-left". It's definitely confused about where "center" is.
Literally Reagan, that pinko commie with his government cheese and immigration amnesty.
?
You wanted to know where they think the center is.
It's well known centrist, Ronald Reagan.
Can anyone remember the bill that Trump tanked? I tried to look it up but I guess journalists didn't want to give the name of or number of the bill?
I found HR 815 on one, but that's a bill that became law, so probably a mistake?
The bill started in the Senate and got killed there, so look for a Senate number. I don't think it ever made it to the House.
Not angry, just sharing valid news articles that are being brought up by the Right also. Your explanations and defense of Harris are appreciated Mozz.
I had a feeling you wouldn't have an answer for what her messaging should be / what she should do instead.
Honestly, like I say, I do sort of agree that it's off-putting and misleading messaging, and that maybe it would be better to make some sort of attempt to communicate what's actually going on and what the Democrats have been trying to do (since our media seems uninterested in doing that fairly important thing.) But, it is complex. Maybe it is right to just talk "border security", lean into that, and if people get confused but still vote for her, then whatever it is fine.
But yes it's a bunch of shit to attack her with headlines that claim she said something she never said. IDK if she will make a genuine attempt to fix the border, but Biden did make that genuine attempt, and you attacked him with precisely the same messaging, so I think it's fair to call this one bad faith also.
(Edit: Also I see what you meant about "angry"; I went back in fixed it in my message)
There's nothing more she could say. This shithole country is too damn conservative already. The rest of the world is leaving us behind.
.
You don't think the US is a collapsing empire? Capitalistic hellhole?
They dont mind a capitalist collapsing hellhole as long as it's run by an imperialist woman