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.
- 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!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- 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
B-but scawwy foreigners!
75% of this country thinks the border is in crisis. I fucking hate it.
If we had a political party with the courage to say "It's not a crisis, quit falling for bullshit" that number would go down
Not by much, I'd wager. Democrats don't tend to sway their opinions much when the party takes a different line than the majority Dem opinion, and Republicans are too racist to change their views on the border.
It would be nice to have a voice of sanity in the fucking country, though.
A majority of Democratic voters in the 40s and 50s thought segregation was a state issue the federal government should stay out of because they didn't want the controversy, but some Democratic leaders saw it differently, and thank goodness they did because without them pushing the issue along with civil rights activists we never would have gotten (among other things) a voting rights act.
It wouldn't just be nice to have a voice of sanity, it's the only way this issue is getting any better imo
While Truman's advocacy of civil rights in the '48 platform is definitely pivotal in terms of effecting policy, I would raise the question as to how much of the change in opinions was due to the party tack, and how much was due to the ongoing and revitalized post-WW2 civil rights movement and increasing integration and civic participation of liberal blocs in the north.
I suppose it's academic in the end. I would love for the Dem party to take up the issue, like I said. It's just a 'chicken or the egg' question.
I think the border is in crisis. Our shitty policies make it incredibly and unnecessarily difficult for people to enter the country seeking asylum or a legal means of getting citizenship. I would say the camps of people stuck on the other side of the border, prey to criminals who would rape, steal, and murder (not to mention the asylum-seekers vulnerable to those they are seeking asylum from) are the biggest part of that crisis.
So I'm not sure if I'd be considered part of that 75%, because my solution is to make the system more efficient in letting people in and started with paths to citizenship. Then there wouldn't be masses of people at the border.
Yeah, but when most people say "Border crisis", they don't mean "Holy shit refugees are in inhumane conditions, we need to help them", they mean "I'm scared that there are too many brown people coming into MY good, white, Christian country!"
Oh, no, definitely agree, that's why I say I'm not really what one would include in that 75%.
The legislation had funding for more staff and judges to be able to process asylum requests faster. The GOP got some stupid shit in there that probably wouldn't hold up in court (typical tough guy posturing shit), but there were some good things in there too.
My understanding is that the US has one of the most liberal immigration policies in the world. Is that not the case?
If other countries didn't have immigration standards, I'd be European by now...
Heck most Americans don't know that before the end of Roe V. Wade America had one of the most liberal Abortion Policies in the world... the amount of Pro-Choicers fighting 20 week bans who's heads would explode if they ever learned 6 week bans was the norm for most of the developed world.
No no, scary brown people
They're perfectly fine with white foreigners that either speak English or have enough money/power they don't care.
No one ever has a problem with the Canadian Immigrants, even though Ted Cruz did more wrong for this nation than Jose wokring under the table at the farms for under minimum wage