this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024

6 points (68.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers

2822 users here now

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

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Why the Biden Administration Is Shifting on Immigration (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 1 month ago by UnderpantsWeevil to c/politics

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For much of the Biden administration’s first three years in office, migration surged at the Mexican border. Administration officials frequently argued that the problem was beyond their control — a reflection not of U.S. policy but of global forces pushing people toward the border.

Then, starting in December, when the issue threatened President Biden’s re-election, he began a crackdown. The traffic of people crossing the border plummeted. Today, it remains near the lowest point since 2020 and not so different from levels during parts of the Trump and Obama administrations. This week, the Biden administration imposed tough new rules to keep it that way.

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] chakan2 6 points 1 month ago

He didn't really shift his position. He made the mistake of waiting 8 months on the Republicans.

[–] MediaBiasFactChecker -3 points 1 month ago

New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for New York Times:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/04/briefing/biden-immigration-election.html

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

[+] cheese_greater -6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Because the incentives were there for people to take the risk. If there's no or lesser incentive to make the dangerous trip to the point you're likely to return with nothing to show for it (because they probably have some sense of whether they qualify or not), its a different calculation.

The rules and process were far too loose so it consequently resulted in greater migration. The party is over for that and will help to limit it to those who strictly qualify or can make a compelling case that justifies their claim and self-filters from the unqualified or inadmissable applicants who would otherwise be incentivized to make such a gamble

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

The rules and process were far too loose so it consequently resulted in greater migration

For refugees? Is the solution to simply shoot people at the border so they have an equal but opposite incentive not to flee their own country?

Or are we talking about seasonal farm laborers who cross the border to participate in annual harvest? Should we burn down our fruit and vegetable fields and slaughter our livestock en mass so nobody has an economic incentive to take seasonal employment?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

It’s obvious that you aren’t taking this problem seriously. We need to detonate our entire nuclear arsenal and melt the entire continent of North America into radioactive slag. It’s the only way to ensure there’s absolutely no incentive to come here.