this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
345 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19089 readers
5015 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
 

The White House statement comes after a week of frantic negotiations in the Senate.

President Joe Biden on Friday urged Congress to pass a bipartisan bill to address the immigration crisis at the nation’s southern border, saying he would shut down the border the day the bill became law.

“What’s been negotiated would — if passed into law — be the toughest and fairest set of reforms to secure the border we’ve ever had in our country,” Biden said in a statement. “It would give me, as President, a new emergency authority to shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed. And if given that authority, I would use it the day I sign the bill into law.”

Biden’s Friday evening statement resembles a ramping up in rhetoric for the administration, placing the president philosophically in the camp arguing that the border may hit a point where closure is needed. The White House’s decision to have Biden weigh in also speaks to the delicate nature of the dealmaking, and the urgency facing his administration to take action on the border — particularly during an election year, when Republicans have used the issue to rally their base.

The president is also daring Republicans to reject the deal as it faces a make-or-break moment amid GOP fissures.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 166 points 9 months ago (83 children)

What a stupid thing to focus on. I hate that the southern border is even a topic people bring up. It's a completely made up problem.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 9 months ago (4 children)

B-but scawwy foreigners!

75% of this country thinks the border is in crisis. I fucking hate it.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

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!"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 52 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Every 2 years like fucking clockwork there's a "border crisis" to waste time and energy on, which promptly disappears from public consciousness and media the day after the election. It's tiring

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 9 months ago

Its an election year so theres magically another immigrant surge that needs to be fixed.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago

If we had open borders, I bet 99% of Americans wouldn't even notice a change in their day-to-day life. Old peoples' obsession with the border is tiring as fuck. I just don't understand any they care so much about something that doesn't affect them, other than to simply be racist.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (22 children)

According to the DHS,

Affirmative asylum case filings with USCIS nearly quadrupled from 63,074 applications in 2021 to 238,841 in 2022, the highest number on record.

The total number of defensive asylum applications filed with EOIR nearly tripled from 88,162 in 2021 to 253,524 in 2022, the highest on record.

I don't have the numbers for all of 2023 in front of me but they're higher than the ones for 2022. (And keep in mind that not everyone crossing the border files an asylum application.)

Hundreds of thousands more people than normal are entering across the border, and existing systems for accommodating them are overwhelmed. Maybe the best solution is not closing the border, but thinking that there is no problem is inconsistent with reality.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 9 months ago

Yeah it sounds like we need to better fund our asylum program.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 9 months ago (8 children)

Crazy idea, but we all came to this country as immigrants, and wiped out most of the population that was already here. Seems a little ironic to me that we're now concerned about who can and can't live here.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

sounds like we need to floood our immigration system with cash so we can finally help all those human beings. you want to help human beings, right?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (78 replies)
[–] [email protected] 87 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Why do Democrats keep trying to appease Fascists?

[–] [email protected] 36 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (39 children)

Because this will undercut the only politically popular Republican position, which Republicans are currently wielding as a cudgel against the Biden Administration. In the process, Republicans are treating the people crossing the border worse and worse, increasing human suffering. If Biden can take control of the narrative of the border, there is a real possibility he can start to make things better and decrease human suffering.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (14 children)

If Biden can take control of the narrative of the border, there is a real possibility he can start to make things better and decrease human suffering.

There's a possibility he can, but no possibility he will.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (38 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 9 months ago

Because the both answer to the same corporate overlords

[–] [email protected] 75 points 9 months ago (13 children)

The election year eternal immigrant caravan strikes again. I get the move politically, but it’s unfortunate the GOP is so much better at messaging and controlling public focus than the Dems. They have no answer but to play the game on Republican terms.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 9 months ago (4 children)

I don't understand how the immigrant caravan magically disappears the Wednesday after election day. It's like they start making their way to the border the January of an election year and then poof they are gone after the polls close.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 months ago

Their greatest magic trick is that it will disappear for the entirety of a Republican administration. It's Schrodinger's caravan. It only exists if there is an election coming up, or a Democrat is in office.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That’s because the GOP take the easy road of appealing to people’s fear where as dems in theory try to appeal to logic and sensibility, it’s a fight they can never win.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's also a situation requiring nuance and informed critical thinking. We need immigrants to sustain our labor force, and we should be selective about removing red tape and monolithic obstacles for all people crossing the border while maintaining a reliable record of resources and threats to prevent the intake system from being overwhelmed. You can't fit that on a bumper sticker.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Playing the game on Republican terms is why they seem so much better at messaging than us. "Our opponents are right that this is a problem, but our solution is better" is not convincing. "Our opponents are lying about this, like they do with everything else. The situation is under control and we're going to keep it that way by [insert legislation du jour]" is.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

Big part of it is because Republican rhetoric is so much more shocking and sensationalist by design. It attracts attention instantly. Dems do the boring, bread-and-butter politics that we need to run the country. Doesn't attract as much attention.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 66 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I fucking hate the politics surrounding the border in this country.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 9 months ago (2 children)

If you've never seen it, watch an old musical called 'The Music Man.' A con man finds a small town and convinces the locals that their town is on the road to ruin because someone opened up a pool hall. The GOP can find any issue and blow it up. Heck, Obama's suit was a matter of national controversy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_tan_suit_controversy

https://youtu.be/cbiBx5T2uX0

[–] [email protected] 38 points 9 months ago (3 children)

And Democratic party members who pretend Republicans' bullshit is real and try to meet them in the middle with draconian legislation and dumbass statements like this just make the problem worse

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

"The minute your son leaves the house, does he rebuckle his knickerbockers below the knee? It must be because of the Trans Menace!!"

I could see it in a modern take. With a capital T even!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 65 points 9 months ago (5 children)

The fun thing is that this bill would give any president that power.

…. Oh.
But maybe that’s what they want. A president that can shut the border for political points would decimate industry. These tend to be industries that employ a lot of salt of the earth people, and the owners give a lot of money to Republicans. Republicans use this as a wedge issue and have spent years whipping their base into a frenzy. Giving them the authority to hurt themselves.

A stupid Republican president would shut down the border and harm industry. A smart Republican president would not fall into that trap, but be paralyzed until a new talking point arises.
The base would support populist moves like shutting the border. Donors wouldn’t. Farmers with rotting crops would not.

Shrewd.

[–] [email protected] 69 points 9 months ago (10 children)

It's shrewd for a totally different reason. Trump told them not to pass this bill, Johnson says it's DOA in the Republican House. So now Trump and the Republican House are arguing against closing the border.

If any Republican says Biden is for open borders he can just say "I had a bipartisan deal for closing the border and Trump and the Republicans killed it."

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Fucking hell, here's to hoping Congressional Republicans are too self defeating to pass this fucking trash, the fact that Democratic negotiators thought this was a good idea - like, right after the fucking Trump administration, thought "yeah, let's give the executive branch more power to be assholes to immigrants" - is just mind boggling

Then again, it feels pretty similar to Obama trying to work with Republicans to gut social security a few years after 2008, so maybe I should stop being surprised by these things

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago (10 children)

"We won't negotiate with terrorists and fascists."

Immediately negotiates with terrorists and fascists

You mention Obama. I remember in 2008 being so enthused that I volunteered for his campaign and poured my heart out, only to get ... what we got. I don't see this pattern ever changing. We really need to find a way out of this two-party system. I'm not sure what that way is, but we so desperately need it.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Gee, I can't imagine who else could abuse that newfound power for some other arbitrarily heinous reasons.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Do I agree? I don't think so. But I must admit this is a smart move politically. It calls their bluff.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago

Jfc can we get someone up for election who's not a raging fascist?

Fuck this country, and fuck everyone who supports this. Every. One. No matter how much you screech "iLlEgAl" at our prospective immigrants and refugees from the comfort of your home. Fuck you personally if you're someone who does that and who thinks this is a good move by our president.

load more comments
view more: next ›