Political Roundtable Part XXXI

[Fairview4Life]

If I'm not mistaken, illegal immigration/border security is a top 3 or 4 concern of Americans, right up there with the economy and inflation. Isn't that a major reason we ended up with the last president (because our political leaders ignored those concerns?) I'd rather avoid a replay if possible.

That might be something people are concerned about, but the reasons why they are concerned about it are worth thinking through. Just to take a quick example, British people were extremely concerned about immigration levels pre Brexit voting. Then post Brexit, those concerns disappeared within a year. Despite immigration levels going up a bit over that time. The only thing that changed was media framing of immigration pre brexit that treated right wing demagoguery as a legitimate concern, and then once they won the Brexit vote, those concerns magically disappeared, the media stopped discussing it, and the salience dropped to nothing.

In a similar vein, the largest predictor of being a Trump voter in 2016 was racial resentment. When Fox and other far right media spend hours everyday telling you there is a crisis at the border and the country is being flooded with dirty brown people because of democrats, to explain why you don't have affordable healthcare and hide the fact rich people don't pay taxes, that issue becomes very salient for you. All of that is irrespective of what political leaders have actually done at the border. Obama was called the deporter in chief by a bunch of people on the left. Didn't move the needle at all, since that isn't how it was framed to people on the right.

[popper]

If I'm not mistaken, illegal immigration/border security is a top 3 or 4 concern of Americans, right up there with the economy and inflation. Isn't that a major reason we ended up with the last president (because our political leaders ignored those concerns?) I'd rather avoid a replay if possible.

That might be something people are concerned about, but the reasons why they are concerned about it are worth thinking through. Just to take a quick example, British people were extremely concerned about immigration levels pre Brexit voting. Then post Brexit, those concerns disappeared within a year. Despite immigration levels going up a bit over that time. The only thing that changed was media framing of immigration pre brexit that treated right wing demagoguery as a legitimate concern, and then once they won the Brexit vote, those concerns magically disappeared, the media stopped discussing it, and the salience dropped to nothing.

In a similar vein, the largest predictor of being a Trump voter in 2016 was racial resentment. When Fox and other far right media spend hours everyday telling you there is a crisis at the border and the country is being flooded with dirty brown people because of democrats, to explain why you don't have affordable healthcare and hide the fact rich people don't pay taxes, that issue becomes very salient for you. All of that is irrespective of what political leaders have actually done at the border. Obama was called the deporter in chief by a bunch of people on the left. Didn't move the needle at all, since that isn't how it was framed to people on the right.

The latest border security poll FWIW

https://www.ipsos.com

Link doesn't seem to work. Google it if you're interested.

[dobrojim]

No, it's not what I think. IMO, a legal immigration system is an important benefit to our country and our economy (or at least it should be if designed and implemented wisely.) I think the same can be said for a well crafted guest worker program. Alternatively, a system that encourages illegal immigration results in a host of detrimental side effects which are documented and well known to anyone who cares to study the matter.

Please give me your cliff notes version of how the current system:

encourages illegal immigration

Is it the current regulations or is it the economic and social/political disparities between where
people are now and where they would prefer to be?

Legal or otherwise, if you faced the life virtually all of these migrants are facing, I'm guessing you'd
probably be trying to get here too, whether it was legal or not.

Give us a short list of the detrimental side effects so we can understand your position better.

I would want to emigrate to the USA (illegally if necessary) if I were destitute or living in a hopeless situation abroad. Who wouldn't? You're an intelligent person Jim. No need for me to do your research. If you're really interested you can start with Barbara Jordan's findings from the US Commission on Immigration Reform and move forward from there.

Mayors Browser and Adams are requesting federal assistance to deal with their illegal emigrant population. Maybe we should ask them what's the big deal?

I was actually interested in *your* description or feelings on what the detriments were.
Yes I can find and read reports and such but there is no "popper" section in those reports.

How do you think those mayor's requests would be different if instead of needing
help dealing with illegal immigration they were asking for help dealing with legal
immigration?

[dobrojim]

It should be anyone but DeSantis. Democrats need to get their heads out of their ass and start building the party brand instead of looking to individuals to save them. Andrew Gillum was an exciting candidate and we all know he had his own demons. The worst Democratic candidate is better than the majority of Republican candidates.

And not to get too dark, but Florida’s deaths from COVID have exceeded Desantis’ margin of victory.



There’s over 12 million 18 year olds in Florida. Where is the March for Our Lives kids getting behind Val Demmings and whoever wins the Democratic Primary.
This should be a heavily Republican leaning midterms but there’s an opportunity for Democrats to buck history if people show up and vote blue down the ballot. Keep Ron Desantis and the lunatic Republicans from ruining your life, the life of family members and friends.

Policy-wise, no question. Electability....

Demmings ought to have a shot to knock off Little Marco. Not holding my breath though.

I’d look at electability with a heavy dose of skepticism. Marco Rubio is a hypocrite and sniveling coward that’s done nothing for the majority of people in Florida. In fact he’s voted and blocked legislation that’s widely popular with Florida. He’s the embodiment of everything people hate about politicians. He only won his race by 600,000 votes in 2016. How many young people have been eligible to vote since then? How many are organizing for Demmings and Democratic candidates.

Democrats run people normal people who happen to be competent. Republicans run lunatics like Gym Jordan who are only electable because of Gerrymandering and low voter turnout. Just look at this idiot below. You can’t tell me he’s electable. Side note I love the reaction of the guys face when he goes from laughing to realizing this dude is a complete muppet.

Do you think a more liberal, and to my way of think, better candidate than Biden, would
have won the 2020 presidential race? Personally I have my doubts.

We have to win elections in the country we have, not the country we wish we had
to paraphrase Rumsfeld.

[dobrojim]

No, it's not what I think....

I am really glad to read this.

& of course I agree w/ this:

...a legal immigration system is an important benefit to our country and our economy (or at least it should be if designed and implemented wisely.) I think the same can be said for a well crafted guest worker program....

For sure -- on both counts! The problem politically is that, overall, those who pose the current situation as a "crisis" may also regard the crisis as being located in the base fact of "lots" of hispanic people entering the country. Period.

Historically, it needn't be "hispanic", obviously. It can be Irish, Jews, Italians, Poles, etc. If you haven't already done so, you might read about the Immigration Act of 1924 to get a sense of how this has worked in our national political history.

...Alternatively, a system that encourages illegal immigration results in a host of detrimental side effects which are documented and well known to anyone who cares to study the matter.

Inevitably. Just the way outlawing alcohol made the alcohol problem worse, & outlawing marijuana results in a terrific stimulus to a criminal industry! While, of course, neither of these laws actually eliminated use of either substance.

That said, it remains an open question which is worse -- closing the borders effectively (somehow) so that no one gets in vs. people getting into the country illegally. One does not have to be for illegal immigration to regard it as preferable to no immigration.

Going back to my original point about the actual number of, in this case, Mexicans living in the US illegally, I am guessing that most people who speak in the framework of a "crisis" do imagine that we have an increasing tide, even a flood, of illegal Mexicans in the US. Do you think I'm off base in that?

Not to mention people who imagine somehow that increasing our Hispanic population is some kind of negative force towards "changing the national character." Again, do you think I'm over-estimating that? Or even imagining it?

As far as I'm concerned, and with some common sense limits, the more legal migrants we receive from Mexico the better. They're generally a wonderful and hard working people that are a net plus to our economy and culture. Regarding the numbers, I'm not sure and wouldn't trust them even if published by the government. You're probably aware that the Census Bureau totally screwed up the latest national count. We're choking on government incompetence.

If I'm not mistaken, illegal immigration/border security is a top 3 or 4 concern of Americans, right up there with the economy and inflation. Isn't that a major reason we ended up with the last president (because our political leaders ignored those concerns?) I'd rather avoid a replay if possible.

Given what they've done as opposed to what they may have said, which republicans support your
view to increase legal immigration maximally? I'm not currently aware of any.

Regarding the top 3-4 concerns of Americans, it is a distinctly different list depending
on the political affiliation of the respondent.

[popper]

Please give me your cliff notes version of how the current system:

encourages illegal immigration

Is it the current regulations or is it the economic and social/political disparities between where
people are now and where they would prefer to be?

Legal or otherwise, if you faced the life virtually all of these migrants are facing, I'm guessing you'd
probably be trying to get here too, whether it was legal or not.

Give us a short list of the detrimental side effects so we can understand your position better.

I would want to emigrate to the USA (illegally if necessary) if I were destitute or living in a hopeless situation abroad. Who wouldn't? You're an intelligent person Jim. No need for me to do your research. If you're really interested you can start with Barbara Jordan's findings from the US Commission on Immigration Reform and move forward from there.

Mayors Browser and Adams are requesting federal assistance to deal with their illegal emigrant population. Maybe we should ask them what's the big deal?

I was actually interested in *your* description or feelings on what the detriments were.
Yes I can find and read reports and such but there is no "popper" section in those reports.

How do you think those mayor's requests would be different if instead of needing
help dealing with illegal immigration they were asking for help dealing with legal
immigration?

I thought I covered some of the detrimental side effects with my first post on the subject (women and children drowning, dozens suffocated while locked in a trailer, women raped and sexually assaulted in route, hundreds dropping dead in the desert crossings, cartels pocketing hundreds of millions facilitating human trafficking, etc.)

Don't know what to make of the mayor question.

[popper]

I am really glad to read this.

& of course I agree w/ this:


For sure -- on both counts! The problem politically is that, overall, those who pose the current situation as a "crisis" may also regard the crisis as being located in the base fact of "lots" of hispanic people entering the country. Period.

Historically, it needn't be "hispanic", obviously. It can be Irish, Jews, Italians, Poles, etc. If you haven't already done so, you might read about the Immigration Act of 1924 to get a sense of how this has worked in our national political history.


Inevitably. Just the way outlawing alcohol made the alcohol problem worse, & outlawing marijuana results in a terrific stimulus to a criminal industry! While, of course, neither of these laws actually eliminated use of either substance.

That said, it remains an open question which is worse -- closing the borders effectively (somehow) so that no one gets in vs. people getting into the country illegally. One does not have to be for illegal immigration to regard it as preferable to no immigration.

Going back to my original point about the actual number of, in this case, Mexicans living in the US illegally, I am guessing that most people who speak in the framework of a "crisis" do imagine that we have an increasing tide, even a flood, of illegal Mexicans in the US. Do you think I'm off base in that?

Not to mention people who imagine somehow that increasing our Hispanic population is some kind of negative force towards "changing the national character." Again, do you think I'm over-estimating that? Or even imagining it?

As far as I'm concerned, and with some common sense limits, the more legal migrants we receive from Mexico the better. They're generally a wonderful and hard working people that are a net plus to our economy and culture. Regarding the numbers, I'm not sure and wouldn't trust them even if published by the government. You're probably aware that the Census Bureau totally screwed up the latest national count. We're choking on government incompetence.

If I'm not mistaken, illegal immigration/border security is a top 3 or 4 concern of Americans, right up there with the economy and inflation. Isn't that a major reason we ended up with the last president (because our political leaders ignored those concerns?) I'd rather avoid a replay if possible.

Given what they've done as opposed to what they may have said, which republicans support your
view to increase legal immigration maximally? I'm not currently aware of any.

Regarding the top 3-4 concerns of Americans, it is a distinctly different list depending
on the political affiliation of the respondent.

I don't know the answer to your first question. I haven't researched it and the answer wouldn't influence my opinion on the border situation. Why would it?

Agree with your statement about top concerns being influenced by political affiliation.

[dckingsfan]

Given what they've done as opposed to what they may have said, which republicans support your view to increase legal immigration maximally? I'm not currently aware of any...

Cuts to the chase. The current R party wants zero new immigration. Their constituents (business and farmers) are happy with immigration to drive down the prices of labor. The current R party doesn't actually want to enforce rules on their constituents with heavy fines.

Quite the disconnect.

All while we drive migration with climate change, guns running south and driving illegal drugs with our demand.

Fascinating, no?

[pancakes3]

Popper, what everyone's driving at is:

You keep saying "illegal immigration" is a problem, and then casually allude to "border security" but what does that mean? It's not just ambiguous; it seems to allow for diametrically opposite opinions.

1) You're advocating for more immigration so that less people are classified as "illegal"
2) You're advocating for stronger border security so the US can keep the rape and death on the Southern side of the border.

Based on your Republican voting history and your claim that Dems are bad on the issue, which is what made Trump so attractive as a candidate, it suggests that you believe in the latter, but based on your empathy for immigrants, it suggests the former, and that is why everyone is asking for a straight answer out of you, because the follow-up question is - how can you still vote Republican, if the immigration issue is a top 3-4 concern for you, and you're sitting squarely on the Dem side of the issue?

Similarly, re: you citing Barbara Jordan, I don't really know what your specific stance is because the report advocates one thing, but was falsely cited by the previous administration to say another.

https://cmsny.org/publications/martin-barbara-jordan/

[pancakes3]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/herschel-walker-skipping-debate-for-perplexing-reason/ar-AA10SDBD?li=BBnb7Kz

not sending their best

[pancakes3]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/when-vietnamese-fishermen-went-to-war-with-the-klan-in-texas

racism. immigration. economic uncertainty. it's nothing new.

[popper]

Popper, what everyone's driving at is:

You keep saying "illegal immigration" is a problem, and then casually allude to "border security" but what does that mean? It's not just ambiguous; it seems to allow for diametrically opposite opinions.

1) You're advocating for more immigration so that less people are classified as "illegal"
2) You're advocating for stronger border security so the US can keep the rape and death on the Southern side of the border.

Based on your Republican voting history and your claim that Dems are bad on the issue, which is what made Trump so attractive as a candidate, it suggests that you believe in the latter, but based on your empathy for immigrants, it suggests the former, and that is why everyone is asking for a straight answer out of you, because the follow-up question is - how can you still vote Republican, if the immigration issue is a top 3-4 concern for you, and you're sitting squarely on the Dem side of the issue?

Similarly, re: you citing Barbara Jordan, I don't really know what your specific stance is because the report advocates one thing, but was falsely cited by the previous administration to say another.

https://cmsny.org/publications/martin-barbara-jordan/

More legal immigration makes sense to me assuming we target specific demands for labor in those enterprises that can't otherwise source it domestically. I also believe that minimizing illegal immigration is in our best interest. I don't see any disconnect in logic there.

[FAH1223]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Republicans flipping the US House and Democrats keeping the US Senate seems to becoming more and more likely

[dobrojim]

Just now seeing that cakes had a similar take on this conservation as I had

Given what they've done as opposed to what they may have said, which republicans support your
view to increase legal immigration maximally? I'm not currently aware of any.

Regarding the top 3-4 concerns of Americans, it is a distinctly different list depending
on the political affiliation of the respondent.

I don't know the answer to your first question. I haven't researched it and the answer wouldn't influence my opinion on the border situation. Why would it?

Agree with your statement about top concerns being influenced by political affiliation.

Given what I know and how the political landscape has changed dramatically in the last 20 years
regarding immigration, I strongly suspect the answer to the question of which republicans would
support a maximally increased level of immigration is NONE. You have stated the border situation
is in crisis and that this is important to you. You have previously hinted if not outright
stated your political leanings are conservative. I'm suffering cognitive dissonance with
this combination of observations.

You think immigration is a very important issue.
You think the levels of legal immigration should be dramatically increased.
You are a fairly staunch republican.
No prominent republicans agree with your immigration position.

What did I get wrong?

[popper]

Just now seeing that cakes had a similar take on this conservation as I had

Given what they've done as opposed to what they may have said, which republicans support your
view to increase legal immigration maximally? I'm not currently aware of any.

Regarding the top 3-4 concerns of Americans, it is a distinctly different list depending
on the political affiliation of the respondent.

I don't know the answer to your first question. I haven't researched it and the answer wouldn't influence my opinion on the border situation. Why would it?

Agree with your statement about top concerns being influenced by political affiliation.

Given what I know and how the political landscape has changed dramatically in the last 20 years
regarding immigration, I strongly suspect the answer to the question of which republicans would
support a maximally increased level of immigration is NONE. You have stated the border situation
is in crisis and that this is important to you. You have previously hinted if not outright
stated your political leanings are conservative. I'm suffering cognitive dissonance with
this combination of observations.

You think immigration is a very important issue.
You think the levels of legal immigration should be dramatically increased.
You are a fairly staunch republican.
No prominent republicans agree with your immigration position.

What did I get wrong?

1. Yes
2. Legal immigration should be modulated (increased or reduced) based upon job specific employer needs. Currently there seems to be a number of specific job categories that could use an influx. I did read recently however that a large percentage of companies intend to start laying off employees. Not sure how that will play out.
3. I am a registered Independent in FL that almost always votes R. I consider myself a conservative if that means conserving those institutions and policies that IMO benefit my family, myself and the country.
4. You may or may not be right. I simply don't know the preferred policy positions on this subject from hundreds of R's serving in congress. I hesitate to define any of them as prominent.

[dckingsfan]

Cognitive dissonance meets willful ignorance and complexity horizons.

[popper]

Cognitive dissonance meets willful ignorance and complexity horizons.

Please explain.

[dobrojim]

I wonder how much attention will be paid to GOP efforts to eliminate Soc Security
which by the way, could be in much better shape if we had the kind of robust
legal immigration Pop says he wants.

I'm eligible but waiting at least a year, maybe 4.5 years.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=JDz-Y9zF2F_ZA6zFCVJ7lg&s=19

Read on Twitter

?t=_SX2Zi0hT0bsNjRvEVwOEA&s=19

Read on Twitter

?t=rd-3O6xjo89xFUPCu5_wNA&s=19

Read on Twitter

?t=bNE7nLOuBRVVPVuoMCmHCQ&s=19

[dobrojim]

Trump channeling Nixon. If I do it, it's not illegal.