96 points
*

Hello! Okay so, one, she didn’t say that. The quote was:

“Our administration worked on the most significant border security bill in decades. Some of the most conservative Republicans in Washington, D.C., supported the bill. Even the Border Patrol endorsed it. It was all set to pass, but at the last minute, Trump directed his allies in the Senate to vote it down.”

There’s also a quote that’s a little closer, from this pretty good article about the rally where this all happened:

“Donald Trump does not care about border security — he only cares about himself,” Harris said. “As president, I will bring back the border security bill that Donald Trump killed, and I will sign it into law, and show Donald Trump what real leadership looks like," she said.

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:

  1. There’s a huge backlog of asylum / deportation cases which means people stay in custody in racist and oppressive overcrowded prisons
  2. We’re rate limiting the people coming into the country (see point #1), which means a lot of asylum seekers who are trying to do it legally wind up waiting for months (maybe years now, IDK) on the other side of the Mexican border, basically just living in a big, dangerous, squalid, crime-ridden open-air field with no facilities for life, and no job, no medical care for anyone no matter how young or old, it’s fuckin dangerous

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?

permalink
report
reply
19 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

And Left-Center!

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Amazing how anything left of stormfront is “left” something

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points
*

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)

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

I had a feeling you wouldn’t have an answer for what her messaging should be / what she should do instead.

There’s nothing more she could say. This shithole country is too damn conservative already. The rest of the world is leaving us behind.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

I’m not voting for a Democrat because they are “tougher” on the border. I want better border policy, not shitty draconian Republican or Biden border policy.

permalink
report
reply
16 points

Considering Trump killed a bi-partisan border deal because it might make the other side look good, that’s not a surprise.

https://youtu.be/0gsR001be-U#t=14s

permalink
report
reply
14 points

To be fair, coupled in with this more draconian set of rules was an attempt to actually make the border function normally if you actually read some of the finer details. We have a massive need for more immigration judges which is causing migrants to be in camps longer and leading to more abuse as they and their families wait for rulings. Republicans have made the disfunction part of the process to keep them tortured longer and the new policy would be the first real push in over a decade to fix that. I’d also rather have a hiring wave under a Democrat than a republican. Bush created a nightmare with border patrol by advertising the positions to the public and structuring it as defending America rather than taking care of desperate people and getting them processed.

permalink
report
reply
6 points
*

Yeah, exactly. There was some genuine cruelty in the bill, put in as an attempted compromise with the Republicans so they could get it passed (incl. making it harder to get asylum and easier to kick people out), although nothing even close to the child-stealing horror movie stuff that Trump was getting his kicks out of putting into place. But the majority of the legislation was trying to help – increasing the number of judges so people aren’t waiting in custody for over a year in a terrifyingly racist and overcrowded prison when they didn’t even do anything wrong being a big one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

We don’t actually want this. This is bad. Stop it.

permalink
report
reply
15 points
*

I have good news! She’s not actually doing what the headline says. IDK why the media is so shit when covering this issue but the picture that’s being created (where the choices are “nothing” which is fine or “border security” which means cruelty), is wrong in both respects. See my longer top level comment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Biden’s current border strategy is killing migrants by forcing them into remote areas of the border. They’ve continued trumps bullshit but no one gives a shit because it isn’t Trump.

As an example for a long time, they were keeping migrants in open air detention camps while not feeding or giving water to these migrants. Volunteers were keeping them alive. This is evil and I do not want it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Good news, Biden tried to fix that, by giving enough funding to ICE so they would have places to put those people, increasing the number of judges so there wouldn’t be this massive backlog of 3 million asylum cases to be heard (THREE FUCKING MILLION PEOPLE). Bad news, the Republicans killed it, and none of the left supported him on it either because the media doesn’t give a fuck about any of those people in any of those open air detention camps, and so they represented it all wrong, so people thought he was doing cruelty to migrants and opposed his attempt to do anything to fix it. So, nothing happened. They’re still in the camps. And ICE is still racist. Biden can’t fix that either.

It’s a fucking disaster. And now, the left is preemptively shitting on Harris for getting tangentially involved in it, before she’s even had a chance to fuck anything up. Sounds like those people better have their supplies of sunscreen and bottled water in place.

😢😢😢

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

If “tough” means “focused”, I’m fairly indifferent. Indiscriminately breaking up families and harrassing people because you’re bigoted is not “tough”, it’s just hateful. It serves no real world functional purpose. And that’s the policies of the right. They aren’t tough, because they aren’t results orientated, beyond punishing “them”. I have to assume (hope) Harris is motivated more by real world cost benefit calculations and less by knee jerk stereotypes. Tough could mean fair, if she intends to apply the rules more justly, and less punativatively. If tough means more scrutiny with less prejudice, it sounds more like a better return on investment for border infrastructure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

Words are inaccurate.

It is perfectly possible to be tough on border security without treating people like sub human trash.

You can make a border more difficult to illegally bypass, while also opening the gates to more to ensure that people are documented. Turning potential “illegals” into legal immigrants. This reduces the need to try and get through the border illegally. This is obviously a very basic over view, lacking any kind of thought into policy for supporting them.

Of course, if someone’s definition of tougher on border security is “fuck off, we’re full”, with the border having razor wire and armed guards shooting on sight, then they would disagree with the above.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 188K

    Comments