this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
159 points (95.4% liked)

politics

19241 readers
1681 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The former president reportedly plans on utilizing the military to enforce immigration policies and erecting deportation camps along the border.

Donald Trump isn’t only looking to reinstate the extreme, anti-immigration policies of his first term if he wins in November; he is seeking to take things a step further. “We have to do something about it,” Trump told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham in a town hall Tuesday, repeating his ugly 2015 claim that other countries are “not sending their finest” to the United States. “We have the worst border in the history of the world.”

Claiming that countries are “emptying out their prisons” into the U.S., Trump reiterated his plans to carry out mass deportations, which he has promised on the campaign trail would be the “largest” in American history. Of course, he was vague on the details, telling Ingraham that he would “get the bad ones out first,” which he’d find using “local police.”

Nevertheless, the remarks provided yet another glimpse into the radical border policies he’d pursue in a second term—which, as the Washington Post reported Wednesday, could include mobilizing the military for immigration enforcement and the establishment of deportation camps along the border. “Americans can expect that immediately upon President Trump’s return to the Oval Office, he will restore all of his prior policies, implement brand new crackdowns that will send shock waves to all the world’s criminal smugglers, and marshal every federal and state power necessary to institute the largest deportation operation in American history,” campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told the outlet. Undocumented immigrants “should not get comfortable,” she added, “because very soon they will be going home.”

top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 48 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Trump wants to commit genocide against brown people.

Trump wants to commit genocide against queer people.

Trump would be happy to let Israel continue their genocide against Palestinians.

But don't vote for "Genocide Joe!"

Someone this morning suggested voting for Cenk Uygur. Who was born in Turkey from Turkish parents. He isn't even eligible to be president. That'll sure stop any one of those three genocides.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If you can't stop ALL evil, why bother stopping any of it?

If you can't reduce ALL harm, why bother reducing any of it?

I wonder how some people muster the motivation to get up in the mornings with their way of thinking.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Those people don't actually have a reason to get up in the morning, and Trump makes them believe that's because of Dems.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

I find it incredible how Trump could make anyone believe anything. They have to be so deep in an alternate world.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

I like listening to YT (most of the time - they keep harping on Gaza so much lately and I've started skipping through some of those. I get that it's a big deal, but it's been 100% of the content for recent shows. I also don't like it much when Cenk sometimes gets so emotional that he's cutting off Ana as well. ) but I don't really understand what Cenk's thing is with running. He's explained it multiple times and it still doesn't seem to make much sense to me.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

But don’t vote for “Genocide Joe!”

I feel like a large part of this is blaming the voter for something they didn't ask for.

Democrats: LA LA LA! I'm not Listening, vote for Biden or lose your democracy.

Democrats: La La La! I'm not listening, vote for Biden or lose your democracy! Also we're going to smuggle some weapons for Israel free of charge!

Someone this morning suggested voting for Cenk Uygur.

He's not going to win, but a shocking concept of where a political rival aligns with your ideals and you "Want" to vote for him.

Versus a candidate that abandons those ideals and blames/gaslights you for not supporting their off moral behavior.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Who should I vote for to stop Trump from implementing those genocides? Give me a name please. Show me the likelihood of them winning.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Standing up for a candidate that aligns with your wants/needs? 0.000000000000000000000000000000001% chance

Letting genocides slide with no repercussions: 0%

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You appear to have not read my post and just posted something unrelated.

I will ask you again:

Who should I vote for to stop Trump from implementing those genocides? Give me a name please. Show me the likelihood of them winning.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I do apologize, I probably should have added more context between my posts.

A candidate like Cenk Uygur. 0.000000000000000000000000000000001% of preventing a genocide

Letting genocides slide with no repercussions: 0% of preventing another genocide.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Ah, I see, you either don't understand math or don't understand the constitution.

Cenk cannot be president. He was not born in the United States. His parents weren't even citizens. He has a 0% chance of being able to stop a genocide. Not a 0 with a decimal point, a bunch of other zeroes and then a 1. 0. Zero. Goose egg. Nothing. Nada.

You might as well vote for Prince Harry.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He's not going to win, but a shocking concept of where a political rival aligns with your ideals and you "Want" to vote for him.

Versus a candidate that abandons those ideals and blames/gaslights you for not supporting their off moral behavior.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Your words:

A candidate like Cenk Uygur. 0.000000000000000000000000000000001% of preventing a genocide

Also, my words:

Who should I vote for to stop Trump from implementing those genocides? Give me a name please. Show me the likelihood of them winning.

So you neither did that nor were accurate about his ability to be elected and prevent genocide because, again, he can't be elected.

So unless you're trying to claim that voting for someone who can't get elected will somehow stop Trump... otherwise, again, tell me who to vote for who will stop Trump from implementing the genocides he and his people have already announced their intentions to implement.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I feel like we are arguing semantics when we say stuff like Republican genocide vs Democrat genocide and asking which one is worse. When obviously the answer is both are wrong and counter productive to a growing society.

So..... what are democrats going to do about it?

Because it seems republicans have made their minds up.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I feel like we are arguing semantics when we say stuff like Republican genocide vs Democrat genocide and asking which one is worse.

This is what I said:

Trump wants to commit genocide against brown people.

Trump wants to commit genocide against queer people.

Trump would be happy to let Israel continue their genocide against Palestinians.

I'm not asking which one is worse, I'm saying there will be three under Trump.

Do you really think Biden plans to cleanse the U.S. of brown people and queer people? Or is it not genocide when it's queer people and the wrong kind of brown people?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

How do you make peace with one genocide? I don't mean this as a 'gotcha' question, but it's literally a thing I don't know how to handle. Thanks.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I’m not asking which one is worse, I’m saying there will be three under Trump.

Sounds like it will be a real blood bath, what are democrats going to do about it?

Because for me it's sounds pretty simple

  • Cease fire in Gaza

  • Resume food aid into Gaza

Really simple and quite easy to do. But if they don't want to do that.... they can always....

  • Try someone besides Biden

  • Push economic policies that help Americans

But if they really didn't want to do that and wanted to lose an election, all they have to do is the same thing they are right now.

Do you really think Biden plans to cleanse the U.S. of brown people and queer people? Or is it not genocide when it’s queer people and the wrong kind of brown people?

People are people whether they live in the US or not. I am not going to put one on a balance over the other.

But I am not going to agree with one flavor of genocide over the other, just because Biden's is fruit punch flavored.

So... what are democrats going to do about it, because the ball is in their court.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Let me give you a little dose of realism.

We are long past the point where voting in a presidential election can disrupt the status quo.

Under the current circumstances, voting in the presidential can never be anything more than harm reduction. There are only 3 options when it comes to voting:

  1. Vote for Trump and accelerate the US decline to neofascism.

  2. Throw away your vote on a 3rd party candidate who will never - and could never - win, likely contributing to the decline since conservatives are considerably less likely to vote 3rd party.

  3. Vote for Biden to stave off the decline as much as possible while pursuing other means of affecting change.

Even if a large enough number voted 3rd party to make Democrats take notice, the Democrats are not going to change in any meaningful way. The best they will give us is more of the same, paying lip service to leftist ideas while compromising with corporations and the right at every possible opportunity.

If you want things to change in this country you need to protest, engage in direct action and mutual aid, unionize, and do everything you can think of to create and grow alternative institutions of power.

Edit to include voting in primaries and voting local if you live in an area where that could possibly help.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

How can you be more aggressive than locking kids in cages? Just straight up murdering them?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago

Drowning them with barbed wire is the cool new thing

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

Please stop giving them ideas

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He's somehow implemented more aggressive border control without even being president. He gives orders and republican reps obey anyway.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

He's implemented nothing.

Bidens border policy is pretty much the same as his admins was- just more put together, reasonable, and less divisive. Trump's bs hasn't changed how the us is handling immigration.

The problem with my the immigration issue is that both parties can campaign on it. If it's fixed they can't. Which is exactly the reason the Republicants reneged on the deal they wanted. It was actually going to make a meaningful difference.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

other countries are “not sending their finest”

Yeah, that's kinda true now, only insane would like to live in the US in this economy.
Jokes aside, a few people around me would at least think about it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Hopefully he will deport his entire family