2020 US Election (Part One)

[Sommerswerd]

Let the record show that J favors the Trump concentration camps and a Wall, or at least that's how his comments here read.

I mean obviously the problem is that we're calling people illegal and then abusing them because of that label. I'm not surprised that the closet racists love that approach, because it gives them cover. "Oh well they broke the law!" They're also human beings and haven't hurt anyone with their actions. In fact they're typically trying to help themselves and their family have better lives.

If you ever needed proof that the whole idea of the right favoring people who bootstrap through hard work was utter bullcrap, this is it. "Oh we can't let in people who want to work for practically nothing at manual labor 16 hours a day!" So much for the virtue of hard work.

Don't forget "personal responsibility". I always ask people who criticize "illegals" to consider what could possibly be a better example of someone taking "personal responsibility" for their own life and livelihood than a person who uproots and relocates to a different country to work a grueling job at substandard wages, rather than beg for "handouts"...

 

[Farm Boy]

Define your "grueling job" in there for me, if you would.

Firstly, obviously you can only collect remittances from legal labor.

Al Capone?

 

[El_Machinae]

If you ever needed proof that the whole idea of the right favoring people who bootstrap through hard work was utter bullcrap, this is it. "Oh we can't let in people who want to work for practically nothing at manual labor 16 hours a day!" So much for the virtue of hard work.

[Like]
Let me just say that if your citizenry is *damaged* by people working harder for cheaper ... you've got a systemic problem with distributing the *gains* within a country.

 

[Lexicus]

I mean obviously the problem is that we're calling people illegal and then abusing them because of that label.

The ultimate problem is we have immigration law and enforcement that is still based in white supremacy and meeting the needs of capitalists.

This is our immigration policy, America's immigration policy:

No man has to bow. No man born to royalty. Here, we judge you by what you do, not by who your father was. Here, you can be something. Here, is the place to build a home. But it's not the land. There's always more land. It's the idea that we all have value -- you and me.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Or if you want to go back even further:

Now the onely way to avoyde this shipwracke and to provide for our posterity is to followe the Counsell of Micah, to doe Justly, to love mercy, to walke humbly with our God, for this end, wee must be knitt together in this worke as one man, wee must entertaine each other in brotherly Affeccion, wee must be willing to abridge our selves of our superfluities, for the supply of others necessities, wee must uphold a familiar Commerce together in all meekenes, gentlenes, patience and liberallity, wee must delight in eache other, make others Condicions our owne rejoyce together, mourne together, labour, and suffer together,

Everything else is racism and fascist nonsense.

 

[metatron]

Yes, because I am only one-tenth as smart as you, the all-seeing, the all-knowing.

Rather than being snippy you might want to actually watch that video, now, on the third offering.
Because a) humor and b) well... creepy.

Truth is I've just never paid much attention to Biden

It's not like i'd find him all that naturally interesting either, but he has been the clear frontrunner in the polling for most of the duration of this thread.
And, well, once upon a time he used to be Vice President.

 

[onejayhawk]

UVa has an article by Alan Abramowitz attempting to predict the electoral vote based on two primary factors--the economy and His approval rating. Results range from certain defeat to landslide victory, as one might expect. This is not new, but here is his version
http://crystalball.centerforpolitic...s-forecasting-the-2020-presidential-election/

The most plausible prediction at this point, however, is for a very close contest. Given a net approval rating of -10, approximately where Trump’s approval rating has been stuck for most of the past year, and real GDP growth of between 1% to 2%, in line with most recent economic forecasts, the model predicts that he would receive between 263 and 283 electoral votes. Of course, it takes 270 electoral votes to win.
​

I am skeptical for three reasons. First and most important is the unique level of media opposition. Second is the generational divide within the Democratic party. Third is the quality, or lack of it, of the eventual opponent. Still, all of that probably slides the scale only 20 votes or so.

J

 

[Gori the Grey]

Are you claiming that illegal immigration is not a problem needing a solution? Is anyone here claiming that?

I needed a day or two to mull it over, but I think I'm ready to go on record saying that I don't think illegal immigration is a problem. And that the "solution" that we previously pursued, of largely ignoring it, was the right "solution" to this non-problem. American businesses got cheap labor. American consumers got cheaper goods. Foreign workers got rates of pay that, to them, based on their home economies, were satisfactory or even desirable. The only problem with that arrangement is that we can't say out loud that we favor it because then we're condoning poor pay for some workers and acknowledging our own bad faith in creating such a circumstance.

There. Have at me.

UVa has an article by Alan Abramowitz attempting to predict the electoral vote based on two primary factors--the economy and His approval rating. Results range from certain defeat to landslide victory, as one might expect. This is not new, but here is his version
http://crystalball.centerforpolitic...s-forecasting-the-2020-presidential-election/

The most plausible prediction at this point, however, is for a very close contest. Given a net approval rating of -10, approximately where Trump’s approval rating has been stuck for most of the past year, and real GDP growth of between 1% to 2%, in line with most recent economic forecasts, the model predicts that he would receive between 263 and 283 electoral votes. Of course, it takes 270 electoral votes to win.
I am skeptical for three reasons. First and most important is the unique level of media opposition. Second is the generational divide within the Democratic party. Third is the quality, or lack of it, of the eventual opponent. Still, all of that probably slides the scale only 20 votes or so.

Talk about a non-prediction prediction. And not just the part that you call "not new." But also the claim that the election will be close. Duh. Our system is designed to drive elections to a narrow margin of victory. And then setting Trump's predicted electoral votes on a scale that runs from not winning to winning. Way to go out on a limb there, crystalball.

 

[Lexicus]

Rather than being snippy you might want to actually watch that video, now, on the third offering.

I'm not the one being snippy, m80.

The only problem with that arrangement is that we can't say out loud that we favor it because then we're condoning poor pay for some workers and acknowledging our own bad faith in creating such a circumstance.

There. Have at me.

I dunno I feel like the problem is the part where you explicitly say you're fine with a regime of formal legal inequality (indeed, a regime where millions have no substantive legal protections at all and can be literally disappeared by the state at any time) for the sake of cheaper goods and labor. But I'm just a pinko commie so what do I know.

 

[Takhisis]

I am not Republican.

*snickers*

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Ports of entry typically have Mexican cities/towns across from them serving as collection points for people trying to get into the country regardless of what route they decide to take at that point. If the wall extends too far people wont try to cross the desert to get around it. They'll stay in close to the port of entry and get thru it without having to risk the journey. If you have the means to go through, under or over the wall why do it out in the middle of the desert?



And then they'd have to walk across the Nowhere Desert. I dont disagree with you about a wall's inefficiencies, but the walls we've built so far have driven more people out into the desert. We can stop or reduce that by removing walls or extending them. Hell, we already have barriers most of the way from San Diego to Texas. The drop in apprehensions has been attributed mostly to the recession of 2008.

You just cited the best argument against the wall. Compared to the desert, as a barrier it is superfluous.

That said, the difference between crossing the border near a port of entry and crossing the border out in the desert is not the quality of the barrier, it's the enforcement. Between Aqua Prieta and Antelope Wells it doesn't matter what sort of barrier you put up, I can come at it from the Mexico side with whatever equipment I need to get past it and no matter how hard that is and what equipment it takes it is a secondary cost compared to what I already need to get through the mountains to civilization on the US side. As it stands right now, I don't have to go terribly far from Antelope Wells, population two, to be able to cut through the fencing uninterrupted, but I still have the same problems.

What my somewhat tongue in cheek previous post was supposed to point out is that no matter what kind of speed bump you put out there, the only thing that would make a difference is building that thriving city, from scratch, at Antelope Wells that you would need to support the manpower to enforce the fence. Real time monitored surveillance of fifty miles of border, with personnel and equipment available that can deploy rapidly enough to at least keep your fence from being stolen is an ENORMOUS cost. If you have that, a chain link fence or even just a painted line on the ground will be fine. If you don't the ice wall from Game of Thrones isn't really going to stop anyone. Someone will just come along with a torch and take the time to melt a tunnel through it.

 

[rah]

To be really really picky, the ice wall in Game of Thrones was also protected with an enchantment to stop that from happening. Unless you had an enchanted dragon, of course.

 

[Lexicus]

To be really really picky, the ice wall in Game of Thrones was also protected with an enchantment to stop that from happening. Unless you had an enchanted dragon, of course.

Well are president clearly knows magic so checkmate Tim

 

[rah]

To be even more picky, it's 'our' not 'are' and I'm not Tim.

 

[Lexicus]

'are President' is a joke phrase implying that Trump supporters are stupid

 

[Gori the Grey]

I dunno I feel like the problem is the part where you explicitly say you're fine with a regime of formal legal inequality (indeed, a regime where millions have no substantive legal protections at all and can be literally disappeared by the state at any time) for the sake of cheaper goods and labor.

informal

 

[Lexicus]

No, it's formal. It's two different legal regimes. It's not one legal regime that just isn't applied to certain people in practice.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Define your "grueling job" in there for me, if you would.

I scoff in your general direction. You know damn well what a grueling job is

 

[Gori the Grey]

No, it's formal. It's two different legal regimes. It's not one legal regime that just isn't applied to certain people in practice.

It is under a rigorous no problem with illegal immigrants plan.

 

[rah]

'are President' is a joke phrase implying that Trump supporters are stupid

So you imply Trump supporters are stupid by sounding stupid like them. I would think there are more effective ways.

But thanks, I wasn't aware of that.

 

[Sommerswerd]

To be really really picky, the ice wall in Game of Thrones was also protected with an enchantment to stop that from happening. Unless you had an enchanted dragon, of course.

To be really, really, really picky... despite its impossible height, preposterous thickness and ludicrous coast-to-coast length, the ice wall in GoT also had wildlings scaling it and raiding on the other side of it basically at will. So... I guess that just strengthens the point. Fairy tale superwalls r dum n dunt werk