• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

General political chat

OneofThree

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Yeah, that was my first thought, too.

This is only a personal anecdote, but over the holidays I was part of several discussions at various gatherings about the first caravan. Even people who actively hate Trump, aren't for the wall, who can't even say his name without looking like they are going to wretch, down to a person, said some variation of "Oh, but that caravan? Nah, that's not cool. We gotta do something about that. That's not right."

I think most people who are not intellectually dishonest do understand that, even if these people start off with a "legitimate" group and reason for coming, that they just pick up more and more people along the way who don't have the same excuses. They saw how the actual people seeking refuge took it when it was offered in Mexico (most of the original several thousand). They watched the media fawn and broadcast all that video of trains and trains of large groups among the "migrants" who were able-bodied young men with designer-branded clothes all rushing at the stops to find the massive charging stations for everyone's smartphones.

I wonder how the media is going to cover this one. Did they learn their lesson? The new polls out show that, out of those polled, a majority of people are blaming Trump for the shutdown, but when you read down the other questions, you see that people who are actually concerned about immigration has increased and actual opposition to "the wall" has decreased since the last round of "look at this mob of people heading to the US" media blitz.
Thus far, I have withheld support for "The Wall" primarily because I believe those funds might better address the problem if allocated elsewhere. At the same time, the arguments being tossed around by babbling fools are almost always without any merit whatsoever, save for fueling those frothing at the mouth at every utterance from the White House. The only aspect which might cause me to reconsider my own position is the suggestion that those actually responsible for securing the border (you know, people who possess practical experience) have reportedly indicated that it would go a long way in facilitating that difficult, but necessary function.
 

The Empress Lilly

Well-Known Member
And even if the wall did substantially block smugglers, the same sorts of drugs—or close substitutes—would be instead generated domestically, as long as there is a demand for them.


.:cautious:
Well that would actually be a good thing. ;)

I'd rather the US decriminalised drugs than built a wall. It might accomplish more too. Less destabilisation from Mexico to Columbia so less incentive to leave, less drug trafficking accross the border eating up the resources of border patrol, less policing and criminalising of domestic poor - affecting disproportionally the communities of the minorites the wall seeks to keep out which again frees up resources and social goodwill and energy.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
I love how people spend more time on a hamburger typo by Trump, than the sad ridiculousness of claiming “white privilege” to a black man.

If that story doesn’t show how stupid we’ve become, and how crazy this whole ‘White privilege’ nonsense is, then I don’t know what else could.

I haven’t checked, but out of curiosity, have TWP and the NYT and MSNBC and HuffPost and Vice etc etc etc writing headlines and tweets about it?
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Perhaps my language wasn’t representative in which dems voted for what in 2006 or 2013. I’ve stated before that they should clarify the differences if there are any between what happened then vs now. I don’t think they are anti border security. I don’t believe that since they voted for fencing in 2006 that now they must naturally vote for a wall in 2019.
It isn't just about votes in 2006, though. You can find quotes up to 2016 from these people, again, including Obama, talking about strengthening border security. You can point to the moment when this started to turn - when Trump came down that escalator, talked about illegal immigration, and everyone screamed "RACIST!" Though, really, the super-far-left swing has only been in the past six months or so, because most of the opposition to the wall itself has been wholly economic (who is going to pay for it) not this idea that it is an immoral idea.

But I agree that there is a lot of obstructionist attitudes that seemed to develop among the republicans during Obama and now we are seeing it from the left. It’s terrible and will probably get worse until we get back to the middle. But step #1 is realizing that there are differing opinions to solving a problem and respecting those (not a point at you directly).

And I concede your point that this is made worse by the Trump dynamic. Trump has to deliver this wall to his base, and the dems have to stop it to appease theirs. It’s a no win foe anyone in the middle.
Agreed, I just don't have the confidence that we are going to just bounce back to a middle. Or at the least, this is going to get a whole lot worse before then. Like, apocalyptic worse.

I do think, though, that politically the Democrats are the ones here who are losing the most. By far. Because Trump is pleasing his base, but the Democrats are just further shattering theirs. Heck, when you have Cher tweeting "just give him the damn money, Nancy, this needs to be over" - LOL, you know it is bad. ;)

Seriously, though, as story after story day after day comes out about how terrible this shutdown is and how many people are hurt by it, they missed a huge opportunity to take the true moral high ground and stop this before it got this far. They wouldn't have lost nearly as much base as they think, because much of that base thinks Trump is in his last days anyway once the Mueller report comes out. But now?

TL;DR - I think they picked the wrong battle, and it is going to cost them the most in the ongoing war.
 

BuddyThomas

Well-Known Member
You don’t follow the Clemson guys on twitter, huh?

To be fair, I only follow one and only because my family knows his family... he wasn’t offended in the slightest. Most of the players have said repeatedly that they had a good time, and the journalist in the room said they cheered for the food.

They’re college kids.. chill out.
That’s wonderful news. Serving junk food on silver platters is actually the perfect metaphor for this presidency.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
How'd that first "invasion" do for getting the wall??
It moved the polls among those opposed to the wall by nearly 10%. Opposition went from 63% to 54%.

That was the entire point of what we are talking about. If this new Caravan is covered as widely in the media as the last one, and even half as many people change their minds - that would shift the majority.

I think there is a decent chance of that happening, as people won't be able to dismiss it now as a "one time thing" or somehow unusual, not to mention that from the very start no one is pretending this one is anything but this is an organized, purposeful act.
 

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
Premium Member
You don’t follow the Clemson guys on twitter, huh?

To be fair, I only follow one and only because my family knows his family... he wasn’t offended in the slightest. Most of the players have said repeatedly that they had a good time, and the journalist in the room said they cheered for the food.

They’re college kids.. chill out.
Thus far, the only people I have seen who are offended by the fast food spread have been people outside the Clemson football team. Everything I have seen and heard from players has been positive. Trevor Lawrence said it was awesome.

Seems like some are trying to create controversy where none exists.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Thus far, the only people I have seen who are offended by the fast food spread have been people outside the Clemson football team. Everything I have seen and heard from players has been positive. Trevor Lawrence said it was awesome.

Seems like some are trying to create controversy where none exists.
Exactly.
 

Prince-1

Well-Known Member
It moved the polls among those opposed to the wall by nearly 10%. Opposition went from 63% to 54%.

That was the entire point of what we are talking about. If this new Caravan is covered as widely in the media as the last one, and even half as many people change their minds - that would shift the majority.

I think there is a decent chance of that happening, as people won't be able to dismiss it now as a "one time thing" or somehow unusual, not to mention that from the very start no one is pretending this one is anything but this is an organized, purposeful act.
Sorry but the wall is never going to happen. I can also show you a poll that shows something completely different than what you just posted (without any backup). I think we will be fine with another (fake) invasion.
 

draybook

Well-Known Member
When
Sorry but the wall is never going to happen. I can also show you a poll that shows something completely different than what you just posted (without any backup). I think we will be fine with another (fake) invasion.

What is fake about the numbers of folks who gain unauthorized access to this country?
 

The Empress Lilly

Well-Known Member
That’s wonderful news. Serving junk food on silver platters is actually the perfect metaphor for this presidency.
Us snooty Europeans might call it a metaphor for America period.

Regardless, for all the heated sentiment it creates, what is actually wrong with it? College guys want burgers, not 15 calorie poached pheasant eggs with truffle powder. Still, out of respect, they do get their burgers served on a silver platter - this is the White House, one does not serve on plastic plates.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Not that I can make much sense of her tweets (and I realise it was a somewhat jocular point on your part anyway), but Cher seems to have backtracked on this: https://twitter.com/cher?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author
She just clarified that she didn't "demand" it, but then explains she said it because of the people getting hurt. Basically, she is saying what I was saying the other day - that no matter what your politics, it is clear Trump isn't budging. So even if you think the worst of him, like she does, this isn't the battle that is going to win the war, yet it is having very real collateral damage.

I follow very little Twitter, but I am familiar with hers - it definitely is an acquired skill to make sense of.

BTW, I do appreciate you realizing that one example was not the basis for the entire argument. That happens way too often and usually goes down an unproductive hole.
 

Prince-1

Well-Known Member
When



What is fake about the numbers of folks who gain unauthorized access to this country?
1) I was talking about the fake invasion and some poll that AEfx said changed 10% in favor of the wall. 2) As for people illegally entering the US...people do get across the border everyday. That will not change with a $10-20 billion dollar wall. People will adapt and figure out to get over or go under.
 

Prince-1

Well-Known Member
She just clarified that she didn't "demand" it, but then explains she said it because of the people getting hurt. Basically, she is saying what I was saying the other day - that no matter what your politics, it is clear Trump isn't budging. So even if you think the worst of him, like she does, this isn't the battle that is going to win the war, yet it is having very real collateral damage.

I follow very little Twitter, but I am familiar with hers - it definitely is an acquired skill to make sense of.

BTW, I do appreciate you realizing that one example was not the basis for the entire argument. That happens way too often and usually goes down an unproductive hole.
And Trump is the one who is not budging even after his own party his open to reopening the government so that everyone can negotiate. Any collateral damage is now on his hands.
 
Top Bottom