politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Thank you for the link!
I don't have time to respond to all of this, but there are a few things I just gotta
Ask all your federal agencies what resources they have on hand that could be redirected to humanitarian efforts for migrants and asylum seekers, order those resources deployed immediately with an executive order. When federal courts strike it down for a bullshit reason, change one or two superficial details, reissue the order, and again make it effective immediately. Trump did this with his travel bans and showed a determined executive can move a lot faster than oversight.
Exploiting a badly designed system is not an ideal long term solution I'll admit, but so long as the Republican party continues to exist and make solving those system design problems impossible it will have to do.
Also, ditch the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court with like thirteen new appointments, right after slapping yourself in the face several times for not doing this years ago.
"The border is in crisis right now, but I think Democrats are doing a good job," just seems like a really unlikely pair of opinions to hold to me.
I also feel like if you're in a headspace where the border is your chief concern (with things like climate change, mass shootings, healthcare, affordable housing, Russia, Israel, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. all at different levels of crisis), you're going to be a harder sell on the big tent party.
And just in general, one of the axioms about human behavior I believe is that if you do not like what is being said you need to change the conversation. I'm thinking of those easily swayed moderates when I say our approach should be, "The border? Sure, we want to get funding from Congress to provide needed services there and that's in process, but what's driving this migration is climate change, and that's why this administration has etc."
Because you do not state this right wing media propaganda controls the narrative, imo
If it's done with a bit of tact and coordination, yeah. Try not to seem like you're ignoring it by responding to it quickly, but if you're giving it more than one or two sentences you're wasting time that should be spent talking about more important issues.
I'll try to narrow down to my central point, but first points I agree with:
Yeah, I believe Biden should do as much as possible to alleviate the suffering for those seeking a better life and seeking asylum within the purview of existing laws.
Yeah I agree the filibuster should be ditched (thank Sinema for blocking that)
Yeah I agree the Supreme Court needs overhauled (though I can't say I'm a legal expert and I know there are a few routes to take with this).
The existential question at hand is: How do we keep Trump and the Republican party and Project 2025 away from power?
Because if entropy teaches us anything, it's always easier to smash a a trillion-piece puzzle than to preserve it let alone build upon it.
Would Biden be acting this way if he had a super-majority in Congress and a fair Supreme Court? I think the answer is fairly clear that he would not. So I think this is what we need to work towards first and foremost.
But here's the key thing: This is the position of many. From that link I gave you, along with this WaPo article titled, "Democrats' border problem is getting real -- they highlight the fact that this is impacting not just swing-voters and independents, but a large swath of Democrats, themselves. That is, indeed, a problem that the Biden administration is clearly concerned about.
Nevertheless, until polling shifts I truly don't think the Biden administration has a choice but to cater to the concerns of these crucial voters, lest he loses and things get very bad very quickly. In the end I believe it would be incredibly hard to pith during an Oval Office meeting to Biden by saying, "Yeah independents, swing voters, and even a large chunk of Democrats consider the (manufactured) border crisis a huge issue, but we don't believe you should concern yourself with this." Meanwhile Ukraine's funding is slipping because of Republicans holding this aid hostage. Unfortunately because of this, every single press conversation and every single debate with Republicans is going to arise the issue of the border crisis.
And while I completely agree with you that that we should "change the conversation" and go to the root of the problem and try to alter the outcome of the polls themselves, that's a long-term strategy and easier said than done when right-wing media propaganda has complete domination on the national narrative — especially in the aftermath of Citizens United and SpeechNow decisions. Forget the fact that there is a clear foreign presence influencing dialogue as well (Russia; likely China). In that respect, I also do think that Biden should redirect the conversation every single time to not just climate change, but to the domestic right-wing extremist terrorist threat within our borders itself. Any time the border comes up, redirect to the threat to Democracy itself and the FBI's pointing out that these are the most dangerous individuals to national security. Not the poor migrants fleeing crime and poverty south of the border. But simultaneously, Biden's campaign has little choice but to respond to the polls as they are now and address it. And to me, I love the move to side-step Republicans and call their bluff.