Post New

Trump is literally driving the left nuts.

Actually, what's going on is that a bunch of borderline mentally-stable folks are finally having to come to grips with their problems...the latest example? None other than The Meathead, Rob Reiner:

"I’m finding it very hard to sleep these days. It is 3:15 am," he posted later. "I am laying awake dreading January 20th 2025."

https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2024/11/21/rob-r...

First, he rage-quit X and moved over to BlueSky so he could be among friends...but even that didn't last:

‪Rob Reiner‬ ‪@robreiner.bsky.social‬ • November 19, 2024, 3:56 PM

All the abuse and hate from Twitter has now spewed over to here. There seems to be no point anymore.

‪Rob Reiner‬ ‪@robreiner.bsky.social‬ • November 20, 2024, 10:57 PM

This platform is vile, racist and evil. It did not take long for MAGA scum to come spread their lies.

So now he's checked himself into a facility where he can get some rest:
‪Rob Reiner‬ ‪@robreiner.bsky.social‬ • November 21, 2024, 12:23 AM

I have made the decision to take the next few days to check into a facility for peace and relaxation. No phones, social media , no trolls, just calmness to heal my pain.

Trump is literally driving the left nuts.

But no riots yet....

But no riots yet....

You guys really, really want to dunk on me over that one, eh? Okay :).

I have faith that the loonier elements of the American left won't let me down!

Still no where near what we saw when Trump lost last time...
Alan

I have faith that the loonier elements of the American left won't let me down!

And if they riot (as opposed to “peacefully protest”), they should be arrested, charged and prosecuted.

Few folks will be calling them Patriots, or demanding they be released and paid reparations.

But there are always a few bozos in any crowd, so I’m sure you’ll let us know who they are.

One thing for certain- that group of bozos will not include half the Democratic members of Congress.

I have faith that the loonier elements of the American left won't let me down!

Time is almost up Dope - you don't get four years. Up to the searing in, and that's being generous.

Time is almost up Dope - you don't get four years. Up to the searing in, and that's being generous.

Time? I have all of time.

To your chagrin, I never said when they would riot - just that they would. You folks should have made me place a time restriction on it.

The left rioted on Inauguration Day last time and there's a big protest planned this time. Let's see what they come up with.

Time? I have all of time.

To your chagrin, I never said when they would riot - just that they would.

NO. The riot(s) were going to be for Trump being elected... and the association with that is running out, capiche? Riots that occur after his election won't be over him being elected, that time will have passed, they'll be over something he did which is not due to the election, its due to his actions after being President.

Time is running out Dope. Tick tock, tick tock...

I predict there will be no riots. There will be demonstrations at various times based on some ass-hattery move on his part. There may be a demonstration on his inauguration day (maybe?). If he abandons Ukraine, there will be a demonstration (almost certainly). If he abandons NATO. Less likely, but you might see one if he abandons the SCS to the Chinese. Etc.

But no riots. Unlike the Right, the Left actually respects the process, and accepts (however grudgingly) the results. Doesn't mean they don't complain, want the EC eliminated, etc. But you will not see a Jan 6 event. Any right-winger predicting such is just projecting.

To your chagrin, I never said when they would riot - just that they would. You folks should have made me place a time restriction on it.

Given enough time, we’ll probably see riots among any and all demographic populations.

So if that’s the time frame (open ended) I agree with you.

There may be a demonstration on his inauguration day (maybe?).

There will be demonstrations on inauguration day. And I expect that almost anything that happens during those demonstrations, even if it is just some isolated disorderly conduct, will be labeled by Dope1 as a riot.

But it is interesting that the left has reacted to the Trump victory with....acceptance. He won, the election's over, he will be the President, and there is no point in having a riot over the fact of his election. There may be protests over his policies and actions.....


.....though maybe not.

‘Get Somebody Else to Do It’: Trump Resistance Encounters Fatigue
Donald J. Trump’s grass-roots opponents search for a new playbook as they reckon with how little they accomplished during his first term.

https://archive.ph/JZPLo#selection-703.0-707.137

TL;DR - modern progressive activists are (finally!) learning the lesson that protests don't actually effect political change. I'm a little skeptical they'll learn the broader lesson behind that, and revert back to the old model of activism, but that's a start.

I'm a little skeptical they'll learn the broader lesson behind that, and revert back to the old model of activism, but that's a start.

Are not protests and demonstrations a part of activism? Or am I being tainted by my memories of Vietnam (my older brother was of draft age, so I was aware of a lot of peace protests, burning draft cards, burning bras -different issue-, and I even remember bracelets engraved with the names of servicemen who died in 'Nam)?

Or are you thinking more like GA in 2020 with their get out the vote (Stacy Abrams).

>>But no riots yet....<<

You guys really, really want to dunk on me over that one, eh? Okay :).

I have faith that the loonier elements of the American left won't let me down! - Dope

-----------------

We may get some action on Jan 20. You can be sure the pro-Hamas loons will be out there in great numbers. They are already prone to vandalism, trespassing, assault. All we need is a Ray Epps to spark them off....

Up to the searing in, and that's being generous. - Lambo

--------------

It will be hot!

Are not protests and demonstrations a part of activism? Or am I being tainted by my memories of Vietnam (my older brother was of draft age, so I was aware of a lot of peace protests, burning draft cards, burning bras -different issue-, and I even remember bracelets engraved with the names of servicemen who died in 'Nam)?

Part of activism, yes. But not all of it. Perhaps not even the most important part.

You can't actually change policies with protests and demonstrations. That was the major failure of Occupy Wall Street, perhaps the first major "social media" protest/demonstration (long enough ago that it was arguably spawned by Tumblr and not Twitter). They got a lot of attention - but because there was no organization behind it, there was no practical way to translate that attention into actual policy changes. There were no leaders, no hierarchical structure, no mechanisms to internally prioritize goals, no mechanism for sustained lobbying and coordination and all of the boring stuff that goes into an actual movement.

The Civil Rights movement had structure. The NAACP and the SCLC and CORE were real organizations, with staff and membership and a group of people who held positions of real authority. The problem with "leaderless" movements that the modern generation wants to have is that leaders are important. They're not just important for motivating people - they also provide structure for decisions to be made, bargains to be struck and honored, and for priorities to be set.

Just telling millions of people on Twitter to show up on the Mall won't do much, even if a million people show up for your event.

Or am I being tainted by my memories of Vietnam

Probably. The thing about the Vietnam protests was that they were huge- against two administrations (Johnson and Nixon) that were losing 200 young men a week for much of the war, and covering up the disaster by using the mushroom theory of communication to cover up their serial failures (often in stark contrast to the images being shown by CBS, NBC, ABC and Life Magazine). And young men, conscious of their draft lottery numbers, wanted no part of that war.

With the shelving of the draft, and the relative paucity of combat deaths in both Afghanistan and Iraq, young men (and women, just don’t feel the urgency to go out and protest.

Plus- what have protests actually changed?

Yes- activism.

Organization. Supporting voter registration and voter rights. Financial support for advocacy groups, independent press. Volunteering in local programs and initiatives that address human needs etc etc etc.

Haven’t attended a protest since 1970. But have participated in many of the alternatives listed above.

As Michelle Obama said recently, “Do something!”

Or am I being tainted by my memories of Vietnam

As long as we're not reverting to political assassination - the other old model of activism that came to mind.

--Peter

Plus- what have protests actually changed?

By themselves? Probably only calling public attention to an issue. Circa 1970, the protests were HUGE. You couldn't ignore them. They were all over the news all the time. Probably not enough to move people to vote against the war (i.e. politicians supporting the war). However, coupled with the grim images on peoples' televisions, I think it did have an effect and got us out a bit earlier than we otherwise would have.

I think Occupy Wall Street suffered from a lack of objective. Lots of people, lots of news coverage, but they didn't really have a stated agenda that I can remember.

I do agree that supporting the ACLU (for example) is probably more productive in that they actually do stuff.

Demonstrations when the convict abandons Ukraine (which I expect he will do) can only call attention to the situation. Ultimately, no amount of activism can change that decision. Otherwise, I would say people should work on educating voters, and getting out the vote to defeat the regressive agenda that is looming. It will be easier when a few atrocities are on the record, of course. Which shouldn't be long after MAGA seizes government in January.

Trump is literally driving the left nuts.

Trump is literally driving patriotic Americans nuts.

Fixed it.

All we need is a Ray Epps to spark them off....

As on 1/6, you'll have to find him among yourselves.

But no riots. Unlike the Right, the Left actually respects the process, and accepts (however grudgingly) the results.

The left rioted in January of 2017 also.

We may get some action on Jan 20.

They’re also gearing up to lose their minds over deporting felons.

They’re going to keep pile driving their party over illegal immigration, and we’re here for it!

They’re also gearing up to lose their minds over deporting felons.
Kind of in the same way people are fine with Israel killing terrorists, but dislike all the collateral deaths.

Do you think this will happen without significant disruption to normal lives? As we have seen in the past, Trump and his minions have little regard for some people, and are willing to do great harm to some innocents.
Alan

Kind of in the same way people are fine with Israel killing terrorists, but dislike all the collateral deaths.

I wouldn’t draw that comparison, but go ahead.

Do you think this will happen without significant disruption to normal lives?

It’s somewhat more of a disruption to leave thousands of felons running loose.

It’s somewhat more of a disruption to leave thousands of felons running loose.
Since the collateral damage remains to be seen, we don't really know do we?

So you agree almost everybody wants felons deported?

The left rioted in January of 2017 also.

That was Proud Boys and Oath Keepers in disguise. ;P

You guys really, really want to dunk on me over that one, eh? Okay :).

I have faith that the loonier elements of the American left won't let me down!

One protest arrest is required for the Saul Alinsky merit badge. We gotta admit that your bloody insurrection is a classic that will go down in history. You beat the Stonewall Riots. Whoda thunk that you'd beat and kill police? It's a good thing that was a no gun zone or lead woulda been flyin'. I mean very seriously, a violent attempt to stay in power? Didja think you were the vanguard of the proletariat?

So you agree almost everybody wants felons deported?

Nope. Not everyone does. For example, I give you the city of Denver:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/denver-may...

Democratic Denver Mayor Mike Johnston pledged to resist President-elect Trump's proposed immigration policies, invoking China's infamous Tiananmen Square incident by saying residents would rise up against federal agents.

Johnston emphasized Denver's commitment to protecting illegal migrants and maintaining its sanctuary city status, saying it would not be "bullied" by the incoming Trump administration.

"We're not going to sell out those values to anyone," Johnston told the Denverite in an interview. "We're not going to be bullied into changing them."

Whoda thunk that you'd beat and kill police?

You are misinformed.

Nope. Not everyone does. For example, I give you the city of Denver:

Where did he say he didn't want felons deported? It wasn't in the quotes in the article. Was it somewhere else?

Where did he say he didn't want felons deported? It wasn't in the quotes in the article. Was it somewhere else?

He's affirming his status as a sanctuary Mayor in a sanctuary city. That means no local LEO help for the feds.

Who are the feds coming for? People who are in contact with LEOs...i.e. criminals. He's saying no help even for that.

Now, it could be all performative, but since he's out there saying stuff about 50,000 Deverites meeting the feds and all that, maybe not.

Where did he say he didn't want felons deported? It wasn't in the quotes in the article. Was it somewhere else?

To be fair to dope, he seems to be lumping in Abuela Rosita with the bad hombres. Both are technically “felons”, Abuela for entering the country illegally 30 years ago, and the bad hombre for murdering a drug rival.

You missed this piece, as you did when you talked about LA.
people who commit felonies could still face immigration enforcement, Johnston said.
You continue to misrepresent what the progressives are about, and what there concerns are.

In the past progressives have pushed back hard against the rights willingness to murder innocent brown people in pursuit of their policies, and this is exactly what Johnsons stated concern is.
Alan

Who are the feds coming for? People who are in contact with LEOs...i.e. criminals. He's saying no help even for that.

Not all people who are in contact with LEO's are criminals (most aren't). Not all criminals are felons (most aren't). And most sanctuary city rules wouldn't interfere with the feds picking up people who have been convicted of a felony, because such people aren't able to leave custody by posting bail. The feds don't need local LEO help to get convicted felons.

So is there something specific you're thinking of, here, that indicates that Denver's mayor doesn't want felons deported?

So is there something specific you're thinking of, here...?
Both Trump, and Dope have admitted they want to deport all 11M? undocumented people. They are just currently hiding behind the guise of deporting felons because they know their true desire is generally not something the American people want.
Alan

Abuelo Jose came to the USA, a bracero, allowed to drive home and visit, come back to work the fields of Blythe, the central valley, and the western states.
Abuela Rosita came back with him after XMAS one year. The border guard waved them through and she's lived happily ever after cooking and washing for Jose as he continued working long days in the campos.
Abuela Rosita is no felon. Jose's wealthy employers didn't want Juan and Rosita to become documented. Arrest the employers who took advantage of los abuelos, paying dirt wages for working in harsh conditions with none of the benefits a citizen would enjoy.


https://www.cschs.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/L...

I've always said, "target the employers". That won't affect asylum-seekers, so probably wouldn't make much difference today. But if there are no jobs, people not seeking asylum won't come here. And then let's see how long it takes Americans who want their lettuce to demand reform.

>>Nope. Not everyone does. For example, I give you the city of Denver:<<

Where did he say he didn't want felons deported? It wasn't in the quotes in the article. Was it somewhere else? - albaby

---------------

The mayor makes no mention of the felon exception in his standard sanctuary talking points.

Both Trump, and Dope have admitted they want to deport all 11M?

I never said that.

You continue to misrepresent what the progressives are about, and what there concerns are.

Downthread you made up a position I don't hold; I wouldn't throw stones.

In the past progressives have pushed back hard against the rights willingness to murder innocent brown people in pursuit of their policies, and this is exactly what Johnsons stated concern is.

Yeah, okay. *twirls fingers around ear*

The mayor makes no mention of the felon exception in his standard sanctuary talking points.
As most of us know, his standard citizen population has more felons than his immigrant population.
This makes talking about it seem a little silly. When asked directly about it he will say felons can be deported. As Dope and I earlier agreed, many of them should be incarcerated, as typically happens with felons, rather than deported.

I am not going to search out the exact post... but it was something like...
First we deport the felons,
then we deport the rest,
Then we deport the dreamers.

Perhaps you were just quoting Trump, but in this context I would take quoting him as supporting his ideas.
Alan

So is there something specific you're thinking of, here, that indicates that Denver's mayor doesn't want felons deported?

You're going to have to ask Denver's Mayor about what he meant with his Tianammen Square and 50,000 Denverites blocking ICE or something comments.

The left is going to make any deportations that Trump does their next avenue of "resistance". The point I am making is that the first round of "mass deportations"...are all people who

1. Are criminals with active arrest warrants
2. Are national security risks here illegally
3. Have been in front of an amnesty judge and been denied, and
4. Are under a deportation order.

The democrats are doing their usual level of obfuscation, where they don't clearly come out and say what they believe in.

I found the original, and you clearly stated it was a Trump plan to:
(1) deport felons
(2) deport others
(3) deport dreamers.

Since you are supporting Trump in "phase 1", it was easy to infer you would support (rather than resist) him in future phases.
Alan

I am fully supportive of getting rid of the groups I listed plus some others:

-People with arrest warrants
-Terror watch list suspects
-People who’ve had their amnesty petition DENIED
-People under deportation orders

None of those groups has any right to stay. Show them the door. There’s over a million people in those categories.

Trump in the past has signaled a willingness to do something for Dreamers. They’re a fairly small number compared to the ocean of illegals currently running around.

The left is going to make any deportations that Trump does their next avenue of "resistance". The point I am making is that the first round of "mass deportations"...are all people who


1. Are criminals with active arrest warrants
2. Are national security risks here illegally
3. Have been in front of an amnesty judge and been denied, and
4. Are under a deportation order.

Based on what? I haven't seen Trump say that. Is there a quote from Stephen Miller out there that says only people that meet all four of those criteria are going to be deported - and no one else?

Based on what? I haven't seen Trump say that. Is there a quote from Stephen Miller out there that says only people that meet all four of those criteria are going to be deported - and no one else?

He didn't say "only". Just that those were the first.

He didn't say "only". Just that those were the first.

Did he? Again, I don't recall him saying even that more limited thing, that the first wave would only include those people.

Could you provide a link?

Did he? Again, I don't recall him saying even that more limited thing, that the first wave would only include those people.

Could you provide a link?

No, I don't have a link. It came up in an interview that Homan gave.
Given the magnitude of the number of people who need to be immediately gone, they will have their hands full with that.

Given the magnitude of the number of people who need to be immediately gone, they will have their hands full with that.

Again, though, not really relevant unless they actually do limit that first wave to going after only those people. There's been no official policy drafted yet, of course; but it's not like Trump or Miller have come out and said that the policy you're describing is the one they're going to pursue.

And I think you're overstating how many people are actually, practically deportable in this first wave. The first two categories (active arrest warrants and national security threats) are and have been priorities for deportation for a long time. The reason they haven't been deported is because ICE can't put their hands on them. That's not especially likely to change. Plus, they're not the biggest group.

The biggest group are the ones that already have removal orders. But again, there's a reason why those folks haven't actually been removed. You can't remove someone unless you can physically and legally transport them back to their home country. A non-trivial portion of these folks simply can't be removed. Some are from countries that won't accept any removals from the U.S.; others simply lack any documentation to show that they're citizens from their native countries, so they specifically won't be accepted. Another non-trivial number have deferrals for practical reasons - they have serious medical conditions and can't be safely transported, or they are from parts of the world where it is simply very difficult to arrange transport to (easier to have another full flight to Honduras than try to get folks back.

The overwhelming bulk of the rest are the people who haven't been physically removed because our resources for moving people back to their country of origin are limited and they are very low priority. These are the folks that haven't committed any crimes since they arrived and are often heads of households of families (often with spouses or minors who depend upon them for support). And a fair number of Abuelitas.

Pretty quickly, you're going to find yourself in a position where you're prioritizing for removal a swath of the population that's more sympathetic than the "criminals" and "national security threats," but just folks that have been here without incident for quite some time.

Again, though, not really relevant unless they actually do limit that first wave to going after only those people. There's been no official policy drafted yet, of course; but it's not like Trump or Miller have come out and said that the policy you're describing is the one they're going to pursue.

They've said public safety is job 1. Who else would they deport first? Why would they hand the democrats a bunch of images of kitted-up ICE dudes ripping families apart? What purpose does that serve?

And I think you're overstating how many people are actually, practically deportable in this first wave. The first two categories (active arrest warrants and national security threats) are and have been priorities for deportation for a long time. The reason they haven't been deported is because ICE can't put their hands on them.

Actually, Joe Biden doesn't WANT to deport them. He never did.
If preventing terrorists from coming in or deporting them was a Biden thing, then he was amazingly inept at it. So the more logical explanation is that he didn't really care.

You know how I know all that? Because Biden basically halted workplace enforcement. If you have no worries that Uncle Sam is going to check your taxpayer ID at your job then you have every incentive to stay.

The biggest group are the ones that already have removal orders. But again, there's a reason why those folks haven't actually been removed.

I'm aware. The biggest dumb thing Biden did was allow places like Venezuela to empty their jails and send them here. You don't think all those gangs operating all over the place happened organically, did you? The Venezuelan government probably laughed their rear ends off at qué estúpidos son los yanquis.

But it's all good. Bundle them up and fly them back. Yes, yes, yes you're going to tell me that there's a statute that says You Can't Do That On Television.

Pretty quickly, you're going to find yourself in a position where you're prioritizing for removal a swath of the population that's more sympathetic than the "criminals" and "national security threats," but just folks that have been here without incident for quite some time.

These arguments always end up in the place: Oh, well. There's nothing to be done, so let's throw up our hands and accept the present situation. Or just offer them all citizenship and be done with it.

They've said public safety is job 1. Who else would they deport first? Why would they hand the democrats a bunch of images of kitted-up ICE dudes ripping families apart? What purpose does that serve?

Because it's the easiest way to remove a large number of folks. Perhaps the only way. Again, the dangerous ones have made themselves scarce. The ones with arrest warrants are concealing themselves from the authorities (else the warrants would be served by the local LEOs); the ones that are actual national security threats as well (borrowing your formulation, the worst PR catastrophe for the Dems would have been a national security event perpetrated by an illegal alien whose location they knew).

The population that you can remove, if you want to make a show of enforcement, are the ones that aren't criminals or national security threats. The ones who have low priority removal orders, because they're ordinary people with families, and so there hasn't been (until this election cycle) any real reason to prioritize them for removal.

But it's all good. Bundle them up and fly them back. Yes, yes, yes you're going to tell me that there's a statute that says You Can't Do That On Television.

It's not a YCDTOT thing (man, I loved that show). Other countries have borders, too. If the country won't accept the person proposed to be removed, they won't let them in. You can't remove someone without a place to remove them.

These arguments always end up in the place: Oh, well. There's nothing to be done, so let's throw up our hands and accept the present situation. Or just offer them all citizenship and be done with it.

Not at all. You could, if you wanted, throw everyone out of the country that is here illegally. It would cost north of a trillion dollars, cause a lot of human misery, and end up with those Abuelitas and broken-up families all over the nightly news.

It's not that there's nothing to be done - it's that there's nothing easy to be done that's big enough to make a major dent in the population that's here. So when someone claims that there's an easy way to make a big dent (like Trump is doing, and Miller would like you to believe), it's probably inaccurate.

"But no riots yet...." - Al

"You guys really, really want to dunk on me over that one, eh? Okay :).

I have faith that the loonier elements of the American left won't let me down!" - Dope

Oh, I have absolutely no doubt that you will be able to find some radical left person who gets violent and maybe even a group of them who riot. The big difference will be though that the vast majority of the rest of the Democratic party will not support that violence like you and the rest of your ilk did for the January 6th insurrectionists. Remember, you have dozens of posts on these board expressing sympathy for people who attacked law enforcement and chanted death threats. You have over a dozen posts supporting Ashley Babbit alone over the officer who was trying to protect his charge.

That won't happen on the left. So you will still be wrong with your behavioral projection about riots.

The reason they haven't been deported is because ICE can't put their hands on them. - albaby

-----------

I think the reason is because the Biden Admin could give a rats ass about catching and deporting, their priority was intake and transport.

I think the reason is because the Biden Admin could give a rats ass about catching and deporting
Yet the Biden administration deported over 1M people a year. We will have to see how Trump does in his first year:-)
We can be reasonably confident the truth distortion field you all live in will continue to warp your perspective.
Alan

We can be reasonably confident the truth distortion field you all live in will continue to warp your perspective.

Thanks. This is helpful discourse and perspective.

Just to put some numbers on the deportations. Numbers from perplexity.ai

2010
In fiscal year 2010, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reported more than 392,000 removals of illegal aliens.

2011
In fiscal year 2011, ICE reported a record number of deportations, with 396,906 people deported. This was the largest number in ICE’s history at that time1.

2012-2016 (Obama Administration)
During the Obama administration, which spanned from 2009 to 2016, approximately 3.2 million people were deported. Here are some specific annual numbers where available:
In fiscal year 2012, the number of deportations was around 409,000.
In fiscal year 2013, it was approximately 368,000.
In fiscal year 2014, ICE conducted 315,943 removals.
For the other years, the exact annual figures are not provided in the sources, but the overall total for the administration is 3.2 million.
Note
The sources do not provide detailed annual breakdowns for every year, but they give a comprehensive view of the deportation trends during different administrations.

2016
Approximately 1.01 million individuals were deported.

2017
The number of deportations increased to about 1.13 million under the Trump administration.

2018
Deportations slightly decreased to around 1.03 million.

2019
The total deportations were approximately 1 million.

2020
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, deportations dropped significantly to about 185,000.

2021
Deportations began to rise again, totaling approximately 1.2 million.

2022
The number increased further to about 1.5 million.

2023
The total reached 1.1 million, which included a mix of removals and returns.

Aussi

Black thief breaks window, shot while running away from police.
A righteous shoot.


Ashley Babbit at the head of a mob that had broken through police lines, entered the Capitol and now breaking and crawling through door window of House Chamber where sheltering Congressional leaders are trying to evacuate. Told to stop by police. Was shot by police at close range while moving TOWARD officers. The mob directly behind her fell back.
Somehow, the same folks who are ok shooting a black man who is running away…. feel exactly the opposite about someone at the head of a mob running toward law enforcement who are the only obstacle between the mob and a group of Congressional leaders. Somehow, this makes her a Patriot and the cop who shot her- a murderer.

Back the Blue, indeed.

Ashley Babbit at the head of a mob that had broken through police lines, entered the Capitol and now breaking and crawling through door window of House Chamber where sheltering Congressional leaders are trying to evacuate. Told to stop by police. Was shot by police at close range while moving TOWARD officers. The mob directly behind her fell back.

What does this have to do with left wing meltdowns?

Interesting set of numbers... so for those keeping score
Deportations/removals under Trump 1: about 3.3M
Deportations/removals under Biden: about 5M

somehow this does not fit with the trump marketing warped perspective.

Interesting set of numbers... so for those keeping score
Deportations/removals under Trump 1: about 3.3M
Deportations/removals under Biden: about 5M

somehow this does not fit with the trump marketing warped perspective.

Interesting.
Does "deportation" mean the same thing from administration to administration?

I'll help you: it doesn't.
https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deporta...

But the portrait of a steadily increasing number of deportations rests on statistics that conceal almost as much as they disclose. A closer examination shows that immigrants living illegally in most of the continental U.S. are less likely to be deported today than before Obama came to office, according to immigration data.

Expulsions of people who are settled and working in the United States have fallen steadily since his first year in office, and are down more than 40% since 2009.

Hmm...how can that be?

On the other side of the ledger, the number of people deported at or near the border has gone up — primarily as a result of changing who gets counted in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency’s deportation statistics.

The vast majority of those border crossers would not have been treated as formal deportations under most previous administrations. If all removals were tallied, the total sent back to Mexico each year would have been far higher under those previous administrations than it is now.

That's how.
Because you folks never question what you're told, you accept everything. And you're manipulated because of it.

And more on this:
https://www.politico.com/story/2011/10/obama-depor...

But the Obama administration is using smoke and mirrors to achieve its so-called historic record. Take away the illusion, and the facts show that the administration conjures up its deportation statistics.

The administration appears to have artificially inflated its deportation numbers. It includes voluntary removals in the deportation statistics. But this is not removal because an illegal immigrant is not then subject to penalties for returning to the United States. For example, a single illegal immigrant can show up at the border and be voluntarily returned numerous times in one year — and counted each time as a removal.

Even The Washington Post found the Obama administration used questionable methods to achieve its deportation numbers last year. Just like pulling a rabbit out of a hat, the Obama administration’s record is a trick. In reality, President Barack Obama and his administration are giving amnesty to illegal immigrants through inaction. It’s no wonder that the president recently admitted to Hispanic voters that his administration’s deportation numbers are “deceptive.”

Take away the hocus-pocus, and it is clear the Obama administration is neglecting to enforce immigration laws. The administration has all but abandoned worksite enforcement actions. Over the past two years, worksite enforcement has plummeted 70 percent.

Biden has done the same thing.

So you are saying things changed during the Obama administration, and that invalidates the Trump/Biden comparison?
Interesting. Given that things are certainly shifting, the data still confirms that "the Biden Admin could give a rats ass about catching and deporting" is wrong, and Trump has been lying about and distorting this issue for his own political gain.

Some people have swallowed Trumps lies hook line, and sinker.

--> The main reason Trumps numbers are lower is the Pandemic. The main reason the numbers are "similar" is that policy has not changed, regardless of what you are told.

So you are saying things changed during the Obama administration, and that invalidates the Trump/Biden comparison?
Interesting. Given that things are certainly shifting, the data still confirms that "the Biden Admin could give a rats ass about catching and deporting" is wrong, and Trump has been lying about and distorting this issue for his own political gain.

Wow. You drew the exact wrong conclusion.
Obama gamed the numbers to make himself look like he was enforcing the law, when he was doing exactly the opposite. Being a good leftist, you accept the spin as fact.

Mike's point is correct: Biden did not enforce the law, and never had any intention of doing so.

“the January 6th
insurrectionists.”

J6 is ancient history and it did not have a significant influence in the 2024 election.

It's not that there's nothing to be done - it's that there's nothing easy to be done that's big enough to make a major dent in the population that's here. So when someone claims that there's an easy way to make a big dent (like Trump is doing, and Miller would like you to believe), it's probably inaccurate.

This post should have 20 recs. That's the best description I've seen. I'm just waiting to see how the logistics play out and how the economy holds up.

J6 is ancient history and it did not have a significant influence in the 2024 election.

Oh, so somebody is going on about this? Heh.
https://cha.house.gov/_cache/files/2/2/22c7bff3-c7...

After a thorough examination of e-mails and documents, including letters, memorandums,
agreements, plans, orders, reports, briefings, statements made in congressional hearings, closed
door testimony to the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States
Capitol (“Select Committee”), and closed-door testimony made to the DoD IG, the
Subcommittee’s investigation has concluded that the Department of Defense intentionally
delayed the deployment of the DCNG to the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Furthermore, the
Subcommittee also maintains that the DoD IG knowingly concealed the extent of the delay in
constructing a narrative that is favorable to DoD and Pentagon leadership.

somehow this does not fit with the trump marketing warped perspective.

Facts have a liberal bias

...it's that there's nothing easy to be done that's big enough to make a major dent...

That is true of so many issues. The Right, especially, seems to oversimplify things, and then gets frustrated when they can't do X, Y, or Z. I think it happens less frequently on the Left (but is does happen) because, as you said before, the Left is the intelligentsia, and realize/acknowledge more nuance than the Right (in general).

But, yes, the Left also does it, sometimes with -arguably- predictable consequences (like the druggies out on the streets of Seattle and San Francisco...I've walked both cities, and seen them myself). The Right just seems to do it a lot more, and even can't learn when it fails (so they double-down...which midwestern Rep governor cut taxes, and when his budget tanked, cut them more?).

In this case, the logistics are impossible, the expense is impossible, and the legality is highly questionable given current asylum law (as best I understand it). They're trying to use an M1 Abrams when they need a scalpel.

Interesting set of numbers... so for those keeping score
Deportations/removals under Trump 1: about 3.3M
Deportations/removals under Biden: about 5M

somehow this does not fit with the trump marketing warped perspective.

Right-wing arithmetic. 3.3M > 5M if the 3.3 is Republican/MAGA.

Does "deportation" mean the same thing from administration to administration?

I'll help you: it doesn't.
https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deporta... You referencing 2014.

Are you saying the Trump administration used inflated figures?

Aussi

you said before, the Left is the intelligentsiaM/iL

This is really, really, funny.

Are you saying the Trump administration used inflated figures?


Trump wasn’t President in 2014.

>>Interesting set of numbers... so for those keeping score
Deportations/removals under Trump 1: about 3.3M
Deportations/removals under Biden: about 5M

somehow this does not fit with the trump marketing warped perspective.

Right-wing arithmetic. 3.3M > 5M if the 3.3 is Republican/MAGA. - 1pg

------------

Not sure of the context of all this, but given the immigration shitshow we have endured under Biden, are you actually making a case that Biden was tougher on illegal immigration than Trump?

Are you saying the Trump administration used inflated figures?


Trump wasn’t President in 2014.

Well that is pretty obvious!!

I thought you were using information from 2014 to talk about Trump. If not, why were you referencing 2014 which wasn't part of the discussion??

Aussi

Not sure of the context of all this, but given the immigration shitshow we have endured under Biden, are you actually making a case that Biden was tougher on illegal immigration than Trump?

No. Just more effective at deportation. Those numbers are deportations, and don't include how many entered (asylum or migrant workers). We already know more entered under Biden. Though, again, if the seek asylum, then the law must be followed (even if it's the convict). Unless Congress changes the law, but the convict already nixed that. You may never have that opportunity again.

I thought you were using information from 2014 to talk about Trump. If not, why were you referencing 2014 which wasn't part of the discussion??

The left tries to use deportation numbers to make a statement about how left wing Presidents somehow follow the law. The truth is far more complex, something that the “intelligentsia” has difficulty processing.

Just more effective at deportation.

Nope. Just more effective at fudging definitions, as has been shown.

"I thought you were using information from 2014 to talk about Trump. If not, why were you referencing 2014 which wasn't part of the discussion??" - Aussi

Dope is trying to point out that under Obama in 2014, ICE changed the way they counted deportations. In Dumbass Dope logic, he thinks this somehow negates the fact that Biden deported more people than Trump despite the fact they used the same exact method of counting.

Don't expect Dope to understand even his own arguments.

"And then let's see how long it takes Americans who want their lettuce to demand reform."

The Americans responsible for the Fox TV government can eat cats and dogs (or shit, for all I care) as production is impacted and prices for food go up.

On the morning of Aug. 7, 2019, production lines ground to a halt. Hundreds of ICE agents streamed into seven processing plants in six towns. At a plant in Sebastopol, northeast of Morton, workers found that doors were closed. “People started to get alarmed, that it was immigration and that we had to run, but I said, ‘Run where?’” said Carolina Perez, 26, who had worked at the plant for two years before the raids and still lives in Mississippi.

Agents loaded nearly 700 people onto buses and drove them to an airplane hangar outside of Jackson.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/04/us/arrestees-tr...

You continue to misrepresent what the progressives are about, and what there concerns are.

Dope (Rush's mini-me) : Downthread you made up a position I don't hold; I wouldn't throw stones.

'misrepresent what the progressives are about'
That sums up every episode of the Rush Limbaugh program. It's a tired schtick but it has always worked on the mouth-breathing market.

They've <Trump and Miller> said public safety is job 1.

Since when did we start believing anything Trump & Co says is 'truth' or 'reliable'??

Wow. You drew the exact wrong conclusion.
Obama gamed the numbers to make himself look like he was enforcing the law, when he was doing exactly the opposite. Being a good leftist, you accept the spin as fact.

Mike's point is correct: Biden did not enforce the law, and never had any intention of doing so.

You didn't answer his question, so I'll restate.

By Dope's statements the Trump/Biden comparison is valid. The change happened under Obama, so the change was in effect for both Trump's term and Biden's term. Dope is merely obscuring this. This supports the proposition that Biden enforced deportation as effectively as Trump, or was better.

It also supports the proposition that both Mike and dope are dead ass wrong. End of restatement. Have a nice day! :)

Since when did we start believing anything Trump & Co says is 'truth' or 'reliable'??

Just before the election, Trump said he knew nothing about Project 2025, knew nothing about the people involved in Project 2025.

Enough said.

But here's something that Trump allies said on the very day after the election, that is completely true:

"Project 2025 was the plan all along."

How many times did we hear people say, even here.... "You folks think Trump is going to go all Project 2025 on your asses.... ha ha ha"

Trump's margin of victory may well be those low-information voters who say they didn't believe all of that Democratic propaganda about Project 2025 because Trump told them it wasn't true.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on...... oh hell, what can I say about folks who are willingly fooled over and over and over again?"

Charlie Brown, meet Lucy holding that football for you to kick through the uprights on that goal-post.....

OOoops! She did it again! Damned Democrats!

Just more effective at deportation.

Nope. Just more effective at fudging definitions, as has been shown.

Wow, you really don't understand the defect{s} in you arguments.

By Dope's statements the Trump/Biden comparison is valid. The change happened under Obama, so the change was in effect for both Trump's term and Biden's term. Dope is merely obscuring this. This supports the proposition that Biden enforced deportation as effectively as

How do you know that? The articles didn’t say how things were counted under Trump.

You people are wrong in another way: how do you know the number of people who attempted to run the border for each President?

I can’t believe you all are even bothering to argue this, but the first lib I meet that ever admits to being on the wrong side of an issue is the first lib I’ll have have met that admits to being on the wrong side of an issue.

Speaking of meltdowns. When do the lists of pregnant chicks start?

Defects in *my* arguments? Lol.

You people are honestly trying to argue that Joe Biden is tough on border issues.

The sad thing is, you all believe it.

Actually…from mine, and Jedi’s and Mike’s POV - it’s not sad at all!

Please keep posting what you do :)

How do you know that? The articles didn’t say how things were counted under Trump.

Because the onus is on you to show that it's counted differently under Trump, that's how, and you haven't done that.

Lol.
Keep convincing yourself that Biden is the world’s greatest border enforcement agent.

And keep making it about me. It’s working wonders for you.

Defects in *my* arguments? Lol.

You people are honestly trying to argue that Joe Biden is tough on border issues.

No. I'll give you a chance - tell us specifically what are we arguing. Get this right and you'll advance to round 3.

You’re not arguing anything.

What do I win?

ME No. I'll give you a chance - tell us specifically what are we arguing. Get this right and you'll advance to round 3.

Dope:You’re not arguing anything.

What do I win?

ME: Wrong answer. Win? Jail. Go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.

That's what I thought.

Thread's about liberal meltdowns. I should know, because I started it.

Thanks for providing yet another one! *Collects $200 off the board's libs*

LMAO@COLLECTS 200. oh shit

Thread's about liberal meltdowns. I should know, because I started it.

I started a thread about a week ago that went on and on and on and on... for over 120 posts.

I looked at it and wondered: "How did folks get here.... after I started the thread way over there.....?

And then I thought.... so what? Threads are gonna do what threads gonna do.

Relax and enjoy the show.

I started a thread about a week ago that went on and on and on and on... for over 120 posts.

See how memory makes the heart grow fonder??

I just looked. My thread didn't have "over 120 posts".... it was only 111

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.