No human being is illegal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what left wing crazy DEI candidate the Democrats will run in 2028 to lose the Presidential election.
Leading candidates are AOC, Jasmin Crocket, and Kamala Harris.
Can the DCUM crowd name a candidate you like who is actually electable? I bet you can’t!

Dems have the luxury of a very unpopular sitting GOP president working in their favor for 2026 and 2028. We just went through this scenario in 2020 and 2024. Unpopular sitting presidents are a death sentence to the incumbent party. Dems will be able to win with just about any clown on the their ticket as they did in 2020.

Typical Democrat, you have nothing to say except slamming President Trump. Give me the name of one viable candidate that is not a crazy leftist with nothing going for him or her besides identity politics. I bet you can’t.

DP. I have a question for you: Please give me the name of one viable REPUBLICAN candidate other than Donald Trump. If you were going to answer "JD Vance," then you are naive because DJT will not just hand over power to Vance on his way out the door. Trump is already a lame duck and you and your party need to plan for the future. You will have to face the fact that Trump has hijacked the GOP and is ruining it--whether you like it or not.

sure, Glenn Youngkin, an extremely successful businessman who supports the same conservative ideas that got Trump elected, such as securing the border, getting rid of illegals, cracking down on crime, cutting waste and fraud from government, lower taxes, erasing DEI, and so forth, but has done a nice job of keeping his political distance from Trump. Trump will have a lot less say over the 2028 Republican candidate than the Obamas had over the Democrat the last two cycles because there will be an open primary and the voters will decide.

My guess is that the Democrats will run a far left, angry DEI candidate like Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, or AOC, who will be so out of the mainstream that instead of campaigning on their ideas, they will run a campaign that consists entirely of ad hominem attacks on the Republican candidate, and attacks on Trump.

Prove me wrong - tell me a potential Democrat candidate, and an idea or two that he or she could run on, without bashing Trump or anybody else. (for example, the platform idea can't be "not being a fascist and a racist").

I bet you can't!

Glen Youngkin is boring. He might’ve been an acceptable candidate for the old GOP, but he’s not going to grab the attention of the new MAGA GOP. Not to mention that Trump may have other ideas about who can succeed him if and when he exits public office. Right now the GOP is his party, and it’s nothing like the GOP I grew up with.

As to viable Dem candidates less than six months after the last presidential election, yeah you got me. I don’t have a name right now. I know who I would like to see running, but who the hell knows what the political landscape will look like in a few years. The Democrat candidate who emerges is most likely going to be someone we don’t even know about right now.

As to the issues that future Democrats run on, I hope they go back to bread and butter issues like affordable housing, affordable day care, and preparing workers for the coming AI revolution. They won’t have to run on “not being a fascist and racist” because the consequences of Trump’s reign of terror will be obvious to all. I hope they run on the future and not the past, on hope and not hate and fear of the other like the GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what left wing crazy DEI candidate the Democrats will run in 2028 to lose the Presidential election.
Leading candidates are AOC, Jasmin Crocket, and Kamala Harris.
Can the DCUM crowd name a candidate you like who is actually electable? I bet you can’t!

Dems have the luxury of a very unpopular sitting GOP president working in their favor for 2026 and 2028. We just went through this scenario in 2020 and 2024. Unpopular sitting presidents are a death sentence to the incumbent party. Dems will be able to win with just about any clown on the their ticket as they did in 2020.

Typical Democrat, you have nothing to say except slamming President Trump. Give me the name of one viable candidate that is not a crazy leftist with nothing going for him or her besides identity politics. I bet you can’t.

DP. I have a question for you: Please give me the name of one viable REPUBLICAN candidate other than Donald Trump. If you were going to answer "JD Vance," then you are naive because DJT will not just hand over power to Vance on his way out the door. Trump is already a lame duck and you and your party need to plan for the future. You will have to face the fact that Trump has hijacked the GOP and is ruining it--whether you like it or not.

sure, Glenn Youngkin, an extremely successful businessman who supports the same conservative ideas that got Trump elected, such as securing the border, getting rid of illegals, cracking down on crime, cutting waste and fraud from government, lower taxes, erasing DEI, and so forth, but has done a nice job of keeping his political distance from Trump. Trump will have a lot less say over the 2028 Republican candidate than the Obamas had over the Democrat the last two cycles because there will be an open primary and the voters will decide.

My guess is that the Democrats will run a far left, angry DEI candidate like Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, or AOC, who will be so out of the mainstream that instead of campaigning on their ideas, they will run a campaign that consists entirely of ad hominem attacks on the Republican candidate, and attacks on Trump.

Prove me wrong - tell me a potential Democrat candidate, and an idea or two that he or she could run on, without bashing Trump or anybody else. (for example, the platform idea can't be "not being a fascist and a racist").

I bet you can't!

Does it count as being anti-Trump if you run on bringing back Garcia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder what left wing crazy DEI candidate the Democrats will run in 2028 to lose the Presidential election.
Leading candidates are AOC, Jasmin Crocket, and Kamala Harris.
Can the DCUM crowd name a candidate you like who is actually electable? I bet you can’t!

Dems have the luxury of a very unpopular sitting GOP president working in their favor for 2026 and 2028. We just went through this scenario in 2020 and 2024. Unpopular sitting presidents are a death sentence to the incumbent party. Dems will be able to win with just about any clown on the their ticket as they did in 2020.

Typical Democrat, you have nothing to say except slamming President Trump. Give me the name of one viable candidate that is not a crazy leftist with nothing going for him or her besides identity politics. I bet you can’t.

DP. I have a question for you: Please give me the name of one viable REPUBLICAN candidate other than Donald Trump. If you were going to answer "JD Vance," then you are naive because DJT will not just hand over power to Vance on his way out the door. Trump is already a lame duck and you and your party need to plan for the future. You will have to face the fact that Trump has hijacked the GOP and is ruining it--whether you like it or not.

sure, Glenn Youngkin, an extremely successful businessman who supports the same conservative ideas that got Trump elected, such as securing the border, getting rid of illegals, cracking down on crime, cutting waste and fraud from government, lower taxes, erasing DEI, and so forth, but has done a nice job of keeping his political distance from Trump. Trump will have a lot less say over the 2028 Republican candidate than the Obamas had over the Democrat the last two cycles because there will be an open primary and the voters will decide.

My guess is that the Democrats will run a far left, angry DEI candidate like Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, or AOC, who will be so out of the mainstream that instead of campaigning on their ideas, they will run a campaign that consists entirely of ad hominem attacks on the Republican candidate, and attacks on Trump.

Prove me wrong - tell me a potential Democrat candidate, and an idea or two that he or she could run on, without bashing Trump or anybody else. (for example, the platform idea can't be "not being a fascist and a racist").

I bet you can't!

Does it count as being anti-Trump if you run on bringing back Garcia?

Last time they ran on a "humane approach" all evidence says it didn't work. Though I think it's arguable that they actually tried humane deportations, IMO they just lied about humane deportations and tried to get amnesty.

[Anonymous]

What about "non-immigrant". Thats a good round sounding term. That's whats stamped on the visas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is this basic message getting lost in the current news?

But a person’s PRESENCE can be illegal if they have entered the country in violation of the law.
Can everyone agree on that?

[Anonymous]

They are literally planning on deporting random Asian people to Africa for no reason. This policy does not make any sense.

[Anonymous]

Real life and dystopian satire are starting to converge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about "non-immigrant". Thats a good round sounding term. That's whats stamped on the visas.

Wouldn’t the US citizens who were born in this country also be non-immigrants? So maybe “non-US citizen non-immigrant”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are literally planning on deporting random Asian people to Africa for no reason. This policy does not make any sense.

It’s a deterrent against illegally migrating here for economic reasons and claiming you’re a refugee. If you were a refugee then you’d be happy in any safe country that wasn’t your own dangerous country that you’re leaving. Trump is calling their bluff. Australia does the same thing by the way, and has done so for decades. It dropped their “asylum seekers” numbers dramatically when they started doing refugee swaps and other programs like that. Basically Australia has a policy that if you come to Australia without proper documentation, you will never actually live in Australia - if you’re an economic migrant then you’ll be sent home and if you’re believed to be a refugee then you’ll be swapped for other refugees in a random other country. That’s how they keep the illegal immigration numbers down. It’s not worth it to make the journey through other safe countries to get to Australia when you won’t be able to stay there. We need to do exactly the same thing here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are literally planning on deporting random Asian people to Africa for no reason. This policy does not make any sense.

It’s a deterrent against illegally migrating here for economic reasons and claiming you’re a refugee. If you were a refugee then you’d be happy in any safe country that wasn’t your own dangerous country that you’re leaving. Trump is calling their bluff. Australia does the same thing by the way, and has done so for decades. It dropped their “asylum seekers” numbers dramatically when they started doing refugee swaps and other programs like that. Basically Australia has a policy that if you come to Australia without proper documentation, you will never actually live in Australia - if you’re an economic migrant then you’ll be sent home and if you’re believed to be a refugee then you’ll be swapped for other refugees in a random other country. That’s how they keep the illegal immigration numbers down. It’s not worth it to make the journey through other safe countries to get to Australia when you won’t be able to stay there. We need to do exactly the same thing here.[/quote]

Agreed we need to do SOMETHING. Comprehensive, effective immigration reform is decades overdue in this country, and it has been a thorn in the side of every administration.

But nothing that the Trump administration has done in terms of their handling of people already in the country inspires any confidence. One of the main reasons he won was because of his thinly veiled racism and antipathy towards brown/black people aka "illegals." This started the moment he came down the escalator at Trump Tower and said: “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best... They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” That set the tone for everything that came afterward. This stance is his biggest issue and will keep the base and others motivated by anti-migrant sentiment satisfied even as he destroys our economy. But anti-migrant hatred and fear can only get you so far. At some point, extreme right wing anti-migrant governments, which is what we have now, have to actually improve citizens' lives or they will be voted out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are literally planning on deporting random Asian people to Africa for no reason. This policy does not make any sense.

Anonymous wrote:
It’s a deterrent against illegally migrating here for economic reasons and claiming you’re a refugee. If you were a refugee then you’d be happy in any safe country that wasn’t your own dangerous country that you’re leaving. Trump is calling their bluff. Australia does the same thing by the way, and has done so for decades. It dropped their “asylum seekers” numbers dramatically when they started doing refugee swaps and other programs like that. Basically Australia has a policy that if you come to Australia without proper documentation, you will never actually live in Australia - if you’re an economic migrant then you’ll be sent home and if you’re believed to be a refugee then you’ll be swapped for other refugees in a random other country. That’s how they keep the illegal immigration numbers down. It’s not worth it to make the journey through other safe countries to get to Australia when you won’t be able to stay there. We need to do exactly the same thing here.

Funny, how liberals don't think twice about having non-immigrants transplant to the US but scream about having them transplant somewhere else. Oh, no but their families la di da.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are literally planning on deporting random Asian people to Africa for no reason. This policy does not make any sense.

Anonymous wrote:
It’s a deterrent against illegally migrating here for economic reasons and claiming you’re a refugee. If you were a refugee then you’d be happy in any safe country that wasn’t your own dangerous country that you’re leaving. Trump is calling their bluff. Australia does the same thing by the way, and has done so for decades. It dropped their “asylum seekers” numbers dramatically when they started doing refugee swaps and other programs like that. Basically Australia has a policy that if you come to Australia without proper documentation, you will never actually live in Australia - if you’re an economic migrant then you’ll be sent home and if you’re believed to be a refugee then you’ll be swapped for other refugees in a random other country. That’s how they keep the illegal immigration numbers down. It’s not worth it to make the journey through other safe countries to get to Australia when you won’t be able to stay there. We need to do exactly the same thing here.

Funny, how liberals don't think twice about having non-immigrants transplant to the US but scream about having them transplant somewhere else. Oh, no but their families la di da.

Funny how RWNJs like you support the offering of asylum to WHITES from South Africa who claim "racial discrimination" but don't recognize any other basis for asylum, especially when the person requesting asylum is black/brown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are literally planning on deporting random Asian people to Africa for no reason. This policy does not make any sense.

Anonymous wrote:
It’s a deterrent against illegally migrating here for economic reasons and claiming you’re a refugee. If you were a refugee then you’d be happy in any safe country that wasn’t your own dangerous country that you’re leaving. Trump is calling their bluff. Australia does the same thing by the way, and has done so for decades. It dropped their “asylum seekers” numbers dramatically when they started doing refugee swaps and other programs like that. Basically Australia has a policy that if you come to Australia without proper documentation, you will never actually live in Australia - if you’re an economic migrant then you’ll be sent home and if you’re believed to be a refugee then you’ll be swapped for other refugees in a random other country. That’s how they keep the illegal immigration numbers down. It’s not worth it to make the journey through other safe countries to get to Australia when you won’t be able to stay there. We need to do exactly the same thing here.

Funny, how liberals don't think twice about having non-immigrants transplant to the US but scream about having them transplant somewhere else. Oh, no but their families la di da.

Funny how RWNJs like you support the offering of asylum to WHITES from South Africa who claim "racial discrimination" but don't recognize any other basis for asylum, especially when the person requesting asylum is black/brown.

Brown and Black people think they are minorities in the world and deny white people minority privileges when they deserve them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are literally planning on deporting random Asian people to Africa for no reason. This policy does not make any sense.

Anonymous wrote:
It’s a deterrent against illegally migrating here for economic reasons and claiming you’re a refugee. If you were a refugee then you’d be happy in any safe country that wasn’t your own dangerous country that you’re leaving. Trump is calling their bluff. Australia does the same thing by the way, and has done so for decades. It dropped their “asylum seekers” numbers dramatically when they started doing refugee swaps and other programs like that. Basically Australia has a policy that if you come to Australia without proper documentation, you will never actually live in Australia - if you’re an economic migrant then you’ll be sent home and if you’re believed to be a refugee then you’ll be swapped for other refugees in a random other country. That’s how they keep the illegal immigration numbers down. It’s not worth it to make the journey through other safe countries to get to Australia when you won’t be able to stay there. We need to do exactly the same thing here.

Funny, how liberals don't think twice about having non-immigrants transplant to the US but scream about having them transplant somewhere else. Oh, no but their families la di da.

Funny how RWNJs like you support the offering of asylum to WHITES from South Africa who claim "racial discrimination" but don't recognize any other basis for asylum, especially when the person requesting asylum is black/brown.

Brown and Black people think they are minorities in the world and deny white people minority privileges when they deserve them.

Do you have familiarity with the context in South Africa? Have you ever met an Afrikaner? I think you are drawing analogies that are not apt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are literally planning on deporting random Asian people to Africa for no reason. This policy does not make any sense.

Anonymous wrote:
It’s a deterrent against illegally migrating here for economic reasons and claiming you’re a refugee. If you were a refugee then you’d be happy in any safe country that wasn’t your own dangerous country that you’re leaving. Trump is calling their bluff. Australia does the same thing by the way, and has done so for decades. It dropped their “asylum seekers” numbers dramatically when they started doing refugee swaps and other programs like that. Basically Australia has a policy that if you come to Australia without proper documentation, you will never actually live in Australia - if you’re an economic migrant then you’ll be sent home and if you’re believed to be a refugee then you’ll be swapped for other refugees in a random other country. That’s how they keep the illegal immigration numbers down. It’s not worth it to make the journey through other safe countries to get to Australia when you won’t be able to stay there. We need to do exactly the same thing here.

Funny, how liberals don't think twice about having non-immigrants transplant to the US but scream about having them transplant somewhere else. Oh, no but their families la di da.

Then you shouldn't have a problem with us rounding up MAGAs and transplanting them to Rwanda when Trump's term ends, right? You just made the argument there's nothing wrong with that.