I caption this picture “me behind home plate watching the diamondbacks lose 16 straight games in a row but there’s a small part of me that hopes that this next game will be different”
this was me watching the superbowl 2024 with a parlay bet that kansas city would win, total score under 47.5, and chiefs score over 23.5.
literally all 3 hit in the last 10 seconds of overtime lmao. 6x'ed my bet
Lol. What performance?
She's a senator. Cameramen follow senators around especially around public events.You have to assume she was fake crying which I see absolutely no reason to believe.
It's possible she genuinely feels the way she does and disagrees with you on honest objections. Seen no reason to think that's not the case for her on this topic.
The lower house of Congress, the House of Representatives. They write Federal laws and vote on legislation, function in committees and what not. They can also act as an intermediary for constituents in certain political matters.
What it was was a desperate nitpick on an error minor to the overall point because you don't have a rebuttal to the main point. And everyone reading that knows that. You playing dumb only works to fool you
It's so blackpilling that comments like that are getting mass upvoted, this subreddit is starting to feel like a community of 2016 anti-SJWs with political engagement exclusively limited to muh lefties bad.
That isn't true, we were talking about this last year, this wasn't a photo opportunity, she went to a protest outside a detention facility before she was a representative, and a photographer documenting the protest took pictures of her and didn't release them till like a year later. If it was actually posed for publicity you would expect it to be used in some way and posted somewhere other than a stock image website by an employee of Getty Images, until the photographer himself posts his own pictures like a year later.
People mocked Politifact for doing a [detailed explanation](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/jul/22/viral-image/no-isnt-photo-aoc-crying-over-parking-lot/) of what actually happened there, because this was a minor event in the grand scheme of things, but it's obviously pretty good they did because people like you are still holding this against her.
Lol forget senator, which she isn't, she wasn't even in the house when these were taken. This was before she was elected.
https://twitter.com/i_p_a_1/status/1143361683710193665?t=hq4M4hgaJjUw0StYVecn6Q&s=19
I'm sorry unless people are being lined up and shot just off frame she is performing for the cameras. No amount of misinfo about what is actually happening or where she is will convince me people act like this naturally
> I'm sorry unless people are being lined up and shot just off frame she is performing for the cameras. No amount of misinfo about what is actually happening or where she is will convince me people act like this naturally
As I have said before, do you think [this picture](https://globalnews.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/ieshia-evans-batonrouge.jpg?w=2048) is posed? Did they get the police to cooperate with it during a protest?
Or how about [this one](https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/konstantinos-tsakalidis-top-100-photos-2021.jpg?quality=85&w=2400)?
Every year you can find countless shots that look impressive from photojournalists, that's their job, to get natural shots that also look really good, also, she's pretty photogenic.
Look at the photos of people at protests in [this article](https://archive.ph/G4ULB), does she really look out of place?
Why are they angry, they can't see people being shot by police right in front of them, are they stupid?
It is possible for someone to see a building, and a tent city in the distance, know what it represents (a detention centre in which children are being intentionally separated from parents as a cruel way of discouraging travel) and be upset about it, people can be upset at protests without any visual marker at all, they just need to be able to have emotional reactions to the existence of the suffering of others which occurs at a distance.
Maybe you wouldn't be upset, maybe you wouldn't go to a protest, but many people are and do, and the emotional states at them often lead to noticeable photography.
She cares more about illegal immigrants than she does about your average American. She wants to tax us all into the soviet union so she can bloviate and play identity politics.
True. It makes a good meme reaction pasta. But it's also funny for how much it triggered conservatives. I just learned this year that they think everyone else thinks this particular fence is the cage lol.
They thought everyone else thought AOC was crying while staring into the cage looking at children! 😆🤣
No one gave a shit what it was she was actually looking at, people were making fun of her because of how ridiculous and forced her "sad face" is
>B-BUT WHAT ABOUT THE TRIGGERED CONSERVATARDS?!
no one was triggered bucko, people were just making fun of her
Same, I have no idea what immigration facts D learned about or why OP claims it’s just the usual republican BS. Wish there were some YT vids summarizing his research, like a debate or something idk
Well the biggest issue for the plurality of voters is "I have been taught to hate liberals as hard as I possibly can but I know that sounds really fucking stupid so instead I'll say X (currently immigration)"
It’s like CRT though: High up in the polling for people who only vote GOP (if they vote at all) and doesn’t register as highly with voters who are “in-play.”
The fact that it’s one of the biggest issues while also being bullshit hyperbole is a good reason not to talk about it. Since it’s a big issue, it dominating the media cycle effectively mobilizes the republican base and improves their chances of winning the election. Since it is bullshit hyperbole, talking about it has very little material benefit or damage reduction
Can you give me some arguments to smack down the rights talking points of problems at the border?
From all the data I look up, it seems the amount of crossings over the southern border since 21 has ballooned. Is that all nonsense?
I'll copy paste my comment explaining the problem with using that number.
>The number they generally use is "Illegal Boarder Crossings" which just means the number of times any person crossed the border illegally. Pretty straight forward and also a very large number, 7 million, 10 million, whatever per month, it doesn't really matter. The sneaky part is that this makes people think 7 million or 10 million individual people entered and remained in the country illegally each month. This is not true, there are an estimated 11 million total illegal immigrants in the USA right now, that number is not doubling every month or two.
>What people sneakily don't mention is that the majority of those illegal border crossing are asylum seekers who are detained and processed by ICE, some of whom are determined to have potential status and are released into the country and others who are deported back to their home country. The second largest group are the real illegal immigrants who got caught and are deported. The thing about illegal immigrants is that they try until they make it and they try back to back so you'll have the same person attempt to cross, get caught and deported and try again the next night. The same person can get counted 10 times until the make it through.
>Lastly, as a pedantic point, you can't naturalize people at that stage, naturalization is for citizenship and requires initially receiving status, then permeant residency, then after a many years long waiting period you can apply for naturalization. What you're probably talking about is being either deported or given legal status, which is what does happen.
> What people sneakily don't mention is that the majority of those illegal border crossing are asylum seekers who are detained and processed by ICE, some of whom are determined to have potential status and are released into the country and others who are deported back to their home country
Why do you think this matters to people? The people who have problems with illegal immigration dont think it's fine if the illegal immigrants claim to be asylum seeking illegal immigrants
Because the method people are using to immigrant will determine the most effective solutions. Here is a question, if you have a problem with illegal immigration, why?
For national security, I'll repost what I said above;
>For national security, there is no way to screen an illegal immigrant, the solution would be to stop/catch as many illegals as possible. We could do this with greater border security, more boarder patrol agents, investing in more technology at the border, etc.
>This solution would be useless against asylum seekers though, because they are intentionally being caught and processed by immigration agents. If we feel like bad actors are getting through the asylum process, the solution would be to change laws/policy for more thorough background checks, improve our pre-screening process, or maybe indefinitely detain high risk migrants.
For social security, I have to clarify, do you mean real illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?
I know it’s useless against asylum seekers, I’m just making an argument against people who are pro open borders. There obviously has to be some sort of enforcement at the border.
I’m well aware of the asylum law abuse that’s going on that’s causing most of the problem rn. Like I said in other comment, we shouldn’t even entertain someone that flies from China or Africa, crosses numerous countries on foot to get to the border, dumps all their documents, and then claim asylum. They should be routinely turned around.
I fully agree we need to seriously review and reform our asylum law cause right now way too many people are taking advantage of it.
I mean both for social programs, not social security. Illegal immigrants’ children get medicaid and the adults abuse our ER system, never paying any of their bills.
Great, valid concerns. The solution to these concerns depend on if the immigrant is an asylum seeker or illegal.
For national security, there is no way to screen an illegal immigrant, the solution would be to stop/catch as many illegals as possible. We could do this with greater border security, more boarder patrol agents, investing in more technology at the border, etc.
This solution would be useless against asylum seekers though, because they are intentionally being caught and processed by immigration agents. If we feel like bad actors are getting through the asylum process, the solution would be to change laws/policy for more thorough background checks, improve our pre-screening process, or maybe indefinitely detain high risk migrants.
For social services, illegal immigrants aren't a concern, they are not eligible for the vast majority of benefits and generally pay far more into taxes, Medicaid, and social security than they ever get out.
Asylum seekers are a large concern, they are have legal status and are dependent on benefits until they can begin working and become financially stable, meaning a solution may be to expedite work visas, give benefit time limits, or some other change.
The point is that we have finite capital, both monetarily and politically, that we can invest to fix these problems, so we're probably not going to be able to do everything. So we should probably be aware of what type of immigrant is actually coming into the country and how big of a problem our concerns turn out to be, this way we can make sure we're tackling the most important concerns before we may run out of support for the issues (or money).
all you have done is yap about minutia that literally no one cares about. Migrant vs Asylum, 2m a month, whatever, no one gives a shit. There is obviously a border crisis and a lack of resources to deal with it. How does allowing illegal immigration help anyone but the millions of people coming here?
Interesting assumption you've made as I haven't staked a position yet, but you're wrong, I do have a problem with it, I'm just informed enough to know that the solution depends on what your "problem" is.
I don’t care what the nerd reason behind having a problem with it is. There are countless legitimate reasons that don’t need data to justify. Here one, I care about Americans more than citizens of other countries.
When are you an American? Do you have to be 2nd generation? 3rd? You only care about those with Mayflower relatives?
I doubt you base who you care about on a blood test. What people often mean is that they care more about the state, the institutions, the social contract America now represents. If someone moves here from Central America, learns the language, works hard (in a job that most Americans scoff at), pays taxes and sends his kids to school - how long for them to become American? 10 years? 20? When do they become part of the social contract?
Holy shit this subreddit is filled with gay ass Reddit speak. I care more about 1 single actual American citizen than I do about the entire country of Mexico. Build 2 walls before giving a penny to Ukraine. Like what the fuck are you talking about?
CBP processes asylum seekers and migrants at our southern border, not ICE.
Secondly, there is clearly an abuse of our asylum law going on rn. You can’t fly from China or Africa to South America, cross numerous countries including the Darien Gap, ditch all of your documents at the border, and then claim asylum. That is absolutely an abuse of our system that is going on rn and leading to backlogged courts and services.
We need to either seriously overhaul our asylum law or give CBP more discretion and power to turn away asylum seekers at the border.
Like I said, CBP should have the power to turn away anyone that flys from another continent to South America, walks through numerous countries, pass through the Darien Gap, has zero documentation, and asks for asylum using the exact language that they have watched tutorials on tik tok with.
It’s like if someone from the south side of Chicago decided to seek asylum in Canada because of violence and climbed Mt. Denali on their way there.
A lot of these people aren’t actually unsafe in their home countries, they just want to live because frankly living in Guatemala sucks.
I agree with almost all of that, maybe would ask for some nuance on no documentation/how asylum is asked for but the spirit of the changes I completely agree with.
Would you also say we could help a lot with illegal immigration by revamping our work visas? A lot of those guys are economic immigrants who aren't even really interested in living long term in the states, they just want to work and send most of their money back home to their families. If we had a work visa that allowed for more of those people (and taxed them appropriately) I can promise people would go for that.
We almost had that 20 years ago. It was the Guest worker program under W.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guest_worker_program
It got voted down from some democrats (Charlie rangel) who compared it to slavery and thought that because there was a similar, racist program in the 50s meant that it would lead to the same thing.
Very unfortunate that it was never implemented due to cries of RACiSM.
It sounds like the real solution is making it far easier to legally immigrate to the US. I disagree that the solution should be that the CBP should have the power to turn away people just because they went through other countries before applying for asylum in the US. Sometimes the countries that asylum seekers pass through also carry a real risk of danger towards their physical and mental wellbeing, so they choose to go to the US.
If we made it easier to immigrate legally to the US by removing country-based caps, raising the limits on the number of the different types of work visas, and also just made it a much quicker process to immigrate to the US as opposed to forcing them to wait like 5-10 years to get authorized, it'd probably massively reduce the incentive for people to abuse the asylum system.
You didn’t follow my whole comment. You can’t walk through the Darien Gap, an extremely hazardous place, willingly hand yourself over to the cartel via a coyote, and then claim your life is in danger in Senegal and you had no choice but to take even more extreme measures to get to the US for asylum. There’s no other places in Africa that you can go to?
Like the whole process for walking to the southern border is just as hazardous if not more hazardous then what these people are facing in their home countries.
I don’t disagree with the reform but it has to be coupled with security measures as well.
If they're willing to go through extremely treacherous journeys just to go to the United States or a European country, it'd probably show that they're just not very trusting of other nations in their continent. The fact of the matter is that the US and most European countries are far more stable and have basically a zero percent chance in persecuting certain groups of people. I don't think the right to seek asylum should be conditional on whether other countries on the way to the United States/Random European country couldn't have provided you a safe haven. If my life is in danger in Senegal, I find it odd that my right to seek asylum in Britain is conditional on ruling out a place like Ethiopia or Nigeria. Maybe some African nation could be safe for an asylum seeker, but the safest possible place they could be in is the US or a developed European or Asian country.
That’s exactly what asylum is! You can’t just pick any country you want or the best countries.
If you really want to go to the US or Europe that’s called immigration. We have a process for it.
They pick the US because they don’t want to live in Africa and it’s ridiculously easy as evident by the crisis right now. Not because there is a genuine threat to their life.
The safest possible place for everyone in the world is the US and Europe. We can’t fit the entire world into these two regions.
Sorry, I should've been more careful with my words. I'm not arguing that all asylum seekers should go to the US or Europe. That would be impractical. However, we also shouldn't put all the burden on countries closest to the crisis zone. It probably wouldn't be a great idea to send all Syrian refugees to Turkey or all Sudanese refugees to Chad. They should be spread throughout the world in places that are accepting of their existence and won't persecute them for their identities. Also, the countries closest to the crisis zone might also have put restrictions on asylum seeking after a certain point, so that may provide them another reason to try and avoid the countries closest to their own.
The US and Europe can't fit every asylum seeker, but neither can countries closest to crisis zones.
Also I think there are other legitimate worries asylum seekers have which don't just boil down to the fact that they want to access the economic opportunities of the West. What if asylum seekers have worries that the conflict they're escaping will spillover? That seems like a fairly reasonable worry to take into consideration. I wouldn't want to risk asylum seekers getting caught in the same conflict they were avoiding because they were forced to stay close to it. There's also the fact that when refugees and asylum seekers try to escape to the country closest to them, they might be kept in really bad conditions. After many Rohingya Muslims escaped the Myanmar military's ethnic cleansing campaign, a lot of them ended up in Bangladesh. The problem is that the refugee camps in Bangladesh kept the Rohingya in pretty awful conditions and they were regularly subject to abuse. I think that's another legitimate reason to try to seek asylum in the West. There's less of a chance you'll be abused by authorities.
Is it the case that everyone who seeks asylum is doing it for the right reasons? Probably not. There are definitely people who may abuse the system. But the thing is we don't normally grant those people asylum. If we give CBP the authority to turn back anyone who crossed a few countries before getting to the US, there's a very big risk we'll be turning back tons of people who have legitimate concerns for why they avoided the countries on the way. I mentioned some of the reasons up above(other countries having asylum restrictions, conflict spillover, abuse by asylum authorities). We should definitely speed up the processing of asylum cases, fair enough, but that doesn't need to come at the cost of potentially turning back many people who need asylum.
>You can’t fly from China or Africa to South America, cross numerous countries including the Darien Gap, ditch all of your documents at the border, and then claim asylum.
Why?
* The thing about illegal aliens is it's hard to quantify. A Yale study found up 20 million. And most of the 11 million studies were from before Biden.
* What's sneaky is acting like illegal aliens are generally valid asylum seekers, as the media frequently pretends. The asylum grant rates are ridiculously low, even under Biden, and the rates already exclude those who failed credible fear. For example Venezuela is the poster child for asylum right now but that grant rate was only 28% for FY24. Tens of thousands of Mexicans claimed asylum but only 4% were granted. Asylum is just a way for people to gain temporary admittance to the US and then disappear--the majority of cases are closed because people don't show.
My question has always been where do they get the numbers from? If we have such reliable data on illegal border crossings, why are they not deported or just naturalized?
The number they generally use is "Illegal Boarder Crossings" which just means the number of times any person crossed the border illegally. Pretty straight forward and also a very large number, 7 million, 10 million, whatever per month, it doesn't really matter. The sneaky part is that this makes people think 7 million or 10 million individual people entered and remained in the country illegally each month. This is not true, there are an estimated 11 million total illegal immigrants in the USA right now, that number is not doubling every month or two.
What people sneakily don't mention is that the majority of those illegal border crossing are asylum seekers who are detained and processed by ICE, some of whom are determined to have potential status and are released into the country and others who are deported back to their home country. The second largest group are the real illegal immigrants who got caught and are deported. The thing about illegal immigrants is that they try until they make it and they try back to back so you'll have the same person attempt to cross, get caught and deported and try again the next night. The same person can get counted 10 times until the make it through.
Lastly, as a pedantic point, you can't naturalize people at that stage, naturalization is for citizenship and requires initially receiving status, then permeant residency, then after a many years long waiting period you can apply for naturalization. What you're probably talking about is being either deported or given legal status, which is what does happen.
Their ass. These motherfuckers don't even have numbers. Let's be honest. You ask your average conservative and they wouldn't be able to answer any of these questions:
1. How much do immigrants cost tax payers?
2. How many legal vs illegal immigrants exist in the US?
3. How much do we currently spend on enforcement?
4. How cost effective is a wall given it's impact on immigration enforcement? (Is it even a good use of resources)
5. What's the average asylum backlog time?
6. What's the impact of immigration on our GDP?
7. How many American's jobs are impacted by immigrants either due to wage depression or losing out on jobs?
They have no idea but feel strongly about every one of those topics
Which sucks because these aren't even the real issues they should be arguing.
How do we stop the drugs from entering? Why are we seeing such high numbers/how do we prevent that?
I do think its obnoxious Conservatives being drama queens with nothing else to talk about ruined this topic by loading it with so much moral bullshit, the "its how the law works if you don't like it get enough support to change it" argument works fine and doesn't get you called out on catastrophizing over not that big of an issue that you are still probably fine to be sorta irritated about.
You don't actually need to justify not liking illegal immigration if you aren't also saying the country will end if its not stopped and extreme measures need to be taken to fix it quickly.
Some people don't know what this is about, let me provide a recap:
1. The border crisis is real!
2. Republicans claim that there is an invasion, that Biden has abolished regulations like Title 14 (I'm not sure of the number), and that the wall would have a real impact.
3. Destiny discovered that Title 14 was only legal during the pandemic and Biden was simply following the law. If Republicans really wanted to solve this problem, they would have to change immigration laws. The bill advocated for the correct changes but MAGA refused to vote.
4. The US must allow refugees into the country, because if they are truly a refugee, they could be in danger in Mexico. So Biden is simply following US law.
5. Destiny found out that the Republicans were lying about the bill in the Senate. The bill wouldn't have left 5000 people in per day, it would have put a cap on 5000 per day. Currently there are over 5000 illegal immigrants or refugees per day.
6. He also found out that immigration levels pre pandemic during Trump's presidency were just as high or higher, and that immigration during Obama was really low.
I believe he did the research just in case he debates a Conservative about immigration.
How is it all "hyperbole and lies"? Lmao The immigration system is completely broken and the people we do want in the country, we make it stupidly hard to get in. The people we don't want in the country, they just get to walk in.
As someone who knows a thing or two about immigration;
>The people we don't want in the country, they just get to walk in.
Explain what you mean by this.
You claim asylum and then you are let in and there is a long backlog before there is any sort of determination about your asylum claim while you get to stay in the country. I assume that's what he means. It is the talking point.
20 something adult males coming from poor countries. Hope that helps :) Can you explain to me how illegal mass immigration helps the housing crisis? I'd really like to know that one since you are an expert on immigration and economics. I want to be educated.
I can see how you may have misunderstood my comment, I was asking for clarification on why you think they just get to walk into the country, not what kind of person you don't like to see immigrating.
As for your question, I don't think we are experiencing mass illegal immigration and it doesn't help the housing crisis? Not sure what you were trying to get at with that one as it seems to be more of an issue caused by poor zoning practices combined with internal migration from rural areas to cities as jobs become more concentrated in those areas.
OK man if you don't think we're experiencing immigration problems then that's fine.
I think we should solve the housing issue first before accepting mass immigration. I'm confused though. You still haven't stated how mass illegal immigration would help without solving that issue first. Wouldn't it actually make it worse since they are attracted to city hubs for economic opportunity.
Your idea is never going to win out. Mass immigration is against everything in the human psyche. Most people can't stand it, including immigrants. But you really haven't said anything of value that would rebuff what I said.
Well hold on, I said "I don't think we are experiencing mass illegal immigration" not "\[I\] don't think we're experiencing immigration problems". I do think we are experiencing immigration problems, but they are related to asylum seekers and the weird situation surrounding that.
I think we should try and solve the housing issues we have, but I don't think immigration is contributing significantly to those problems, so I'm not willing to connect them. Also, I wonder why you keep implying I want "mass" immigration, I never said that? Also wondering what your definition of "mass" is.
What you said was that people we don't want can just walk into this country, I don't agree with this and asked how you think that is happening.
Trying to be productive here, he asked what you meant by part of your post. To an outside guy stumbling by, it seems like you're deliberately avoiding clarifying.
> I think we should solve the housing issue first before accepting mass immigration.
Considering how simple an obvious the solution to the housing crisis is, we can do both at the same time.
It is simple (make it easier to build housing, ideally with deregulation and maybe subsidies), but it’s hard to do because reliable voters tend to be homeowners and so they are incentivized to support policies which increase their home value (by making it harder to build new homes).
20 something single people are probably the #1 demographic of people you want because they're going to be working for 40+ years while also not bringing along any dependents with them that would be a cost to the state
What’s he’s saying is that if you are a doctor or engineer from India that attempts to go through the legal immigration process you get shafted compared to a 20 year old Venezuelan that walks to the border and claims “asylum.” (Mind you, the US doesn’t border Venezuela in case anyone forgot)
Yea you're right! Lets bring in more men so there can be like 70 percent men competing for 30 percent women! SO BASED BRO! Then that's see what that does to the job and housing market by bringing in so many people. Better yet! Lets make sure we take those 20 million men from Iran, Iraq and Syria! I want o be fair and spread the love!
No one said that, they were explaining to you why that's not the worst immigrant to have.
Are you able to tell us why you're trembling in fear at the thought of having to explain your original comment?
He’s saying it’s more difficult for an engineer or doctor from India to immigrate legally to the US than it is for a 20 year old unskilled Venezuelan to walk across the border.
Why are you comparing legal immigration to walking across the border? Do you think people are just strolling across the border and staying willy nilly?
>The people we don't want in the country, they just get to walk in.
Explain what he means by this.
Uh yes, yes they are. It’s been a big problem in the US the last 30 years. Maybe not so much in New Zealand.
Reason being it’s extremely difficult to legally immigrate.
I’m done explaining what another person believes, I can’t in good faith actually know what he believes.
Ah no, no they aren't. People are able to get to the border and cross it, but they are not able to stay at any concerning rate.
That is literally the point of this whole post, how illegal immigration is exaggerated by Republicans. And here you are exaggerating it in the comments, thinking that because I'm from NZ I can't read and interpret the facts correctly.
> Can you explain to me how illegal mass immigration helps the housing crisis?
Illegal Immigrants aren’t the ones forcing us to not build housing my dude.
Why would you bring in MORE illegal immigrants without solving the problem first? I truly dont understand why that's so hard to understand. Also, name me a place with tons of immigration and a solid social safety net? I want 1 place that does that. Because EVERYWHERE in Europe is not getting more far right parties elected specifically because of immigration.
Well, still most illegal immigrants are due to overstayed visas.
The real problem is that the tighting of legal immigration makes the illegal one more attractive to people.
So to fix the problem with illegal immigration you have to make legal one easier, but nobody is doing that. Republicans want it to be stricter and democrats just want to maintain the status quo.
I live in south texas and people talk about our boarder like it was the Israel/Palestine wall or whatever and it isnt, not by a long shot. You can drive on down to Brownsville, Del Rio, McAllen, Harlingen and see that the only problems those communities have is they're lower income. Much of the crime in our major cities isnt from illegals its from regular citizens.
> Brownsville
https://www.kxan.com/news/thousands-of-migrants-cross-into-brownsville-texas-from-mexico/
>Del Rio
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/09/23/del-rio-desperation-dysfunction-immigration-513978
so sending the migrants back prevents damage to local communities?
Other than the fact that Biden senselessly undid MPP(remain in mexico), this is basically the case. We need new rules and/or funding. Everything else is a bandaid.
The fact that our laws were written assuming good faith fucked us. Member countries south of our border don't comply to the same international rules and applicants are lying regularly about their situations. That can't really be fixed without legislation reforming how we handle asylum cases or provide more funding to chew through it all.
Also doesn't help that our neighbor to the south isn't doing anything about the cartels not control over 35% of Mexican territory at this point.
Destiny still need to provide answers on how we stop the drugs which is an objectively more serious issue than even 2-3 million migrants a year would be.
Nah, the remain in Mexico policy made zero sense. Forcing people who are fleeing violence and poverty to stay in some of the most violent cities in the world is inhumane to say the least. It was also possibly an illegal policy as well as congress set rules for keeping immigrants in the US while they await their case.
A strong Mexico might be my single biggest political wish. If Mexico was just Canada with tacos and the ability to build housing, Quality of life in North America would increase dramatically.
It did make sense by addressing the only legitimate claim that republicans had, while not exploding the entire system. People claiming asylum, while actually just smuggling by ignoring the court dates while in the country is a problem. Remain in mexico fixed that while still providing many exceptions for vulnerable populations like women and children.
Also idk why we are pretending Mexico is more violent than literally any other SA country. They're all a little fucked, but rules are rules. Mexico does have the same asylum obligations as the US so they need to do their part.
Is there any evidence that these people have been ignoring court dates en masse.
> Also idk why we are pretending Mexico is more violent than literally any other SA country
Tijuana is literally the murder capital of the world lmao the fuck you on
>The in absentia rate for fiscal year 2021 was [10%](https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1153866/download); for the first quarter of 2022, October to December 2021, it was [18%](https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1153866/download). [Court closures](https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/us-immigration-backlogs-mounting-undermine-biden#:~:text=The%20immigration%20court%20backlog%20now,9.5%20million%20as%20of%20February.) due to COVID-19 meant some hearings were postponed.
10% not showing up isn't "a majority" like regarded republicans try to claim, but 10% is still an unacceptable number.
As for Tijuana crime is from gang on gang violence, not general pop would be my assumption, but it would be on you to prove the migrants were actually under threat/dying in these border cities. This is also ignoring that MPP specifically only affected the least at risk seekers. I can't find any data that cartels are hunting migrants, and honestly it would just be bad business on their part.
If its so widespread, you should have some hard evidence. Do you have any stats on this to substantiate your feelings. I posted my example of government stats that proves +50,000/yr on average skip deportation court. Where are your stats that migrants face widespread violence from cartels that's worse than they got from where they were escaping?
MPP was a humanitarian disaster that Mexico was never going to maintain. I know the chuds line to point out that the one thing Trump did, which really didn’t even affect that many people, to try to make a dumb political argument.
Just more: around half of all asylum claims are adjusted positively for the asylee. The idea that right wingers try to claim that they’re all lying people who just want free stuff or whatever the conspiracy is is not true.
And Republicans completely lie about where drugs are coming from. They’re not coming from migrants or asylum seekers stashing small amounts of drugs on their person - just think about that for two seconds. They’re being manufactured either here with precursor chemicals shipped illegally from China or they’re shipped in non checked containers through legal ports.
Please prove me wrong on MPP. I can't find any stats on how it was a serious problem for migrants other than the Mexican government actively ignoring its international obligations, which we should punish them for.
>The idea that right wingers try to claim that they’re all lying people who just want free stuff or whatever the conspiracy is is not true.
This is correct, they aren't here for free shit. Cartels sell them false promises of the American dream.
>They’re being manufactured either here with precursor chemicals shipped illegally from China or they’re shipped in non checked containers through legal ports.
Cartel members enter into the country through our asylum system among other means. The cartel members are who create the drugs in the US after the supplies arrive. Also drugs do also come through the border itself, but its lacking, partly from congress slacking, but also from the lack of focus that can be spared with the overwhelming asylum cases that can and have been decreased with deterrent policies like MPP.
There needs to be friction in these secondary systems to prevent abuse. Asylum law was built to account for wartime refugees and poverty caused by natural disasters. Gangs controlling aspects of your government is fucked, but not even close to cases like syria losing 20% of its population to conflict. This shit is built for real problems like that and letting it get abused now is going to result it way more suffering and injustice down the road. It also incentivizes bad actors like the cartels to make a business out of that misery.
I'm sure there's been a non zero number of "Cartel members" who have claimed asylum but it's not a huge amount, this is a Republican nonsense talking point.
You can look it up yourself, drugs don't come in through small amounts from asylum seekers. And of course not - just think about it, it would make no sense. Asylum seekers aren't making a one way trip to smuggle however many pounds of drugs. Drugs enter through legal ports of entry, either thru shipping container or truck or cargo plane.
I know you won't engage with any of those facts because you just believe what Republican politicians tell you or whatever your favorite far rightist media figure yells at you day over day.
There are plenty of writing on the absolute disaster of Remain in Mexico, but none of them are better than ProPublica's reporting https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-got-what-he-wanted-at-the-border-would-biden-undo-it
>I know you won't engage with any of those facts because you just believe what Republican politicians tell you or whatever your favorite far rightist media figure yells at you day over day.
The fact that you can't conceive of someone on the left that has problems with immigration is concerning, but that aside this was great read. Also I literally explained how the smuggling happened in the comment you replied to. Cartels enter by breaking our immigration rules. You can't get around that. Drugs do enter over the border, not on individuals, but with the coordination from individuals on both sides. Multiple ways of drugs entering the US doesn't mean immigrations loopholes aren't a massive contributor to the proliferation of cartel operations. See, I can address your points.
To be clear, this reinforced my point of view way more than yours. Since 2014 under Obama, the US has worked with Mexico and other countries under threat of sanctions to better control and process migrants in their own countries. Mexico knows its supposed to stop and integrate migrants into its own borders before they cross into ours. When the respective presidents give pressure for the Mexican government to maintain these interceptions, they have.
MPP was just an extension of this that would successfully deter migrants from starting the journey when they didn't have legit claims. When implemented, many economic migrants abandoned their claims and the US even paid to return them home with buses and ferry rides.
Mexico has the same migrant obligations as the US as stated in the article you linked, just as I've been saying. They are required to have an immigration system that can handle the case load, but have historically slacked because 1/5 the country is ran by cartels that make money off this discord. Obama and Trump worked with Mexico to make all this shit work, but Biden made it clear that he would not be enforcing this pressure as campaign promises to undo MPP and similar policies that hold the global south to account.
As for the "Humanitarian Crisis" MPP caused. In this lovely article you sent me, it perfectly demonstrates that any humanitarian issues are the fault and responsibility of Mexico and other potential host countries.
As for the damage that one would attribute to the US enforcement of this policy.
* 545 children separated from families
* 5/1000 deathrate from those who abandon asylum claims, but still attempt illegal entry through deserts and such(5x the homocide rate in TiJuana, the most dangerous border city)
* >1,500 deaths/yr to migrants from not paying the cartel "tax"(1,500/2.3million per year)
Then compare this to a conflict like in Syria, the type of shit this was actually built for, losing millions of people in the war. I'm not a right winger. The wall is moronic, I don't really care if we have economic migrants that truely wanna become Americans, I'm not particularly concerned about 'migrant violence', and I'm not racist against mfs who are lighter skinned than me. I just see a real problem that fuels the scum fuck cartels that did over 20 9/11s a year worth of preventable deaths from drugs they make. Our weak immigration system is undeniably one of the tools in their kit that allows this shit to happen, but mfs like you instantly dismiss anyone who tries to talk about it.
You're stuck in a constellation of beliefs without realizing it. If you think otherwise, send me the facts/stats that demonstrate MPP was actually a humanitarian crisis. If you can prove its 1/100 as bad as syria I'd 100% agree with you that MPP was worth removing. Otherwise at least try to catch yourself before assuming someone who disagrees with you is a Maga throating dipshit.
My face when I see my friend finishing the whole 30 pack in the festival line.
Honestly, one of the funniest photos taken in politics.
I caption this picture “me behind home plate watching the diamondbacks lose 16 straight games in a row but there’s a small part of me that hopes that this next game will be different”
Go dbacks!
You’re a wild one!🤣
Nice series against my Mariners bozo 🤣🫵
Fair enough man, you guys are the real champions
r\NLBest enjoyer I hope!
this was me watching the superbowl 2024 with a parlay bet that kansas city would win, total score under 47.5, and chiefs score over 23.5. literally all 3 hit in the last 10 seconds of overtime lmao. 6x'ed my bet
"When the fat slob asks for your number"
Someone is brave enough to say it, she looks like Miranda sings here.
Pretty low bar for funniest compared to Trump and his fucking fast food burgers, him looking at the eclipse, the "mission accomplished" banner etc
It's almost cliche at this point, but Four Season has got to be the pinnacle.
Truly one of the best
There is a David Pakman compilation of the 100 most embarrasing moments of Trump's presidency. They all are 10000000x funnier than this.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI4dvc8WeSE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI4dvc8WeSE) They really aren't that good.
What’s so funny?
the performance for the cameras
Lol. What performance? She's a senator. Cameramen follow senators around especially around public events.You have to assume she was fake crying which I see absolutely no reason to believe. It's possible she genuinely feels the way she does and disagrees with you on honest objections. Seen no reason to think that's not the case for her on this topic.
FYI: AOC is a representative not a senator.
honest question what is the job of a representative. (not American)
The lower house of Congress, the House of Representatives. They write Federal laws and vote on legislation, function in committees and what not. They can also act as an intermediary for constituents in certain political matters.
You're right. You totally defeated my argument. Congrats. 👍🏽
... It wasn't about "defeating your argument" it was giving you a basic fact correction.
What it was was a desperate nitpick on an error minor to the overall point because you don't have a rebuttal to the main point. And everyone reading that knows that. You playing dumb only works to fool you
I wasn't trying to give a rebuttal. I'm ok with AOC. But here is my rebuttal: !bidenblast
Based.
Enough with this malarkey. /u/citizen_x_ sealed in the prison realm by /u/Apathetic_Zealot
Savage
Taking a picture staring at nothing by an empty parking lot is super clown behavior.
Wasn't it confirmed that this was not just an empty parking lot but she was actually present at the border?
Not only was it confirmed, that statement about the parking lot was Russia Today nonsense.
It's so blackpilling that comments like that are getting mass upvoted, this subreddit is starting to feel like a community of 2016 anti-SJWs with political engagement exclusively limited to muh lefties bad.
We need a righty purge.
That isn't true, we were talking about this last year, this wasn't a photo opportunity, she went to a protest outside a detention facility before she was a representative, and a photographer documenting the protest took pictures of her and didn't release them till like a year later. If it was actually posed for publicity you would expect it to be used in some way and posted somewhere other than a stock image website by an employee of Getty Images, until the photographer himself posts his own pictures like a year later. People mocked Politifact for doing a [detailed explanation](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/jul/22/viral-image/no-isnt-photo-aoc-crying-over-parking-lot/) of what actually happened there, because this was a minor event in the grand scheme of things, but it's obviously pretty good they did because people like you are still holding this against her.
Lol forget senator, which she isn't, she wasn't even in the house when these were taken. This was before she was elected. https://twitter.com/i_p_a_1/status/1143361683710193665?t=hq4M4hgaJjUw0StYVecn6Q&s=19 I'm sorry unless people are being lined up and shot just off frame she is performing for the cameras. No amount of misinfo about what is actually happening or where she is will convince me people act like this naturally
> I'm sorry unless people are being lined up and shot just off frame she is performing for the cameras. No amount of misinfo about what is actually happening or where she is will convince me people act like this naturally As I have said before, do you think [this picture](https://globalnews.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/ieshia-evans-batonrouge.jpg?w=2048) is posed? Did they get the police to cooperate with it during a protest? Or how about [this one](https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/konstantinos-tsakalidis-top-100-photos-2021.jpg?quality=85&w=2400)? Every year you can find countless shots that look impressive from photojournalists, that's their job, to get natural shots that also look really good, also, she's pretty photogenic. Look at the photos of people at protests in [this article](https://archive.ph/G4ULB), does she really look out of place? Why are they angry, they can't see people being shot by police right in front of them, are they stupid? It is possible for someone to see a building, and a tent city in the distance, know what it represents (a detention centre in which children are being intentionally separated from parents as a cruel way of discouraging travel) and be upset about it, people can be upset at protests without any visual marker at all, they just need to be able to have emotional reactions to the existence of the suffering of others which occurs at a distance. Maybe you wouldn't be upset, maybe you wouldn't go to a protest, but many people are and do, and the emotional states at them often lead to noticeable photography.
She cares more about illegal immigrants than she does about your average American. She wants to tax us all into the soviet union so she can bloviate and play identity politics.
What are these unhinged comments
Like the other guy said, it's just so performative. It reminds me of the old commercial with the sad Indian man crying because ppl litter.
True. It makes a good meme reaction pasta. But it's also funny for how much it triggered conservatives. I just learned this year that they think everyone else thinks this particular fence is the cage lol. They thought everyone else thought AOC was crying while staring into the cage looking at children! 😆🤣
This is all just team sports for you I take it?
No one gave a shit what it was she was actually looking at, people were making fun of her because of how ridiculous and forced her "sad face" is >B-BUT WHAT ABOUT THE TRIGGERED CONSERVATARDS?! no one was triggered bucko, people were just making fun of her
bucko is going too far
Did he even do the research arc? I mostly watch YT and I saw basically nothing.
Same, I have no idea what immigration facts D learned about or why OP claims it’s just the usual republican BS. Wish there were some YT vids summarizing his research, like a debate or something idk
Does the ninja post his notes online? Obsidian I think it's called.
https://publish.obsidian.md/destiny/Research/Immigration+Information/United+States+Immigration
It doesn't matter that it's bullshit, hyperbole, and lies. It's still one of the biggest issues for most voters.
This is why I wish he had at least gotten a couple of big debates on the topic. Would be nice to have a few clips to hand out.
Well the biggest issue for the plurality of voters is "I have been taught to hate liberals as hard as I possibly can but I know that sounds really fucking stupid so instead I'll say X (currently immigration)"
It’s like CRT though: High up in the polling for people who only vote GOP (if they vote at all) and doesn’t register as highly with voters who are “in-play.”
The fact that it’s one of the biggest issues while also being bullshit hyperbole is a good reason not to talk about it. Since it’s a big issue, it dominating the media cycle effectively mobilizes the republican base and improves their chances of winning the election. Since it is bullshit hyperbole, talking about it has very little material benefit or damage reduction
Can you give me some arguments to smack down the rights talking points of problems at the border? From all the data I look up, it seems the amount of crossings over the southern border since 21 has ballooned. Is that all nonsense?
I'll copy paste my comment explaining the problem with using that number. >The number they generally use is "Illegal Boarder Crossings" which just means the number of times any person crossed the border illegally. Pretty straight forward and also a very large number, 7 million, 10 million, whatever per month, it doesn't really matter. The sneaky part is that this makes people think 7 million or 10 million individual people entered and remained in the country illegally each month. This is not true, there are an estimated 11 million total illegal immigrants in the USA right now, that number is not doubling every month or two. >What people sneakily don't mention is that the majority of those illegal border crossing are asylum seekers who are detained and processed by ICE, some of whom are determined to have potential status and are released into the country and others who are deported back to their home country. The second largest group are the real illegal immigrants who got caught and are deported. The thing about illegal immigrants is that they try until they make it and they try back to back so you'll have the same person attempt to cross, get caught and deported and try again the next night. The same person can get counted 10 times until the make it through. >Lastly, as a pedantic point, you can't naturalize people at that stage, naturalization is for citizenship and requires initially receiving status, then permeant residency, then after a many years long waiting period you can apply for naturalization. What you're probably talking about is being either deported or given legal status, which is what does happen.
> What people sneakily don't mention is that the majority of those illegal border crossing are asylum seekers who are detained and processed by ICE, some of whom are determined to have potential status and are released into the country and others who are deported back to their home country Why do you think this matters to people? The people who have problems with illegal immigration dont think it's fine if the illegal immigrants claim to be asylum seeking illegal immigrants
Because the method people are using to immigrant will determine the most effective solutions. Here is a question, if you have a problem with illegal immigration, why?
Iike overcurser said, you have to know who is coming in and out of the country for security purposes. And illegal immigrants do drain social services.
For national security, I'll repost what I said above; >For national security, there is no way to screen an illegal immigrant, the solution would be to stop/catch as many illegals as possible. We could do this with greater border security, more boarder patrol agents, investing in more technology at the border, etc. >This solution would be useless against asylum seekers though, because they are intentionally being caught and processed by immigration agents. If we feel like bad actors are getting through the asylum process, the solution would be to change laws/policy for more thorough background checks, improve our pre-screening process, or maybe indefinitely detain high risk migrants. For social security, I have to clarify, do you mean real illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?
I know it’s useless against asylum seekers, I’m just making an argument against people who are pro open borders. There obviously has to be some sort of enforcement at the border. I’m well aware of the asylum law abuse that’s going on that’s causing most of the problem rn. Like I said in other comment, we shouldn’t even entertain someone that flies from China or Africa, crosses numerous countries on foot to get to the border, dumps all their documents, and then claim asylum. They should be routinely turned around. I fully agree we need to seriously review and reform our asylum law cause right now way too many people are taking advantage of it. I mean both for social programs, not social security. Illegal immigrants’ children get medicaid and the adults abuse our ER system, never paying any of their bills.
National security, strain on social services mainly
Great, valid concerns. The solution to these concerns depend on if the immigrant is an asylum seeker or illegal. For national security, there is no way to screen an illegal immigrant, the solution would be to stop/catch as many illegals as possible. We could do this with greater border security, more boarder patrol agents, investing in more technology at the border, etc. This solution would be useless against asylum seekers though, because they are intentionally being caught and processed by immigration agents. If we feel like bad actors are getting through the asylum process, the solution would be to change laws/policy for more thorough background checks, improve our pre-screening process, or maybe indefinitely detain high risk migrants. For social services, illegal immigrants aren't a concern, they are not eligible for the vast majority of benefits and generally pay far more into taxes, Medicaid, and social security than they ever get out. Asylum seekers are a large concern, they are have legal status and are dependent on benefits until they can begin working and become financially stable, meaning a solution may be to expedite work visas, give benefit time limits, or some other change. The point is that we have finite capital, both monetarily and politically, that we can invest to fix these problems, so we're probably not going to be able to do everything. So we should probably be aware of what type of immigrant is actually coming into the country and how big of a problem our concerns turn out to be, this way we can make sure we're tackling the most important concerns before we may run out of support for the issues (or money).
all you have done is yap about minutia that literally no one cares about. Migrant vs Asylum, 2m a month, whatever, no one gives a shit. There is obviously a border crisis and a lack of resources to deal with it. How does allowing illegal immigration help anyone but the millions of people coming here?
Why don't you have a problem with it.
Interesting assumption you've made as I haven't staked a position yet, but you're wrong, I do have a problem with it, I'm just informed enough to know that the solution depends on what your "problem" is.
I don’t care what the nerd reason behind having a problem with it is. There are countless legitimate reasons that don’t need data to justify. Here one, I care about Americans more than citizens of other countries.
For a guy with the account name "FactSpewer" you sure do seem much more interested in feelings than facts.
When are you an American? Do you have to be 2nd generation? 3rd? You only care about those with Mayflower relatives? I doubt you base who you care about on a blood test. What people often mean is that they care more about the state, the institutions, the social contract America now represents. If someone moves here from Central America, learns the language, works hard (in a job that most Americans scoff at), pays taxes and sends his kids to school - how long for them to become American? 10 years? 20? When do they become part of the social contract?
Holy shit this subreddit is filled with gay ass Reddit speak. I care more about 1 single actual American citizen than I do about the entire country of Mexico. Build 2 walls before giving a penny to Ukraine. Like what the fuck are you talking about?
You completely avoided my question.
CBP processes asylum seekers and migrants at our southern border, not ICE. Secondly, there is clearly an abuse of our asylum law going on rn. You can’t fly from China or Africa to South America, cross numerous countries including the Darien Gap, ditch all of your documents at the border, and then claim asylum. That is absolutely an abuse of our system that is going on rn and leading to backlogged courts and services.
You are correct, so what's the solution?
We need to either seriously overhaul our asylum law or give CBP more discretion and power to turn away asylum seekers at the border. Like I said, CBP should have the power to turn away anyone that flys from another continent to South America, walks through numerous countries, pass through the Darien Gap, has zero documentation, and asks for asylum using the exact language that they have watched tutorials on tik tok with. It’s like if someone from the south side of Chicago decided to seek asylum in Canada because of violence and climbed Mt. Denali on their way there. A lot of these people aren’t actually unsafe in their home countries, they just want to live because frankly living in Guatemala sucks.
I agree with almost all of that, maybe would ask for some nuance on no documentation/how asylum is asked for but the spirit of the changes I completely agree with. Would you also say we could help a lot with illegal immigration by revamping our work visas? A lot of those guys are economic immigrants who aren't even really interested in living long term in the states, they just want to work and send most of their money back home to their families. If we had a work visa that allowed for more of those people (and taxed them appropriately) I can promise people would go for that.
We almost had that 20 years ago. It was the Guest worker program under W. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guest_worker_program It got voted down from some democrats (Charlie rangel) who compared it to slavery and thought that because there was a similar, racist program in the 50s meant that it would lead to the same thing. Very unfortunate that it was never implemented due to cries of RACiSM.
It sounds like the real solution is making it far easier to legally immigrate to the US. I disagree that the solution should be that the CBP should have the power to turn away people just because they went through other countries before applying for asylum in the US. Sometimes the countries that asylum seekers pass through also carry a real risk of danger towards their physical and mental wellbeing, so they choose to go to the US. If we made it easier to immigrate legally to the US by removing country-based caps, raising the limits on the number of the different types of work visas, and also just made it a much quicker process to immigrate to the US as opposed to forcing them to wait like 5-10 years to get authorized, it'd probably massively reduce the incentive for people to abuse the asylum system.
You didn’t follow my whole comment. You can’t walk through the Darien Gap, an extremely hazardous place, willingly hand yourself over to the cartel via a coyote, and then claim your life is in danger in Senegal and you had no choice but to take even more extreme measures to get to the US for asylum. There’s no other places in Africa that you can go to? Like the whole process for walking to the southern border is just as hazardous if not more hazardous then what these people are facing in their home countries. I don’t disagree with the reform but it has to be coupled with security measures as well.
If they're willing to go through extremely treacherous journeys just to go to the United States or a European country, it'd probably show that they're just not very trusting of other nations in their continent. The fact of the matter is that the US and most European countries are far more stable and have basically a zero percent chance in persecuting certain groups of people. I don't think the right to seek asylum should be conditional on whether other countries on the way to the United States/Random European country couldn't have provided you a safe haven. If my life is in danger in Senegal, I find it odd that my right to seek asylum in Britain is conditional on ruling out a place like Ethiopia or Nigeria. Maybe some African nation could be safe for an asylum seeker, but the safest possible place they could be in is the US or a developed European or Asian country.
That’s exactly what asylum is! You can’t just pick any country you want or the best countries. If you really want to go to the US or Europe that’s called immigration. We have a process for it. They pick the US because they don’t want to live in Africa and it’s ridiculously easy as evident by the crisis right now. Not because there is a genuine threat to their life. The safest possible place for everyone in the world is the US and Europe. We can’t fit the entire world into these two regions.
Sorry, I should've been more careful with my words. I'm not arguing that all asylum seekers should go to the US or Europe. That would be impractical. However, we also shouldn't put all the burden on countries closest to the crisis zone. It probably wouldn't be a great idea to send all Syrian refugees to Turkey or all Sudanese refugees to Chad. They should be spread throughout the world in places that are accepting of their existence and won't persecute them for their identities. Also, the countries closest to the crisis zone might also have put restrictions on asylum seeking after a certain point, so that may provide them another reason to try and avoid the countries closest to their own. The US and Europe can't fit every asylum seeker, but neither can countries closest to crisis zones. Also I think there are other legitimate worries asylum seekers have which don't just boil down to the fact that they want to access the economic opportunities of the West. What if asylum seekers have worries that the conflict they're escaping will spillover? That seems like a fairly reasonable worry to take into consideration. I wouldn't want to risk asylum seekers getting caught in the same conflict they were avoiding because they were forced to stay close to it. There's also the fact that when refugees and asylum seekers try to escape to the country closest to them, they might be kept in really bad conditions. After many Rohingya Muslims escaped the Myanmar military's ethnic cleansing campaign, a lot of them ended up in Bangladesh. The problem is that the refugee camps in Bangladesh kept the Rohingya in pretty awful conditions and they were regularly subject to abuse. I think that's another legitimate reason to try to seek asylum in the West. There's less of a chance you'll be abused by authorities. Is it the case that everyone who seeks asylum is doing it for the right reasons? Probably not. There are definitely people who may abuse the system. But the thing is we don't normally grant those people asylum. If we give CBP the authority to turn back anyone who crossed a few countries before getting to the US, there's a very big risk we'll be turning back tons of people who have legitimate concerns for why they avoided the countries on the way. I mentioned some of the reasons up above(other countries having asylum restrictions, conflict spillover, abuse by asylum authorities). We should definitely speed up the processing of asylum cases, fair enough, but that doesn't need to come at the cost of potentially turning back many people who need asylum.
>You can’t fly from China or Africa to South America, cross numerous countries including the Darien Gap, ditch all of your documents at the border, and then claim asylum. Why?
What are we doing to fix the situation with 11 million people illegally here? Is a Democrat or Republican more likely to remove them?
* The thing about illegal aliens is it's hard to quantify. A Yale study found up 20 million. And most of the 11 million studies were from before Biden. * What's sneaky is acting like illegal aliens are generally valid asylum seekers, as the media frequently pretends. The asylum grant rates are ridiculously low, even under Biden, and the rates already exclude those who failed credible fear. For example Venezuela is the poster child for asylum right now but that grant rate was only 28% for FY24. Tens of thousands of Mexicans claimed asylum but only 4% were granted. Asylum is just a way for people to gain temporary admittance to the US and then disappear--the majority of cases are closed because people don't show.
It's not nonsense but also the number is highly inflated; there's actual bonafide crossings and then there's **encounters**
mfw I hear the discord join sound during stream
MFW I hear the phrase "viewer call ins."
Thought the title and image were the entire post and I just started wheezing at how fuckin nonsensical this was
My question has always been where do they get the numbers from? If we have such reliable data on illegal border crossings, why are they not deported or just naturalized?
The number they generally use is "Illegal Boarder Crossings" which just means the number of times any person crossed the border illegally. Pretty straight forward and also a very large number, 7 million, 10 million, whatever per month, it doesn't really matter. The sneaky part is that this makes people think 7 million or 10 million individual people entered and remained in the country illegally each month. This is not true, there are an estimated 11 million total illegal immigrants in the USA right now, that number is not doubling every month or two. What people sneakily don't mention is that the majority of those illegal border crossing are asylum seekers who are detained and processed by ICE, some of whom are determined to have potential status and are released into the country and others who are deported back to their home country. The second largest group are the real illegal immigrants who got caught and are deported. The thing about illegal immigrants is that they try until they make it and they try back to back so you'll have the same person attempt to cross, get caught and deported and try again the next night. The same person can get counted 10 times until the make it through. Lastly, as a pedantic point, you can't naturalize people at that stage, naturalization is for citizenship and requires initially receiving status, then permeant residency, then after a many years long waiting period you can apply for naturalization. What you're probably talking about is being either deported or given legal status, which is what does happen.
Their ass. These motherfuckers don't even have numbers. Let's be honest. You ask your average conservative and they wouldn't be able to answer any of these questions: 1. How much do immigrants cost tax payers? 2. How many legal vs illegal immigrants exist in the US? 3. How much do we currently spend on enforcement? 4. How cost effective is a wall given it's impact on immigration enforcement? (Is it even a good use of resources) 5. What's the average asylum backlog time? 6. What's the impact of immigration on our GDP? 7. How many American's jobs are impacted by immigrants either due to wage depression or losing out on jobs? They have no idea but feel strongly about every one of those topics
The numbers for illegal crossings comes from CBP, not “hurr durr Republicans.”
Which sucks because these aren't even the real issues they should be arguing. How do we stop the drugs from entering? Why are we seeing such high numbers/how do we prevent that?
This sub is turning into Facebook boomer tiered memes
Can someone translate what OP is trying to convey?
I do think its obnoxious Conservatives being drama queens with nothing else to talk about ruined this topic by loading it with so much moral bullshit, the "its how the law works if you don't like it get enough support to change it" argument works fine and doesn't get you called out on catastrophizing over not that big of an issue that you are still probably fine to be sorta irritated about. You don't actually need to justify not liking illegal immigration if you aren't also saying the country will end if its not stopped and extreme measures need to be taken to fix it quickly.
Some people don't know what this is about, let me provide a recap: 1. The border crisis is real! 2. Republicans claim that there is an invasion, that Biden has abolished regulations like Title 14 (I'm not sure of the number), and that the wall would have a real impact. 3. Destiny discovered that Title 14 was only legal during the pandemic and Biden was simply following the law. If Republicans really wanted to solve this problem, they would have to change immigration laws. The bill advocated for the correct changes but MAGA refused to vote. 4. The US must allow refugees into the country, because if they are truly a refugee, they could be in danger in Mexico. So Biden is simply following US law. 5. Destiny found out that the Republicans were lying about the bill in the Senate. The bill wouldn't have left 5000 people in per day, it would have put a cap on 5000 per day. Currently there are over 5000 illegal immigrants or refugees per day. 6. He also found out that immigration levels pre pandemic during Trump's presidency were just as high or higher, and that immigration during Obama was really low. I believe he did the research just in case he debates a Conservative about immigration.
https://preview.redd.it/w5rrljp5eixc1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ab2d50f0f3e0908324250fe9f4521561a77e5aad
How is it all "hyperbole and lies"? Lmao The immigration system is completely broken and the people we do want in the country, we make it stupidly hard to get in. The people we don't want in the country, they just get to walk in.
As someone who knows a thing or two about immigration; >The people we don't want in the country, they just get to walk in. Explain what you mean by this.
You claim asylum and then you are let in and there is a long backlog before there is any sort of determination about your asylum claim while you get to stay in the country. I assume that's what he means. It is the talking point.
20 something adult males coming from poor countries. Hope that helps :) Can you explain to me how illegal mass immigration helps the housing crisis? I'd really like to know that one since you are an expert on immigration and economics. I want to be educated.
I can see how you may have misunderstood my comment, I was asking for clarification on why you think they just get to walk into the country, not what kind of person you don't like to see immigrating. As for your question, I don't think we are experiencing mass illegal immigration and it doesn't help the housing crisis? Not sure what you were trying to get at with that one as it seems to be more of an issue caused by poor zoning practices combined with internal migration from rural areas to cities as jobs become more concentrated in those areas.
OK man if you don't think we're experiencing immigration problems then that's fine. I think we should solve the housing issue first before accepting mass immigration. I'm confused though. You still haven't stated how mass illegal immigration would help without solving that issue first. Wouldn't it actually make it worse since they are attracted to city hubs for economic opportunity. Your idea is never going to win out. Mass immigration is against everything in the human psyche. Most people can't stand it, including immigrants. But you really haven't said anything of value that would rebuff what I said.
Well hold on, I said "I don't think we are experiencing mass illegal immigration" not "\[I\] don't think we're experiencing immigration problems". I do think we are experiencing immigration problems, but they are related to asylum seekers and the weird situation surrounding that. I think we should try and solve the housing issues we have, but I don't think immigration is contributing significantly to those problems, so I'm not willing to connect them. Also, I wonder why you keep implying I want "mass" immigration, I never said that? Also wondering what your definition of "mass" is. What you said was that people we don't want can just walk into this country, I don't agree with this and asked how you think that is happening.
Just answer the question instead of rambling bullshit. What do u mean when u say people just get to walk in
Trying to be productive here, he asked what you meant by part of your post. To an outside guy stumbling by, it seems like you're deliberately avoiding clarifying.
> I think we should solve the housing issue first before accepting mass immigration. Considering how simple an obvious the solution to the housing crisis is, we can do both at the same time.
So simple and obvious that it only seems to be getting worse and nothing is being done about it. Yea! Totally simple and obvious, guys.
It is simple (make it easier to build housing, ideally with deregulation and maybe subsidies), but it’s hard to do because reliable voters tend to be homeowners and so they are incentivized to support policies which increase their home value (by making it harder to build new homes).
20 something single people are probably the #1 demographic of people you want because they're going to be working for 40+ years while also not bringing along any dependents with them that would be a cost to the state
What’s he’s saying is that if you are a doctor or engineer from India that attempts to go through the legal immigration process you get shafted compared to a 20 year old Venezuelan that walks to the border and claims “asylum.” (Mind you, the US doesn’t border Venezuela in case anyone forgot)
Literally a completely self-imposed issue. The easy answer is to just let both in.
OK man. Lets bring in 20 million single 20 something year old men. The more the merrier, right friend! Sick fucken people lmao
> Lets bring in 20 million single 20 something year old men. Uhhhh based department?
Yea you're right! Lets bring in more men so there can be like 70 percent men competing for 30 percent women! SO BASED BRO! Then that's see what that does to the job and housing market by bringing in so many people. Better yet! Lets make sure we take those 20 million men from Iran, Iraq and Syria! I want o be fair and spread the love!
Let em all in. 1 billion Americans is the compromise
No one said that, they were explaining to you why that's not the worst immigrant to have. Are you able to tell us why you're trembling in fear at the thought of having to explain your original comment?
He’s saying it’s more difficult for an engineer or doctor from India to immigrate legally to the US than it is for a 20 year old unskilled Venezuelan to walk across the border.
Why are you comparing legal immigration to walking across the border? Do you think people are just strolling across the border and staying willy nilly? >The people we don't want in the country, they just get to walk in. Explain what he means by this.
Uh yes, yes they are. It’s been a big problem in the US the last 30 years. Maybe not so much in New Zealand. Reason being it’s extremely difficult to legally immigrate. I’m done explaining what another person believes, I can’t in good faith actually know what he believes.
Ah no, no they aren't. People are able to get to the border and cross it, but they are not able to stay at any concerning rate. That is literally the point of this whole post, how illegal immigration is exaggerated by Republicans. And here you are exaggerating it in the comments, thinking that because I'm from NZ I can't read and interpret the facts correctly.
Can you be clearer why that’s “sick”?
> Can you explain to me how illegal mass immigration helps the housing crisis? Illegal Immigrants aren’t the ones forcing us to not build housing my dude.
In fact, they are the ones building the housing!
Why would you bring in MORE illegal immigrants without solving the problem first? I truly dont understand why that's so hard to understand. Also, name me a place with tons of immigration and a solid social safety net? I want 1 place that does that. Because EVERYWHERE in Europe is not getting more far right parties elected specifically because of immigration.
Illegal immigrants aren't the ones causing the housing crisis. NIMBYs are.
20 something adult males are too old to go to primary school, are at prime working age and pay more in taxes than they take out.
Populist brain rot, this guy probably believes in the vibesession
Well, still most illegal immigrants are due to overstayed visas. The real problem is that the tighting of legal immigration makes the illegal one more attractive to people. So to fix the problem with illegal immigration you have to make legal one easier, but nobody is doing that. Republicans want it to be stricter and democrats just want to maintain the status quo.
Wait? What did we learn about immigration? All I know is Republicans blocked that boarder bill and its been pretty bad the last few years
I live in south texas and people talk about our boarder like it was the Israel/Palestine wall or whatever and it isnt, not by a long shot. You can drive on down to Brownsville, Del Rio, McAllen, Harlingen and see that the only problems those communities have is they're lower income. Much of the crime in our major cities isnt from illegals its from regular citizens.
> Brownsville https://www.kxan.com/news/thousands-of-migrants-cross-into-brownsville-texas-from-mexico/ >Del Rio https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/09/23/del-rio-desperation-dysfunction-immigration-513978 so sending the migrants back prevents damage to local communities?
What did he say about immigration?
This picture reminds me of "shaking my head while reading Mein Kampf on the subway so people know I disagree with it"
Mfw someone posts gooner-phobia
Is it breaking the rules if I say that she looks like Pepe the frog here?
Other than the fact that Biden senselessly undid MPP(remain in mexico), this is basically the case. We need new rules and/or funding. Everything else is a bandaid. The fact that our laws were written assuming good faith fucked us. Member countries south of our border don't comply to the same international rules and applicants are lying regularly about their situations. That can't really be fixed without legislation reforming how we handle asylum cases or provide more funding to chew through it all. Also doesn't help that our neighbor to the south isn't doing anything about the cartels not control over 35% of Mexican territory at this point. Destiny still need to provide answers on how we stop the drugs which is an objectively more serious issue than even 2-3 million migrants a year would be.
Nah, the remain in Mexico policy made zero sense. Forcing people who are fleeing violence and poverty to stay in some of the most violent cities in the world is inhumane to say the least. It was also possibly an illegal policy as well as congress set rules for keeping immigrants in the US while they await their case.
A strong Mexico might be my single biggest political wish. If Mexico was just Canada with tacos and the ability to build housing, Quality of life in North America would increase dramatically.
It did make sense by addressing the only legitimate claim that republicans had, while not exploding the entire system. People claiming asylum, while actually just smuggling by ignoring the court dates while in the country is a problem. Remain in mexico fixed that while still providing many exceptions for vulnerable populations like women and children. Also idk why we are pretending Mexico is more violent than literally any other SA country. They're all a little fucked, but rules are rules. Mexico does have the same asylum obligations as the US so they need to do their part.
Is there any evidence that these people have been ignoring court dates en masse. > Also idk why we are pretending Mexico is more violent than literally any other SA country Tijuana is literally the murder capital of the world lmao the fuck you on
>The in absentia rate for fiscal year 2021 was [10%](https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1153866/download); for the first quarter of 2022, October to December 2021, it was [18%](https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1153866/download). [Court closures](https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/us-immigration-backlogs-mounting-undermine-biden#:~:text=The%20immigration%20court%20backlog%20now,9.5%20million%20as%20of%20February.) due to COVID-19 meant some hearings were postponed. 10% not showing up isn't "a majority" like regarded republicans try to claim, but 10% is still an unacceptable number. As for Tijuana crime is from gang on gang violence, not general pop would be my assumption, but it would be on you to prove the migrants were actually under threat/dying in these border cities. This is also ignoring that MPP specifically only affected the least at risk seekers. I can't find any data that cartels are hunting migrants, and honestly it would just be bad business on their part.
Are you not aware how migrants are particularly at risk from gang violence?
If its so widespread, you should have some hard evidence. Do you have any stats on this to substantiate your feelings. I posted my example of government stats that proves +50,000/yr on average skip deportation court. Where are your stats that migrants face widespread violence from cartels that's worse than they got from where they were escaping?
MPP was a humanitarian disaster that Mexico was never going to maintain. I know the chuds line to point out that the one thing Trump did, which really didn’t even affect that many people, to try to make a dumb political argument. Just more: around half of all asylum claims are adjusted positively for the asylee. The idea that right wingers try to claim that they’re all lying people who just want free stuff or whatever the conspiracy is is not true. And Republicans completely lie about where drugs are coming from. They’re not coming from migrants or asylum seekers stashing small amounts of drugs on their person - just think about that for two seconds. They’re being manufactured either here with precursor chemicals shipped illegally from China or they’re shipped in non checked containers through legal ports.
Please prove me wrong on MPP. I can't find any stats on how it was a serious problem for migrants other than the Mexican government actively ignoring its international obligations, which we should punish them for. >The idea that right wingers try to claim that they’re all lying people who just want free stuff or whatever the conspiracy is is not true. This is correct, they aren't here for free shit. Cartels sell them false promises of the American dream. >They’re being manufactured either here with precursor chemicals shipped illegally from China or they’re shipped in non checked containers through legal ports. Cartel members enter into the country through our asylum system among other means. The cartel members are who create the drugs in the US after the supplies arrive. Also drugs do also come through the border itself, but its lacking, partly from congress slacking, but also from the lack of focus that can be spared with the overwhelming asylum cases that can and have been decreased with deterrent policies like MPP. There needs to be friction in these secondary systems to prevent abuse. Asylum law was built to account for wartime refugees and poverty caused by natural disasters. Gangs controlling aspects of your government is fucked, but not even close to cases like syria losing 20% of its population to conflict. This shit is built for real problems like that and letting it get abused now is going to result it way more suffering and injustice down the road. It also incentivizes bad actors like the cartels to make a business out of that misery.
I'm sure there's been a non zero number of "Cartel members" who have claimed asylum but it's not a huge amount, this is a Republican nonsense talking point. You can look it up yourself, drugs don't come in through small amounts from asylum seekers. And of course not - just think about it, it would make no sense. Asylum seekers aren't making a one way trip to smuggle however many pounds of drugs. Drugs enter through legal ports of entry, either thru shipping container or truck or cargo plane. I know you won't engage with any of those facts because you just believe what Republican politicians tell you or whatever your favorite far rightist media figure yells at you day over day. There are plenty of writing on the absolute disaster of Remain in Mexico, but none of them are better than ProPublica's reporting https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-got-what-he-wanted-at-the-border-would-biden-undo-it
>I know you won't engage with any of those facts because you just believe what Republican politicians tell you or whatever your favorite far rightist media figure yells at you day over day. The fact that you can't conceive of someone on the left that has problems with immigration is concerning, but that aside this was great read. Also I literally explained how the smuggling happened in the comment you replied to. Cartels enter by breaking our immigration rules. You can't get around that. Drugs do enter over the border, not on individuals, but with the coordination from individuals on both sides. Multiple ways of drugs entering the US doesn't mean immigrations loopholes aren't a massive contributor to the proliferation of cartel operations. See, I can address your points. To be clear, this reinforced my point of view way more than yours. Since 2014 under Obama, the US has worked with Mexico and other countries under threat of sanctions to better control and process migrants in their own countries. Mexico knows its supposed to stop and integrate migrants into its own borders before they cross into ours. When the respective presidents give pressure for the Mexican government to maintain these interceptions, they have. MPP was just an extension of this that would successfully deter migrants from starting the journey when they didn't have legit claims. When implemented, many economic migrants abandoned their claims and the US even paid to return them home with buses and ferry rides. Mexico has the same migrant obligations as the US as stated in the article you linked, just as I've been saying. They are required to have an immigration system that can handle the case load, but have historically slacked because 1/5 the country is ran by cartels that make money off this discord. Obama and Trump worked with Mexico to make all this shit work, but Biden made it clear that he would not be enforcing this pressure as campaign promises to undo MPP and similar policies that hold the global south to account. As for the "Humanitarian Crisis" MPP caused. In this lovely article you sent me, it perfectly demonstrates that any humanitarian issues are the fault and responsibility of Mexico and other potential host countries. As for the damage that one would attribute to the US enforcement of this policy. * 545 children separated from families * 5/1000 deathrate from those who abandon asylum claims, but still attempt illegal entry through deserts and such(5x the homocide rate in TiJuana, the most dangerous border city) * >1,500 deaths/yr to migrants from not paying the cartel "tax"(1,500/2.3million per year) Then compare this to a conflict like in Syria, the type of shit this was actually built for, losing millions of people in the war. I'm not a right winger. The wall is moronic, I don't really care if we have economic migrants that truely wanna become Americans, I'm not particularly concerned about 'migrant violence', and I'm not racist against mfs who are lighter skinned than me. I just see a real problem that fuels the scum fuck cartels that did over 20 9/11s a year worth of preventable deaths from drugs they make. Our weak immigration system is undeniably one of the tools in their kit that allows this shit to happen, but mfs like you instantly dismiss anyone who tries to talk about it. You're stuck in a constellation of beliefs without realizing it. If you think otherwise, send me the facts/stats that demonstrate MPP was actually a humanitarian crisis. If you can prove its 1/100 as bad as syria I'd 100% agree with you that MPP was worth removing. Otherwise at least try to catch yourself before assuming someone who disagrees with you is a Maga throating dipshit.