Quote:
Originally Posted by wheatrich
I'm not forgetting anything, the goal is to win elections, and insisting on OPEN BORDERS like this thread does, isn't helpful to that goal.
This is a very fair point. "Open borders" have been made into scary words even though they describe, like, the way borders exist throughout most of the world and have existed here for most of our existence. The problem is that Democrats then trip over themselves to call for tighter border security, which the general public think means the same thing as building a wall/fence/whatever.
Democrats happen to be on the right side of this issue (pretty standard) and happen to absolutely, positively SUCK at messaging on this issue (totally standard).
The proper response IMO when being hit for wanting open borders in a debate/interview/whatever is something like:
Literally nobody serious in politics in America is for open borders, but anybody serious about the future prosperity of this country is for open ports of entry with good security screening.
That means expanding legal immigration, expanding temporary work visas, and streamlining the process so that we can process applications for entry more efficiently. This gives immigrants every reason in the world to come in through a port of entry, and the vast majority of them will do so.
The facts are pretty simple: immigrants contribute greatly to our economy, we need workers right now, and it's the right thing to do. It makes our country richer economically and culturally... and when we give them every reason to come in legally and work legally, guess what? That means more tax revenue as well! It's a win-win, and it's morally the right thing to do.
Now what we really need to be worrying about keeping out at the border is drugs, not people. A wall doesn't do anything about that, but using technology to screen at ports of entry does.
So our proposal is simple: expand legal immigration, expand temporary work visas, process everything efficiently and use technology to screen for drugs at ports of entry. That is cheaper than a wall, it will make America richer and it provides opportunities to our neighbors who are looking for a chance at their American dream.
And by the way, this isn't a liberal or conservative idea. Ronald Reagan spoke of the same thing... It's an American idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lozen
Dems should build like 30-40 feet of steel-slat wall, and then make a viral video of people tossing stuff over it, passing stuff through it, squeezing through in between the slats, climbing it with ladders, and cutting through it. End it with something really flashy/funny, like an Evel Knievel style motorcycle jump or something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Namath12
You know, this may be one of the great silver linings of this presidency. The fact that he's even flirted with calling a national emergency over this bull**** should be the only kick in the ass the Democrats need to actually do it on climate change after winning in 2020 if the GOP won't work with them to get stuff done. Like, 99% of scientists say we're utterly ****ed in four years if we don't take strong action now. If that's not a national emergency, what is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by metsandfinsfan
Lol at believing there is really a pee tape
I'm going to warn you right off the bat, this is really going to come as a shock to you, but it's a basic truth. Nothing in the dossier has proven patently false. Literally like nothing. Plenty of things have been proven true and even more looks very likely to be true circumstantially. So while we may never know if there is a pee tape, so far the surrounding body of work makes it more likely that it exists than that it doesn't.
But, most of all, it's not even the most important thing in the dossier - not even close. The proposed sale/gift of 19% of Rosneft is what's important.