"And heartbreaking they are" sure Donald. Worst attempt at appearing empathetic by a sociopath ever. Charles Manson showed more warmth than this guy.

I had asked a long time ago on this forum about how does America recover from this. Now I'm pretty sure we don't. The deplorables have tasted the sweet nectar of deplorableness, of being able to be openly racist with virtually no repercussions, with a leader that encourages the behavior. Even if Democrats win back congress, and we get Barack 2.0 in 2020, I think the genie has been let out of the bottle. Societal norms that would at least keep the deplorables in check in the past have been stripped away. There's no way the deplorables are giving up this new feeling freely. Some type of internal American conflict is coming.

But their belief isn’t wrong. Anybody born to a median wealth family DOES have to work hard as an adult to have their own median income family. The mistake is thinking that most poor people or people who require government assistance to eat and have a home are people just like me them who choose not to work hard.

I thought simulations recently indicated that much of our success (or lack thereof) in life is due to chance. Pretty sure someone posted the story in this forum.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...n-we-realized/

I think we mostly have to wait for the Boomers to die off and hope the young anime Nazis can be contained. I’m not super optimistic about our chances. Dems need an overwhelming blue wave to take back the senate and undo gerrymandering, and Dems are thoroughly incompetent. And idk how they keep Republicans from continuing to have a lock on the SCOTUS.

The more fundamental problem of our social norms being demolished is also a terrifying and uncharted new territory. I have no idea what the long term impact is of having an eroded social fabric.

That doesn’t contradict what I’m saying. Most of us can make simple decisions that will make us poor ( not showing up to work etc) but that’s not an accurate representation of who poor people really are.

Lots of these deplorable are 65+ years old and will be dying off soon. Trump polls terribly with the younger crowds. Basically a lot of this awfulness comes from boomers who have still been the largest group in the US for a long time but are starting to die off and are slowly beginning to lose ground to millennial.

I feel like in 15ish years the current racist trump type voting block will drop from like 45%ish of the voting block to like 30% and we won't need to be governed by them anymore. And from there it will keep falling. Gen x is much better than boomers, Millinials are even better, and these young kids like the parkland survivors are the stone cold nuts.

America will be fine, we just gotta try to limit the damage in the next 15-20 years and wait for these old pieces of trash to die off.

Every day, 10000 Americans turn 18.

If we really want these kids to vote we need to have steam do a program where they get credits towards buying video games for voting. Or custom special outfits or weapons in their favorite game.

I may be missing something but weren’t a lot of the boomers the hippies and protesters of the sixties? I mean I’d love to imagine that the millennials are going to clutch their youthful morals longer than previous generations, but where is that confidence supposed to come from?

This actually isn't a bad idea at all. Gabe Newell is fairly left wing. Somebody should pitch it to him.

No. Most boomers were far too young to be involved, and the hippies and protesters were always a small minority anyway.

The millennials are just a cancer formed during the Obama years. Thanks. When the youths during the Trump Presidency begin to show form - the country will once again be voting for freedom and opportunity. We just have to wait.

The Truth About Separating Kids

Quote:

1) Family units can go home quickly. The option that both honors our laws and keeps family units together is a swift return home after prosecution. But immigrant advocates hate it because they want the migrants to stay in the United States. How you view this question will depend a lot on how you view the motivation of the migrants (and how seriously you take our laws and our border).

2) There’s a better way to claim asylum. Every indication is that the migrant flow to the United States is discretionary. It nearly dried up at the beginning of the Trump administration when migrants believed that they had no chance of getting into the United States. Now, it is going in earnest again because the message got out that, despite the rhetoric, the policy at the border hasn’t changed. This strongly suggests that the flow overwhelmingly consists of economic migrants who would prefer to live in the United States, rather than victims of persecution in their home country who have no option but to get out.

Even if a migrant does have a credible fear of persecution, there is a legitimate way to pursue that claim, and it does not involve entering the United States illegally. First, such people should make their asylum claim in the first country where they feel safe, i.e., Mexico or some other country they are traversing to get here. Second, if for some reason they are threatened everywhere but the United States, they should show up at a port of entry and make their claim there rather than crossing the border illegally.

3) There is a significant moral cost to not enforcing the border. There is obviously a moral cost to separating a parent from a child and almost everyone would prefer not to do it. But, under current policy and with the current resources, the only practical alternative is letting family units who show up at the border live in the country for the duration. Not only does this make a mockery of our laws, it creates an incentive for people to keep bringing children with them.

Children should not be making this journey that is fraught with peril. But there is now a premium on bringing children because of how we have handled these cases. They are considered chits.

In April, the New York Times reported:

Some migrants have admitted they brought their children not only to remove them from danger in such places as Central America and Africa, but because they believed it would cause the authorities to release them from custody sooner.

Demographics. The way deplorable is typically defined on this forum blends seamlessly into white nationalism. Of course millennials will prob find a whole new type of deplorablism that doesn’t require whiteness.

**** off, adios.

lol - adios is so predictable I thought to myself before I hovered over the link, "like the national review knows anything about the truth". Boom. National Review piece.

It's not our fault we are treating them humanely apparently, it's because they shouldn't have come in the first place. Sorry guys. Totes can't help it. TRUTH.

5:55

You're an evil mother****er

national review is such an embarassment to actual journalists and academics in the country

Why are you making me hit you baby.

The fact that adios hasn't been permanently banned yet is shameful.

This. He just comes in every so often and posts some garbage and then leaves, never acknowledging it again. No attempt at any discourse at all.

fyp

Probably an oversimplification to say either way. People born into poverty have obstacles others don't, so their odds of ending up poor are higher. However even among those born into poverty, some make worse choices than others and those poor choices can further skew the odds against them.

Problem is the deplorables want to pretend it's 100% poor choices or innate laziness. Helps them justify their prejudices, with the added benefit of allowing them to attribute all of their own success to their amazing puritan work ethic.