#the border isn't open under biden

[2bpoliticallycurious]

Contrary to popular belief, the borders are NOT "open" under Biden.

These misguided and misinformed truckers are trying to defy the Federal Government by joining the neo-Confederates in Texas in an attempt to impose cruel deterrents for migrants, including razor wire and buoys with attached circular saws that can maim or kill migrants.

Ironically, these foolish truckers are completely mistaken in their belief that the U.S. border is "open" under the Biden administration and stronger under the Trump administration.

In fact, the percentage of migrants who have been released by the Trump administration (52%) in its last two years in office is greater than the percentage released (49%) by the Biden administration in its first two years in office, according to the CATO Institute.

New Data Show Migrants Were More Likely to Be Released by Trump Than Biden

According to new data published last month [Oct. 2023], the Biden Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has removed a higher percentage of arrested border crossers in its first two years than the Trump DHS did over its last two years. Moreover, migrants were more likely to be released after a border arrest under President Trump than under President Biden. In absolute terms, the Biden DHS is removing 3.5 times as many people per month as the Trump DHS did. These figures are important for understanding how each administration has carried out border enforcement. During the Trump administration, DHS made 1.4 million arrests—what it calls “encounters”—in fiscal years 2019 and 2020 (24 months). Of those people arrested, only 47 percent were removed as of December 31, 2021, which includes people arrested by Trump and removed by Biden, and 52 percent were released into the United States. Under Biden, DHS made over 5 million arrests in its first 26.3 months, and it removed nearly 2.6 million—51 percent—while releasing only 49 percent. In other words, the Trump DHS removed a minority of those arrested while the Biden DHS removed a majority. Biden managed to increase the removal share while also increasing the total removals by a factor of 3.5. [color emphasis added]

Someone should send the truckers this information.

Someone should send Fox News this information.

Someone should also remind the mainstream media about this information.

And someone should certainly send this to the House GOP as they continue to use immigration to weaponize the House against the Biden administration.

Experts say that the Christian nationalist rhetoric adds a dangerous dimension to the standoff between Texas and the Federal Government.

A trucker convoy of “patriots” is heading to the U.S. border with Mexico next week, as the standoff between Texas and the federal government intensifies.

The organizers of the “Take Our Border Back” convoy have called themselves “God’s army” and say they’re on a mission to stand up against the “globalists” who they claim are conspiring to keep U.S. borders open and destroy the country.

[profnic]

Downfall of the GOP: Party Platform Comparison 2024 and 2016

It probably isn't a surprise to anyone that the GOP has changed as a party since Trump won the 2016 primary and was elected president. I went over the Dem's and GOP's party platforms (mostly to be prepared for a class I teach) and noticed a drastic difference between the two - unsurprising, but what was surprising was that it wasn't just content, it was style. So, I decided to compare the 2024 to the 2016 GOP platform (they reused the 2016 platform in 2020), and I think the difference is telling. Not just how the party has become more extreme but how it has broken down as an organization.

TL;DR - the 2024 platform looks like a first draft, has no substance, and shows no signs of being anything other than Trump's ideas instead of being the product of a committee. Likely, the real GOP platform is Project 2025 (unsurprising).

Let's start with the obvious. The GOP party platform was 66 pages long in 2016, with 54 pages of actual policy/platform content. In 2024, it is 16 pages long, with 10 pages of policy/platform content. You can see the length below.

Here, we also have the second thing that immediately stands out: Style. The 2016 document starts with a nice title page, it has color, and it looks like an official document. The 2020 one is in all-caps impact font, black on white. It looks like a first draft—hell, it might be. Notice as well the document files—the current platform doesn't have one, and the 2016 one is labeled directly as the 12th draft.

Next, we have the dedication pages:

Again, there is a very obvious difference in style and, now, language too. The 2016 one speaks directly about the military, police, and first responders - and their families. The 2024 one is nebulous - yet we also know precisely who is being talked about Trumpers who think themselves "forgotten" by the government/culture in favor of racial, gender, sexuality, etc. minorities.

The 2016 document has this little notice next—the 2024 one has nothing like it. I double-checked, and this notification is also on the 2012 GOP party platform, so the change to not having it is new. I feel like this being missing in 2024 indicates that the GOP expects every candidate to share this platform, or else they just don't care about the technicalities, or both.

Next, we have the Preambles:

I won't judge two columns versus none (the Democrats didn't use columns either). The 2016 one has a nice header, though, which is consistent throughout the document. It also adds stars for each section. The 2024 one looks again like a first draft or even a student paper.

The most telling thing here, though, is the use of language in the actual document. The content is very similar, but the 2016 platform uses your average political language. "We believe the Constitution was written not as a flexible document, but as our enduring covenant." "Our economy has become unnecessarily weak with stagnant wages. People living paycheck to paycheck are struggling, sacrificing, and suffering." It evokes emotion but still remains largely political and professional.

In the 2024 platform, it feels like Trump speaking or a long form Truth Social post. Directly invoking emotional language, have Randomly Capitalized Words, all caps for emphasis, and very casual language. "But now we are a Nation in SERIOUS DECLINE." "Yet after nearly four years of the Biden administration, America is now rocked by Raging Inflation, Open Borders, Rampant Crime, Attacks on our Children, and Global Conflict, Chaos, and Instability." "We will DRILL, BABY, DRILL and we will become Energy Independent, and even Dominant again. The United States has more liquid gold under our feet than any other Nation, and it’s not even close"

The 2024 preamble is 2.5 pages long, and the 2016 one is 1.5 pages long. At the end of the 2024 preamble, they put the 20 points of Trump's platform, which is on his website, word for word. There is no mention of the GOP committee that is supposed to write the party platform (the 2016 version has the signatures and images of the heads of the committee). To me, this feels like this preamble, and this platform is Trump's mandate to all GOP politicians. Given some of the language use, I also think he just dictated it, or a staffer just took quotes from his speeches.

Once again, there are major style differences in the table of contents. But importantly, the 2016 platform feels like general topics/titles with more specifics in the sections. The 2024 platform table of contents is basically just platform points in and of themselves.

And then we get to the actual platform.

And here we get into the most obvious difference of all. The first chapter of the 2016 GOP platform is eight pages long. The image above shows the whole first chapter of the 2024 platform. All of the chapters in the 2024 platform are a single page in length. For as much as people (including myself) joke that Harris' campaign is all just vibes, there is indeed policy and content there. The 2024 GOP platform is literally just vibes and vague promises.

This isn't surprising, but the sheer difference between the two—without even looking at their actual ideas—shows how the GOP has changed as an organization. There is no real structure, no plan beyond whatever Trump wants. But who needs a policy when your goal is to destroy the institution of government and consolidate power? Who needs to justify yourself through a platform to the people when you have a rabid base who will follow along no matter what?

The final difference I'll point out is the very end of the documents. The 2024 document just ends after chapter 10. The 2016 document goes on to list the entire platform committee, all of the committee members (2 from each state, by the way), the platform staff, etc.- everyone who worked on forming the platform. Obviously, Trump did not write the 2024 platform himself but the people who did have been erased from the equation; it is all just Trump.

To me, these major differences between the 2016 and 2024 GOP platforms show not only the breakdown of the GOP as an organization but also that the 2024 published platform isn't the real platform. This is a Trump mandate, an order and talking points that the politicians will follow. People have said that the GOP is just the party of Trump now, and the 2024 platform really shows it. But also, I think it shows that the real platform is likely Project 2025 or at least a version of it. Because Project 2025 actually provides explanations and details on what is going to be done (922 pages, to be precise, too long for a published party platform, but still).

The GOP has a direction. Project 2025 has the organized plan to get there.

[earthytzipi]

also i really don't like the conflation that's happening right now between people saying "i'm going to vote third party" and other people hearing "so you're saying not to vote???"

not to say that there isn't anyone out there telling people not to vote. there are always people saying not to vote.

i'm just saying, i think that not wanting to vote for a supporter of genocide is not a bad thing. that means neither trump nor biden. i live in california, which is always going to go blue, and acting like there's any danger it will go red is completely unreasonable. therefore i'm going to use that relative privilege to exercise my right to vote for someone who actually represents my beliefs. i don't think that's morally bankrupt and i resent the assertion that we are powerless on election day against the machine.

i also resent the fearmongering that diehard dems are using to try and get people to vote. saying things like, "what will happen to queer people under trump?" is completely ridiculous when you open your eyes and realize that queer people are losing rights, right now, under biden, and he and his party are doing nothing about it! trans people are banned from bathrooms in utah now! that happened under his presidency! and at the beginning, dems had the big majority! what did they do with it?

same thing with racism, border cruelty, warmongering, etc. if he wants my vote he has to ACTUALLY KEEP HIS PROMISES. from my point of view, he is ineffectual at best, no better than trump at worst, and paying lip service to marginalized people with no intention of doing anything to actually materially help us is disgusting.

[hybridmindthoughtsreloaded]

Looking at the comments on this post, the majority seem to believe all these people are now here in the United States. Since the wording is a little weird and they have the propaganda of a so-called "open boarder" playing in their heads, they automatically see it as so. In truth this is how many illegal migrants were caught, processed into a digital biometric database, deported, and barred from re-entering the US for at least five years, and are "presumed ineligible for asylum". The boarder patrol is not only doing their job, but they are doing it remarkably well given the influx of people at the boarder. Just because some right-wing alt-media reporter goes to the boarder and films a tent of people doesn't mean those people are coming into the country. They can and do say whatever they want to spin a story to manipulate you. All they have to do is make shit up while they show footage with no context except what they are telling you. It's no different than when the mainstream media does it. Trump era boarder polices are still in effect and have been since Biden took office. Biden didn't change what Trump enacted, he only didn't renew Title-42, and Title-42 was only enacted because of COVID. The whole open boarder propaganda is just that, propaganda. If you think the boarder isn't secure and is open then what you're really saying is that Trump's boarder policies don't work.

After Title-42 expired the Biden administration and US immigration authorities unveiled a "carrot and stick" approach that encourages legal pathways, while also implementing strict penalties for those who cross illegally.

They have opened regional processing centers in Latin America aimed at helping migrants apply to come to the US and expanded access to CBP One, an app migrants can use to schedule asylum appointments. People who cross illegally are deported, barred from re-entering the US for at least five years, and are "presumed ineligible for asylum", according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Trump enacted a biometric digital ID system to screen all asylum seekers entering America. This biometric digital ID system is tied to the Real ID. You will need a Real ID just to fly domestically from state to state starting in 2025. Yes, this is the same digital ID that the right-wing claims to be against. You can thank Trump for bringing you that biometric digital ID system under the guise of securing the boarder.

[drawingconclusions]

THE DEMOCRATS' BAIT-AND-SWITCH PLAY

It was the bait-and-switch play of the decade, allowing President Joe Biden to once again declare his candidacy for office and to secure the primary votes necessary, only to have Vice President Kamala Harris suddenly take his place at the top of the ticket without so much as a primary win or a single debate against any challengers.

You'd think the so-called champions for democracy among Democrats would be at least slightly chagrined about the, well, undemocratic aspects of the process. On another note, it was concerning how some liberal celebrities & such seemed obsessed with winning in the upcoming presidential election, but they never seemed to ask (at least not publicly), Who's really running the country right now? (Some reports have claimed that President Biden has even had trouble recognizing acquaintances at this point.) On yet another note, it sort of makes you wonder if certain Democrats, being fully aware of President Biden's cognitive state, had planned this type of substitution all along, replete with fake expressions of astonishment, a few weeks of teenage angst, and a "joyous" & historic celebration to top it off. (..Since when did it become "joyous" to conduct walk-in abortions right outside a national political convention, as the Democrats did last week?!? It truly speaks volumes about our society that some choose to end unborn lives with such frivolous impunity.)

And Vice President Kamala Harris is off to quite an interesting start in her campaign, presenting Trump's idea of "No Taxes on Tips" as her own, conveniently leaving out a policy page on her website, and refusing to hold any substantial press conferences with even Democrat-friendly network anchors. (Keep in mind that some in the mainstream media have gone so far as to claim VP Harris was never designated as responsible for the southern border in the Biden administration. This gives you just a glimpse into the political leanings of the media, which makes it even more bewildering as to why Kamala has deliberately chosen not to publicly chat with any of them as of yet…) Outlets such as The National Desk and the Daily Caller have outlined her campaign's unethical actions of editing the content of news articles from various media outlets in Google search's sponsored ads.

So if the Harris-Walz ticket is so upstanding and exemplary, why should it take those kind of tactics (whether through acts of omission or commission) to convince the populace that they're the best choice for the country?

Perhaps Governor Walz isn't too confident about the public perception of his handling of the coronavirus in Minnesota. Fox News reported how business owners were jailed or harassed under the Walz administration for re-opening during the pandemic. And as was routine with many Democrat-led states, patients with Covid were intentionally sent to nursing homes & senior living facilities, with deadly results to the elderly residents. Maybe Kamala Harris is trying to stifle our memory of how she championed for the release of often violent protesters a few years ago, encouraging others to help provide bail for them. And some of us are actually wondering why Kamala, if she really is for the people, didn't act with prosecutorial decisiveness to help stem the fatal flow of fentanyl streaming across our border. (And we're also wondering why she didn't appear to concretely address the topic of artificial intelligence, with which she was also entrusted as Vice President.)

I could continue about how Democratic Socialists here in America apparently cheered when Governor Walz was selected as Kamala's VP pick, or I could touch on Kamala's suggestion of implementing federal price controls to combat price gouging. (…The federal government can't even settle on or keep its own financial budget. How in the world can they be expected to properly determine prices & affect balance sheets for successful & private businesses? History, as well as current policies in the country of Venezuela, has shown the disastrous results of such socialistic tendencies.)

But the long and short of it is, there are a number of questions without answers in all of this. And the American people deserve answers to every one of them. Before the election.

[bllsbailey]

Kamala Goes Babbling in Philly With Tim Walz, Opens Mouth and Inserts Foot

Kamala Harris has finally made her selection of her running mate, and it was probably the worst choice — Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, someone who isn't well-known across the country, except perhaps for his failure to properly stop the riots in 2020 that burned Minneapolis. Not exactly the best thing to be known for. 

There are a ton of clips of him saying things that most Americans would find bizarre and/or disqualifying, as well as a lot of other baggage. It doesn't seem a very smart choice for a far-left candidate to double down on the far-left. That might get some folks in Michigan, but it could well cost them Pennsylvania. 

After the announcement, Harris and Walz held an event in Philadelphia that showed off how cringy they would be together. She was her regular bizarre self, and he was giving off Tim Kaine vibes. You know how that choice went. 

READ MORE: Tim Walz Addresses the Crowd in Philly Following Announcement As VP Pick - I've Got Good News and Bad

He also made me think of Howard Dean and the infamous scream. 

Harris immediately went straight to the cackle and incoherence, repeating over and over again, "Good evening!" as Walz looked Dean-like and weird in the background, making weird faces and smacking his hands together. 

Harris claims she launched her campaign for president a couple of weeks ago, leaving out the coup on Biden and that she didn't get one primary vote for the position. 

So much for the "We want to save democracy" crew. 

It sounded like a lot of what she said was from the speech she normally gives, once again raising the question, just like with Joe Biden, how much she can speak off the cuff.

Then she spoke about what she wanted to do, including helping people buy a home, own a business, and "build wealth." 

That was possibly her most ridiculous statement since everything that she and Joe Biden have done since they took office has worked against people's ability to buy a home, own a business, and build wealth. Homes are out of reach for many because of the high interest rates and inflation. It's hard to "build wealth" when you need to use your savings just to keep afloat and buy groceries that are so expensive under Biden-Harris. 

Harris and Walz also chanted they were "not going back." 

Yes, that's the problem. "Back" under Trump, we had low inflation and more peace in the Middle East. We had good foreign policy and a secure border versus the chaos that Harris helped to bring in. 

Where do they want to go into the future? Harris opened her mouth and inserted her foot. 

Now that she's embraced him, she's embraced all of his radical beliefs along with all of his failures, including the Minneapolis riots — where she also promoted the bail fund for people arrested during those riots. 

Does she really know what she's hooked herself to? Does she think socialism is like neighborliness, too? Does she think the red state areas are mostly "rocks and cows" like he does? That should work well, just as "deplorables" did for Hillary Clinton. 

READ MORE: Here Are the Damning Tim Walz Comments the GOP Should Run on a Loop

JD Vance Response to Walz Pick Shows Just How It Should Be Done

This is going to be great fun, with all the ads they'll be able to do on the weirdness, the bad statements, and the bad policy. 

Bailey: Only a dumbass democrat would vote for a dumbass  to be president. This is why the America people are suffering, too many dumbasses run our government.

[wmproprt]

If they will lie and tell you the videos VERY clearly showing that Joe Biden is extremely old and senile by calling them "deep fakes," just remember they also lied about:

100% safe and effective

The border is not open

Biden needs Congress to secure the border

The laptop was Russian disinfo

Inflation won't happen

Inflation isn't happening

Inflation is under control

2020 was the most secure election in history

Puberty blockers are harmless and fully reversible

The cases against Trump are non-political

We are dealing with a vile and malicious movement full of snakes and liars. They want political power so badly that they will desecrate America over and over to achieve it.

@charliekirk11

[sethshead]

Asylum seekers, pending their hearings, are legally in the US. They are not "illegals"; they have the right to be here. The problem is that asylum claims are being abused by economic migrants. Our systems for housing and caring for such an influx of people, not to mention backlogs in the courts assigned with adjudicating these claims, has made the status quo untenable. No country can admit on short notice an unlimited number of people and ensure them comfortable and dignified conditions.

Both right and left are at fault here. The right has starved immigration courts of the funds they need to assess and rule on these asylum claims, most of which will be denied anyway. The right has engineered part of the crisis. The left demands open borders, which are not feasible from either a national sovereignty or national security standpoint. The left also rejects many traditional plans for housing migrants, such as accommodation ships, as "segregated", putting city administrators in an impossible bind.

Malign actors, possibly foreign, are contributing to this too, by spreading the word that all one need say is "asylum" and the US will grant you permanent haven and all you need to get started in your new home, which simply isn't true or possible. The result is that families find themselves in desperate straits here after having endured what is often a harrowing and dangerous trek to our borders.

This situation has to end. Part of the solution is providing aid to countries battling poverty, instability, and violence so that fewer people will feel a need to emigrate. We'll see if Morena's "Abrazos, no balazos" policy against cartels and gangs that constitute more an insurgency against the state than common or organized criminal activity bears fruit under President-Elect Sheinbaum. For aid to work, of course, a country must already have stable government - not something that can be said of some countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Nonetheless, we must also stabilize ourselves. To an extent, it doesn't matter who's right in absolute terms about how to address the crisis. The fact is a crisis exists and must be addressed for Biden to be competitive against Trump, whose attitude towards immigrants constitutes a crime against humanity if implemented. That cannot be allowed to happen under any circumstances, and that is the greatest pressure the US faces now.

[the-eternal-quest-for-balance]

Robert Malley was placed on unpaid leave effective at the end of June, but the State Department declined to specify why, drawing scrutiny from congressional Republicans.

The Tehran Times, an English-language daily newspaper believed to have close ties to the theocracy’s foreign ministry, purported to shed light on the matter Sunday by publishing an April 21 memo labeled “sensitive but unclassified” and addressed to Malley from Erin Smart, director of the Office of Personnel Security and Suitability in the Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security.

In the memo, Smart wrote that the office “has received information regarding you that raises serious security concerns and can be disqualifying under National Security Adjudicative Guidelines E (Personal Conduct), K (Handling Protected Information) and M (Use of Information Technology).”

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

Now go ahead and try to tell me the Biden Administration ISN'T trying to get a Nuclear War started SOMEWHERE, ANYWHERE on the planet. A Nuclear Iran is nothing short of suicide !!!!!

[theculturedmarxist]

First of all

You can't "restore" Roe v. Wade. You can try to restore some of the protection it offered. The president can't do that by himself. Congress has to do that. Joe Biden and the thin Democratic majority in the senate are the reason there isn't a national abortion ban.

The president could have prevented the dissolution of RvW in the first place by going after the justices behind it. If they're such a fucking problem then maybe steps could be taken to remove them. You have Clarence Thomas that is just skating by on behavior that should merit at the very least a serious corruption investigation, and then his wife that was involved with the January 6 riots and who knows what else. If the Democrats were serious about protecting abortion then the justice department should be leaning on them, and hard, not extending them and their families extra police protection to shield them from the consequences of fucking everyone over.

Also when was this metaphorical football pulled before? Joe Biden was elected the first time before Dobbs v. Jackson, it was just too late to do anything about it because the Supreme Court had already been stacked with right wing justices.

We went through all this before with Clinton and then Obama. Much like the Democrats are doing now, Obama also promised that “'the first thing I’d do as president' would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act." Then he just didn't. Oops.

I'm tired of the excuse about the SC being packed with right wing judges too. The need to codify abortion rights goes back pretty much to the minute the decision of Roe was announced because the anti-abortion faction of the Republicans made no secret how against it they were or their plans of seeing it overturned. Over and over again Democrats ran on protecting and codifying it, and over and over again when they had the power to do so, they just didn't.

Can we overturn Dobbs? Maybe, but we'd have to deal with the Supreme Court first. As it stands, that means waiting for a couple of justices to retire or shuffle off this mortal coil, while we have enough Democrats in office to fill the seats. If you want to reform the Supreme Court in any way, you need congress for that too.

It really doesn't matter how many Democrats there are in office, because there will never, ever be enough. There will always be some excuse, some technicality, some justification for why they just can't do whatever it is they promised to do. This is a big part of why they can't get anyone to vote for them without threatening the entire country with nightmare scenarios about Trump bringing on an eternal night of brutal fascism. I mean, it's a lot like what you're doing now, really. Instead of expecting the Democrats to use the power that they do have, you're casting them as impotent without some fantastic scenario where their main problem just dies and they've somehow achieved the supermajority necessary to just do whatever they want.

This is how the Republicans keep making you all look like a bunch of fucking fools. They tried overturning abortion legislatively, but that didn't work because it's a generally unpopular position to take, especially nowadays. So they went at it through the judiciary and executive branches, and here we are.

So, how about this: make these states decide whether or not they want to ban abortion, or get federal funding for their highways. The DoT is under the authority of the executive branch. Make it clear one way or another that if any jurisdiction at the local or state level makes a single fucking move to limit abortion or access to it, then they're on the hook themselves for their highways.

Or how about this: the president also has sole discretion on whether or not military bases stay open. If Texas or Florida want to play chicken with the federal government on abortion, or the border, or trans rights, tell them: fine. No more military bases in that case. See how much the life of the fetus means to them with the billions of dollars US military bases bring on the line.

You act like the poor widdle pwesident is powerless to do anything about this when the executive branch has tons of power that could be used right this very instant to make the people responsible for this mess hurt, make them hurt bad, and it's just not being done. Why? Because Biden and the rest of the Democrats aren't serious about helping regular people in general or ensuring abortion rights in particular.

Hillary Clinton said she would protect Roe v. Wade. You didn't elect her. Democrats at the state level have said they will protect abortion in their states. They have. They are doing that right now. Joe Biden said he would appoint pro-choices justices to the Supreme Court if he had the opportunity. He did: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

I love this constant refrain, as if Clinton isn't basically a Republican herself, and that it's somehow everyone else's fucking fault she couldn't win. Nevermind that she was a historically unpopular candidate. Nevermind that Clinton's own fucking strategy was to promote Trump so that she could run against him. Nevermind it was Clinton's own dogshit campaign that lost her the fucking election. No, we failed her, somehow.

And, what, are we supposed to praise the Democrats for cleaning up after the mess that they fucking made? If they'd followed through on their promises before this SC decision they wouldn't have to "protect abortion in their states"—even though this is happening in spite of the fucking Democrats.

President Joe Biden and other Democrats are championing efforts to restore abortion access in red and purple states.

But local organizers and national advocates fear Democratic candidates, in promoting abortion-rights referendums that may boost their electoral prospects, could inadvertently doom the initiatives.

It’s a particular concern in key presidential and Senate battlegrounds like Arizona, Montana and Nevada where ballot measure campaigns to codify abortion rights need more than just Democratic voters to succeed.

“We haven’t won or beat back a single one of these ballot measures without significant independent and Republican support,” said Mini Timmaraju, president and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All. “We spent a lot of last year talking to candidates directly saying, ‘Don’t put things on the ballot just to enhance voter turnout for Dems.’ That’s not how this works.”

Democratic candidates and ballot measure coalitions are united in wanting to expand abortion access, but they’re sometimes divided on how to achieve it. Some ballot campaigns, like Ohio’s in 2023 and Missouri this year, have largely avoided holding events with Democratic politicians or featuring them in ads — concerned doing so would further politicize the measures and turn off Republican and independent voters. Some, like Florida, have warned Democrats to remain at arm’s length.

But oh well. In the months or years it takes for Democrats to regain control of the House and Senate, I'm sure all the millions of people impacted by your colossal fucking failure will appreciate how hard you're working for them.

We told you we'd lose Roe if Trump won in 2016. We were right. I wish we were wrong, but we weren't.

Get fucked, you sanctimonious asshole. This is as much the Democrats' fucking fault as the Republicans. This disaster didn't happen under Trump, it happened on your watch. And now your party of fucked shitheads is about to capitulate to the Orange Badman again, not unlike it did when Gore just gave up in order to not piss off the Republicans. We're here exactly because of you feckless dipshits, not in spite of you, so thanks for nothing, cunt.

"Joe Biden is going to restore Roe v. Wade."

No, really. This time for sure! Honest!

[hybridmindthoughtsreloaded]

Since the right-wing/alt-media has been a buzz with the propaganda of Hamas terrorist crossing the boarder as asylum seekers and setting up sleeper cells in every major city in America, here something to keep in mind.

Trump era boarder polices are still in effect and have been since Biden took office. Biden didn't change what Trump enacted, he only didn't renew Title-42, and Title-42 was only enacted because of COVID. The whole open boarder propaganda is just that, propaganda. If you think the boarder isn't secure and is open then what you're really saying is that Trump's boarder policies don't work.

After Title-42 expired the Biden administration and US immigration authorities unveiled a "carrot and stick" approach that encourages legal pathways, while also implementing strict penalties for those who cross illegally.

They have opened regional processing centers in Latin America aimed at helping migrants apply to come to the US and expanded access to CBP One, an app migrants can use to schedule asylum appointments. People who cross illegally are deported, barred from re-entering the US for at least five years, and are "presumed ineligible for asylum", according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Trump enacted a biometric digital ID system to screen all asylum seekers entering America. This biometric digital ID system is tied to the Real ID. You will need a Real ID just to fly domestically from state to state starting in 2025. Yes, this is the same digital ID that the right-wing claims to be against. You can thank Trump for bringing you that biometric digital ID system under the guise of securing the boarder.

I wonder how many people that listen to right-wing/alt-media propaganda all day actually research what they hear? Just because Trump says something or Alex Jones says something doesn't mean that it's true. It's no different with left-wing media, they are liars and propagandist too manipulating their own base audience.

[hayquetenerpatience]

The pundits say that border state, and now Florida, governors are engaging in political stunts by transporting all these illegal border crossers -- the same illegals sent to their states by the Biden administration -- to self-proclaimed sanctuary cities. This sentiment begs the question: how isn't it a political stunt for this presidential administration to purposely NOT defend the border, and signal to every potential illegal border crosser that you'd be allowed to stay in the US if you just make it across the border? How is that not using illegal border crossers as political pawns?! They've been secreting border crossers to all parts of middle America under cover of darkness damn near since the Biden administration took over. They have utterly and completely slapped the face every person waiting in line to become a legal immigrant. They have opened our borders to terrorists, narcotics trafficers, human trafficking, and every other sort of miscreant. These people coming here over the border all willy-nilly is proof positive that this administration is the most derelict in my lifetime!

[captainjonnitkessler]

@whoweepsforthesemarios okay. So your argument isn't that they're the same, but rather that it's impossible to know in advance which one will be better or worse? I feel like that's splitting hairs, but alright, I disagree. I think that the guy whose first move in office was to ban Muslim refugees from entering the country and whose party is openly rooting for Israel to bomb Palestine off the map is not going to be any better for Palestine than Biden is, and I think that in general the party whose platform is incredibly open about their intent to reshape the government to support conservative interests and suppress social progress on every level is going to be worse for the country than the party whose platform isn't that. And I think that pretending like there's no possible way to tell which platform would be worse for the country if enacted is disingenuous.

Covid-19 deaths are worse in red states. Reproductive rights are worse in red states. Trans healthcare is worse in red states. Labor laws and unions are weaker in red states. Migrant protections are worse in red states, and Trump is threatening that his first move on being elected is going to be to mobilize the National Guard from red states to start deporting migrants who are currently under the protection of Democrat states and sanctuary cities.

Democrat states outperform Republican ones in virtually every single measure and that is because Democratic lawmakers are more progressive and make better laws, which is why I advocate for voting for them even though there are many things I still think they're doing wrong. Biden is not a dictator. He doesn't have unilateral control over state laws and the Republican-controlled House is currently preventing Democrats from making many of the moves they want to make. Blaming Republican lawmakers' policies on Biden is insanely disingenuous and shows that you are either incredibly ignorant as to how politics work or you're not as interested in a good-faith argument as you claim.

Biden's administration has also appointed hundreds of progressive judges to federal positions, most of whom are female and/or people of color, appointed pro-labor judges to the NLRB and was the first President in history to join a picket line, approved billions in student loan forgiveness even after Republicans shot down his initial, broader-reaching plan, invested billions into infrastructure and fighting climate change, settled a Trump-era lawsuit with an agreement that prohibits federal agents from separating migrant families at the border, capped insulin prices at $35 a month and is now working on negotiating down prices of other medications for Medicare recipients.

Now I feel pretty confident that Trump would not have done any of that, on account of he had four years and didn't do any of it.

Can you point me to where I said Biden isn't evil? He's actively funding a genocide, of course he's fucking evil. But I'm not willing to give up all the progress we DID make in order to elect option 2 who will - and I cannot stress this enough - also fund the exact same genocide while also stripping back every protection we've managed to gain out of the Biden administration.

If you really can't bring yourself to vote for Biden, then don't. I can't make you do anything, I'm just some guy on the internet. But the country doesn't get a third option - it's going to be one or the other, and I simply can't agree that throwing your hands up and saying "well it doesn't really matter because who really knows what either of them will actually do" is a rational or moral choice.

This person went on to use 1500 words and an increasingly tortured metaphor to say "both political parties are exactly the same and the only reason you prefer Democrats is because you don't care if brown people in other countries die".

Not sure that's the good faith you think it is, bud!

[pinkcondom69]

WALMART VS. THE MORONS (THIS IS NOT A JOKE) HMMmmm... 😢

1. Americans spend $36,000,000 at Wal-Mart Every hour of every day. 😳

2. This works out to $20,928 profit every minute!

3. Wal-Mart will sell more from January 1 to St. Patrick's Day (March 17th) than Target sells all year. 😯

4. Wal-Mart is bigger than Home Depot + Kroger + Target + Sears + Costco combined. 😧

5. Wal-Mart employs 1.6 million people, is the world's largest private employer, and most speak English.

6. Wal-Mart is the largest company in the history of the world.

7. Wal-Mart now sells more food than Kroger and Safeway combined, and keep in mind they did this in only fifteen years.

8. During this same period, 31 big supermarket chains sought bankruptcy. 😢

9. Wal-Mart now sells more food than any other store in the world.

10. Wal-Mart has approx 3,900 stores in the USA of which 1,906 are Super Centers; this is 1,000 more than it had five years ago.

11. This year 7.2 billion different purchasing experiences will occur at Wal-Mart stores. (Earth's population is approximately 6.5 Billion)

12. 90% of all Americans live within fifteen miles of a Wal-Mart.

You may think that I am complaining, but I am really laying the ground work for suggesting that MAYBE we should hire the guys who run Wal-Mart to fix the economy.

This should be read and understood by all Americans. Democrats, Republicans, EVERYONE!!

To President Biden and all 535 voting members of the Legislature

It is now official that the majority of you are corrupt morons:

a.. The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775. You have had 246 years to get it right and it is broke.

b.. Social Security was established in 1935. You have had 86 years to get it right and it is broke.

c.. Fannie Mae was established in 1938. You have had 71 years to get it right and it is broke.

d.. War on Poverty started in 1964. You have had 57 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor" and they only want more.

e.. Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. You have had 56 years to get it right and they are broke.

f. Freddie Mac was established in 1970. You have had 51 years to get it right and it is broke.

g.. The Department of Energy was created in 1977 to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. It has ballooned to 16,000 employees with a budget of $24 billion a year and we import more oil than ever before. You had 44 years to get it right and it is an abysmal failure - after we were Energy Independent under Trump.

You have FAILED in every "government service" you have shoved down our throats while overspending our tax dollars.

AND YOU WANT AMERICANS TO BELIEVE YOU CAN BE TRUSTED WITH RUNNING OUR GOVERNMENT as we watch FAILURE after FAILURE! 😠

Folks, keep this circulating. It is very well stated. Maybe it will end up in the e-mails of some of our "duly elected' (they never read anything) and their staff will clue them in on how Americans feel.

ANDI know what's wrong. We have lost our minds to "Political Correctness" along with pushing for Marxism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Someone, please tell me what the HELL's wrong with all the people that run this country!!!!!!

We're "broke" & can't help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans, Homeless, etc., but we can send millions/billions to other countries!?!?!

In the last year, we have provided aid to Haiti, Chile, Turkey etc...

In Afghanistan - we left Literally, MILLIONS of DOLLARS of weapons & abandoned Americans!!!

And now we are sending millions, in aide & weapons, to Ukraine!!!

Yet - our retired seniors living on a 'fixed income' receive no aid

AMERICA: a country where we have homeless without shelter, children going to bed hungry, elderly going without 'needed' meds, and mentally ill without treatment -etc., etc. However, Illegals get free everything as they continue to cross our OPEN border!!!

Imagine if the *GOVERNMENT* gave 'US' the same support they give to other countries. Sad isn't it? Make America First!!!

{99% of people won't have the guts to forward this.

I'm one of the 1% -- I Just Did}

[xtruss]

'You have the watches, we have the time': Why the Taliban was never defeated

— By Stan Grant | August 9, 2021 | abc.net,au

Nothing should be surprising in the rapid return of the Taliban. Not even the speed with which the group has taken power. (Reuters)

The Taliban has a saying: "You have the watches, we have the time. We were born here. We will die here. We aren't going anywhere."

This is how it outlasted the might of American and allied forces for 20 years.

This is why it is resurgent. This is why it has reclaimed vast swathes of Afghanistan. This is why it is on the verge of retaking the entire country.

The West has been fighting an enemy that will not die. A foe that has nowhere else to go.

We should have learned these lessons. Toppling the Taliban was never going to be enough. Anything short of complete and total victory would always be claimed as a win by the Taliban.

Remember what Henry Kissinger said after the Vietnam War, another conflict with an intractable, dug in, resilient, brutal, opponent fighting on its turf: "The guerrilla wins if he does not lose. The conventional army loses if it does not win."

Joe Biden is the fourth American president to wage this endless war and as he withdraws his troops, he says he will not hand this conflict to a fifth.

'Good Taliban' and 'Bad Taliban'

For America, what has been waged on the battlefield must be settled at the negotiating table. As far as Biden is concerned, this is now an Afghan problem to be solved by Afghans.

It is an exit strategy built on the idea of separating the "good Taliban" from the "bad Taliban".

Yes, that's right, as odd as it may sound — "good Taliban" and "bad Taliban".

I first heard this phrase some years ago when I interviewed Pakistan's Foreign Minister, Shah Mahmood Qureshi, in Islamabad.

Back then, I did a double take. But he explained the "good Taliban" were in Afghanistan committed to power sharing and a return to responsible government.

The Taliban took the city of Mazar-i-Sharif over the weekend. This is what it was like inside the city as the militants closed in.

Apparently, there was a political Taliban who could be brought into the fold and warrior Taliban who must be defeated.

The US believes the "good Taliban" can be convinced to enter a power sharing agreement with the Afghan government.

Yet, those brokered peace talks have stalled. The Taliban does not accept the legitimacy of Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. It never has.

It is committed to reinstalling its caliphate under its version of sharia. And as the Taliban now says, why negotiate when you are winning.

'Politics with bloodshed'

Pakistani Major General Ehsan Mahmood Khan some years ago defined what he called "Taliban warfare". It was never about negotiation.

As he said: "Taliban warfare is politics with bloodshed".

The general said the Taliban is waging a war of ideas, "ideology versus ideology — the Islamic ideology versus Western line of thought".

That is about overturning the concept of the "nation state". It has nothing to do with democracy or power sharing.

As General Khan said, the Taliban has a "grand strategic outlook aimed at seizing legitimacy, credibility and politico-moral ascendancy both by violent and non-violent means".

The violence we are seeing right now. The non-violent is building alliances among tribal groups, infiltrating local populations.

Exploiting a Power Vacuum

The Taliban exploits weak, corrupt, inept, civilian government that fails its people.

Indeed, when the Taliban first took control in the 1990s, it seized on the withdrawal of a foreign army — the Soviet Red Army — exploited a power vacuum amidst a bloody civil war in Afghanistan and was hailed by some as heroes or saviours.

Of course, it quickly became a brutal, ruthless, ruling force murdering opponents, ordering women inside, banning music and carrying out public punishment.

How familiar this now sounds.

It gave haven to militant Islamist groups like Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda who then plotted the September 11 terror attacks on the United States.

Even after it was toppled by US forces after the invasion in 2001, it maintained a strong presence, even a form of "shadow government", and played the long game of protracted war.

There is an element of ethno-nationalism among the Taliban. It emerged out of the dominant Pashtun ethnic majority.

As General Khan wrote, that ethnic identity and religious belief formed the core of its identity. The Pashtun social code, he said, combined with jihad formed a "formidable war ideology".

When the Taliban took power, it executed hundreds of other ethnic minorities. The same must be feared now.

Taliban's Rapid Return Isn't Surprising

It isn't a transnational terror organisation like Al Qaeda or Islamic State. The Taliban seeks to rule Afghanistan.

Yet it stops short of a nationalist movement, it breaks from other secular Pashtun nationalists. It remains Islamic and allies with other global Islamist groups seeking to establish the Umma — a global collective of Muslim people bound by faith not, flags.

It is feared a return of Taliban power will again give cover to other groups including Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.

Nothing should be surprising in the rapid return of the Taliban. Not even its speed.

The departure of foreign troops was always going to be an open door. The Afghan government and military — despite high-tech training and tens of billions of dollars funding — has predictably proved little obstacle.

The Taliban has maintained its structure, it has rebuilt, it has survived the deaths of senior leadership figures. It has maintained a base in Pakistan and support from within Pakistan's military and intelligence — despite Pakistani denials.

A Quick Fall Into Disaster

Pakistan has always had a tiger by the tail, trying to use the "good Taliban" as a form of strategic depth in its longer battle with neighbouring foe India.

But where is that line between "good Taliban" and "bad Taliban" now? Where is Joe Biden's "good Taliban" to bring back to the negotiating table?

What we have is just the Taliban and it is moving fast on the Afghan capital Kabul. It has triggered a humanitarian disaster with approaching half a million people uprooted from their homes.

Afghans are heading for the borders. Most of the country is now under Taliban rule or in areas contested by the Taliban.

Even the north — traditionally an area of anti-Taliban resistance — has quickly fallen.

Twenty years of war to return to Taliban rule. As they say, "you have watches, we have the time".

[xtruss]

WORLD

U.S.— German Ties Are Bad Under Trump — If Biden Wins He May Struggle to Repair Them

"This is the most important U.S. election in the history of Germany," one former ambassador said. The U.S.-German relationship is at it's lowest ebb since World War II.Sebastian Konig / for NBC News

— Aug. 3, 2020 | By Alexander Smith and Carlo Angerer | NBCNEWS.COM

Illustration of German flag-pattern flowers falling dead in a vase with U.S. flag pattern.

During the Trump administration, few places have recoiled with as much horror as Germany, once a vital friend that the White House now berates with open hostility.

But anyone hoping the U.S. presidential election in November would quickly reverse years of turmoil with Germany may be sorely disappointed, according to former U.S. diplomats, and officials and analysts in Berlin.

Trump has steered the transatlantic alliance into its worst crisis since World War II, these experts agree. Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, may be unable or unwilling to turn back the clock to the more cordial days of 2016, when he was vice president.

"If Biden wins, everybody's going to cheer and say everything's wonderful," said John C. Kornblum, U.S. ambassador to Germany under President Bill Clinton. "But compared with 2016, he will be dealing with an entirely different world of issues and problems — and they aren't going to be solved just by him being nice."

Nevertheless, the U.S. election presents two drastically different visions of German's future.

Trump is about as unpopular there as anywhere on the planet. Many fear that if he is re-elected, he would not only trash what's left of Berlin's ties with Washington but deal a death blow to the concept of the West itself.

"This is the most important U.S. election in the history of Germany," said John M. Koenig, who led the Berlin embassy as chargé d'affaires for a year under President Barack Obama. "This means almost as much to the future of Germany as it does to the U.S."

Worst Since WWII

This alliance is no stranger to crises.

In 1987, Kornblum, then a senior U.S. official in Berlin, felt he had to take drastic action to repair a growing rift with what was then West Germany.

The West Germans were angry that American intermediate-range nuclear missiles were deployed on their soil. The Americans worried their allies would lose faith and try to make a deal with the Soviet Union.

Kornblum's solution started with a scrawled idea on a cocktail napkin at a reception, and ended with one of the most significant speeches in modern history.

On June 12 that year, President Ronald Reagan demanded, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" in front of the Brandenburg Gate, an address Kornblum says he choreographed to reassure the Germans that the Americans still had their backs.

"We started planning it a year before as an important, high-level romantic symbol — and it worked," Kornblum said.

Two years later, the Berlin Wall fell. Reagan’s speech is now seen as a historic turning point in a relationship that's become emblematic of postwar liberal multilateralism.

U.S. soldiers and East German border guards at Berlin's Checkpoint Charlie in 1961. Czechatz / ullstein bild via Getty Images file

The first Germans arrived in Pennsylvania in the early 1600s, and today some 45 million Americans have German heritage, the most common ancestral country of the last census.

Americans helped defeat the Nazis, spent billions funding Germany's reconstruction, midwifed its constitution and stationed hundreds of thousands of soldiers there during the Cold War.

As a critic of Trump's, Kornblum believes that if Biden wins he would need his own "Brandenburg Gate moment" to have any hope of repairing the bond with Germany. But, like other observers, Kornblum is skeptical it will ever be the same.

Many in Europe have watched with anger and sadness at Trump's freewheeling, convention-busting presidency. He has favored his own brand of transactional nationalism, berating allies for freeloading on Washington's goodwill, and singling out Germany for being "delinquent" on military spending and for running a trade surplus.

Trump appears to have developed a particular animus for its leader, Chancellor Angela Merkel. Trump once blamed Merkel for "ruining Germany," has accused her of being a "captive" of the Kremlin because of a new gas pipeline to Russia, and tweeted in 2018 that "the people of Germany are turning against" her over her immigration policies.

Things came to a head last week when the Trump administration announced it would withdraw almost 12,000 of its 35,000 troops stationed in Germany, a sweeping reorganization that will redraw the map of U.S. military presence in Europe.

Defense Secretary Mark Esper was eager to paint the move, redeploying headquarters, fighter squadrons and battalions elsewhere in Europe, as one motivated by military strategy. That rationale was quickly undermined by Trump, who told reporters at the White House, "We don't want to be the suckers any more. We're reducing the force because they're not paying their bills. It's very simple."

Trump did not mention that Italy and Belgium — where some of these troops will be moved — spend even less on defense than Germany as a proportion of their respective GDPs.

The move has also alarmed retired generals and congressional Republicans and Democrats. They argue that the troops are not there to protect Germany, but to provide an American launching pad to the Middle East, if needed, and a psychological bulwark against Russia.

"From the beginning of the new administration, it was clear the U.S. style had changed. It wasn't about negotiation. It was more: OK, this is what we expect you to do," David Deißner, chief executive of Atlantik-Brücke, a Berlin nonprofit focused on U.S.-German relations, said.

"That kind of style of blackmailing isn't hugely appreciated here," he said, referring to the repeated, brusque demands issued by the Trump administration.

A Pivotal Election, a Continent Away

It's little surprise some Germans are already looking to Nov. 3 as a possible chance for renewal.

"How interested are the Germans in the U.S. election? They are obsessed with it," said John B. Emerson, U.S. ambassador to Germany from 2013 to 2017.

Advocates of the transatlantic relationship worry about how much more damage Trump could do during a second term.

"I mean, Trump could formally withdraw from NATO," Gustav Gressel, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations in Berlin, said. "It is not over-dramatizing things to say that if Trump gets re-elected, the concept of the West has ceased to exist."

Merkel speaks to Trump during the G7 summit in Quebec, Canada, in June 2018. Jesco Denzel / Reuters file

But if Biden wins, he will surely be more polite and bring "a more cooperative, more multilateral style of policymaking," Deißner said.

Biden would immediately review the decision to withdraw troops from Germany. But once in office he would also be greeted by European leaders who are far more wary than they were during his days as Obama's point person on foreign policy.