David Frum (who im NOT a fan of): If the left say borders are fascist, voters will hire fascists

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
332,723
Reputation
-34,421
Daps
637,532
Reppin
The Deep State
I'm NOT a fan of David Frum AT ALL!

...BUT...

DEMOCRATS MUST FIX THIS ISSUE!!! ...or else you'll let the goddamn republicans do it!





The Caravan Challenges the Integrity of U.S. Borders - The Atlantic


The Caravan Is a Challenge to the Integrity of U.S. Borders

If Trump’s opponents stand opposed to policing America’s boundaries, they will not help immigrants—they will only lose votes.

10:32 AM ET

David Frum

Staff writer at The Atlantic

lead_720_405.jpg

Central American migrants hitchhike on a truck along the highway as they continue their journey in Tapachula, Mexico on October 22, 2018Ueslei Marcelino / Reuters

Short of an election-eve exoneration by Robert Mueller, it would be hard to imagine a nicer October surprise for Donald Trump than an attempt by thousands of unauthorized immigrants to force the borders of the United States. It dramatizes every one of his themes, but none more spectacularly than this: his claim that his opponents will not defend the borders of the United States.

On Sunday, some thousands of people rafted across the Suchiate River, which separates Guatemala from Mexico. Mexico did not detain or expel them, and soon they were on the move again. Organizers seem to hope that the unprecedented mass of the caravan will overawe Mexican and U.S. authorities.

What it is also doing is testing the U.S. political system.

Just as Donald Trump has energized American conservatives to take a harder line on immigration, he’s had the opposite effect on his political opponents. It is, of course, crazy for the president to describe the caravan as “led” by Democrats, as he did in a tweet last week. But he’s not wrong to sense that Democrats are massively discomfited by the caravan. Trump’s tweeting and fulminating and conspiracizing deters any Democratic leader from saying or doing anything that could be interpreted as agreeing with him.




Meanwhile, in the Democrats’ liberal base, the mood toward the caravan is positively sympathetic. The caravan’s slogan, “People without borders,” chimes with the rising sentiment among liberals that border-enforcement is inherently illegitimate, and usually racist, too.


But understand what’s at stake: The theory behind the caravans—this latest, and its smaller predecessors over the past 15 years—is that Central Americans have valid asylum claims in the United States because of the pervasive underemployment and gang-violence problems in their countries. If that claim is true, that is a claim shared not only among the thousands in the current caravan, but the millions back home. A 2013 Pew survey found that 58 percent of Salvadorans would move to the United States if they could. The seven countries of Central America together have a population of some 45 million, or about the same as Mexico’s back in 1970, when the mass migration from that nation began.

Things happen much faster in the 2010s than they did in the 1970s. When Germany temporarily suspended its border rules in August 2015, almost a million migrants surged into the country within the next four months. That surge continued into 2016. Its political effects linger still: It was crucial to the British vote to quit the European Union, to the election of a reactionary government in Poland, to the political revival of Viktor Orbán in Hungary, and to the collapse of center-left parties in France, Italy, Sweden, and Germany.

Trump’s election owes something to the surge across the U.S.’s southern border in the summer of 2014. Tens of thousands of women and children crossed the border in only a few weeks. Many of those who entered in 2014 remain in the United States to this day, even after their cases have been negatively adjudicated, because they have disregarded their removal orders and vanished into the vast U.S. population of unauthorized immigrants.


The strong U.S. job market is again attracting low-wage workers. After a dip in 2017, illegal crossings of the southern border in 2018 have returned to their levels of 2016—and are running well ahead of 2015. If the thousands of people in the caravan successfully cross the border, lodge asylum claims, and are released into the U.S. interior pending adjudication, many more seem likely to follow.

Why wouldn’t they? More than 60 percent of the population of Honduras lives in poverty, according to the World Bank, and very nearly 60 percent do so in Guatemala. While rates of crime and violence have declined in both countries since 2014, they remain appalling by world standards.

For Trump, the caravan represents a political opportunity. Here is exactly the kind of issue that excites more conservative Americans—and empowers him as their blustery, angry champion.

For Trump’s opponents, the caravan represents a trap. Has Trump’s radical nativism so counter-radicalized them that they have internalized the caravan message against any border enforcement at all? If yes, they will not help immigrants. They will only marginalize themselves—and American politics will follow the European path in which anti-immigration parties of the extreme right cannibalize the political center.

If liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders, then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals will not do. I’ve been pounding the drum for this warning since the European migration crisis accelerated in 2013. The warning holds as true as ever—and now it’s coming home.
 

re'up

Veteran
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
21,237
Reputation
6,563
Daps
66,902
Reppin
San Diego
We don't have OPEN BORDERS NOW

That is a total fallacy, I'm in San Diego, and have crossed the border in the last month. It is an oppressive, highly controlled place, with more federal law enforcement than most people will ever see in the their entire lives. It is entirely effective in what it is capable of. Immigrations without documentation are routinely detained, drug shipments are also routinely seized and intercepted.
 

Json

Superstar
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
13,908
Reputation
1,770
Daps
42,928
Reppin
Central VA
These traditional Republicans have no place to run to the way the Dixiecrats did. That’s why they keep trying to make Democrats think about stuff they want so they don’t have to follow Trump’s over enforcement/nationalism.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
332,723
Reputation
-34,421
Daps
637,532
Reppin
The Deep State
We don't have OPEN BORDERS NOW

That is a total fallacy, I'm in San Diego, and have crossed the border in the last month. It is an oppressive, highly controlled place, with more federal law enforcement than most people will ever see in the their entire lives. It is entirely effective in what it is capable of. Immigrations without documentation are routinely detained, drug shipments are also routinely seized and intercepted.
perception is reality son.

The policies around amnesty are a little wonky too...












Trump Has No Easy Way to Halt Latin American Caravan - The Atlantic

theatlantic.com
Trump Has No Easy Way to Halt Latin American Caravan
Priscilla Alvarez
9-11 minutes
The president tried prosecuting migrants and separating families but so far hasn’t been able to deter the latest migrant caravan from heading north.

8:12 AM ET

lead_720_405.jpg

A group of Central American migrants cross the Suchiate River aboard a raft made out of tractor inner tubes and wooden planks, on the border between Guatemala and Mexico, in Ciudad Hidalgo, Mexico.Moises Castillo / AP
President Donald Trump is fuming over a U.S.-bound migrant caravan. Over the course of the past week, he’s posted 15 tweets about the caravan, estimated to consist of as many as 7,000 people, that left from San Pedro Sula, Honduras, earlier this month and has been growing along the way. Trump has placed blame on Democrats, threatened to cut aid to Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador, and urged an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws despite Congress being out of session.

He called the caravan an “assault on our country” at a rally Monday night in Houston and said the “Democrats had something to do with” it. Earlier in the day, Trump had pledged to cut off or “substantially” reduce foreign aid to the Northern Triangle countries.

“They’re paid a lot of money every year. We give them foreign aid. They did nothing for us, nothing. They did nothing for us,” he told reporters, adding, “We have been giving so much money to so many different countries for so long and it’s not fair and it’s not good. Then when we asked them to keep their people in their country, they’re unable to do it.”

Trump’s calls to action on immigration aren’t new. He campaigned on the issue in 2016 and has continued to push for his border wall since taking office. But it’s moments such as these, when images of thousands of migrants are broadcast across networks, that spark the president’s outrage and produce reactions that are highly problematic. Witness what happened in April, the last time a caravan from Latin America was headed north and the Trump administration implemented a policy called “zero tolerance” in hopes of deterring people from journeying to the southern border. Events since then have shown that this approach lacked nuance, triggered national and international outrage, and fell far short of addressing the deep-rooted problems that are causing people to migrate.

“I think the idea from the Trump administration that you can somehow just stop people from coming by either threatening to cut off the aid—which basically goes to the government, not to the people that are fleeing—or by believing you can close off borders is not going to really address why people are very willing to get up from one day to the next, it seems, and travel north with the hope for a better life,” said Maureen Meyer, the director for Mexico and migrant rights at the Washington Office on Latin America, an advocacy organization.

A key aspect of the “zero tolerance” policy that greeted the April caravan’s arrival called for the prosecution of adults crossing the border illegally. After pleading guilty to illegal entry—which is a misdemeanor—migrants were sentenced to time served and, later, processed for deportation. But this was the problem: “Criminalizing” border crossing necessitated family separation—because children by law couldn’t be kept in federal jail.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions described the situation at the time as “a crisis … that necessitates an escalated effort to prosecute those who choose to illegally cross our border.” Trump, under intense political pressure, eventually ended the policy, which had led to roughly 2,000 separated families, through an executive order in June. But even “zero tolerance” and family separation haven’t stemmed the flow of migrants from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

After prosecuting those illegally crossing the border, Sessions sought in June to make it much harder for migrants to be granted asylum: He reversed an immigration-appeals-court ruling and said that domestic abuse and gang violence no longer qualified as grounds for asylum. The ruling immediately undercut the claims of many migrants from Latin America, where gang violence is endemic. The administration has also recently been floating a number of possible new policies aimed at deterring migrants, one of which would include forcing parents who cross the border illegally with their children to give them up to foster care or be detained together, according to media reports.


The goal is clear: to discourage migrants from coming to the United States. Former President Barack Obama also tried to stem the flow of migrants journeying to the U.S.-Mexico border with threats of detention. He, too, discovered that deterrence policies usually fail in the face of economic distress and violence.

To that end, in 2016, then–Secretary of State John Kerry announced a plan that, with the help of the United Nations, would identify people eligible for refugee status in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Those who were fleeing imminent danger would be placed in Costa Rica for processing. The administration also expanded the Central American minors program to include siblings, parents, and caregivers accompanying minors.

“It was limited in scope but it’s certainly tried to create legal ways for a small but growing population of people that were in dire need of protection,” Meyer said, noting that it wasn’t a long-term solution.

The Trump administration ended the program in August 2017.

The problem facing the administration is that many of the migrants arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border are from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala and seeking asylum, which calls at a minimum for a “credible fear” interview. If officials determine that a migrant’s credible-fear claims are valid, they can have him or her stay in ICE custody until their hearings, where a judge will ultimately make the final decision on their claim, or be released until their hearing date, which can take months, if not years, given backlogs in the immigration courts. (The United States is obligated, under the Refugee Act of 1980, to offer protection to those who qualify as refugees, including asylum seekers.)


“This population is not trying to evade capture at the border,” said John Sandweg, who served as a counselor to then-Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and as the acting director of ICE from 2013 to 2014. “These people are surrendering when they cross the border.” This is a stark difference from pre-2014, when largely Mexican nationals were trying to evade U.S. officials when crossing the border, Sandweg noted.

Now that the Trump administration is no longer separating migrant children from their parents, it has run headlong into another legal impediment: a 1997 consent decree known as the Flores agreement, which says that children cannot be kept in immigration detention for longer than 20 days. Administration officials have taken steps to withdraw from the agreement without effect.

So for now, they have no choice but to release families seeking asylum before the 20 days have run out, leaving migrants waiting for their hearing dates stuck in Arizona and other locales along the border with a process Trump loathes and has denigrated as “catch and release.”

What is the Trump administration to do? One solution requires quickly and vastly expanding the immigration courts so that asylum hearings can be held in days or weeks, doing away with the need to release families waiting for their hearing dates. Sessions has been hiring immigration judges and plans to add at least 75 more this fall, which could speed up the process. But far more judges would have to be brought on to effectively end “catch and release.”

Read: Sessions Is Transforming the Immigration Courts

The administration is also reportedly considering ways to deport people more quickly and extend the use of ankle monitors, which have been used to track immigrants awaiting their hearings. Sandweg agrees that deportation might work as a deterrent, but that, too, requires time and resources.

Immigrant advocates have meanwhile argued for the continued aid to the Northern Triangle countries and fair hearings for immigrants seeking asylum that would allow them to cite fears of gang and domestic violence. The conservative Heritage Foundation, for one, has warned about the consequences of cutting aid to Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador.

The latest caravan is not expected to arrive to the U.S. until after the November election, and it’s likely to dwindle in size as it makes its way through Mexico. The president, who has used fear of undocumented immigration as a potent means of energizing his conservative base, will need to confront how to address those migrants. “There is,” Sandweg said, “no immediate solution.”

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

Priscilla Alvarez is an assistant editor at The Atlantic.
 

Pressure

#PanthersPosse
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
47,733
Reputation
7,272
Daps
151,637
Reppin
CookoutGang
We don't have OPEN BORDERS NOW

That is a total fallacy, I'm in San Diego, and have crossed the border in the last month. It is an oppressive, highly controlled place, with more federal law enforcement than most people will ever see in the their entire lives. It is entirely effective in what it is capable of. Immigrations without documentation are routinely detained, drug shipments are also routinely seized and intercepted.
They don't hear you, but this is just latest spin.

They'll move on from this just like they moved on from the economic anxiety angle. :mjlol:
 

Pressure

#PanthersPosse
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
47,733
Reputation
7,272
Daps
151,637
Reppin
CookoutGang
Why are democrats so weak on enforcing the border and discouraging illegals?

Oh, and I know what Obama did... www.thecoli.com/posts/31452780/
The aren't. You're just talking.

And you, like these guys, feel like you're losing the useless safe democratic party you love to progressives so you're attempting to play up this angle.

Just vote republican and keep it moving.
You really should you agree with almost every part of their platform. :francis:
 
Top