Because the business that sponsors politics loves the cheap labour, and there is no cheaper worker than one who will always fall in line out of fear of losing everything.
This is a bipartisan issue: as evidenced by farmers crying uncle in Arizona and Florida, resulting their respective Republican governments scaling back on enforcement after crops started to rot in the fields. The same thing happened with meatpackers in some ruby-red midwestern town after an immigration raid on a meatpacking plant. Unsurprisingly, Republican voters are down for "mass deportation now", but not in their backyards, or place of business.
Every issue affects the entire society directly or indirectly, but one party has lower illegal net migration numbers vs. the other having higher illegal net migration numbers
So if the premise is "business that sponsors politics loves the cheap labour, and there is no cheaper worker than one who will always fall in line out of fear of losing everything", then the logical conclusion is that the party with the higher illegal net migration is the one that the premise refers to, right?
None of these sources prove that "the Democratic party is the one that wants to let in US as many illegal immigrants as possible."
If anything, it proves that point completely wrong tying higher immigration numbers to better economic conditions. Bush had more immigration than Obama (who deported more people than Trump). Trump had higher levels of immigration than Obama, until COVID happened and basically shut things down. As the economy recovered, immigration went back up under Biden.
What the source says: "Overall, net immigration increased the most under current U.S. President Joe Biden's term. CBO estimates for 2021 to 2024 project that the U.S. added over 10 million immigrants."
It doesn't seem like you are looking for an honest discussion.
A sentence saying that the number of immigrants went up is not proof of the claim you made that: "the Democratic party is the one that wants to let in US as many illegal immigrants as possible."
How hypocritical of you to say "doesn't seem like you are looking for an honest discussion" and then go on to claim that the number of immigrants merely "went up" when the source clearly states it was the highest, "the most"
Then you claim again "tHaT dOeSn'T pRoVe AnYtHiNg"
Let's look specifically at the tally of illegal migrants under Biden: +7.3 million net illegal migrants
And during Trump's first term? It's -34,000 (yes, that's a negative number)
How about the tally for Obama's second term? That's +493,000 net illegal migrants
Numbers and facts speak for themselves, but you speak a different language
>And during Trump's first term? It's -34,000 (yes, that's a negative number)
And during Obama's first term it was -653,000 (yes, that's a far larger negative number).
Bush's full 8 years had higher immigration than Obama's 8 years. Obama also deported more people than Trump [1]. Do you allow those numbers and facts to speak for themselves? Because when I read them, I don't hear them saying: "the Democratic party is the one that wants to let in US as many illegal immigrants as possible." Your initial claim that you still haven't backed up in any meaningful way.
Somehow you believe that evidence that's more than 15 years old should take precedence to what happened after that? Biden's term ended less than 20 months ago, I think that's far far more relevant.
My claim is very well proven by the most recent data, you keep insisting you want some sort of official statement "we the Dems want at least 30 million more illegal immigrants". Even other leftist that commented here agree with me that the numbers look bad for the Dems.
As I said, numbers and facts speak for themselves. You keep claiming "tHaT dOeSn'T pRoVe AnYtHiNg", which is funny. Shows you're brainwashed.
Your logic is basically "someone that rapes women without officially declaring he's a rapist, is not really a rapist, because he didn't officially declare it".
I don’t know how you can say this. Obama deported so many people he was known as the “Deporter-in-chief”. Biden deported more people in his term than Trump did in his first term. He also was ready to sign a comprehensive bipartisan immigrant bill before Trump told his party to tank it.
By what metric does the Democratic party want “as many illegal immigrants as possible” and why would they be deporting so many people if that were the case?
The numbers say Biden's immigration policies contributed to historically high unauthorized immigration, that deportations did not keep pace with arrivals, and that the administration failed to enforce immigration restrictions effectively. They don't say they wanted unlimited illegal immigration. They especially don't say that about Obama, who had Bush-level numbers.
What evidence shows that Obama and Biden wanted to actually maximize illegal immigration, as opposed to having different enforcement priorities or failing to control immigration effectively? Noting again that they were ready to pass a bill and sign it into law, but Trump tanked it.
It seems to me if there's a problem, and people want to fix it, but someone says "no", it's that person who wants the problem to persist.
Lol, your claim is "the numbers look bad for the Democrats, but they never explicitly said they want the country to be invaded with illegals, they just did it"
That's the most brainwashed thing I've read all day
Don't trust what the politicians say, look at what they do:
- Illegal migrants under Biden: +7.3 million net illegal migrants
- During Trump's first term? It's -34,000 (yes, that's a negative number)
- How about the tally for Obama's second term? That's +493,000 net illegal migrants
As shown by those numbers, border enforcement does not need special legislation. If the people in power want to curb it, they can do so. If they want to turn on the tap of illegals, they can. And the Democrats did turn up the tap to the max.
You made a claim you can't support. Just move on. The numbers you're citing don't prove what you claimed, and they also don't support "an invasion of illegals" that's a political characterization. Net positive migration does not mean they want as many as possible, even if the numbers are larger than you want. You can ask ChatGPT for further explanation if you're still confused as to why, I'm not engaging with you further.
> your claim is "the numbers look bad for the Democrats, but they never explicitly said they want the country to be invaded with illegals, they just did it"
"Invaded with illegals" is the characterization you chose. Please don't put your words in my mouth. Have a nice day.
I see you gave up completely on arguing the facts of the matter and you're just focusing on the semantics of a hyperbole, which is funny.
Anyway, my larger point was proven by the numbers and still stands. You conceded that Biden's immigration numbers are awful and then came with with some logical contortion that basically said "someone that rapes women without officially declaring he's a rapist, is not really a rapist, because he didn't officially declare it" (if I may use another hyperbole). Someone has to be really brainwashed to believe what you're saying. Border enforcement does not need special legislation, any Administration can just do it if they actually want to.
No I gave up on arguing with you because I've already made my point perfectly clearly, you've made yours as well, there's nothing left to say without going in circles. The only reason I engaged further was because you attributed your words to me, which I found quite rude. If you're not going to apologize for that, then please just move on like I asked you 2 posts ago. Again, have a nice day.
Well for starters we have past experience. I think it's a gross lack of faith to pretend we're just going to repeat the same things.
A far right government today may not be to everyone's liking, but it would obviously not look the same at all that something born out of the early 20th century consciousness.
Tempest Rising was taunted as the old school C&C RTS comeback and it ended as niche game with small player base and 9.5k player peak on Steam.
Probably best RTS game going on currently is Beyond All Reason, and that's because guys are doing it as an open source clone/followup to Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander Alliances and not actual business (but they started to look for a way to monetize it to fund future development).
Yes, some stuff make your skin more sensitive to light than others. For example, you should avoid vitamin A creams and some herbs during summer because they increase risk of permanent skin discoloration.
> So now I am building my own forum completely without JS, and with Python Django doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Later this year I will be releasing Misago 0.40, which is a near complete rewrite from React.js to HTMX, with rest of features to follow in 2027. And yes, noscripy support is part of it.
reply