TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#238026: Apr 9th 2018 at 9:53:13 AM

[up] The right's hatred for academia is well known. I don't see what can be done about it, though.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
MorningStar1337 The Encounter that ended the Dogma from 🤔 Since: Nov, 2012
The Encounter that ended the Dogma
#238027: Apr 9th 2018 at 9:57:11 AM

I mean when knowledge is power and part of one's modus opporandi is to take power away and hoard it that's kinda of a given.

I'm almost certain that certain people would had gone so far as to ban reading if they could.

AdricDePsycho Rock on, Gold Dust Woman from Never Going Back Again Since: Oct, 2014 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
Rock on, Gold Dust Woman
#238028: Apr 9th 2018 at 9:59:47 AM

I live in Florida and I've only met a few people who have had anything nice to say about Scott. Most people are mad at him for budget cuts that have affected their jobs. Scott meanwhile is a repugnant human being who makes me ill. I remember a time when a woman publicly confronted and shamed him inside of a Tallahassee Starbucks and Scott responded by outright putting an attack ad out against that woman while bragging about how he's created lots of jobs for people. He's a con man and a sleazeball.

Have you any dreams you'd like to sell?
Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#238029: Apr 9th 2018 at 10:09:15 AM

And yet he has a 58% approval rating as of last February...

https://morningconsult.com/2018/02/01/governor-rankings-jan-2018/

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Alycus Since: Apr, 2018
#238030: Apr 9th 2018 at 10:17:21 AM

Anti-intellectualism among Republicans and many dictatorships is no surprise.

Academia is about seeking the truth.

Authoritarianism is about declaring the truth to be what you say or think it is, and forcing as many people as possible to believe it.

TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#238031: Apr 9th 2018 at 10:17:32 AM

The right's hatred for academia is well known. I don't see what can be done about it, though.

I just figure if nothing else we can call attention to the exact tactics being used and the viciousness of them, especially since far too many on the left or in the news industry fall for the old trap of "if you don't give full consideration to those people who literally want to murder or strip the rights from large segments of the population, then it means you're the one who is close minded and hates freedom!"

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#238032: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:25:04 AM

Does anyone have any ideas for how to try and show that a border wall would be stupid and ineffective?

In my American Government class today, I was trying to argue against one, as well as against Trump ordering the National Guard to the border.

I tried bringing up that border crossings by undocumented migrants has been steadily decreasing from over a million in 2000, to about 300,000 in 2017, and people who actually study/work in immigration issues, as well as the numbers, say that currently, the real gap and pontential National Security issue is Visa Overstays. I also brought up the cost of the wall as well as the infrastructure that would need to be created to build and mantain it.

edited 9th Apr '18 1:38:58 PM by megaeliz

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#238033: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:28:07 AM

[up]Sounds like you've already brought up the main points against it, if they didn't believe/care about any of that then they're probably not going to be convinced by anything else. That kind of racism is sadly immune to facts.

edited 9th Apr '18 11:28:18 AM by Fourthspartan56

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#238034: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:33:12 AM

[up] But the thing is, I don't think they realize the implicit racism that a border wall implies. They just see it as "protecting their country".

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#238035: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:33:33 AM

[up] Those are all excellent points. Here are some more.

  • Most immigrants find productive employment, taking jobs that Americans often simply refuse to do; they pay taxes and generally make less use of social services than citizens (due to the fact that they aren't eligible for many of them). The meme that they're coming here to mooch off our food stamps is simply false.
  • Remittances tend to come back to us; the basic math of trade means that dollars sent to Mexico ultimately get spent to buy things from the United States, creating jobs for our workers.
  • There is no evidence that the crime rate or the criminal recidivism rate is higher among immigrants.
  • Immigrants bring needed population growth to the country, since Americans are not currently having enough babies to sustain our labor pool in the long run. Growth of the labor pool expands the consumer base, providing more wealth for everyone.
  • The idea that immigrants drive wages down for other workers is only true in the sense that their illegal status permits them to be exploited for lower wages than they might otherwise get. If you improve protections for these workers, you will also increase wages, raising the bottom line for everyone.
  • Related to the above, many of the industries that support anti-immigration politicians employ large numbers of illegal workers. They don't actually want the supply of laborers cut off; they want them to stay illegal so they can pay them lower wages and deny them benefits.
  • The private prison system loves illegals, since they can be incarcerated without much if any effective due process.

There's a lot more where that came from; these are just off the top of my head.

It's also worth noting that just about nobody actually expects a border wall to be built, and there's little evidence that it would be effective in any case. What the big political interests want is for migrants to exist in a continual third-class status so they can be vilified and exploited at the same time. The wall is just a piece of rhetoric to rally voters around.

edited 9th Apr '18 11:42:15 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#238036: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:36:38 AM

[up][up]Yeah because they're motivated by that racism, make no mistake it's no coincidence if someone supports building a wall to keep out undocumented immigrants.

Personally I'm a strong supporter of border security but I would never support doing something as stupid as a wall, because I care about facts and I'm not a racist.

[up][awesome]

edited 9th Apr '18 11:36:51 AM by Fourthspartan56

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#238037: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:39:26 AM

The racism thing always gets me because while I get that's definitely true, you'd think it would also mean they'd be interested in things that might actually work.

But I guess "making the message known" is more important than whether it can actually be carried out.

megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#238038: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:43:12 AM

[up][up][up] [awesome]

And here's the report on Visa Overstays they were citing, if anyone's interested.

edited 9th Apr '18 11:44:07 AM by megaeliz

Mio Since: Jan, 2001
#238039: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:43:40 AM

Rick Scott is very good at avoiding bad press which is not hard since local press ( at least here in South Florida) is not the best to say the least.

Also even though Florida is considered a swing when it comes to the Presidency it is still a pretty standard Southern State when it comes to most other institutions.

I do wonder though if the fact that this race will no doubt garner National media attention might make it harder for Scott to avoid bad press like he usually does.

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#238040: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:44:18 AM

[up][up][up]Yeah it's really dumb, but racism is counter-factual so it tends to lead to other counter-factual positions.

edited 9th Apr '18 11:44:30 AM by Fourthspartan56

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Kakuzan Let memes die. Kill them, if you have to. from Knock knock, open up the door, it's real. Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Above such petty unnecessities
Let memes die. Kill them, if you have to.
#238041: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:47:09 AM

I think it is racism/nationalism as well as wanting to show how "strong" we are. And what better way to do that than to build a glorified monument to egotism? It is not about being practical at all. A gigantic slab of whatever material they want to use makes people feel safe, therefore, in their minds, they are safe, and it is justified.

Don't catch you slippin' now.
Gilphon (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#238042: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:47:09 AM

It seems to me that bringing pro-immigration arguments to a debate against the wall is putting the cart before the horse.

Like, surely a stronger argument against it would that nothing resembling The Wall has ever been remotely effective- the only comparable structure that's ever been built, the Great Wall of China, bankrupted multiple dynasties and didn't keep out invaders.

Or, stuff like 'most illegal immigrants didn't get in by illegally crossing the Mexican border- mostly they got in by legitimate means and then just never left. And most of the ones that don't apply to got in by boat'. Or 'you do realize that Mexicans are familiar with how ladders work?' Or 'There's already a pretty heavily guarded fence there.'

Or, the argument that I'd use if I was in that situation: 'the idea of the wall is so ridiculous that the fact that you're defending it proves that your opinions on this issue aren't worth taking seriously or engaging, and therefore I'm ending this conversation.'

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#238043: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:49:48 AM

Heck, the border geography makes a coast-to-coast wall not merely impractical, but all but impossible. Even Trump had to admit that in a rare moment of candor.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#238044: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:51:37 AM

What about Trump trying to send the National Guard to the border, and trying to increase the number of ICE and CBP agents, when they are already having trouble hiring?

A lot of the students in my class seemed to think that this was a fantastic idea, and seemed to believe that we didn't have enough already.

I also tried talking about the awfulness of both of those agencies, but everyone was skeptical.

edited 9th Apr '18 11:53:32 AM by megaeliz

TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#238045: Apr 9th 2018 at 11:53:27 AM

A couple of interesting headlines:

Senator Baldwin (D-Wisconsin) proposes that workers be able to elect 1/3 of the Board of Directors in order to represent worker interests

    No wage stagnation without representation? 
Right now, the way most public corporations work is something like this: Employees show up every day and do their jobs under the direction of a management team made up of the CEO and COO, among other higher-ups. Those higher-ups are working to achieve goals and financial benchmarks set by the board of directors, which they’re on, alongside a bunch of other directors elected by shareholders.

In this setup, the CEO and his or her management team are essentially the buffer between the board of directors and the workers tasked with meeting their demands. The workers themselves have little to no say in what those demands actually are, or how they are compensated for meeting them. (This has fact has been cited as a driving force in worker burnout and dissatisfaction.)

It doesn’t have to be this way. Senator Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat from Wisconsin, recently proposed a new model for public companies that would allow workers to directly elect one-third of the board members. And most Americans, it turns out, are on board with the idea: According to a new poll of 3,300 American workers by Civis Analytics (who shared poll data directly with Fast Company), 53% of those surveyed looked favorably on the idea of furthering democracy in workplaces by giving employees a direct say in who governs them.

The actual question Civis asked was this:

“In many countries, employees at large companies elect representatives to their firm’s board of directors in order to advocate their interests and point of view to management. Democrats say this gives regular workers a greater say over how their companies are run and will increase wages, while Republicans claim that this makes companies less efficient and be bad for the economy. Would you support letting employees at large companies elect representatives to their firm’s board of directors?”

The “many countries” referred to here includes Germany, where supervisory boards of large companies are made up of half shareholders and other directors, and half workers (they call this “co-determination”). Research has found that the setup reduces worker turnover, boosts salaries and productivity, and supports income equity. Shareholder returns do suffer slightly, but researchers largely agree that tilting the flow of revenue back toward workers is a good thing.

...

Of course, the Civis poll found that Democrats, or those who lean Democrat, display more enthusiasm for the concept than those on the Republican side. On the left, the “lean Democrat” category voted 75% in favor of the question, and just 9% opposed. Around 43% of the “lean Republican” category supported the concept, while 31% opposed, and the pure Republican category saw 4% more opposed than in favor. But overall, a clear majority of people favor the concept. Some of the open-ended responses to the Civis poll in support of the concept included: “Because a company is made or broken by the employees” and “Because all employees have the right.to know that they are being treated equally.”

On that note, unions and Labor in general are seeing something of a renewed push and are trying to come up with new, more imaginative ideas for how to steer themselves in the future

    Is Labor finally waking up? 
The Center for American Progress (CAP), one of Washington, DC’s most influential liberal think tanks with deep ties to the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton campaign, has just proposed a big idea for raising Americans’ wages.

A new paper by CAP’s David Madland calls for the creation of national wage boards, tasked with setting minimum wage and benefit standards for specific industries. Fast-food companies, say, would send representatives to meet with union officials and other worker representatives, and hammer out a deal that ensures workers get a fair shake. Same goes for nurses, or retail workers, or home health aides, or accountants.

“Bargaining panels would have 11 members — five representing employers, five representing workers and one representing the government,” Madland explains. “The government representative would be the U.S. secretary of labor or their delegate. Employers would choose employer representatives through the employers’ industry associations.” Employees would be represented by unions, or other worker representatives. The secretary of labor would create separate boards for different industries and occupations, and work with unions and other worker groups to enforce the wage rules once they’re adopted.

This may seem like an extreme idea, an unprecedented government and union intrusion into the free market. But it reflects a model already gaining steam in some liberal states (like New York and California), and which owes a lot to policies in Europe. It’s the latest sign that pro-labor voices in America are looking to counterparts in France, Germany, and elsewhere across the Atlantic for signs of how to revive the labor movement and get the working class’s wages rising again.

And while ideas like wage boards and giving workers spots on corporate boards may seem pie-in-the-sky today, they could easily become part of the next Democratic president’s agenda, or become law in left-leaning states even before 2020.

Labor unions in America today are in crisis. In the mid-1950s, a third of Americans belonged to a labor union. Now, only 10.7 percent do, including a minuscule 6.4 percent of private sector workers. The decline of union membership explains as much as a third of the increase in inequality in the US, has caused voter turnout among low-income workers to crater, and has weakened labor’s ability to check corporate influence in DC and state capitals.

The future for traditional unions looks so bleak that a growing number of labor scholars and activists are coming to the conclusion that the US model, which relies on individual workers in individual workplaces getting together and organizing on their own, is dead and can’t be revived. What’s needed, they argue, is a more national or industry-wide approach to supplement or replace the old model of individual workplace-level organizing.

“In 2016, we had the most pro-labor president since the 1960s, the most pro-labor secretary of labor since [FDR’s Secretary] Frances Perkins, an economy with shrinking unemployment and rising wages — and yet we lost a quarter-million union members in the United States,” says David Rolf, president of SEIU 775, a local union representing home care workers in Washington and Montana. “We need to be trying everything.”

The solution, Rolf and others have come to believe, is to look to strategies that have worked abroad. Most European countries still have far greater levels of union coverage than the US. As of 2013, more than two-thirds of workers in Denmark, Sweden, and Finland were union members. In France and Austria, a minority of workers are in unions, but 98 percent are covered by collective bargaining contracts.

Not coincidentally, none of those countries relies as heavily on workplace-by-workplace organizing as the US does. In its stead, they use:

  • Wage boards setting minimums for whole industries or occupations, like the ones Madland proposes.

  • Works councils, which are committees elected by workers in their workplaces meant to serve as a vehicle to register concerns and resolve disputes with management, even in workplaces that are not union-organized.

  • Codetermination, a system in which workers have the ability to elect members to the company’s corporate board, giving them a voice in the company’s high-level decision-making.

  • Union-administered unemployment insurance, which gives workers a reason to join unions and pay dues even if their specific workplace isn’t organized with a given union.

Since the 2016 election, liberals and the Democratic Party have increasingly embraced a variety of European tax and spending policies, from single-payer health care to tuition-free college. What writers like Madland are suggesting is that the party should also grow more ambitious, and draw more inspiration from Europe, when it comes to labor and work issues. And it’s a suggestion that the American left and worker movement appear ready for, given the surge in teacher strikes and walkouts in recent months.

Senators ask Trump why there isn't any movement on the recommendations of his Opioid Commission

    You mean you actually have to follow up on things you say? 
Last year, President Donald Trump created a commission to study the opioid epidemic. The commission released its recommendations in November. But since then, we’ve heard very little about what’s going on with the commission’s proposals.

Now, two Democratic senators are looking for answers. In an April 9 letter to Trump obtained exclusively by Vox, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Patty Murray (D-WA) have asked the White House for an update on each of the commission’s recommendations — how far along they are, which ones the Trump administration believes will require congressional action, and who is overseeing the White House’s response to the opioid crisis.

“We are concerned, however, by reports that in spite of the opioid epidemic’s devastating impact on American communities, your Administration has failed to act aggressively to combat it,” Warren and Murray wrote. “You declared the opioid epidemic a national public health emergency on October 26, 2017, but there has been little evidence that your Administration has taken advantage of the supplemental executive branch authorities and resources provided by this designation.”

The letter is part of a broader effort to hold the Trump administration accountable for its response to the opioid crisis. In January, Warren and Murray also asked the Government Accountability Office to study the Trump administration’s response to the crisis so far.

The opioid commission released two sets of proposals last year. Trump reacted to the first set of preliminary proposals by declaring a public health emergency over the crisis, which was the commission’s top recommendation at the time. But the Trump administration has done very little, at least publicly, about the broader final set of 56 proposals — which generally focused on expanding access to addiction treatment by, for example, streamlining federal funding for drug addiction.

Meanwhile, Trump announced a vague plan to confront the opioid crisis in March. But instead of taking up the commission’s largely public health–oriented proposals, Trump’s plan focuses largely on harsher criminal justice measures, including a scheme to use the death penalty more often for drug traffickers — which the commission did not recommend. Trump’s plan also made some ambiguous promises to encourage fewer opioid painkiller prescriptions and scale up addiction treatment.

Trump even seemed to dismiss the concept of his own commission in the speech unveiling his plan.

“These are terrible people, and we have to get tough on those people,” he said, referring to drug dealers and traffickers, “because we can have all the blue ribbon committees we want, but if we don’t get tough on the drug dealers, we’re wasting our time. Just remember that. We’re wasting our time. And that toughness includes the death penalty.”

The opioid epidemic is now the deadliest drug overdose crisis in US history. Nearly 64,000 people died of drug overdoses in the US in 2016, and at least two-thirds of those deaths were linked to opioids such as fentanyl, heroin, and prescribed painkillers. The total drug overdose deaths were higher than the number of deaths linked to guns, car crashes, or HIV/AIDS during any single year in America. Based on preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 2017 was even worse.

Executive Order by New Jersey Governor would make it far easier for the public to access information relating to gun violence

    Transparency 
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy has signed an executive order making data on gun violence more accessible to the public.

The so-called "Name and Shame" order will cite the origin of a gun involved in a crime. According to the state, approximately 80 percent of guns involved in crime come from outside of New Jersey.

Now, New Jersey authorities will identify the origins of those guns involved in crimes. Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy, who was elected to replace Republican Chris Christie, touts the order as being in the public interest, saying in a statement, "Any death due to gun violence, is one death too many."

According to the order, department and state police would periodically publish data on guns involved in crime and where they came from. These data are already collected and open to the public via the FBI, but according to Murphy, this order would streamline the process. The first published data are expected next month.

A notable from a few days ago:

John Kelly's time as Chief of Staff may be almost up. Indications are that he fought hard against Bolton's appointment and urged Trump to fire Pruitt, but Trump has grown tired of being balked or having an "adult in the room" saying no to his impulses

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#238046: Apr 9th 2018 at 12:00:21 PM

[up][up]

  • Generally speaking, the states with Mexican border crossings are already maintaining security at them, and their governors already have the power to deploy additional resources there if needed. Trump's intervention is unwanted and unnecessary, especially if he won't help the states pay for the extra troops.
  • It's unclear what value adding more troops would have. Border security is one of the most boring jobs in existence and Trump's push to reinforce them is alarmingly unspecific about what they would actually be doing.
  • Most illegal migrants don't bother trying to evade security; they want and expect to be picked up. They are often placed in wretched and abusive conditions, denied due process, and generally mistreated.

Part of the problem of hiring border agents is the fact that ICE and CBP have been trying to sell the job as one of these exciting occupations where you're hunting down drug runners and rapists while waving around your massive cock substitute wrapped in the American Flag, but it's an absolutely mind-numbing occupation that is not at all for the excitement-loving person or adrenaline junkie. It also calls for a great deal of discretion, since the people they intercept are often in desperate straits and immediately need humanitarian aid. Plus, our laws say you can't just point a gun at them and send them back across the border; they have to be detained and remanded to ICE, something not beloved of the Call of Duty-addled twats who play at being armchair soldiers.

For more on this topic, see Last Week Tonight's segment on the border patrol.

edited 9th Apr '18 12:06:11 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#238047: Apr 9th 2018 at 12:02:09 PM

Is Labor finally waking up?
As a massive fan of Tripartism and Corporatism this is exactly the kind of thing I love, this is exactly what we need to steer our society and economy in a better direction that truly benefits the greater good. grin

edited 9th Apr '18 12:02:27 PM by Fourthspartan56

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#238048: Apr 9th 2018 at 12:02:16 PM

~@megaeliz,

What about Trump trying to send the National Guard to the border, and trying to increase the number of ICE and CBP agents, when they are already having trouble hiring?

A lot of the students in my class seemed to think that this was a fantastic idea, and seemed to believe that we didn't have enough already.

I also tried talking about the awfulness of both of those agencies, but everyone was skeptical.

If nothing else, you could start on a bunch of the practicalities on logistics of the troop deployment. Such as these ones laid out by Jim Wright in his initial reaction from the 4th:

Multiple media outlets are now announcing Trump will shortly sign a proclamation sending the National Guard to the southern border.

I have questions:

- Where's the money come from?

Activating Guard troops, an activation that wasn't scheduled, that's not in the current state or federal budgets. How long? How much? Who pays?

Deploying troops isn't cheap. They have to be fed, quartered, provisioned, transported. Where's the money come from?

- What's the mission?

The mission determines the equipment, determines the training, determines the costs. DHS Secretary Krstjen Nielsen said the troops will be in a support role, but refused to give details. What's that mean?

- What are the rules of engagement?

I mean, we're sending in TROOPS. Nielson declined to provide any information on what those troops will actually do when/if they confront immigrants attempting to cross the border.

- What are the limits of authority?

Soldiers under Federal authority are normally constrained from law enforcement on US soil. They CAN enforce the law under a state governor, but the states don't have authority over border security. So, what's the chain of command here?

"We will be taking strong action."

What's that MEAN?

Here's the thing: Nielson said she hopes to have troops begin arriving as soon as TONIGHT.

Tonight.

But she ALSO said the administration hasn't finalized a plan yet.

We're sending troops. We don't yet have a plan.

So, we're sending troops without clear orders, objectives, chain of command, or ROE.

Maybe it's just me.

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#238049: Apr 9th 2018 at 12:09:36 PM

I posted it earlier in the thread, but here's the list of things the military can actually do on the border. [1]

Whatever the troops they just sent end up doing, it'll fall into one of those categories. Given that there are already official channels for LE As to request military support, and that the military already has a presence on the border, the only reason Trump is even doing this is so it looks like he's doing something. The motivations of narcissists have been posted a few times here and "collect adoration" is one of the big ones. Trump is doing this so the conservative media can crow over him for a few weeks with zero real action required.

edited 9th Apr '18 12:32:02 PM by archonspeaks

They should have sent a poet.
Gilphon (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#238050: Apr 9th 2018 at 12:12:33 PM

My approach be to just play Socrates and interrogate their positions. What would it accomplish? Why would that be a good thing? Why isn't it the standard practice?

If Illegals are stealing jobs, what jobs are they stealing? Why would they take the risk of getting caught by selling illegal drugs, if they're already here illegally?

Because the thing about counter-factual beliefs is that they're unlikely to be internally consistent, so they shouldn't stand up to being picked apart like that.

It is also important to remember that debate rarely changes the opponent's mind- the goal is to convince the audience.

edited 9th Apr '18 12:15:28 PM by Gilphon


Total posts: 417,856
Top