As the Trump administration has ramped up ICE activity across the country, many Americans, especially Democrats, have grown outraged by the perception that ICE is acting with impunity and fearful that events like those playing out in Minneapolis illustrate the country’s slow decline into authoritarianism—feelings that are
I also think that the sanctuary cities whose police force are not allowed to cooperate with ICE are part of the problem. At the very least an illegal immigrant who has been convicted of a crime should be reported to DHS. Also those with deportation orders already … but maybe this is by design to make ICE look bad?
This is definitely the case. Sancturary cities and states are seeing a natural population drain due to high taxes. Since illegals count for the census, these places can protect their Congressional seats by importing as many as they can.
And yes, the left is using its standard "kick the dog till it bites then demand to shoot the dog" tactic, which is standard operating procedure. They are fighting this in the court of public opinion since they don't have a legal leg to stand on.
Note that we don't have these issues in Florida or Texas - just deep blue cities. This is 100% by design.
The left is like a bank robber that was busted and is trying to keep the money he stole. That is the right way to frame this whole thing.
Some ICE agents have definitely been too aggressive, even illegal, in their interactions with civilians. But the reason that opinion polls show declining public support is that the non-conservative media - that’s almost the entire legacy media - have been completely one-sided in their coverage of ICE activities. ICE is always shown in negative ways, but there is rarely even slight mention of the thousands of violent criminals that ICE has apprehended. I live near Minneapolis and the recent ICE surge has resulted in ten convicted murderers and dozens of other violent criminals taken into custody. I’m not aware of any legacy media outlet disclosing that fact.
As for the political angle, any Democrat who hopes to get or stay nominated for elective office must be vocally anti-ICE, as in ICE should be abolished or do little to no enforcement of immigration laws. The crazed Left controls Democratic primaries. The bottom line is that Democrats are now pro-open borders and they won’t moderate - period.
Democrats lost trust on the immigration issue, and it will be hard for them to get it back. Rarely do people think that the ones they believe caused the problem are the ones who will effectively fix that same problem. Calls for abolishing ICE only make it worse.
Republicans will hit hard on sanctuary policies. They will point out that deportations could be done in an orderly fashion if all levels of government cooperated in the process. Don’t want ICE on your streets? Turn over the illegals detained by law enforcement to DHS instead of releasing them back into the community. It’s a valid point.
How will Democrats respond to this without driving their base into a frenzy?
I wish this and the other reams written on this subject, had proposed an alternative.
Dems seem to have no answer, but ignoring most Immigration Law. Dems refuse to propose new laws that reflect their obvious desire to allow any foreign non criminals who reaches US soil, to stay forever. No vetting, no valid asylum claim, no waiting in line and and no economic self sufficiency, required. That is, undoubtedly, because such a law would be very hard to pass.
Reps messaging on this subject is horrendous, but may not remain that way forever.
Reps have barely mentioned economic implications. This may become a bigger issue quickly, if federal dollars supporting migrants really disappear, as Trump has threatened.
Historically, all US immigrants were subject to "no public charge" laws that forbade immigrants from accessing any sort of taxpayer subsidies, regardless of immigration status. The law was never repealed, but because Immigration Law is federal, Dems simply allowed access to the US safety net when they held the WH. Reps never ended the practice, when they took power. Today, according to the LA Times, 54% of all naturalized citizens, and immigrants dwelling both legally and illegally utilize US welfare.
Under Biden, migrant spending totaled a 1/2 trillion dollars. If federal dollars really end, state spending will never be able to cover the difference. States lack Treasury printing presses.
For example, an Illinois program provided healthcare only for indigent IL undocumented persons between from ages of 44-64. The cost of $412 million, was nearly double the assumed cost. The program ended when IL spent more for healthcare for a small group of migrants, then the state spent for all IL roads, in the same period of time.
Texas, currently spends more than $110 million dollars every 30 days, just for unpaid migrant healthcare, not covered by federal programs. If Reps ever successfully convey taxpayer costs, public opinion is very likely to be affected.
In the mean time the end of Sanctuary cities states would allow migrant criminals to be deported directly from jails, rather than ICE tracking them down after they are released. Why that notion does not appeal to all, is mind boggling.
I noticed in that long interview Trump did with the NYT that he offered a possibility of an eventual path to citizenship of illegal immigrants as part of a broader comprehensive immigration agreement. (I only read the headlines) Maybe it's time for a bill?
America is so concerned for the rights of the criminal we ignore the rights of the victim. The common example is the 20 times arrested criminal stabbing the girl commuting home. The analogy transfers to this case if you see the obstruction of federal police enforcing the law as a criminal activity, which it is, and the victims as all of us who have lost livelihoods, paid more for rent, and used our tax dollars on social services for illegal immigrants.
I (and I think most people) would love to see a bipartisan, comprehensive immigration bill that fixes a very broken system. The funny thing is that such a bill actually existed a little over a decade ago: the Obama administration pursued a plan that included funding to shore up border security, pushed for a stronger E-Verify system, streamlined the legal immigration process, and created a pathway to citizenship for those here illegally (including paying a fine). It passed the Senate with bipartisan support (68 to 32) and likely would have passed the House if it had been put to a vote, but John Boehner refused to bring it up under pressure from the Tea Party. I think his failure to do that is a big reason why we are where we are today.
The reason why we are where we are today is because Biden started flying in illegal immigrants on airplanes, created apps and processing stations on foreign nations, and then opened the border and actually prevented Texas from policing it.
I remember that bill, it had one big glaring problem, the legalisation of 11 million people living and working here illegally at the time. That was the first time I realized that the tea party type renegade Republican congressmen were actually going to support my livelihood and income. I actively canvassed and phone banked for Obama, twice, as I really needed health insurance for myself and my family, but we took a big hit on income. I laid off a lot of guys. I still like Obama, great guy, but his neoliberal wing of the Democratic Party has hurt the working class just as much as the Chamber of Commerce types of the right.
Oh, and it's not getting better. OR just announced after several court battles that it will relent and clear 800,000 (!!!) names off the voter rolls. Any bets on what the over/under D/R percentage of those names are?
"Accountability and reform" is indeed the best route here. But the Democrats will have to be nimbler-than-usual to pursue it, and show more restraint than usual, as the public is being gaslit as to what is going on, and they are dealing with a situation not particularly analogous to the one in 2020--a situation we've seen historically is very difficult it is to rein once it is in place.
ICE under Trump 2.0 has become something very different from the police. The latter have always served a narrow local law enforcement function in their local jurisdictions, on behalf of local politicians, and (mostly) remained accountable to voters in those jurisdictions. You also must receive fairly rigorous training to become a police officer. Due to the changes in the agency's recruiting practices and the manner in which it is run, however, and due to the January 6th pardons, ICE is not bound by the constraints of the law and is at present only answerable to Trump, (since he's sent the message that he will pardon its officers as long as they're acting on his behalf, regardless of what the law says) is full of poorly trained members, and is *not* merely serving its intended purpose. The many cases in which it has harassed local citizenry that we already know about prove that, as does the fact that the biggest deployments of ICE have been to blue cities rather than border towns where undocumented migrants cross into the country and are conspicuously miniscule in red cities with some of the largest numbers of illegal migrants. (see: Dallas Ft.-Worth and Houston)
A similar feat was performed by Putin, Orban, Erdogan, et al. in elevating legitimate law enforcement bodies into de facto paramilitary groups accountable only to them. (there are also older historical precedents, but I'll refrain from bringing up the 'f' word for now) So long as the strongman remains in power it is very difficult for political opposition to rein these groups in, unless there is uniform cooperation amongst the political establishment. And with the country more divided than it's been since arguably the civil war, that is extremely difficult to generate. I fear very little can be done until the strongman (or his Medvedev-like successor, should there be one) is out of power.
Nonetheless, there is a legitimate role for ICE and the Dems have to find a way to re-establish the constraints of that role with a message that won't alienate people--and "abolish ICE" will not do the trick.
ICE had more narrow law enforcement functions, because the vast majority of migrants were turned back at the border, until Biden. Migrant child rapists and other migrant criminals were not found in every US city and state, because they have never before been allowed into the interior of the US, en mass.
Yes, but arriving illegally, partly because we can't seem to control the border, yet striving for citizenship is fine with me. I don't think American workers are lining up for the jobs immigrants do. Ask any employer.
10 million workers have lost their jobs by being undercut on wages. Carpenters really do want to be paid. Do we want to be the party pushing the working class into poverty as we've been doing for 40 years? I don't think so. Remember, there is no job an American won't do, it's only a question of money. We have to get over this idea that screwing over workers is a great thing.
Does economic self sufficiency matter? Nearly all migrants work, but most will never be economically self sufficient. That is not a character flaw. Our cost of living is now, simply too high, for people whose language, education and skills do not match the US economy.
If someone dropped me into Zurich and told me to earn enough money for housing, shelter and healthcare, I wouldn't last long. I do not speak the language or have an education or experience in banking or engineering. Zurich is far more expensive than my area of origin.
Now imagine someone with a a 5th or 8th grade education, no language skills in an expensive, knowledge economy where even most Blue Collar jobs require the ability to read complicated manuals, daily.
We are setting many up for a lifetime of economic failure and extreme poverty. I have never stolen anything in my life, but if that was the only option to feed my kid, I would break the law in a heartbeat. So would most parents on earth. Desperate situations produce desperate acts.
The illegals are not doing jobs Americans won't do, they are working for wages Americans won't accept for doing those jobs. While we deport illegal aliens, let's also prosecute the employers who employed them illegally.
American workers are lining up for houses. And because of the regulatory morass, housing supply can’t keep up with rising demand. Not even close. The outcome is even high housing inflation.
The notion that 20% of people living illegally in the US work in professional fields seems hard to believe. Professions are generally heavily regulated with extensive background checks. Once must prove education and be appropriately licensed.
Read the link, which is from a pro immigrant group, not anti. Table 1, Occupational Category.
Most professional jobs are not licensed. Background checks tend to look at legal and financial issues and verify your degrees, not check if you overstayed your student or tourist visa.
Two things can be simultaneously true. First, Trump has DRAMATICALLY reduced the number of illegals, especially the most violent criminals (current estimates are 3.1m in one year, or projected to be over 12m for his term). That is about half of the estimated illegals that Democrats allowed in. That is very popular. On the other hand, as with anything as you get closer to 100%, incremental gains become more expensive and difficult. I look for J.D. Vance, whom I project as winning with 320 - 340 EVs and 2.5% pop vote---unless it's Zohran, in which case both those bump up a lot---will pretty much get the remainder out in his four years. So it's a very fine line to walk: Democrats can't praise deportations unless they fund them. Which they can't (Democrat Civil War #2).
BTW yesterday someone asked about this year's voter reg trends, as if they would change? Nope.
PA just came in R+7,200, putting Rs just 49,000 down in active voters. This is on pace for PA to flip red within two years max.
The two choices for voters are either open borders with the Democrats or ICE conflicts with leftist agitators.
The Trump Administration should be social media savvy enough to keep track of the left's latest outrage du jour to provide context / footage of the events leading up to whatever image the left is highlighting as evidence of a police state, along with background info on the perp. Maybe it is time for ICE to carry body cams so they can refute the narrative in real time.
People are generally tired of mouthy and disrespectful soup-throwing AWFLs and Antifa in general. I suspect the answer for the Admin is to provide context to every bloody shirt and disrupt the left's narrative.
Here's what will happen - Democrats win the midterms and then spend two years trying and failing to abolish ICE. That acquiescence to the radical progressive wing then is used as a cudgel to beat the hell out of the Democrats in 2028.
The progressive wing of the Democratic Party is toxic and is the transmission vector for insane slogans and policies generated by neo-Communists. Everything they do is elections poison, and takes down the entire party every presidential election.
“But they must be smart about how they approach it, and not succumb to their emotions or the trendy rallying cries of the moment”. Truer words have not been spoken about the Democrats. They need to be seen as problem solvers not problem deniers. Of the many issues the United States face immigration should be among one of the most straightforward and relatively easy to solve. It is very frustrating that we have somehow been unable to do this. Yes both sides have been at fault for using it for their own political benefit. Someone has to step forward and show a different way.
From the first time Good impeded ICE vehicles, she became a criminal. She was following her training. Do you think the trainers ever warned her about the consequences of not obeying an order by ICE? Who are those trainers and who funds them.
Do the Dems realize how many movies with mothers and wives being secret kick ass spies there are? It is more probable than theoretical to many.
Whose more dangerous now? ICE arresting someone or civilians trained on using vehicles against ICE?
It all becomes a moot point if Dem leadership walked the talked and handed the worse of the worse over to ICE. That ought to keep ICE busy for a while.
It seems like we have two groups facing off against each other; the immigration infrastructure (including ICE) and people who are in the US without legal permission. Both groups are treating our laws like they are guidelines or suggestions. You must have legal permission to be in the US. The government must follow due process (defined in the law). Neither of these is negotiable. And a failure by one side doesn't relieve the other side from their obligation.
I also think that the sanctuary cities whose police force are not allowed to cooperate with ICE are part of the problem. At the very least an illegal immigrant who has been convicted of a crime should be reported to DHS. Also those with deportation orders already … but maybe this is by design to make ICE look bad?
This is definitely the case. Sancturary cities and states are seeing a natural population drain due to high taxes. Since illegals count for the census, these places can protect their Congressional seats by importing as many as they can.
And yes, the left is using its standard "kick the dog till it bites then demand to shoot the dog" tactic, which is standard operating procedure. They are fighting this in the court of public opinion since they don't have a legal leg to stand on.
Note that we don't have these issues in Florida or Texas - just deep blue cities. This is 100% by design.
The left is like a bank robber that was busted and is trying to keep the money he stole. That is the right way to frame this whole thing.
Some ICE agents have definitely been too aggressive, even illegal, in their interactions with civilians. But the reason that opinion polls show declining public support is that the non-conservative media - that’s almost the entire legacy media - have been completely one-sided in their coverage of ICE activities. ICE is always shown in negative ways, but there is rarely even slight mention of the thousands of violent criminals that ICE has apprehended. I live near Minneapolis and the recent ICE surge has resulted in ten convicted murderers and dozens of other violent criminals taken into custody. I’m not aware of any legacy media outlet disclosing that fact.
As for the political angle, any Democrat who hopes to get or stay nominated for elective office must be vocally anti-ICE, as in ICE should be abolished or do little to no enforcement of immigration laws. The crazed Left controls Democratic primaries. The bottom line is that Democrats are now pro-open borders and they won’t moderate - period.
Democrats lost trust on the immigration issue, and it will be hard for them to get it back. Rarely do people think that the ones they believe caused the problem are the ones who will effectively fix that same problem. Calls for abolishing ICE only make it worse.
Republicans will hit hard on sanctuary policies. They will point out that deportations could be done in an orderly fashion if all levels of government cooperated in the process. Don’t want ICE on your streets? Turn over the illegals detained by law enforcement to DHS instead of releasing them back into the community. It’s a valid point.
How will Democrats respond to this without driving their base into a frenzy?
I wish this and the other reams written on this subject, had proposed an alternative.
Dems seem to have no answer, but ignoring most Immigration Law. Dems refuse to propose new laws that reflect their obvious desire to allow any foreign non criminals who reaches US soil, to stay forever. No vetting, no valid asylum claim, no waiting in line and and no economic self sufficiency, required. That is, undoubtedly, because such a law would be very hard to pass.
Reps messaging on this subject is horrendous, but may not remain that way forever.
Reps have barely mentioned economic implications. This may become a bigger issue quickly, if federal dollars supporting migrants really disappear, as Trump has threatened.
Historically, all US immigrants were subject to "no public charge" laws that forbade immigrants from accessing any sort of taxpayer subsidies, regardless of immigration status. The law was never repealed, but because Immigration Law is federal, Dems simply allowed access to the US safety net when they held the WH. Reps never ended the practice, when they took power. Today, according to the LA Times, 54% of all naturalized citizens, and immigrants dwelling both legally and illegally utilize US welfare.
Under Biden, migrant spending totaled a 1/2 trillion dollars. If federal dollars really end, state spending will never be able to cover the difference. States lack Treasury printing presses.
For example, an Illinois program provided healthcare only for indigent IL undocumented persons between from ages of 44-64. The cost of $412 million, was nearly double the assumed cost. The program ended when IL spent more for healthcare for a small group of migrants, then the state spent for all IL roads, in the same period of time.
Texas, currently spends more than $110 million dollars every 30 days, just for unpaid migrant healthcare, not covered by federal programs. If Reps ever successfully convey taxpayer costs, public opinion is very likely to be affected.
In the mean time the end of Sanctuary cities states would allow migrant criminals to be deported directly from jails, rather than ICE tracking them down after they are released. Why that notion does not appeal to all, is mind boggling.
I noticed in that long interview Trump did with the NYT that he offered a possibility of an eventual path to citizenship of illegal immigrants as part of a broader comprehensive immigration agreement. (I only read the headlines) Maybe it's time for a bill?
America is so concerned for the rights of the criminal we ignore the rights of the victim. The common example is the 20 times arrested criminal stabbing the girl commuting home. The analogy transfers to this case if you see the obstruction of federal police enforcing the law as a criminal activity, which it is, and the victims as all of us who have lost livelihoods, paid more for rent, and used our tax dollars on social services for illegal immigrants.
I (and I think most people) would love to see a bipartisan, comprehensive immigration bill that fixes a very broken system. The funny thing is that such a bill actually existed a little over a decade ago: the Obama administration pursued a plan that included funding to shore up border security, pushed for a stronger E-Verify system, streamlined the legal immigration process, and created a pathway to citizenship for those here illegally (including paying a fine). It passed the Senate with bipartisan support (68 to 32) and likely would have passed the House if it had been put to a vote, but John Boehner refused to bring it up under pressure from the Tea Party. I think his failure to do that is a big reason why we are where we are today.
The reason why we are where we are today is because Biden started flying in illegal immigrants on airplanes, created apps and processing stations on foreign nations, and then opened the border and actually prevented Texas from policing it.
I remember that bill, it had one big glaring problem, the legalisation of 11 million people living and working here illegally at the time. That was the first time I realized that the tea party type renegade Republican congressmen were actually going to support my livelihood and income. I actively canvassed and phone banked for Obama, twice, as I really needed health insurance for myself and my family, but we took a big hit on income. I laid off a lot of guys. I still like Obama, great guy, but his neoliberal wing of the Democratic Party has hurt the working class just as much as the Chamber of Commerce types of the right.
Oh, and it's not getting better. OR just announced after several court battles that it will relent and clear 800,000 (!!!) names off the voter rolls. Any bets on what the over/under D/R percentage of those names are?
"Accountability and reform" is indeed the best route here. But the Democrats will have to be nimbler-than-usual to pursue it, and show more restraint than usual, as the public is being gaslit as to what is going on, and they are dealing with a situation not particularly analogous to the one in 2020--a situation we've seen historically is very difficult it is to rein once it is in place.
ICE under Trump 2.0 has become something very different from the police. The latter have always served a narrow local law enforcement function in their local jurisdictions, on behalf of local politicians, and (mostly) remained accountable to voters in those jurisdictions. You also must receive fairly rigorous training to become a police officer. Due to the changes in the agency's recruiting practices and the manner in which it is run, however, and due to the January 6th pardons, ICE is not bound by the constraints of the law and is at present only answerable to Trump, (since he's sent the message that he will pardon its officers as long as they're acting on his behalf, regardless of what the law says) is full of poorly trained members, and is *not* merely serving its intended purpose. The many cases in which it has harassed local citizenry that we already know about prove that, as does the fact that the biggest deployments of ICE have been to blue cities rather than border towns where undocumented migrants cross into the country and are conspicuously miniscule in red cities with some of the largest numbers of illegal migrants. (see: Dallas Ft.-Worth and Houston)
A similar feat was performed by Putin, Orban, Erdogan, et al. in elevating legitimate law enforcement bodies into de facto paramilitary groups accountable only to them. (there are also older historical precedents, but I'll refrain from bringing up the 'f' word for now) So long as the strongman remains in power it is very difficult for political opposition to rein these groups in, unless there is uniform cooperation amongst the political establishment. And with the country more divided than it's been since arguably the civil war, that is extremely difficult to generate. I fear very little can be done until the strongman (or his Medvedev-like successor, should there be one) is out of power.
Nonetheless, there is a legitimate role for ICE and the Dems have to find a way to re-establish the constraints of that role with a message that won't alienate people--and "abolish ICE" will not do the trick.
ICE had more narrow law enforcement functions, because the vast majority of migrants were turned back at the border, until Biden. Migrant child rapists and other migrant criminals were not found in every US city and state, because they have never before been allowed into the interior of the US, en mass.
The last time the Democrats were this hostile to Federal agents enforcing the law was when they were fighting against Civil Rights.
Absolutely. Anybody here illegally who won't work, obey the law, etc. needs to go. Nuance is what's lacking from the ICE mission.
I'd narrow it down to all those here illegally. Simpler. Plus we don't want to steal the jobs of millions of American workers, I hope.
Yes, but arriving illegally, partly because we can't seem to control the border, yet striving for citizenship is fine with me. I don't think American workers are lining up for the jobs immigrants do. Ask any employer.
"ask any employer" Surely you are joking?
10 million workers have lost their jobs by being undercut on wages. Carpenters really do want to be paid. Do we want to be the party pushing the working class into poverty as we've been doing for 40 years? I don't think so. Remember, there is no job an American won't do, it's only a question of money. We have to get over this idea that screwing over workers is a great thing.
Does economic self sufficiency matter? Nearly all migrants work, but most will never be economically self sufficient. That is not a character flaw. Our cost of living is now, simply too high, for people whose language, education and skills do not match the US economy.
If someone dropped me into Zurich and told me to earn enough money for housing, shelter and healthcare, I wouldn't last long. I do not speak the language or have an education or experience in banking or engineering. Zurich is far more expensive than my area of origin.
Now imagine someone with a a 5th or 8th grade education, no language skills in an expensive, knowledge economy where even most Blue Collar jobs require the ability to read complicated manuals, daily.
We are setting many up for a lifetime of economic failure and extreme poverty. I have never stolen anything in my life, but if that was the only option to feed my kid, I would break the law in a heartbeat. So would most parents on earth. Desperate situations produce desperate acts.
The illegals are not doing jobs Americans won't do, they are working for wages Americans won't accept for doing those jobs. While we deport illegal aliens, let's also prosecute the employers who employed them illegally.
American workers are lining up for houses. And because of the regulatory morass, housing supply can’t keep up with rising demand. Not even close. The outcome is even high housing inflation.
This is factually incorrect.
Illegal immigrants work in most fields. About 19% work in professional or science professions. About 11% work in manufacturing and 8% in retail.
About 36% have at least some college. 22% have a bachelors or higher.
Top ten countries for sources of illegal immigrants include India (6%) and China (3%).
Source is https://cmsny.org/publications/undocumented-workers-in-high-growth-occupations-and-industries/
The notion that 20% of people living illegally in the US work in professional fields seems hard to believe. Professions are generally heavily regulated with extensive background checks. Once must prove education and be appropriately licensed.
Read the link, which is from a pro immigrant group, not anti. Table 1, Occupational Category.
Most professional jobs are not licensed. Background checks tend to look at legal and financial issues and verify your degrees, not check if you overstayed your student or tourist visa.
Two things can be simultaneously true. First, Trump has DRAMATICALLY reduced the number of illegals, especially the most violent criminals (current estimates are 3.1m in one year, or projected to be over 12m for his term). That is about half of the estimated illegals that Democrats allowed in. That is very popular. On the other hand, as with anything as you get closer to 100%, incremental gains become more expensive and difficult. I look for J.D. Vance, whom I project as winning with 320 - 340 EVs and 2.5% pop vote---unless it's Zohran, in which case both those bump up a lot---will pretty much get the remainder out in his four years. So it's a very fine line to walk: Democrats can't praise deportations unless they fund them. Which they can't (Democrat Civil War #2).
BTW yesterday someone asked about this year's voter reg trends, as if they would change? Nope.
PA just came in R+7,200, putting Rs just 49,000 down in active voters. This is on pace for PA to flip red within two years max.
The two choices for voters are either open borders with the Democrats or ICE conflicts with leftist agitators.
The Trump Administration should be social media savvy enough to keep track of the left's latest outrage du jour to provide context / footage of the events leading up to whatever image the left is highlighting as evidence of a police state, along with background info on the perp. Maybe it is time for ICE to carry body cams so they can refute the narrative in real time.
People are generally tired of mouthy and disrespectful soup-throwing AWFLs and Antifa in general. I suspect the answer for the Admin is to provide context to every bloody shirt and disrupt the left's narrative.
Here's what will happen - Democrats win the midterms and then spend two years trying and failing to abolish ICE. That acquiescence to the radical progressive wing then is used as a cudgel to beat the hell out of the Democrats in 2028.
The progressive wing of the Democratic Party is toxic and is the transmission vector for insane slogans and policies generated by neo-Communists. Everything they do is elections poison, and takes down the entire party every presidential election.
“But they must be smart about how they approach it, and not succumb to their emotions or the trendy rallying cries of the moment”. Truer words have not been spoken about the Democrats. They need to be seen as problem solvers not problem deniers. Of the many issues the United States face immigration should be among one of the most straightforward and relatively easy to solve. It is very frustrating that we have somehow been unable to do this. Yes both sides have been at fault for using it for their own political benefit. Someone has to step forward and show a different way.
"Border control is important but ICE shouldn't be above the law" is a more broadly relatable rallying cry than "abolish ICE.
From the first time Good impeded ICE vehicles, she became a criminal. She was following her training. Do you think the trainers ever warned her about the consequences of not obeying an order by ICE? Who are those trainers and who funds them.
Do the Dems realize how many movies with mothers and wives being secret kick ass spies there are? It is more probable than theoretical to many.
Whose more dangerous now? ICE arresting someone or civilians trained on using vehicles against ICE?
It all becomes a moot point if Dem leadership walked the talked and handed the worse of the worse over to ICE. That ought to keep ICE busy for a while.
It seems like we have two groups facing off against each other; the immigration infrastructure (including ICE) and people who are in the US without legal permission. Both groups are treating our laws like they are guidelines or suggestions. You must have legal permission to be in the US. The government must follow due process (defined in the law). Neither of these is negotiable. And a failure by one side doesn't relieve the other side from their obligation.