Trump didn’t “botch” immigration. He addressed a problem created and exacerbated by the democrat party. Not just Joe and his minions. A good definition of hubris might be criticizing the cleanup of a mess you made.
As to the Twin Cities, I have a couple suggestions. Avoid carrying 9mm pistols with 30 some odd rounds to your basic peaceful expression of displeasure at the enforcement of law. Also avoid driving your several thousand pound vehicle at anyone who can fight back.
One way to avoid these difficulties would be to suggest to your elected officials follow the oath of office they took. There was no crawfish clause in that oath.
An organization that operates above the law isn't a law enforcement organization. And beating someone with the butt of your gun well after you've subdued them (and then shooting them) isn't law enforcement, it's thuggery, of the sort you find in mafia and cartel militias--and professionally-trained LEOs know it. That’s why a lot of them have spoken out against ICE's tactics. You have to work hard and train to be a cop. To watch a bunch of unprofessional loose cannons with no training swarm around your neighborhood and drack heads willy-nilly because they know there’s a pardon from The Big Man waiting is infuriating for real police.
Protesting while armed has been important to conservative causes in recent years, -are you saying give that up now? But I would just replace it with, maybe do not attempt to physically intervene in a law enforcement opperation (that includes offering "assistance" of any kind to those targeted by law enforcement, including immigration agents, for any reason and in any way) and especially not while armed. Unless you want to risk getting shot that is.
Protesting while carrying concealed is what was going on. Very few ways that works out well for the guy. Later inquiries indicate that his final protest wasn’t the first time he tangled with the law that night. It doesn’t appear that he was the wronged innocent first described. 30 9mm rounds are only self defense on a combat op. Not self defense.
Agree that concealed while protesting is an incredibly bad idea unlikely to end well. Very differant from open carry while protesting. But he also physically intervened in police matters! The lattee, even when unarmed, even when done in a "non violent" mannor (such as by aiding someone who has just been physically pushed by police, as Pretti did), and then finally by resisting arrest, that too will almost always end VERY badly for the person whom chooses such a route, at least with significant injuries and/or serious criminal charges. Add both of these togather, and...
I live in the Twin Cities and I've seen all too many videos of federal agents being way too aggressive in interactions with the public. Many of the protestors engage in provocative tactics, but well-trained local police who live in the community would not have responded as forcefully as many federal agents have. That's why Tom Homan was brought in: he's a competent professional, not a hardline ideologue like Greg Bovino and Kristi Noem are. And it's also true that the media have been completely one-sided in their coverage of the Minnesota operation; if these alleged journalists had been directly on the payroll of left-wing activist groups their coverage would have been the same.
To say it again: the emphasis on these ICE sweeps is NOT the most effective way to achieve large scale deportations. Use most of the funds spent by ICE to target employers who knowingly employ illegal workers and penalize those employers heavily with fines and prison time: presto, within a year millions of unauthorized immigrants who can't find jobs will leave voluntarily, especially if they are given other financial incentives to do so.
Imagine a journalist asking Trump if he is willing to greatly increase the federal efforts to penalize illegal hiring. Many GOP donors want an unlimited supply of cheap, compliant labor, but a huge percentage of blue-collar people would strongly support such an effort. Democrats, of course, would oppose anything that results in their number of future voters decreasing.
“Many of the protestors engage in provocative tactics, but well-trained local police who live in the community would not have responded as forcefully as many federal agents have.”
So, here’s a thought, abandon your sanctuary city policies. The only reason CBP was there was to protect ICE so they could do their jobs. In non-sanctuary jurisdictions, local law enforcement handles that. And it’s not a problem in the first place because ICE doesn’t have to surge those cities because they already coordinate with ICE.
You are right…crowd/riot control is not what CBP is trained for as that is not their remit. Just as taking care of hundreds of thousands of abandoned children at the border is not their remit. The simple fact is Democrats have absconded on their accountabilities to secure our border and to coordinate with federal agencies on deportations.
Now we have a mess to clean up. Trump has read the room on CBP tactics and is changing tact. Democrats like Nadler, Frey, Walz, Omar, and others don’t want a solution. They want the chaos…their base wants it and it distracts from their rampant corruption. And both parties have huge corporate interests that favor illegal workers…don’t act like that’s purely a Republican dynamic.
I pray Americans aren’t as dumb as Democrats require them to be to be successful. I honestly don’t think we are…2024 proved that. The question is likely about midterm turnout, which historically overwhelmingly advantages the opposition party. Dems may very well screw this one up.
Good points and all true. Also although parties have interests wanting cheap labor, Democratic donors and elites are at this point much more dependent on migrant labor then their GOP counterparts overall, simply do to the evolution of US economic and social geography and it's correlarion with politics since the end of The Cold War. Agraculture is by far the biggest remaining exception, but even that is starting to change as a lot of farmers are none too happy with many of Trump's policies these days, not that most are enthused with Democrats either.
Meanwhile, the leadership of many of the biggest corporations are also increasingly non partisan and just self interested, prefering some things about each party but not others, so they donate to and try to compromise both parties to whatever extent they are able.
Instead, the core of the GOP elite these days are regional/local elites, basically wealthy small to mid sized bussiness people, plus wealthy religious conservatives throughout corporate america who largely speak politics publically with their wallets so as to avoid excess risk or noteriety. The more secular religious right wing tech ideologues are a small but important group however because of how incredibly wealthy they are.
But except for the last group (and increasing even them as well!) all of these are now mostly consentrated in smaller wealthy pockits of the red leaning suburbs of Metro areas in the South and lower-central Midwest, as well as in mainly smaller to mid sized metros and exurbia within other parts of the country. Many also live on large semi-rural estates and broudly affluent leaning but otherwise non exclusive areas, but send their kids to expensive private schools and dine in fancy restaurants in the downtowns of the better off local communties.
They live an exclusive life in broadly well off areas in other words but not within ultra exclusive juresdictions. But most conservative US elites either no longer live (or never did in the first place) in the elite suburbs of blue urban regions, although a huge percentage of them once did live in such towns only a few decades ago but have since left such places in great numbers to be replaced by the growing numbers of wealthy Democrats, including many of whom have left just the sort of places their Republican counterparts have been moving to.
This will work if your goal is to punish employers. It will not work if your goal is to deport people here illegally. The illegals would face a choice: stay here without a job, or go back to their home country where they also don’t have a job. I don’t think many would choose to go back voluntarily.
"I don’t think many would choose to go back voluntarily."
Here is where the rubber would hit the road. Public assistance would have to be denied to illegals other than emergency medical care. If they don't have jobs/income to support themselves, they have to leave voluntarily or by force. Of course, the very partisan news media would go into overdrive on the sob stories of individual people and especially families. But if they receive welfare benefits the message would be loud and clear to billions of poor people worldwide: break into America and you can stay forever, on the public dime if need be.
It appear that several Millions have already gone back volentarily from census and orher estimates, all of which are falible to be sure. But the direction has indeed changed for now.
We may never know how Bovino would have deployed if the locals had done their job and dealt with crowd control. Pretty sure Bovino didn't have the option of noy policing up illegals. And yes, the entire TDS coven was excited about having something to be both anti-Trump and anti-lawful.
As to efficiency, if you're given a lawful order and the locals wuss out you need more bodies to provide security when you venture out of the perimeter to DO YOUR JOB. Otherwise you maybe get shot or run over. Had the local law enforcement professionals done their job the extra federals would not have been necessary. The abandonment of their responsibilities by local "peace loving" officials looks like a deliberate attempt to cause incidents.
The federal government has spent decades doing little virtue plays about illegal immigration. Trump is the first guy to get serious about it and to force the rest of the political class to make and follow decisions. Trump (and the rest of the 70+%) want a resolution with a LOT LESS wink wink, nudge nudge. That is whats going to happen.
Trump is only mildly serious about illegal immigration. He very intentionally has done very little to penalize employers who knowingly hire illegal workers. Many GOP donors want cheap, compliant labor, i.e. the same type of labor that Trump's businesses often used.
Thank God someone actually knows what Trumps intentions are. There are several other folk involved in running the national government. The "Trump is the devil" stuff doesn't play well to anyone who doesn't already think that way.
Penalize employers is the same tired line that gets deployed to combat each and every attempt to control immigration. Fact is that illegals depress wages and suck up resources that you and I pay for and hope we won't need. They make the economy weaker, as in hollow. If your statement were correct how could the democrats have failed to clean out the evil Trump empire when they could?
The ugly fact is that in Texas we have lots of hispanic workers from yard guys to executives (all legal citizens of the US) and while they don't want them imprisoned they DO want them to go home and enter legally if approved. Trump has turned the Green light (Y'all come right and and we'll feed you, medicate you and house you) to a Red light and done it without a Congress that only appears to be good at cashing it's paychecks.
Those of us who follow credible sources of information and who don't blindly support everything Trump says and does know the reality: Trump's greatest success on immigration has been sealing the border and greatly minimizing the number of illegal immigrants newly entering the country..
Another fact, though, is that during the five years total that Trump has been President very few employers have been penalized for hiring illegal immigrants. As recent events in Minnesota and elsewhere have shown, 95+% of federal resources devoted to immigration issues have NOT involved employers. That is intentional - if Trump wanted it otherwise he would make that happen. He knows that pro-cheap labor GOP donors don't want their supply of low-wage workers who are currently in the U.S. to be reduced.
Good to know that only people who agree with your sources (and you, of course) have a grasp of reality.
Trumps first move was to "close the border" by simply ordering that existing law be applied. A hill too far for the democrat party. That was reality the easy part.
Conflating Trumps first four year term with the progress in the first few months of his second term is silly. The first term was largely a lost effort. Trump acted as if he'd made an acquisition and all the "employees" would toe the line...wrong! He was seen as an enemy and a PITA by both sides of the aisle. He failed to understand that very few of the career politicos of either brand found him and his insidious goals comfy. I honestly think that having some time to sit and watch the machine operate made him a much more formidable. But thats just my take and., like credible sources, everybody has one.
You are factually wrong on what Trump has done to penalize employers of illegal immigrants. See the February 4 essay by Juan David Rojas on this blog that gives the data. See also Noah Smith's February 3, 2026 blog posting where he wrote the following: "But if we have the government investigate and fine companies that employ them, then companies will become much more averse to hiring people who are in the country illegally. That will decimate demand for undocumented labor, and there will be a big flood of illegal immigrants out of the country — without any detention centers, arrests, etc."
If in the future Trump makes a strong effort against employers of illegal immigrants, I will give him credit for doing so.
E-verify is a joke. Employers aren't allowed to challenge the documents presented to them because it's discriminatory. Here in Omaha illegal employees in a meatpacking plant all got off because the HR person was illegal and didn't submit the false documents so they weren't guilty of providing them. So sick of everyone gaming the system.
See my reply to MU2002 above. While what you write above is of course true to an extent do to just that sort of business to politics corruption, at this point most GOP elites are far less dependent on migrant labor then most Demcratic elites are, -or then much of the GOP elite of a couple of decades ago was. Even Trump's companies now use E-Verify and hire a diverse group of foriegn and US born workers. Trump likes to use seasonal guest workers from eastern Europe for some of his properties, but not to make that widely available for many others. I am pretty sure he does not see that as being hypocritical either, -he sure seems to think he is special after all! Lol. And much of his base seems to fully agree with no objection to such double standards.
But the GOP elete are still surely more dependent on migrant labor then much/most of the general public is, and this certianly has an impact on policy. The biggest differance from blue elites in this regard is the extent that much/most of red elites ALSO still directly depend on white or other US born manual or service wage labor to a great extent, with blue elites having largely replaced the latter with migrant labor (and their secund generation kids to a certian extent) in recent decades. This is because even most red elites now live in red states, and in red counties, in less densely urbanized places and only a small percent are in agreculture. And even those who are, are often in mechanized farming or own large ranches or feedlots with mostly or solely non migrant workforces.
Texas and Florida are partial exceptions of course, but even then those states have far more working class whites within most of their larger urban regions then do most large urban regions within say, California or around DC, NYC etc. Most Hispanic immigrants (not just Cubans) in Florida also have legal status and are often US citizens, to an extent unlike in most states, while a huge percentage of Texas's massive Hispanic population is 3rd+ generation US citizen, much more so then in most of the country.
On the other hand, to a remarkably great extent these days many blue elites, especially those within large global cities and their more elite suburbs, want US born workers from non immigrant backgrounds NO WHERE NEAR their property or, espeically, near their kids(!) They feel they must have migrants to serve them, are have a complete sense of entitlement in this regard. That is why I believe that so many of them are so willing to go to utter war on even just this one issue alone!
All that being said, it appears that already millions of migrants have alreadly left the US on the net since February of last year, just based on Trumps actions and a growing sense of unwelcome and perhaps not so bright future in this country.
In the spirit of Democrats become effective at governing, could one of the many TLP writers explain: how an effective Democrat mayor, governor, future president would have handled the situation as faced by President Trump? In addition, perhaps the writer would also outline how an effective Democrat mayor, governor, president would clean up the current mess in MN, and the nation.
The past has been thoroughly analyzed. It’s time to move forward.
The phenomenon Ruy writes about here is real. And it should convince those of us who are more centrist Democrats that we are unlikely to change the minds of our leftist progressives. Yes, we still should try, but success is unlikely. Therefore, we need to try to broaden the Democratic party rightward if we are to succeed.
I think I will change the emphasis of my own blog in that direction.
You have to admit the activist far left has been very successful at turning out huge crowds. When the crowd is large the drone pulls back to show you just how large. Democrats representing districts that are majority red have had to do some splainin. The activists punch way above their weight class. They seem well organised and cognisant of the idea of pushing the envelope a little with the violence in hopes of a reaction.
Yes, points taken. Please see my post of last week. But to win elections more broadly, a party has to convince the independents that you can govern in a way that is acceptable socially and patriotically.
That's what Harris tried to do in the 2024 election - broaden the Democratic Party rightward. To the extent that this strategy might have worked, it would have empowered the far left because they'd have more voters in their coalition.
By contrast, registering as independent and voting Republican in 2026 and 2028 will send a message and perhaps allow the moderates to regain control of the Democrats.
The ICE protests have “summer of love” written all over them. Except that the martyrs were white and weren’t murdered like Floyd. The Democrats, with their media ecosystem, often win the polls, but ultimately damage their own brand more.
I’ll be curious to see February voter registration changes when the protests have been parsed. The January changes seem to be back steady change towards Republicans, with some notable exceptions like California, Colorado, and Utah.
Edit: I ran the "Summer of Love" by Chat-GPT and it agreed that it was a short-term boost but ultimately hurt the Democratic brand. Of course, Chat-GPT is a people pleaser, even when you phrase your request to be objective.
You mean a well funded and organized insurrectionist group, working hand in hand with corporate media, has managed to provoke responses that they’re able to use in a propaganda campaign against Trump, on an issue where the public doesn’t even agree with them. Quite a trick they’ve pulled off. But then if they try to impose the unpopular agenda they’re advancing, they’ll lose. While fighting against voter ID. Never mind that the left is deliberately destroying the country against the will of the people. “hahaha, we stuck it to Trump!” is what matters.
An article in today's Free Press suggests Minnesota might not be so bad after all. Homan has linked turning over criminal aliens to reducing ICE's presence. It takes two ICE agents to accept the transfer of a prisoner in detention, or eight ice agents to make an arrest at a house complete with whistling demonstrators and they might even be unsuccessful in finding the guy. I would think many more municipalities will take a look at the alternatives and figure the quiet effective way is much easier for all concerned.
Another thought is that activists by grabbing the headlines on the issue establish themselves as being the pro illegal immigration side of things. Open borders is not a popular place to be. Trump is dialing down the rhetoric while increasing the size of his ICE army and deporting more people. His border Czar Homan is a seasoned professional who worked for Obama and is much more results orientated than many in the Trump administration.
Politically who knows. I love polling, and think Nate Silver and Nate Cohen walk on water. Issues polling is fascinating to me, but I always realize it's much harder to pin down than candidate polling. A week before the midterms it might be easier to predict.
Billie Eilish is only 24 and a celebrity, so it’s tempting to write off what she said as just youthful ignorance. The problem for the left is that she accurately parroted exactly what leftist leaders have been telling her for years.
It shows just how incapable they are at foreseeing even the most obvious consequences of their ideas.
Consistent with this, the Cygnal poll shows majority support for “Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) enforcing federal immigration laws to remove illegal immigrants from the U.S.”
There is a certain amount of wishful thinking in spinning this as some kind of egregious miscalculation by Trump. He overreached on tactics, smartly drew back and the policy preferences of the majority of Americans are largely unaffected. they dislike the tactics but they favor removing undocumented people from the population.
This tactical retreat seems in line with Trump’s M. O.
I think we need broad centrist parties. I'm tired of both extremes running things as if they represent the majority, which they don't. Let's have the middle and ship the extremes into media oblivion. JMO
We had broad centrists parties - two of them. Remember when Bill Clinton ran as a "New Democrat" who said "the era of Big Government is over" and that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare." Leftists sneered and called it Republican-lite. I didn't understand at the time given the differences on taxation and abortion, but in hindsight the leftists were correct.
What we need is for leftism as an ideological movement to be defeated. I think it's actually in its death throes right now. Nikita Khrushchev could stare down Nixon and say, "we will bury you." Leftists really believed that they were going to create a Utopia of freedom and prosperity. Now I think they're ideological suicide bombers who want to destroy Western civilization. But people around the globe are seeing through the act and there is a global revolt against leftism. OTOH, if the Democrats win in 2028 they'll open the floodgates, nuke the filibuster, legalize 20 million illegal immigrants and create a permanent majority like California.
It's as if both parties view moderate voters as people their power bases can extract concessions from.
"I'll vote down the ticket for the more authentically moderate candidate, regardless of party affiliation" might be the only way we can shut down the nonsense factory.
Exactly! This is a great rundown of how our national impulse toward immoderation on both sides causes escalating violence, wild pendulum swings, and no sustainable action on important policy. I wonder what sensible enforcement of the rules would even look like at this point - whistle brigades and banging down doors are chaos, and I'm looking for much better logistics.
"without clarifying in any way how they would actually handle the problem of illegal immigration"
You can't clarify how to handle a problem that (1) you deliberately caused and (2) don't actually think is a problem.
Trump didn’t “botch” immigration. He addressed a problem created and exacerbated by the democrat party. Not just Joe and his minions. A good definition of hubris might be criticizing the cleanup of a mess you made.
As to the Twin Cities, I have a couple suggestions. Avoid carrying 9mm pistols with 30 some odd rounds to your basic peaceful expression of displeasure at the enforcement of law. Also avoid driving your several thousand pound vehicle at anyone who can fight back.
One way to avoid these difficulties would be to suggest to your elected officials follow the oath of office they took. There was no crawfish clause in that oath.
An organization that operates above the law isn't a law enforcement organization. And beating someone with the butt of your gun well after you've subdued them (and then shooting them) isn't law enforcement, it's thuggery, of the sort you find in mafia and cartel militias--and professionally-trained LEOs know it. That’s why a lot of them have spoken out against ICE's tactics. You have to work hard and train to be a cop. To watch a bunch of unprofessional loose cannons with no training swarm around your neighborhood and drack heads willy-nilly because they know there’s a pardon from The Big Man waiting is infuriating for real police.
Yeah, I'm sure Elon Musk needs millions of cheap, compliant, ignorant Latinos to assemble Teslas.
Protesting while armed has been important to conservative causes in recent years, -are you saying give that up now? But I would just replace it with, maybe do not attempt to physically intervene in a law enforcement opperation (that includes offering "assistance" of any kind to those targeted by law enforcement, including immigration agents, for any reason and in any way) and especially not while armed. Unless you want to risk getting shot that is.
Protesting while carrying concealed is what was going on. Very few ways that works out well for the guy. Later inquiries indicate that his final protest wasn’t the first time he tangled with the law that night. It doesn’t appear that he was the wronged innocent first described. 30 9mm rounds are only self defense on a combat op. Not self defense.
Agree that concealed while protesting is an incredibly bad idea unlikely to end well. Very differant from open carry while protesting. But he also physically intervened in police matters! The lattee, even when unarmed, even when done in a "non violent" mannor (such as by aiding someone who has just been physically pushed by police, as Pretti did), and then finally by resisting arrest, that too will almost always end VERY badly for the person whom chooses such a route, at least with significant injuries and/or serious criminal charges. Add both of these togather, and...
I live in the Twin Cities and I've seen all too many videos of federal agents being way too aggressive in interactions with the public. Many of the protestors engage in provocative tactics, but well-trained local police who live in the community would not have responded as forcefully as many federal agents have. That's why Tom Homan was brought in: he's a competent professional, not a hardline ideologue like Greg Bovino and Kristi Noem are. And it's also true that the media have been completely one-sided in their coverage of the Minnesota operation; if these alleged journalists had been directly on the payroll of left-wing activist groups their coverage would have been the same.
To say it again: the emphasis on these ICE sweeps is NOT the most effective way to achieve large scale deportations. Use most of the funds spent by ICE to target employers who knowingly employ illegal workers and penalize those employers heavily with fines and prison time: presto, within a year millions of unauthorized immigrants who can't find jobs will leave voluntarily, especially if they are given other financial incentives to do so.
Imagine a journalist asking Trump if he is willing to greatly increase the federal efforts to penalize illegal hiring. Many GOP donors want an unlimited supply of cheap, compliant labor, but a huge percentage of blue-collar people would strongly support such an effort. Democrats, of course, would oppose anything that results in their number of future voters decreasing.
“Many of the protestors engage in provocative tactics, but well-trained local police who live in the community would not have responded as forcefully as many federal agents have.”
So, here’s a thought, abandon your sanctuary city policies. The only reason CBP was there was to protect ICE so they could do their jobs. In non-sanctuary jurisdictions, local law enforcement handles that. And it’s not a problem in the first place because ICE doesn’t have to surge those cities because they already coordinate with ICE.
You are right…crowd/riot control is not what CBP is trained for as that is not their remit. Just as taking care of hundreds of thousands of abandoned children at the border is not their remit. The simple fact is Democrats have absconded on their accountabilities to secure our border and to coordinate with federal agencies on deportations.
Now we have a mess to clean up. Trump has read the room on CBP tactics and is changing tact. Democrats like Nadler, Frey, Walz, Omar, and others don’t want a solution. They want the chaos…their base wants it and it distracts from their rampant corruption. And both parties have huge corporate interests that favor illegal workers…don’t act like that’s purely a Republican dynamic.
I pray Americans aren’t as dumb as Democrats require them to be to be successful. I honestly don’t think we are…2024 proved that. The question is likely about midterm turnout, which historically overwhelmingly advantages the opposition party. Dems may very well screw this one up.
Good points and all true. Also although parties have interests wanting cheap labor, Democratic donors and elites are at this point much more dependent on migrant labor then their GOP counterparts overall, simply do to the evolution of US economic and social geography and it's correlarion with politics since the end of The Cold War. Agraculture is by far the biggest remaining exception, but even that is starting to change as a lot of farmers are none too happy with many of Trump's policies these days, not that most are enthused with Democrats either.
Meanwhile, the leadership of many of the biggest corporations are also increasingly non partisan and just self interested, prefering some things about each party but not others, so they donate to and try to compromise both parties to whatever extent they are able.
Instead, the core of the GOP elite these days are regional/local elites, basically wealthy small to mid sized bussiness people, plus wealthy religious conservatives throughout corporate america who largely speak politics publically with their wallets so as to avoid excess risk or noteriety. The more secular religious right wing tech ideologues are a small but important group however because of how incredibly wealthy they are.
But except for the last group (and increasing even them as well!) all of these are now mostly consentrated in smaller wealthy pockits of the red leaning suburbs of Metro areas in the South and lower-central Midwest, as well as in mainly smaller to mid sized metros and exurbia within other parts of the country. Many also live on large semi-rural estates and broudly affluent leaning but otherwise non exclusive areas, but send their kids to expensive private schools and dine in fancy restaurants in the downtowns of the better off local communties.
They live an exclusive life in broadly well off areas in other words but not within ultra exclusive juresdictions. But most conservative US elites either no longer live (or never did in the first place) in the elite suburbs of blue urban regions, although a huge percentage of them once did live in such towns only a few decades ago but have since left such places in great numbers to be replaced by the growing numbers of wealthy Democrats, including many of whom have left just the sort of places their Republican counterparts have been moving to.
This will work if your goal is to punish employers. It will not work if your goal is to deport people here illegally. The illegals would face a choice: stay here without a job, or go back to their home country where they also don’t have a job. I don’t think many would choose to go back voluntarily.
"I don’t think many would choose to go back voluntarily."
Here is where the rubber would hit the road. Public assistance would have to be denied to illegals other than emergency medical care. If they don't have jobs/income to support themselves, they have to leave voluntarily or by force. Of course, the very partisan news media would go into overdrive on the sob stories of individual people and especially families. But if they receive welfare benefits the message would be loud and clear to billions of poor people worldwide: break into America and you can stay forever, on the public dime if need be.
It appear that several Millions have already gone back volentarily from census and orher estimates, all of which are falible to be sure. But the direction has indeed changed for now.
We may never know how Bovino would have deployed if the locals had done their job and dealt with crowd control. Pretty sure Bovino didn't have the option of noy policing up illegals. And yes, the entire TDS coven was excited about having something to be both anti-Trump and anti-lawful.
As to efficiency, if you're given a lawful order and the locals wuss out you need more bodies to provide security when you venture out of the perimeter to DO YOUR JOB. Otherwise you maybe get shot or run over. Had the local law enforcement professionals done their job the extra federals would not have been necessary. The abandonment of their responsibilities by local "peace loving" officials looks like a deliberate attempt to cause incidents.
The federal government has spent decades doing little virtue plays about illegal immigration. Trump is the first guy to get serious about it and to force the rest of the political class to make and follow decisions. Trump (and the rest of the 70+%) want a resolution with a LOT LESS wink wink, nudge nudge. That is whats going to happen.
Trump is only mildly serious about illegal immigration. He very intentionally has done very little to penalize employers who knowingly hire illegal workers. Many GOP donors want cheap, compliant labor, i.e. the same type of labor that Trump's businesses often used.
Thank God someone actually knows what Trumps intentions are. There are several other folk involved in running the national government. The "Trump is the devil" stuff doesn't play well to anyone who doesn't already think that way.
Penalize employers is the same tired line that gets deployed to combat each and every attempt to control immigration. Fact is that illegals depress wages and suck up resources that you and I pay for and hope we won't need. They make the economy weaker, as in hollow. If your statement were correct how could the democrats have failed to clean out the evil Trump empire when they could?
The ugly fact is that in Texas we have lots of hispanic workers from yard guys to executives (all legal citizens of the US) and while they don't want them imprisoned they DO want them to go home and enter legally if approved. Trump has turned the Green light (Y'all come right and and we'll feed you, medicate you and house you) to a Red light and done it without a Congress that only appears to be good at cashing it's paychecks.
Those of us who follow credible sources of information and who don't blindly support everything Trump says and does know the reality: Trump's greatest success on immigration has been sealing the border and greatly minimizing the number of illegal immigrants newly entering the country..
Another fact, though, is that during the five years total that Trump has been President very few employers have been penalized for hiring illegal immigrants. As recent events in Minnesota and elsewhere have shown, 95+% of federal resources devoted to immigration issues have NOT involved employers. That is intentional - if Trump wanted it otherwise he would make that happen. He knows that pro-cheap labor GOP donors don't want their supply of low-wage workers who are currently in the U.S. to be reduced.
Good to know that only people who agree with your sources (and you, of course) have a grasp of reality.
Trumps first move was to "close the border" by simply ordering that existing law be applied. A hill too far for the democrat party. That was reality the easy part.
Conflating Trumps first four year term with the progress in the first few months of his second term is silly. The first term was largely a lost effort. Trump acted as if he'd made an acquisition and all the "employees" would toe the line...wrong! He was seen as an enemy and a PITA by both sides of the aisle. He failed to understand that very few of the career politicos of either brand found him and his insidious goals comfy. I honestly think that having some time to sit and watch the machine operate made him a much more formidable. But thats just my take and., like credible sources, everybody has one.
It’s clear Mr Webster’s overwhelming interest is to punish employers. Anything else is secondary.
You are factually wrong on what Trump has done to penalize employers of illegal immigrants. See the February 4 essay by Juan David Rojas on this blog that gives the data. See also Noah Smith's February 3, 2026 blog posting where he wrote the following: "But if we have the government investigate and fine companies that employ them, then companies will become much more averse to hiring people who are in the country illegally. That will decimate demand for undocumented labor, and there will be a big flood of illegal immigrants out of the country — without any detention centers, arrests, etc."
If in the future Trump makes a strong effort against employers of illegal immigrants, I will give him credit for doing so.
E-verify is a joke. Employers aren't allowed to challenge the documents presented to them because it's discriminatory. Here in Omaha illegal employees in a meatpacking plant all got off because the HR person was illegal and didn't submit the false documents so they weren't guilty of providing them. So sick of everyone gaming the system.
See my reply to MU2002 above. While what you write above is of course true to an extent do to just that sort of business to politics corruption, at this point most GOP elites are far less dependent on migrant labor then most Demcratic elites are, -or then much of the GOP elite of a couple of decades ago was. Even Trump's companies now use E-Verify and hire a diverse group of foriegn and US born workers. Trump likes to use seasonal guest workers from eastern Europe for some of his properties, but not to make that widely available for many others. I am pretty sure he does not see that as being hypocritical either, -he sure seems to think he is special after all! Lol. And much of his base seems to fully agree with no objection to such double standards.
But the GOP elete are still surely more dependent on migrant labor then much/most of the general public is, and this certianly has an impact on policy. The biggest differance from blue elites in this regard is the extent that much/most of red elites ALSO still directly depend on white or other US born manual or service wage labor to a great extent, with blue elites having largely replaced the latter with migrant labor (and their secund generation kids to a certian extent) in recent decades. This is because even most red elites now live in red states, and in red counties, in less densely urbanized places and only a small percent are in agreculture. And even those who are, are often in mechanized farming or own large ranches or feedlots with mostly or solely non migrant workforces.
Texas and Florida are partial exceptions of course, but even then those states have far more working class whites within most of their larger urban regions then do most large urban regions within say, California or around DC, NYC etc. Most Hispanic immigrants (not just Cubans) in Florida also have legal status and are often US citizens, to an extent unlike in most states, while a huge percentage of Texas's massive Hispanic population is 3rd+ generation US citizen, much more so then in most of the country.
On the other hand, to a remarkably great extent these days many blue elites, especially those within large global cities and their more elite suburbs, want US born workers from non immigrant backgrounds NO WHERE NEAR their property or, espeically, near their kids(!) They feel they must have migrants to serve them, are have a complete sense of entitlement in this regard. That is why I believe that so many of them are so willing to go to utter war on even just this one issue alone!
All that being said, it appears that already millions of migrants have alreadly left the US on the net since February of last year, just based on Trumps actions and a growing sense of unwelcome and perhaps not so bright future in this country.
In the spirit of Democrats become effective at governing, could one of the many TLP writers explain: how an effective Democrat mayor, governor, future president would have handled the situation as faced by President Trump? In addition, perhaps the writer would also outline how an effective Democrat mayor, governor, president would clean up the current mess in MN, and the nation.
The past has been thoroughly analyzed. It’s time to move forward.
The phenomenon Ruy writes about here is real. And it should convince those of us who are more centrist Democrats that we are unlikely to change the minds of our leftist progressives. Yes, we still should try, but success is unlikely. Therefore, we need to try to broaden the Democratic party rightward if we are to succeed.
I think I will change the emphasis of my own blog in that direction.
You have to admit the activist far left has been very successful at turning out huge crowds. When the crowd is large the drone pulls back to show you just how large. Democrats representing districts that are majority red have had to do some splainin. The activists punch way above their weight class. They seem well organised and cognisant of the idea of pushing the envelope a little with the violence in hopes of a reaction.
Yes, points taken. Please see my post of last week. But to win elections more broadly, a party has to convince the independents that you can govern in a way that is acceptable socially and patriotically.
That's what Harris tried to do in the 2024 election - broaden the Democratic Party rightward. To the extent that this strategy might have worked, it would have empowered the far left because they'd have more voters in their coalition.
By contrast, registering as independent and voting Republican in 2026 and 2028 will send a message and perhaps allow the moderates to regain control of the Democrats.
Don't make me laugh. How did Harris to push the Dem party rightward?
The ICE protests have “summer of love” written all over them. Except that the martyrs were white and weren’t murdered like Floyd. The Democrats, with their media ecosystem, often win the polls, but ultimately damage their own brand more.
I’ll be curious to see February voter registration changes when the protests have been parsed. The January changes seem to be back steady change towards Republicans, with some notable exceptions like California, Colorado, and Utah.
Edit: I ran the "Summer of Love" by Chat-GPT and it agreed that it was a short-term boost but ultimately hurt the Democratic brand. Of course, Chat-GPT is a people pleaser, even when you phrase your request to be objective.
https://chatgpt.com/share/6984943c-d320-8007-b21e-7fedd7594e29
You mean a well funded and organized insurrectionist group, working hand in hand with corporate media, has managed to provoke responses that they’re able to use in a propaganda campaign against Trump, on an issue where the public doesn’t even agree with them. Quite a trick they’ve pulled off. But then if they try to impose the unpopular agenda they’re advancing, they’ll lose. While fighting against voter ID. Never mind that the left is deliberately destroying the country against the will of the people. “hahaha, we stuck it to Trump!” is what matters.
An article in today's Free Press suggests Minnesota might not be so bad after all. Homan has linked turning over criminal aliens to reducing ICE's presence. It takes two ICE agents to accept the transfer of a prisoner in detention, or eight ice agents to make an arrest at a house complete with whistling demonstrators and they might even be unsuccessful in finding the guy. I would think many more municipalities will take a look at the alternatives and figure the quiet effective way is much easier for all concerned.
Another thought is that activists by grabbing the headlines on the issue establish themselves as being the pro illegal immigration side of things. Open borders is not a popular place to be. Trump is dialing down the rhetoric while increasing the size of his ICE army and deporting more people. His border Czar Homan is a seasoned professional who worked for Obama and is much more results orientated than many in the Trump administration.
Politically who knows. I love polling, and think Nate Silver and Nate Cohen walk on water. Issues polling is fascinating to me, but I always realize it's much harder to pin down than candidate polling. A week before the midterms it might be easier to predict.
"Eilish got a standing ovation at the Grammys." Celebs always get it right.
Billie Eilish is only 24 and a celebrity, so it’s tempting to write off what she said as just youthful ignorance. The problem for the left is that she accurately parroted exactly what leftist leaders have been telling her for years.
It shows just how incapable they are at foreseeing even the most obvious consequences of their ideas.
You might want to see a doc about that irony deficiency.
Medic!!!!
My big mistake was not putting "lol" after the original comment.
Consistent with this, the Cygnal poll shows majority support for “Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) enforcing federal immigration laws to remove illegal immigrants from the U.S.”
There is a certain amount of wishful thinking in spinning this as some kind of egregious miscalculation by Trump. He overreached on tactics, smartly drew back and the policy preferences of the majority of Americans are largely unaffected. they dislike the tactics but they favor removing undocumented people from the population.
This tactical retreat seems in line with Trump’s M. O.
I think we need broad centrist parties. I'm tired of both extremes running things as if they represent the majority, which they don't. Let's have the middle and ship the extremes into media oblivion. JMO
We had broad centrists parties - two of them. Remember when Bill Clinton ran as a "New Democrat" who said "the era of Big Government is over" and that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare." Leftists sneered and called it Republican-lite. I didn't understand at the time given the differences on taxation and abortion, but in hindsight the leftists were correct.
What we need is for leftism as an ideological movement to be defeated. I think it's actually in its death throes right now. Nikita Khrushchev could stare down Nixon and say, "we will bury you." Leftists really believed that they were going to create a Utopia of freedom and prosperity. Now I think they're ideological suicide bombers who want to destroy Western civilization. But people around the globe are seeing through the act and there is a global revolt against leftism. OTOH, if the Democrats win in 2028 they'll open the floodgates, nuke the filibuster, legalize 20 million illegal immigrants and create a permanent majority like California.
It's as if both parties view moderate voters as people their power bases can extract concessions from.
"I'll vote down the ticket for the more authentically moderate candidate, regardless of party affiliation" might be the only way we can shut down the nonsense factory.
Exactly! This is a great rundown of how our national impulse toward immoderation on both sides causes escalating violence, wild pendulum swings, and no sustainable action on important policy. I wonder what sensible enforcement of the rules would even look like at this point - whistle brigades and banging down doors are chaos, and I'm looking for much better logistics.
I wish ICE was allowed to just put ice picks in the tires of every car blocking the roads.