An outstanding study. As a country we are most certainly diverse. The key question for me is: How should these data be used to get Dem leaders off their asses and develop a coherent and compelling set of actionable positions ie economy, immigration, etc to get back in power?
Anyway, Trump pardoned rioters who attacked law enforcement, engaged in lawlessness and attempted to overturn an election, so spare us the attempt to claim you, he or MAGA really cares about that stuff.
This is instead very clearly intentional escalation pursuant to a power grab--and not only because it is done against the express wishes of the state's governor. (party of 'states rights' my arse) We know from his first term that Trump has for awhile now wanted to use the U.S. military against the domestic population; previously, he had experienced military officers in place that dissuaded him, as we can garner from the testimony of people like Barr. Now those statesman are gone, the government is run by incompetent sycophants like Hegseth, and it's quite clear the ICE protest is a pretext. We know this because this response is excessive in the extreme--never before in history has any president drafted an order that allows the military to be deployed on the homeland and usurp local law enforcement wherever the president or SecDef want, as this latest order does. All prior deployments to quell riots were location specific--the president authorized the army to go *into Los Angeles* in 1992, or *into Tuscaloosa* in 1963 for a specified term. Trump is the first and only president to draft an order that says "we're authorizing the army to go into Los Angeles and wherever else we want to send them," with *no* specified end-date to this deployment.
The fact that you support this is as some sort of 'good thing' is, at the very least, pretty proof positive that you will essentially accept any act he commits, as long as he posts some rationalization for it on Truth Social, and only further substantiates the accusations that those who share your views do indeed support the basis for an authoritarian state.
And here I thought that "progressives" were against "whataboutism." Tell us: Is there a single principle that you and your kind support across the board?
Personally, I am much more disturbed and concerned by the use of military style forces being sent into our streets and communities to "round up suspects" than I am of brown people working in restaurants or laboring in construction or landscaping. The overreach and provocation of the current administration is nothing less than disgusting. If we the people do not stand up to oppose this march toward authoritarianism in every way possible we will find ourselves in a very dark and uncomfortable place sooner than we think.
The L.A. raid was for people who had warrants out -- in other words, criminals. The rioters are attacking federal officers performing their constitutional duties.
(Your "who will pick our fruit" argument is wearing thin. Dems don't want to let go of their indentured servants.)
You can go read the executive order itself. It doesn't even mention warrants. It says it is calling in the National guard to,
"protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring **or are likely to occur** based on current threat assessments and planned operations."
Emphasis mine. Basically Hegseth and Trump are saying they're going to send troops wherever they want, whenever they want--all they need to say is "We determined a protest was likely to occur there."
If you're okay with that, then it is no longer an exaggeration to call you a fascist--this is more or less how the gestapo operated, and this was more or less the reasoning guys like Mussolini used. But you know what? You don't need to hide it anymore. You've got the army on your side. The rest of us, unfortunately, are in danger of becoming a "person in a place where a protest is likely to occur."
I would argue the raids were not looking for criminals. Instead they went to Home Depot looking for undocumented workers and even those who are documented, but do this work. In short, indiscriminate overreach by federal authorities. Separate discussion on a robust policy and fines for people who crossed the border illegally - but who have lived here for years and have no criminal behavior.
Most republicans want Unauthorized migrants (even if they are not otherwise criminals, they are not legally here!) to be deported, not fined and given legal status. This is actually what Trump promised, along with stopping illegal entries. That many profesional class Democrats increasingly cannot even seem to fathom this notion shows just what differant worlds we now live in.
Dems lost 300K unaccompanied migrant children, so as not to slow the flow at the border. They were handed to barely or unvetted guardians. with no DNA testing. They were suppose to check in with the government in 30-90 days.
Years later, 300K kids and those to whom they were handed, have disappeared. They are not in school , because kids in school are easy to find. They arrive with both a state and federal check, so schools keep very good track of them.
In reality, the lucky ones are working on freezing factory floors , or picking produce in the heat. The unlucky ones are changed to beds in mobile brothels, visiting every US city with professional sports.
300K kids in bondage on US soil. I'd say we are already in a very dark and uncomfortable place.
There's nothing illegal or authoritarian about what Trump has ordered. By the way, have you thanked the illegals of L.A. for recording the Republican ads in the next two elections?
In addition, President Obama deported many millions of non-citizens by using due process and without threatening civil war. But I guess that wasn't good enough. Do people really want jackbooted thugs given free reign in our streets?
I think you need to look outside your silo. Calling trained law enforcement men and women 'thugs" is repulsive to most of America. But you do you and watch your party sink even lower, if possible.
Again, in your silo I'm sure people agree with you. Check out Trump's latest polls America's disapproval of your side's actions. It's almost like you're trying to never win another election.
Nope: Obama actually didn't use any more due process for most of his deportations then Trump has for most of his! Obviously, Trump has done some shocking things already, but you now seem to think routine immigration enforcement (not just of convicted criminals!) which is what ICE was actually doing when this started is one of them. The fact that so many not just cities but counties and now whole states have become sanctuary jurisdictions has made their job far more dificult then it would otherwise be.
The Democratic Party has been getting good information and advice such as this from many political scientists. I've even read extremely well researched explicit advice on more moderate language and issues from sources such as Jacobin the socialist web site.
Elected Democratic officials want to get re elected, that is their very first most important priority. Hard to run for the senate or governor if you lose your congressional seat in the primary. The activist class includes both mid income volunteers, staffers, non profits, and deep pocketed billionaires ready to drop six figures and more.
In fairness it's not just Democrats who are deterred from running more moderate candidates.
Call me names, but I don't think the Democrats are exactly smart to be calling rioters peaceful protesters when the photos and videos of rioters standing next to burning vehicles holding Mexican flags, and burning American flags are everywhere. At the very least, I think the Democrats need to hire some better "messaging" consultants. LOL
Native American Lands and Urban Suburbs are perhaps the clearest cases among the communities of culture trumping policy. Urban Suburbs like their leftist social policies even at the cost of high tax burdens. NAL on the other hand oppose government cuts but vote R because of guns and faith
No, I don't think that's actually the case. For one thing, gun policy and social policies are in fact very important to many voters and are often a policy priority! Urban Suburbs voters lean Dem because of more support for more left-"progressive" social policies, while Native American Lands tend to Value gun ownership and favor more libertarian gun polcies.
Furthermore, Urban Surburbs and NALs are both quite bipartisan in reality despite clear partisan leans. Many Urban Suburbs counties still contain a large majority R voting white working class, and many contain large upscale religious conservative populations (especially in outer suburbs) as well. In addition, much of R Voting of NALs isn't even from Tribal populations anyway. Polls have shown most Tribal members overall continue to vote for Democrats, though this is not always the case and an increasingly large minority do vote R including for Trump.
How should the Democrats use this information? Clearly we live in a nation of distinctly different groups. Rather than the usual slice and dice, offering a few goodies to each group, a wiser choice would be to find one goal that appeals to everyone.
I just re-read Ruy’s March 20, 2025 essay “How Deep a Hole Are the Democrats In?’ Wow and double wow. People moving out of states controlled by the democrats and the inevitable result of losing Congressional seats and electoral votes in 2030.
The party really needs a success story; a well run blue state; lowering crime rate, increasing student academic performance, streamlined permitting process, etc. and increasing population. In other words a focus on effective governing. This is a very long road to travel, but the old play book doesn’t work anymore, so the party might as well give people what they want, an improved quality of life.
The recipe is out there to turn around a state. Lots of places where it’s happening. It is just that the policies successful states implement can be the opposite of current democrat party policy.
Time to decide; do the remaining democrats want the comfort of sticking to the old policies, or do they want to start winning again?
Enjoy the well researched info, but am beginning to suspect the Dem inclination to perpetually assert their educational superiority is not an accident. The rural Midwest has "low levels of formal education"? Seriously? Would it not be just as easy, and far less insulting, to say most residents are K-12 grads, while a little less than 1/4th, are college graduates?
I find it interesting Dems repeatedly insult Red State levels of education with nary a mention most of the 10 million people Dems purposefully imported from all over the word, were unlikely to have finished high school, if they attended at all. Most of El Salvador ends school after the 5th grade. Neither Venezuela or Haiti have had a functioning educational system for decades. Africans who crossed the border likely lack much or any formal education, because African education is only available to those who can pay.
Dems are in the process of committing Party suicide via immigration. After last weekend, there is no doubt Dems support open borders. They not only purposefully dissolved the Southern Border for 4 years, they will do it again at their first opportunity. Moreover, Dems obviously seek to make the US a giant home base. The Party policy appears to be anyone who can touch US soil, can never ever be forced to leave, for any reason.
In light of that fact, Dems might, at least, attempt to avoid insulting a large swath of the US. Especially one, swimming in Swing States.
I think you're being a bit oversensitive. 'Formal' = formal educational institutions, i.e. K-12 and college/universities. (you can stretch it to include trade schools, too)
My wife's grandfather never went to college; he finished high school and ran the family farm until the day he died. He knew everything there was to know about agriculture--he was a very educated man, but beyond high school his education was instrumental, not *formal*. I don't think it's an insult to say so. For his purposes, a formal college education would have probably had minimal returns anyway.
I had heard that NALs "the rez" had voted R this election, but I hadn't believed it all the way, now I do. Liberal Patriot doesn't manipulate statistics.
I've spent a short while living on the Fort Peck Reservation and have lived in close proximity to others. Of course not all Native Americans are like the Sioux and it's hard to make generalisations about what are basically many different cultures, but I'm half surprised, half not.
At the time (35 years ago) a useful stereotype was to think of the then young guys my age I socialized with, was midwesterners. Many similarities with everyone else living in eastern Montana. Like ex senator Jon Tester.
"Hey, I wanna do things like get around due process and deploy the army to usurp local law enforcement in states where the governors don't want me to--but I'm not sure how to justify that kind of crazy stuff."
"Every time you make an authoritarian move find an unseemly illegal migrant and claim the people opposing you support them instead of *law and order*, to redirect attention from what you're actually doing."
"Does that really work?"
"You have no idea. It's got a great historical track record"
An outstanding study. As a country we are most certainly diverse. The key question for me is: How should these data be used to get Dem leaders off their asses and develop a coherent and compelling set of actionable positions ie economy, immigration, etc to get back in power?
Q: How should Dem leaders get off their asses regarding immigration?
A: Not supporting riots, attacking law enforcement, and lawlessness.
Name one Dem politician (besides Fetterman) who condemns this violence?
Uh, the governor of California?
Anyway, Trump pardoned rioters who attacked law enforcement, engaged in lawlessness and attempted to overturn an election, so spare us the attempt to claim you, he or MAGA really cares about that stuff.
This is instead very clearly intentional escalation pursuant to a power grab--and not only because it is done against the express wishes of the state's governor. (party of 'states rights' my arse) We know from his first term that Trump has for awhile now wanted to use the U.S. military against the domestic population; previously, he had experienced military officers in place that dissuaded him, as we can garner from the testimony of people like Barr. Now those statesman are gone, the government is run by incompetent sycophants like Hegseth, and it's quite clear the ICE protest is a pretext. We know this because this response is excessive in the extreme--never before in history has any president drafted an order that allows the military to be deployed on the homeland and usurp local law enforcement wherever the president or SecDef want, as this latest order does. All prior deployments to quell riots were location specific--the president authorized the army to go *into Los Angeles* in 1992, or *into Tuscaloosa* in 1963 for a specified term. Trump is the first and only president to draft an order that says "we're authorizing the army to go into Los Angeles and wherever else we want to send them," with *no* specified end-date to this deployment.
The fact that you support this is as some sort of 'good thing' is, at the very least, pretty proof positive that you will essentially accept any act he commits, as long as he posts some rationalization for it on Truth Social, and only further substantiates the accusations that those who share your views do indeed support the basis for an authoritarian state.
What a fairy tale. I'm amazed you can get out from under the bed every morning.
And here I thought that "progressives" were against "whataboutism." Tell us: Is there a single principle that you and your kind support across the board?
Personally, I am much more disturbed and concerned by the use of military style forces being sent into our streets and communities to "round up suspects" than I am of brown people working in restaurants or laboring in construction or landscaping. The overreach and provocation of the current administration is nothing less than disgusting. If we the people do not stand up to oppose this march toward authoritarianism in every way possible we will find ourselves in a very dark and uncomfortable place sooner than we think.
The L.A. raid was for people who had warrants out -- in other words, criminals. The rioters are attacking federal officers performing their constitutional duties.
(Your "who will pick our fruit" argument is wearing thin. Dems don't want to let go of their indentured servants.)
Man, Trump has made you folks so lazy--you can't even spout propaganda that holds up to a simple Google search.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/06/department-of-defense-security-for-the-protection-of-department-of-homeland-security-functions/
You can go read the executive order itself. It doesn't even mention warrants. It says it is calling in the National guard to,
"protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring **or are likely to occur** based on current threat assessments and planned operations."
Emphasis mine. Basically Hegseth and Trump are saying they're going to send troops wherever they want, whenever they want--all they need to say is "We determined a protest was likely to occur there."
If you're okay with that, then it is no longer an exaggeration to call you a fascist--this is more or less how the gestapo operated, and this was more or less the reasoning guys like Mussolini used. But you know what? You don't need to hide it anymore. You've got the army on your side. The rest of us, unfortunately, are in danger of becoming a "person in a place where a protest is likely to occur."
Now you're just being silly and hysterical.
Everything I said is based on what is in Trump's order, literally nothing you have said is.
To anyone who may be reading this, I'll leave you to judge what that says about whose being silly here.
I would argue the raids were not looking for criminals. Instead they went to Home Depot looking for undocumented workers and even those who are documented, but do this work. In short, indiscriminate overreach by federal authorities. Separate discussion on a robust policy and fines for people who crossed the border illegally - but who have lived here for years and have no criminal behavior.
Most republicans want Unauthorized migrants (even if they are not otherwise criminals, they are not legally here!) to be deported, not fined and given legal status. This is actually what Trump promised, along with stopping illegal entries. That many profesional class Democrats increasingly cannot even seem to fathom this notion shows just what differant worlds we now live in.
Dems lost 300K unaccompanied migrant children, so as not to slow the flow at the border. They were handed to barely or unvetted guardians. with no DNA testing. They were suppose to check in with the government in 30-90 days.
Years later, 300K kids and those to whom they were handed, have disappeared. They are not in school , because kids in school are easy to find. They arrive with both a state and federal check, so schools keep very good track of them.
In reality, the lucky ones are working on freezing factory floors , or picking produce in the heat. The unlucky ones are changed to beds in mobile brothels, visiting every US city with professional sports.
300K kids in bondage on US soil. I'd say we are already in a very dark and uncomfortable place.
There's nothing illegal or authoritarian about what Trump has ordered. By the way, have you thanked the illegals of L.A. for recording the Republican ads in the next two elections?
In addition, President Obama deported many millions of non-citizens by using due process and without threatening civil war. But I guess that wasn't good enough. Do people really want jackbooted thugs given free reign in our streets?
I think you need to look outside your silo. Calling trained law enforcement men and women 'thugs" is repulsive to most of America. But you do you and watch your party sink even lower, if possible.
They are thugs. Wake up.
Again, in your silo I'm sure people agree with you. Check out Trump's latest polls America's disapproval of your side's actions. It's almost like you're trying to never win another election.
Nope: Obama actually didn't use any more due process for most of his deportations then Trump has for most of his! Obviously, Trump has done some shocking things already, but you now seem to think routine immigration enforcement (not just of convicted criminals!) which is what ICE was actually doing when this started is one of them. The fact that so many not just cities but counties and now whole states have become sanctuary jurisdictions has made their job far more dificult then it would otherwise be.
Oooh! Jackbooted thugs!
The Democratic Party has been getting good information and advice such as this from many political scientists. I've even read extremely well researched explicit advice on more moderate language and issues from sources such as Jacobin the socialist web site.
Elected Democratic officials want to get re elected, that is their very first most important priority. Hard to run for the senate or governor if you lose your congressional seat in the primary. The activist class includes both mid income volunteers, staffers, non profits, and deep pocketed billionaires ready to drop six figures and more.
In fairness it's not just Democrats who are deterred from running more moderate candidates.
Call me names, but I don't think the Democrats are exactly smart to be calling rioters peaceful protesters when the photos and videos of rioters standing next to burning vehicles holding Mexican flags, and burning American flags are everywhere. At the very least, I think the Democrats need to hire some better "messaging" consultants. LOL
Native American Lands and Urban Suburbs are perhaps the clearest cases among the communities of culture trumping policy. Urban Suburbs like their leftist social policies even at the cost of high tax burdens. NAL on the other hand oppose government cuts but vote R because of guns and faith
No, I don't think that's actually the case. For one thing, gun policy and social policies are in fact very important to many voters and are often a policy priority! Urban Suburbs voters lean Dem because of more support for more left-"progressive" social policies, while Native American Lands tend to Value gun ownership and favor more libertarian gun polcies.
Furthermore, Urban Surburbs and NALs are both quite bipartisan in reality despite clear partisan leans. Many Urban Suburbs counties still contain a large majority R voting white working class, and many contain large upscale religious conservative populations (especially in outer suburbs) as well. In addition, much of R Voting of NALs isn't even from Tribal populations anyway. Polls have shown most Tribal members overall continue to vote for Democrats, though this is not always the case and an increasingly large minority do vote R including for Trump.
How should the Democrats use this information? Clearly we live in a nation of distinctly different groups. Rather than the usual slice and dice, offering a few goodies to each group, a wiser choice would be to find one goal that appeals to everyone.
I just re-read Ruy’s March 20, 2025 essay “How Deep a Hole Are the Democrats In?’ Wow and double wow. People moving out of states controlled by the democrats and the inevitable result of losing Congressional seats and electoral votes in 2030.
The party really needs a success story; a well run blue state; lowering crime rate, increasing student academic performance, streamlined permitting process, etc. and increasing population. In other words a focus on effective governing. This is a very long road to travel, but the old play book doesn’t work anymore, so the party might as well give people what they want, an improved quality of life.
The recipe is out there to turn around a state. Lots of places where it’s happening. It is just that the policies successful states implement can be the opposite of current democrat party policy.
Time to decide; do the remaining democrats want the comfort of sticking to the old policies, or do they want to start winning again?
Enjoy the well researched info, but am beginning to suspect the Dem inclination to perpetually assert their educational superiority is not an accident. The rural Midwest has "low levels of formal education"? Seriously? Would it not be just as easy, and far less insulting, to say most residents are K-12 grads, while a little less than 1/4th, are college graduates?
I find it interesting Dems repeatedly insult Red State levels of education with nary a mention most of the 10 million people Dems purposefully imported from all over the word, were unlikely to have finished high school, if they attended at all. Most of El Salvador ends school after the 5th grade. Neither Venezuela or Haiti have had a functioning educational system for decades. Africans who crossed the border likely lack much or any formal education, because African education is only available to those who can pay.
Dems are in the process of committing Party suicide via immigration. After last weekend, there is no doubt Dems support open borders. They not only purposefully dissolved the Southern Border for 4 years, they will do it again at their first opportunity. Moreover, Dems obviously seek to make the US a giant home base. The Party policy appears to be anyone who can touch US soil, can never ever be forced to leave, for any reason.
In light of that fact, Dems might, at least, attempt to avoid insulting a large swath of the US. Especially one, swimming in Swing States.
I think you're being a bit oversensitive. 'Formal' = formal educational institutions, i.e. K-12 and college/universities. (you can stretch it to include trade schools, too)
My wife's grandfather never went to college; he finished high school and ran the family farm until the day he died. He knew everything there was to know about agriculture--he was a very educated man, but beyond high school his education was instrumental, not *formal*. I don't think it's an insult to say so. For his purposes, a formal college education would have probably had minimal returns anyway.
I had heard that NALs "the rez" had voted R this election, but I hadn't believed it all the way, now I do. Liberal Patriot doesn't manipulate statistics.
I've spent a short while living on the Fort Peck Reservation and have lived in close proximity to others. Of course not all Native Americans are like the Sioux and it's hard to make generalisations about what are basically many different cultures, but I'm half surprised, half not.
At the time (35 years ago) a useful stereotype was to think of the then young guys my age I socialized with, was midwesterners. Many similarities with everyone else living in eastern Montana. Like ex senator Jon Tester.
Law enforcement are thugs, but these are the immigrants Dems want to protect?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/crime/general/feds-release-names-photos-of-6-immigrants-detained-by-ice-in-los-angeles/ar-AA1Gomsh
"Hey, I wanna do things like get around due process and deploy the army to usurp local law enforcement in states where the governors don't want me to--but I'm not sure how to justify that kind of crazy stuff."
"Every time you make an authoritarian move find an unseemly illegal migrant and claim the people opposing you support them instead of *law and order*, to redirect attention from what you're actually doing."
"Does that really work?"
"You have no idea. It's got a great historical track record"
Aren't the criminals getting due process?
"Every time I support violence I blame it on law enforcement."