VP Harris adopts Trump policy on Immigration

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,122
4,319
1,743
#41
I just think that we are wasting alot of oxygen arguing about what Trump said a few years ago and not focusing on what the current crisis is. Are there rapists, murderers, child traffickers, and really bad folks waltzing across our border? Absofrigginlutely!!! I just can't, for the life of me, fathom how anyone can look at what is going on at border and be OK with it. I know that's not what you're saying , I was just curious if you thought this administration is doing a good job down there. Unlike most on this board, I quit focusing on Trump on January 20th. Still waiting for someone to list the things that Biden has done that will help our country....other than not saying mean things...there's always that.
Then you might also call out the others on both sides who did the same thing before I jumped in.

If you're really wanting to know my opinion on managing the border, I actually agree with some of the VPs recent statements, as much as it pains me to say it. If we want to fix the border, we need to fix the other countries with migratory pressures of violence, poverty, and corruption. The overwhelming majority of migrants don't want to leave their countries and most intend on going back once things get better. Also, most migrants aren't coming from Mexico anymore, but Mexico often does too little to help the situation. They don't support enough asylees, help enough with stemming violence and poverty in the other countries, or enforcing their own migration laws in instances when people are passing through. Trump had a decent point on some of that front, too (pains me to say that). We're only 5 months into the current administration so it will be interesting to see what their solutions actually wind up being and I'll reserve judgment until we're farther in. This is not a problem with short term fixes that will work. The only real stance that I take is that we should view migrants as real people. They actually are a lot like you, me, and everyone else in our own society. That doesn't mean open borders, but it should inform how we understand their motivations.

A few other points since they're relevant here. Human trafficking is a bigger problem because of migratory pressures, both because the corruption covers up human trafficking and people are willing to take those risks to leave awful situations. Fix those other issues and you reduce trafficking. The vast majority of drug trafficking occurs through ports of entry and shipping, not land border crossings like you're implying. That's inefficient and more dangerous for them. Finally, crossing the border is not easy and we intentionally made it that way really starting under Clinton. It involves substantial risk of death and capture. Most people who cross via the border in the way you're imagining know that in advance. No one has been "waltzing" across the border since the 90s.
Does this way make us more interventionist though? Meddling in the policies and politics of other countries? And does it really help to give money to a country that has a ruling class that will not give that money to their citizens?

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,122
4,319
1,743
#43
When Harris says that she is focused on fixing the countries that people are fleeing what does that mean? How do we, as Americans, fix these other countries? Send them billions of $? Pretty sure we've tried that. Those $ always end up in the pockets of corrupt politicians and nothing ever gets fixed. I live in a community with a very high Mexican population and I constantly ask them their opinion on immigration. Even they agree that it all starts with a very secure border...which we don't have. Harris isn't going to fix anything and she never intended to fix anything. If they didn't think that the immigrants would eventually vote for democrats they would get serious about the border. They can feel the black vote slipping away and if their constant effort to race bait and divide the country runs out of gas they will need a very large voting block to replace them. I have two employees that are currently trying to get citizenship finalized for their spouses who immigrated the right way and you can't imagine the BS going on on that side of this issue. We have to shut down the border before we start talking about any of these other feel good horse shit ideas that politicians on both sides of the aisle come up with.
Most undocumented folks don't come by land border anymore. That gets all the attention, but that's not the main problem even for a deterrence focused system. Moreover, when people do cross on the land border, they are not mostly sneaking across, they are driving across or wanting to get caught. Many of them think they have good asylum cases and getting caught inside the US allows them to present it. As a final point on the idea of prioritizing "securing the border," the fastest growing undocumented group does not even come from the western hemisphere. It's people from Asia who mostly do not come through the land border, though some try.

You can throw your hands up and say "we can't fix those other countries" and you might even be right, but without improving them there will continue to be people risking their lives to sneak into the US. There will also be people who figure out ways around whatever deterrent system you put up. The question becomes what's going to have the biggest effect and as above, adding some fence and wall isn't it. You also have questions about how do we manage the obligations we have to accept asylees, particularly from destabilized areas that we had a hand in destabilizing as recently as the 1980s (not saying it's mostly on us, but we did have a role). For all of those reasons, I'll reiterate that this does not have simple solutions. There are no quick fixes, despite the simplistic appeal that "securing the border" has. I'll leave it open to maybe you have some ideas about securing the border that deal with this complexity, but I haven't heard them from anyone yet.
I say it's not a one off solution. Reform the legal immigration process, secure the border, and find good ways to help the actual citizens of other countries. I know that's generalized, but I don't have any more specific ideas.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 
May 4, 2011
2,488
1,235
1,743
Charleston, SC
#44
Does this way make us more interventionist though? Meddling in the policies and politics of other countries? And does it really help to give money to a country that has a ruling class that will not give that money to their citizens?

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
That's precisely one of the major things that makes this all so complicated and why I get frustrated with arguments that boil down to an overly simplistic "secure the border". We are going to have to be willing to be ideologically flexible and try new things. How do we help move countries more toward places like Chile or Costa Rica that aren't super wealthy, but are stable with low emigration outflows? Colombia and Argentina are other examples, though maybe less so recently. In the last century, each place had major issues and converted to relative stability. Maybe it's direct intervention in drug trade in those countries, maybe it's decriminalizing it here? Maybe both plus more? I don't know, but I'm reasonably confident that ideological, simplistic answers aren't it or the problem would be solved already.
 
Aug 16, 2012
2,798
1,305
743
58
#45
That's precisely one of the major things that makes this all so complicated and why I get frustrated with arguments that boil down to an overly simplistic "secure the border". We are going to have to be willing to be ideologically flexible and try new things. How do we help move countries more toward places like Chile or Costa Rica that aren't super wealthy, but are stable with low emigration outflows? Colombia and Argentina are other examples, though maybe less so recently. In the last century, each place had major issues and converted to relative stability. Maybe it's direct intervention in drug trade in those countries, maybe it's decriminalizing it here? Maybe both plus more? I don't know, but I'm reasonably confident that ideological, simplistic answers aren't it or the problem would be solved already.
Yes it is a multi-layered issue but as any administrator worth his salt will tell you, you attack the things you can and make steps to fixing the things that take more time. Stopping illegal entry is something we CAN address....period. At the same time, break down the larger problems to smaller components that can be tackled without throwing money at a generalization with the absurd expectation it is going to make a difference.
 
May 4, 2011
2,488
1,235
1,743
Charleston, SC
#46
Yes it is a multi-layered issue but as any administrator worth his salt will tell you, you attack the things you can and make steps to fixing the things that take more time. Stopping illegal entry is something we CAN address....period. At the same time, break down the larger problems to smaller components that can be tackled without throwing money at a generalization with the absurd expectation it is going to make a difference.
Except that's not as easy as you'd like to think. If apprehension and barriers are supposed to be our best deterrents and that's what most people seem to mean when they say secure the border, they don't actually seem to work to deter people. Barriers really got started in the 90s and were really enhanced in the mid aughts, but those aren't the eras where we see apprehensions decline. They also aren't eras where we see declines in levels of undocumented immigrants in the US. I think they do/did something, but their effects have been pretty small and appear to be getting smaller. Offering that as the solution just detracts from the difficult reality that we don't have easy solutions that will have significant effects. If you look below, the thing most associated with declines on migration appears to be when Mexico improved its economy followed by the great recession. Also, note that apprehensions from Mexico have continued a steady decline.

Image1.png
 

PF5

Deputy
Jan 3, 2014
1,008
307
713
#47
She’s down there because migrant numbers are about to drop. They drop every summer because it’s dangerous to walk hundreds of miles through the desert in the summer. Then in a couple of months she’ll take credit for a drop in people arriving at the border……the media will say she is doing a great job and then all the kids will be back in all the cages in fall/winter/spring and they won’t say a word. They absolutely lied about their immigration policy. But they aren’t Trump so everything is fine. That is not an endorsement of Trump. But we live in a world where no matter how bad the person you like is what they do is ok…..Trump enjoyed this division more than anyone has to this point. But what she is doing is 100% BS photo op.
download (1).jpeg
 
Aug 16, 2012
2,798
1,305
743
58
#50
Except that's not as easy as you'd like to think. If apprehension and barriers are supposed to be our best deterrents and that's what most people seem to mean when they say secure the border, they don't actually seem to work to deter people. Barriers really got started in the 90s and were really enhanced in the mid aughts, but those aren't the eras where we see apprehensions decline. They also aren't eras where we see declines in levels of undocumented immigrants in the US. I think they do/did something, but their effects have been pretty small and appear to be getting smaller. Offering that as the solution just detracts from the difficult reality that we don't have easy solutions that will have significant effects. If you look below, the thing most associated with declines on migration appears to be when Mexico improved its economy followed by the great recession. Also, note that apprehensions from Mexico have continued a steady decline.

View attachment 90578
The chart is very informative, but only applicable if the same border barriers were present across every year. They were not. The extent, location and type of barrier is dynamic There have been varying degrees of efforts by border patrol agencies, ebbs and flows of immigrants, and entry efforts are constantly changing.

Easy question. If all else is constant, would there be more or fewer illegal immigrants in the country? Control what you can control and work to address what you cannot control now but hope to in the future.

Securing our borders is possible. Does that mean there will be no illegal immigrants? Hell no. But it means we can stop a huge chunk of them and discourage a chit-ton more. At least the ones who overstay visas can be located eventually. There is no way to find someone who snuck in until they do something that draws attention to themselves. Regardless of the reason for wanting in, illegal immigrants come here because they know they have a good chance of beating the system. We have made it too easy for them. I am all for legal immigration by the tens, hundreds, thousands, 100,000's. Just go through the process. Does it take time? Yes, but...so what, that is the process. If they do not like it, they can stay home. Can we make the process faster? Sure, but I have a saying around my house. "I cannot get to making wanted home improvements because by the time I deal with the everyday maintenance, I do not have the time." Similar situation here. We are so flooded with immigrants that we cannot logically address any long-term policy and "everybody who is here gets to stay" is not a rational long-term policy.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,738
2,170
1,743
#54
Pence never did anything like that. And the left always liked to pounce on trump for not being nice to the press. So what's good for the goose.
I am really surprised how poor she has performed during recent questions from reporters. I am sure she has myriad of people preparing her, but she appears both surprised and unprepared giving answers to what should be expected questions.
 

UrbanCowboy1

Some cowboys gots smarts real good like me.
Aug 8, 2006
3,689
1,893
1,743
Phoenix, AZ
#55
I am really surprised how poor she has performed during recent questions from reporters. I am sure she has myriad of people preparing her, but she appears both surprised and unprepared giving answers to what should be expected questions.
Completely agree. She seems totally caught off guard by even the simplest questions. I think it's a combo of VP's being chosen for purely political reasons and Dem's getting softball questions their whole life from most reporters.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,479
17,977
1,743
#56
I am really surprised how poor she has performed during recent questions from reporters. I am sure she has myriad of people preparing her, but she appears both surprised and unprepared giving answers to what should be expected questions.
Hasn't she always been that way?