Dr. Strangelove

You are never going to believe this but the President doesn't have all encompassing authoritarian powers, no matter how many times you vote for it. For the last few decades, each President's border policy gets endlessly tied up in courts because "jUsT ENfoRcInG ExIStiNg LaW" is endlessly appealed because the current law is not adequate to address current problems. It's almost like, and this is insane, that we need a NEW law that specifically outlines the Presidents ability to address the border. It could even be bipartisan! Republicans can even nominate somebody to negotiate for them! It's almost like, and again this is absolutely bonkers, that it's something Republicans themselves requested to be done.

There's a great story from the Obama years. The story goes something like this: "After working with Senate Republicans for months, offering concession after concession, Obama asked Senator Chuck Grassley, one of the lead negotiators for Republicans on the Affordable Care Act.. "If I offer you every concession, will you vote for the Bill?" Senator Grassley Responded, "No, Mr. President, I don't think I can". At this moment, President Obama realized that after working with them for months to forge a compromise, he realized there was no compromise to be had. This an old, reliable play from the political playbook. It's up to the American voter to correctly punish the party responsible, and we all know how that will play out.

This is nothing but lies from the cabal of woke DEMONcrats who desire Bidens OPEN invasion of criminal brown people at the border. Do you really believe Gubmint data? Information is only accurate if it comes from trustworthy sources, like Catturd on Twitter. You are never going to believe what happens today when CBP encounters thousands of people crossing the border. (Hint: nothing) You're angry that having some restrictions is worse than no restrictions. It boggles the mind.

The only people more disdainful of Trump voters than people like me are the politicians they elect, who privately express disdain for the constituency that elects them. No matter how Republicans treat their electorate, you can rest easily knowing that they will still fully support them at the ballot box. They're is seemingly no amount of abuse that is to much for them.

This is pretty incredible. It's like looking into an encyclopedia article of the mind of a person so consumed with the party line message that they will repeat anything demanded by it. It's so completely expected and unsurprising. Such is the nature of current right wing politics, and why appealing to them is a pointless cause.

Yes and no. America seems more than willing to devour a turd sandwich. The issue with the Republican Party is they traded their traditional business friendly donors base for a constituency that is lower income, uneducated, and has their brains collectively turned into mush by Fox News. They've created a monster that fundamentally believes that government is a deep state operation geared towards crushing their beliefs. It's hard to get donations to political causes when you've created a base that believes political causes are the root of all problems. Hence, they have highly motivated voters for elections but can't use them to raise money.

It does make one wonder how much more effective Republicans could be if they nominated competent individuals to posts like the RNC Chair. Given their systemic advantages, it's amazing that they've let some bozos hold positions of power. However, it's likely that this is not compatible with the MAGA movement. Elevated positions within the party require fielty to Trump. Competency often goes by the wayside in lieu of perceived "loyalty". Such is the Republican Party squandering massive advantages.

Honestly, this is a brilliant move by Republicans. They correctly understand how stupid voters are, and they're going to lose this for their gain. Just like when they used the Lucy pulling the football on Charlie technique on Obama when they passed a watered down version of the ACA, Senate Democrats are now flat on their back and the "on border" is now front and center during the campaign. President Biden now has to defend the "chaos at the border". You can expect the world's largest migrant caravan to make its way to Eagle Pass from the deepest, crime-ridden shadows of Central America this October. Democrats now have to convince the American public - an electorate completely disconnected from reality - that immigration is the fault of Republicans, an issue favorable to them by 30 points.

What about this makes Trump not want to run for President? The entire reason he's running is to avoid prison. It also doesn't affect his electability because the median voter is impossibly stupid.

The deep state cabal - orchestrated by Taylor Swift - has unlimited power. And that power is being directed at Donald J. Trump, to suppress his ability to win elections and save America from the satanic clutches of DEI/CRT/Fentanyl laced Immigrant Caravans pouring over BIDENS open border.

I partially agree. American corruption looks different. Still, American institutions and government workers by and large believe in their missions and work to help the American people. It's not fair to compare American corruption - no matter how corporate money is donated, it doesnt directly go into the pockets of politicians - to outright bribery and corruption seen in Ukraine. It's fair to criticize their corruption and point out, like the European Union has, that is something they need to get under control to join European trade groups, engage in free trade agreements, and the like.

The issue with this deeply flawed CATO Analysis is that it assumes that Ukraine belongs in the Russian sphere of influence, and that the 2014 coup was led by Western countries including the United States, with the assumption of NATO expansion without any evidence. They act like the coup was orchestrated by the West and was not desired by the people of Ukraine. This is deeply flawed because the 2014 coup was widely supported by the population of Ukraine. They chose to ally themselves closer to Western Europe because it's better than the long term future. Russia does not have a right to decide for them. To compare why the people of Ukraine made that choice, lets compare 5 former Soviet Republics. The Baltic States - Former Soviet Republics; now NATO Countries allied with the West Lithuania Latvia Estonia Current Russian Satellite States Belarus Ukraine Lets compare the GDP Per Capita of these 5 countries, and let me know if you notice anything about them GDP Per Capita in 1995 and in 2022 (According the World Bank) Lithuania - 1995: $2167 ----> 2022: $25,064 Latvia - 1995: $2329 -----> 2022: $21,779 Estonia - 1995: $3134 -----> 2022: $29,247 Belarus - 1995: $900 -----> 2022: $7,888 Ukraine - 1995: $1265 -----> 2022: $4,534 The people of Ukraine simply made an obvious choice: it sucks to be poor. They want to ally themselves with the West because the data speaks for itself. That doesn't mean that Ukraine doesn't have it's problems; they have a long road to ending their corruption. But make no mistake, the people choose their destiny. Russia saw it as a threat to their ultra-Nationalist and long term goals, so they invaded. It has nothing to do with the United States, NATO, or the West. It has everything to do with that it sucks to be Russia, allied with Russia, or to be neighboring Russia.

It's even more funny when they're going to reject the most restrictive immigration compromise they're ever going to receive and simultaneously go through the dog-and-pony show of impeaching the Secretary of DHS for not being restrictive enough.

Appreciate it. For the record, your worry about Ukraine, it's history of corruption, the cost of the war and what they can realistically achieve on the battlefield is highly warranted.

I did not mean to imply that they are your country. I apologize if that was the case. Secondly, I and most people would fundamentally disagree with the CATO Institute's assessment of why Russia invaded Ukraine. They are a conservative think tank and aren't exactly unbiased. I'll do my best to summarize why helping Ukraine, a flawed former Soviet Republic, fight against Russia. The first thing to understand about Russia is their geographic vulnerability from a military point of view. Russia is a massive country, however, 80% of the Russian population and economic activity lives within Western Russia - known as the Russian Core. This has been the case throughout the entirety of Russia's history. It's located here approximately (sorry for the poor circle drawn using my finger on my phone): The second thing to know about this region is how vulnerable it is to foreign attack. The geography of Eastern Europe - Belarus and Ukraine- is very similar to the Great Plains in the US, it's massive and essentially flat, and the borders of which are hundreds of miles long. From a military point of view, this flank is nearly impossible to defend. Russia has been invaded multiple times throughout history, notably by Napoleon in 1812 through Belarus and again by Hitler through Ukraine in 1941 killing 30 million people - invading through the flat terrain of Belarus and Ukraine represents a massive security risk. Therefore, Russia has always sought to push its borders as far Westward as possible. The further West the border, the more secure the Russian core (circled above) becomes. Pushing the border west was the manifest destiny of the Russian Empire and later the Soviet Union. It's why the Soviet Union invaded Poland and Finland during WWII. They seek to narrow their borders to neighbors as much as possible. As you can see in the map above, the Soviet Union essentially created a buffer zone protecting the Russian core. The dark red border of Russia is massive, impossible to defend. The light red borders of the Western most Soviet states is much more narrow. The Baltic sea provides protection from the northern flank, while the Black Sea south of Ukraine and the mountain range just to the West of Maldova protects the southern flank (pictured below): Russian ultra-nationalists - like Putin - truly believe that the fall of the Soviet Union represented betrayal of 200 years of Russian history and sacrifice. The wars fought to create the scenario above and protecting Russia - so they can reach their destiny of being a super power - were all for naught. It is therefore critical from their perspective that Russia recreate what the Russian Empire and Soviet Union did: push the sphere of influence as far West as possible. It's why the original attack plans called for an invasion of Moldova: It's why Putin said as recently last week that the Baltic States are run by Nazis. They're trying to set the stage for eventual confrontation with them. It may not be in the immediate future, but in 15 or 20 years, you can bet that they will try. In short, Ukraine chose in 2014 to leave the Russian sphere of influence. This is seen as a massive vulnerability to Russian nationalists who wish to recreate the borders of the Soviet Union to protect their flanks. They seek to undermine America's commitment to NATO in order to accomplish this. Supporting Ukraine presently sends a message that this will not be tolerated, and weakens their ability to conduct further aggressive operations.

I would genuinely like to discuss with you why funding Ukraine is of vital importance to the United States and our future interests, if you're willing to have an honest discussion. I'd be willing to give it real thought on if the continuing struggle of what appears to be a stalemate, if not slight Russian advantage currently, is worth continued investment.

I think Conservatives rallying around the killing of the best concessions they've had from Democrats - who currently hold a Senate MAJORITY - in 30 years is hilarious. You are more than free to articulate how Republicans plan on passing a more restrictive immigration bill and get 60 Senate votes. If so, you'll find yourself with a high paying Consulting job in Washington DC. You're also free to articulate how the President can "enforce existing laws" that doesn't involve endless court battles and the details of which change every time a different party controls the Presidency. If you do this, you will also find yourself making gobs of money as a Consultant in Washington DC. Don't get me wrong, I find it humorous that Republicans are willing to self-immolate on the best deal they're going to get from Democrats in our lifetime. Watching Republicans squander all of their political advantages is a bit of a sick hobby I have. But also as a person genuinely concerned about Asylum claims at the border, this bill is the best and ONLY bet we have of doing that.

Not possible to pass in the Senate. That bill falls short of many things, including expanding legal immigration which it does not address and what many sectors of the American economy rely on. Next time you see a crew roofing houses, paving roads, or visit your local slaughter house and let me know what you see. Hint: there are not a lot of legal workers clamoring for those jobs (A meat packing plant in Grand Island Nebraska was hit with fines after it was discovered that they employed child labor of illegal immigrants). H.R.2 mandates the use of E-Verify which would gut those industries but does not expand legal immigration to make up for the shortfall. Thus, the bill will never pass and was not designed to pass. The current agreement compromises on slightly less restrictive immigration policies but expands legal immigration visa's to makeup for the shortfall. It also expands the number of Asylum judges and officers to properly adjudicate asylum petitions. They're enforcing existing law to the best extent that courts allow. Furthering the enforcement of law requires executive orders, which are challenged in court. It's been the base immigration policy for decades and why immigration policy seemingly changes by administration as their immigration agenda goes through the courts and eventually dies. The current bill codifies certain administrative powers into law to avoid this. I'm much further to the right on immigration than other democrats, this bill is mediocre. But it's also the only one that has a chance of passing. This is it, there are no alternatives. You either want to address the issue with what can actually pass in Congress or you can continue with the status quo of immigration policy which is Presidency-to-Presidency via executive orders, where the policy goes through courts and changes based on what judge see's the case.

There is no other bill. This is your only bet. There isn't anything unserious about this bill, unless you've succumbed to lazy right wing talking points to help Trump get re-elected. As somebody who is much more conservative than most Democrats on immigration, I find it humorous that right wingers don't' want this pass. You are aware that the alternative is the status quo, correct? You truly believe that this bill makes the problem worse? If so, it further proves there is no hope for the MAGA crowd. You give them what they want and they retreat further into their shells. There is no amount of policy that will make them happy; being angry at anything is their base political motive.

It doesn't. 10 Republican Senators agree. It's well known that any Executive Orders get killed in court and that 'enforcing existing law' is what's happening now. Any Fox News segment on what Biden could be doing to "enforce existing law" gets tied up in courts, is outright illegal, or based on conservative interpretations of the law which are nonsense. The source you posted selectively posted excerpts of text of the law and violently misconstrued and made assumptions of what it meant. It's obvious anger farm bait. I get it, you don't actually want to address anything at the border because you know that no other bill has a chance of passing. It's okay to want to protect the Cheeto Man, he wouldn't last long in prison. Not sure what the end game is for you guys but I guess the Republican Party using and abusing their supporters is sort of what they come to expect?

I do admit, it's pretty funny to see the Republican Party on the cusp of one of their biggest policy victories in 20 years, winning the battle against Democrats who've opposed these kinds of immigration restrictions since the 1990s, only to deem them not restrictive enough because the Orange Cult Leader wants to win an election to avoid going to prison. They're going to torpedo one of the few policy goals they have all in the name of one of Felon-to-be-Trump. A form of self immolation that is hilarious. The border issue will never be addressed beyond this point. Republicans will never get 60 votes next year to pass even more restrictive policy. But hey, why fix problems when you can win elections?

I'll be honest, it was a long read and to save the last vestiges of what few functioning neurons I have remaining, I avoid 'sources' on Twitter named anything along the lines of "America First XYZ". You should too. My advice to you is to recognize that this bill is imperfect - anything short of major immigration reform would be - but to simultaneously understand that you're never going to get 60 Senators to agree on a different bill. If you truly believe that Donald Trump will be able to get 60 votes on something next year, by all means, continue to be anger farmed by the MAGA movement. This bill is it. There won't be another bipartisan agreement. 60 votes on something else isn't happening. You either actually think the border needs to be addressed or you just want to use the border to elect Donald Trump.

There are tremendous future consequences to not assisting Ukraine, including future Russian invasion of NATO countries if they feel that America won't fulfill the defense commitment - which seems increasingly likely to be the case based on pro-Russian trends developing on the American right wing. Additionally, assuming you pay more in taxes than you receive, most military assistance to Ukraine is in the form of older equipment that isn't often used. The old equipment is used and replaced by newer, updated equipment courtesy of our domestic defense industry. Most of the money "spent" for Ukraine military assistance is stimulus for American defense industry jobs. Lastly, America's military has learned a great deal helping Ukraine in a major war. From how Drones impact warfare, to the amount of artillery shells needed to conduct offensive operations (hint: the US has learned that our current ability to manufacture artillery shells is WOEFULLY short of what would be necessary), assisting Ukraine has taught America lessons they never would've learned... all while not risking American lives. In short, there is literally no downside to assisting Ukraine. There are exclusively positives. America First Legal is certainly my go to source for unbiased and comprehensive review of what I'm sure is an agenda free analysis of any legal matter.

Honestly, just dramatically lower your expectations for what matters to the median voter. They don't think and fill in a voting bubble. They think that "both sides are bad". Biden has "legal trouble" and so does Trump. Trump was found guilty of a weird crime but that was probably just politics. They think Biden would be found guilty if he went to court too. They then ask themselves if it cost $8 more dollars to fill up their F-250 Extended Cab/Hyundai Odyssey Minivan in October. That's pretty much it. Once you give up hope for the median voter it becomes a lot easier to understand the political climate we find ourselves in. Republican voters will never leave their party, no matter how morally bankrupt it becomes. You're then left with a very small number of persuadable voters who truly do not pay attention to nor care about each political candidate. They are what I describe above.

Unless polls consistently show Biden ahead nationally by ~5%, the race is comfortably in the hands of Donald Trump. Any national popular vote lead by Trump = Electoral College Blowout <- We are here now Minor Biden lead (1-3%) = Popular vote victory for Biden; Electoral College win for Trump <- We are trending this way by election day. 2016 part deux. Biden Lead of 4-5% = Close Electoral College Victory <- It seems extremely difficult to get to these margins. It may not be possible.