Political Posts

[Marco Van Basten]

8 minutes ago, LC said:

I can't even begin to express my disbelief at a half-built fence as a serious measure to control immigration. 

 

 

 

The policy was initially ended by the Biden administration, and after some legal battles, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on June 30, 2022, in Biden v. Texas, that the administration had the authority to end the policy. In December 2022, however, a federal judge blocked the Biden administration from ending the program. Remain in Mexico has been widely criticized by human rights organizations for exposing migrants to attacks while they awaited processing

 

 

 

I am right there with you that Biden could've taken legal, constitutional, reasonable and effective steps to limit illegal migration. In fact that is what his bipartisan bill sought to do. It was torpedo'd by Trump and his sycophantic hold over republican senators and the GOP.

Anybody who applied for asylum from Mexico was an economic migrant and not a refugee.  Had they really been in fear of their lives, they would have applied for asylum and permission to stay from Mexican government.  Hundreds of thousands of US citizens live in Mexico, thousands of retirees move to Mexico from the US every year, and millions of US tourists visit Mexico year after year.  So if you come to Mexico and continue to the US, you are not a refugee, you are an economic migrant.  

[Sweet]

7 minutes ago, LC said:

can't even begin to express my disbelief at a half-built fence as a serious measure to control immigration. 

You thought it was fully built apparently.

 

7 minutes ago, LC said:

The policy was initially ended by the Biden administration, and after some legal battles, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on June 30, 2022, in Biden v. Texas, that the administration had the authority to end the policy. In December 2022, however, a federal judge blocked the Biden administration from ending the program. Remain in Mexico has been widely criticized by human rights organizations for exposing migrants to attacks while they awaited processing

When Biden ended the policy nearly all those waiting in Mexico crossed the border for processing in the US.  Even after the 2022 decision, large parts of the programme was gutted.

 

10 minutes ago, LC said:

I am right there with you that Biden could've taken legal, constitutional, reasonable and effective steps to limit illegal migration. In fact that is what his bipartisan bill sought to do. It was torpedo'd by Trump and his sycophantic hold over republican senators and the GOP.

As is Trump’s right.  Ultimately it was a win handed to Trump by the Dems.

[LC]

1 minute ago, Sweet said:

You thought it was fully built apparently.

 

Well anyone with a cursory knowledge of the US-Mexico border knows nothing will ever be "fully built" along that border.

The difference is some people like Trump actually thought it would work. Need to queue up some more Benny Hill alongside Mexicans climbing up with recipro saws...

 

 

3 minutes ago, Sweet said:

When Biden ended the policy nearly all those waiting in Mexico crossed the border for processing in the US.  Even after the 2022 decision, large parts of the programme was gutted.

 

25,000 people over 2 years, I think? Not exactly mind-blowing numbers considering Trump is going after 3k people per day. Again, the question of efficacy...

 

 

4 minutes ago, Sweet said:

As is Trump’s right.  Ultimately it was a win handed to Trump by the Dems.

 

Absolutely it's his right to torch everything he touches, including the Constitution. "Win" for Trump - bad for America. Seems about right. 

[Sweet]

3 minutes ago, LC said:

As to who said what - I am happy to let the readers be the judge.

 

 

As to your point: again Biden actually complied with judicial decisions:

Biden resumes Remain in Mexico:

https://www.npr.org/2021/12/02/1060896872/u-s-will-resume-remain-in-mexico-policy-for-asylum-seekers

 

Biden expands Remain in Mexico:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hamedaleaziz/biden-remain-in-mexico-expanding

 

You love accusing me of being deceptive with little evidence, but I'm not representing a pandemic-era process as a status-quo activity to justify the unconstitutional ICE behavior in 2025.

His reversal of policies resulted in nearly all those waiting in Mexico being processed instead in the US.

 

Biden didn’t fully implement remain in Mexico even after the court blocked it.  Parts of it never returned.

 

The crossings and numbers under the Biden admin speak for themselves.

 

Trying to sanitise this as anything other than a massive own goal by the Biden admin, by frantically cherrypicking points from Democrat friendly news sources, I find deceptive.

 

It was only after the cockup did he try to reverse course but by that point most of the damage was done and Biden was seen by voters and migrants as a soft touch.

[LC]

13 minutes ago, Marco Van Basten said:

Anybody who applied for asylum from Mexico was an economic migrant and not a refugee

 

This is not true as thousands of Ukraine refugees came thru Mexico and were granted access to the US. 

 

But again I am not even arguing the against the policy.

It's certainly more reasonable than ICE agents in Chicago rounding up brown people. 

 

My point is that we had reasonable solutions proposed under Biden, he even (unwillingly, admittedly) reinstituted Remain in Mexico under court order (or should I say parts of it to satisfy Sweet and avoid more "deceptive" accusations)...and Trump torpedo'd it all because of ego. 

 

You've got a bipartisan bill that provides decent solutions to a difficult problem. Trump shoots it down. And somehow it's everyone BUT Trump's fault, and so now we acquiesce to Trump burning up Constitutional rights?

 

The logic doesn't track - but it illustrates exactly how a subset of Trump supporters will hold dear anything Trump touches without any critical thought. 

Edited September 29, 2025 by LC

[Gregmal]

4 minutes ago, LC said:

 

Well anyone with a cursory knowledge of the US-Mexico border knows nothing will ever be "fully built" along that border.

The difference is some people like Trump actually thought it would work. Need to queue up some more Benny Hill alongside Mexicans climbing up with recipro saws...

 

 

 

25,000 people over 2 years, I think? Not exactly mind-blowing numbers considering Trump is going after 3k people per day. Again, the question of efficacy...

 

 

 

Absolutely it's his right to torch everything he touches, including the Constitution. "Win" for Trump - bad for America. Seems about right. 

I know you like to play the game the same as I do...it's fun, no doubt...but cant common sense let us acknowledge that in 2020 Biden literally campaigned on "open borders"? Specifically undoing everything Trump did, because "Trump bad"? That upon his inauguration we had massive caravans flooding the border with people even holding up "Biden loves us" signs? And that only at the last minute, before the 2024 election, when democrats had an "oh shit, this issue is gonna bite us in the ass" moment...did they offer to put forth a bill that would "fix" the issue? Isnt this sort of factual, like all of it? And not opinion. And then obviously the Republicans and Trump realized they were trying to fix the issue they created, right before elections, so they could take credit for it...and decided to kill it? 

[LC]

 

1 minute ago, Gregmal said:

Specifically undoing everything Trump did, because "Trump bad"?

 

Yeah Biden definitely campaigned on this (i'm guessing the "im another old white geezer" card wouldn't play), and you're also right about the timeline of the border security bill.

 

But I'm no fan of Biden nor Trump, and idgaf about who proposes a good solution.

 

I just want a reasonable solution where we don't have a bunch of homeless dudes and criminals walking the streets in every downtown metro in the US leaning over on fentanyl like their vertebrae stopped functioning, nor do I want ICE proud boys with tacticool gear ripping normal people's heads off and shipping them to a hellhole in Nicarague, either. 

[Gregmal]

1 minute ago, LC said:

 

 

Yeah Biden definitely campaigned on this (i'm guessing the "im another old white geezer" card wouldn't play), and you're also right about the timeline of the border security bill.

 

But I'm no fan of Biden nor Trump, and idgaf about who proposes a good solution.

 

I just want a reasonable solution where we don't have a bunch of homeless dudes and criminals walking the streets in every downtown metro in the US leaning over on fentanyl like their vertebrae stopped functioning, nor do I want ICE proud boys with tacticool gear ripping normal people's heads off and shipping them to a hellhole in Nicarague, either. 

Agreed LOL, touche

[Sweet]

23 minutes ago, LC said:

Well anyone with a cursory knowledge of the US-Mexico border knows nothing will ever be "fully built" along that border.

The difference is some people like Trump actually thought it would work. Need to queue up some more Benny Hill alongside Mexicans climbing up with recipro saws...

 

”didn't Trump build that wall in his first term? Why didn't it solve the problem?”

 

Alright, you now accept the wall wasn’t fully built, but you know for sure it wouldn’t have been successful if it had of been.

 

Got it.

 

 

23 minutes ago, LC said:

25,000 people over 2 years, I think? Not exactly mind-blowing numbers considering Trump is going after 3k people per day. Again, the question of efficacy...

Ha.  This article dates to early 2024.  By that time there had been over 7 million border encounters, and if you read on down the Biden admin was releasing about half into the US.  By the end of the admin there were 10 million encounters at the border and if half were released that would be about 5 million people.  So yeh, let’s focus on the 25,000 part of the failure whilst ignoring the elephant.

 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/million-migrants-border-biden/

 

23 minutes ago, LC said:

Absolutely it's his right to torch everything he touches, including the Constitution. "Win" for Trump - bad for America. Seems about right. 

Genuinely don’t think many of you know what’s good for America to know what is bad.

 

Edited September 29, 2025 by Sweet

[Sweet]

11 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

I know you like to play the game the same as I do...it's fun, no doubt...but cant common sense let us acknowledge that in 2020 Biden literally campaigned on "open borders"? Specifically undoing everything Trump did, because "Trump bad"? That upon his inauguration we had massive caravans flooding the border with people even holding up "Biden loves us" signs? And that only at the last minute, before the 2024 election, when democrats had an "oh shit, this issue is gonna bite us in the ass" moment...did they offer to put forth a bill that would "fix" the issue? Isnt this sort of factual, like all of it? And not opinion. And then obviously the Republicans and Trump realized they were trying to fix the issue they created, right before elections, so they could take credit for it...and decided to kill it? 

I mean yeh, when you run on reversing Trump’s policies, stopping the wall, when you call them undocumented rather than illegals, and when you promise a pathway to citizenship for those undocumented… no shit your going to have millions of people looking in.  Even if you decide mid way through your term that you f’d up the damage has been done.  

And a large part of this is perception, Joe was seen as soft, Trump isn’t.  Trump talk is big for a reason immigration, he’s deliberately trying to be big, bold, brash to send a very clear message.

[adesigar]

On 9/28/2025 at 1:27 PM, Parsad said:

Is it me or has the last 3-4 days on this thread been more civil?  Wow, what a difference! 

 

No, I didn't do anything.  I think we're being boycotted by a few people.  Cheers!

You had to jinx it didn’t you?
 

[LC]

3 hours ago, Sweet said:

 

”didn't Trump build that wall in his first term? Why didn't it solve the problem?”

 

Alright, you now accept the wall wasn’t fully built, but you know for sure it wouldn’t have been successful if it had of been.

 

Got it.

 

 

This was a somewhat sarcastic remark that apparently, was lost in internet-translation. As someone living in America I can tell you it's common knowledge the efficacy and completeness of Trump's "wall" is exactly what you would expect from a real estate development led by Donald Trump 

 

 

3 hours ago, Sweet said:

Ha.  This article dates to early 2024.  By that time there had been over 7 million border encounters, and if you read on down the Biden admin was releasing about half into the US.  By the end of the admin there were 10 million encounters at the border and if half were released that would be about 5 million people.  So yeh, let’s focus on the 25,000 part of the failure whilst ignoring the elephant.

 

From the same article: "spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, who said, in part, that U.S. President Joe Biden's administration "has removed, returned, or expelled more migrants in three years than the prior Administration did in four years."

 

So given Biden "let in" the most illegal immigrants, and also expelled the most illegal immigrants...do you think he got bored with catch and release fishing and decided to institute it as a national endeavor?

 

I think his administration got caught with a wave of illegal immigration, and did their best following the laws and precedent. Was he slow and uninspired in his approach? Absolutely. Probably due to the sleeping pills Hunter was slipping in his evening cocktail, who knows...

 

Still doesn't excuse Trump's nonsense. 

 

[Sweet]

5 hours ago, LC said:

 

This was a somewhat sarcastic remark that apparently, was lost in internet-translation. As someone living in America I can tell you it's common knowledge the efficacy and completeness of Trump's "wall" is exactly what you would expect from a real estate development led by Donald Trump 

 

 

 

From the same article: "spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, who said, in part, that U.S. President Joe Biden's administration "has removed, returned, or expelled more migrants in three years than the prior Administration did in four years."

 

So given Biden "let in" the most illegal immigrants, and also expelled the most illegal immigrants...do you think he got bored with catch and release fishing and decided to institute it as a national endeavor?

 

I think his administration got caught with a wave of illegal immigration, and did their best following the laws and precedent. Was he slow and uninspired in his approach? Absolutely. Probably due to the sleeping pills Hunter was slipping in his evening cocktail, who knows...

 

Still doesn't excuse Trump's nonsense. 

 

Well LC, it’s obvious to everyone apart from you apparently, that if you run on an illegal immigration friendly platform, and you incentivise them by saying we will provide you a pathway to citizenship, you are going to get record numbers of illegal immigrants looking in.

 

Biden may have turned away more than Trump, but that’s a sign of a colossal failure of immigration policy.  Another sleight of hand from you.

And yes, I doubt a wall will do much for those desperate to get in, but together with tough actions it will stop illegals before their journey to the border even begins.

[LC]

7 hours ago, Sweet said:

Biden may have turned away more than Trump, but that’s a sign of a colossal failure of immigration policy.  Another sleight of hand from you.

 

Ah yes, my famous sleight of hand...of quoting the reference article that you yourself posted! 

 

Trump's 2nd term I imagine is on track to turn away even more than Biden's term - does that indicate an even more colossal failure of Trump's policy? Your logic breaks down. Or maybe that's more LC deceptive practices, who knows?

 

Regardless I'll stand behind my thesis:

Joey Baloney (Joe Biden) grew tired (sleepy joe!) of fishing for trout and wanted to play catch and release with some central american immigrants instead! 

 

[Sweet]

2 hours ago, LC said:

 

Ah yes, my famous sleight of hand...of quoting the reference article that you yourself posted! 

 

Trump's 2nd term I imagine is on track to turn away even more than Biden's term - does that indicate an even more colossal failure of Trump's policy? Your logic breaks down. Or maybe that's more LC deceptive practices, who knows?

 

Regardless I'll stand behind my thesis:

Joey Baloney (Joe Biden) grew tired (sleepy joe!) of fishing for trout and wanted to play catch and release with some central american immigrants instead! 

 

 

The president with the worst border and illegal immigration record in modern US history.

 

What do you want to talk about?  His record number of migrants removed or turned away.

 

Hilarious.

 

And yes I posted snopes, I try to post source that aren’t right leaning.  Whereas you post buzzfeed and npr lol.

 

Edited September 30, 2025 by Sweet

[Sweet]

Question for those with kids.  
 

What are you views on the vaccine stuff coming from RFK and the links with autism.

 

I’ve always thought it was a pile of nonsense.  There are some serious people, some who work in health care, expressing some support for RFK views which I find surprising.

 

Have any of you noticed a change in your own children pre- and post-vaccine?

 

Edit - I don’t think I’ve noticed anything with mine, but the wife is hesitating about the next batch now.

 

Edited September 30, 2025 by Sweet

[LC]

1 hour ago, Sweet said:

The president with the worst border and illegal immigration record in modern US history.

 

What do you want to talk about?  His record number of migrants removed or turned away.

 

Hilarious.

 

When the facts don't agree with your narrative, I would imagine laughter helps smooth the cognitive shock.

Why would Biden send back record numbers of illegal immigrants, if his goal was to encourage illegal immigration? 

It doesn't pass the smell test.

 

And maybe this is not "modern" enough,  but some history may help contextualize the US treatment of immigrants at the Mexican border:

• Early 20th century violence (1910–1920): This period along the Texas-Mexico border was marked by state-sanctioned violence against Hispanic Americans by the Texas Rangers, an era that some consider the worst violence ever perpetrated in the U.S.
   
• Mexican Repatriation (1930s): In response to high unemployment, the U.S. government forcibly rounded up and sent back hundreds of thousands of people to Mexico, including many U.S. citizens. This campaign was often fueled by anti-immigrant sentiment and xenophobia. 
   
• The Bracero Program (1942–1964): This guest-worker program was established to address World War II labor shortages but was marred by reports of mistreatment and poor working conditions for Mexican workers.
• Operation Wetback (1954): This initiative resulted in the mass deportation of nearly 4 million Mexican immigrants, raising severe humanitarian concerns. The period was characterized by anti-immigrant sentiment, despite an active guest worker program.
   

America has a lovely history of abusing our immigrants from the southern border, apparently lost on some modern Trump supporters.

[Sweet]

8 minutes ago, LC said:

When the facts don't agree with your narrative, I would imagine laughter helps smooth the cognitive shock.

Why would Biden send back record numbers of illegal immigrants, if his goal was to encourage illegal immigration? 

It doesn't pass the smell test.

 

I never said Biden’s ‘goal was to encourage illegal immigration’.

 

I don’t think I’ve ever met someone consistently as disingenuous as you and I’ve argued a lot online (sadly).

 

I mean this seriously, but are you doing it on purpose, or is it unintentional?

 

If I’m wording something poorly I’ll try and correct it.

[Parsad]

20 hours ago, adesigar said:

You had to jinx it didn’t you?
 

 

My bad!  It was nice for a couple of days.  Cheers!

[Parsad]

1 hour ago, Sweet said:

Question for those with kids.  
 

What are you views on the vaccine stuff coming from RFK and the links with autism.

 

I’ve always thought it was a pile of nonsense.  There are some serious people, some who work in health care, expressing some support for RFK views which I find surprising.

 

Have any of you noticed a change in your own children pre- and post-vaccine?

 

Edit - I don’t think I’ve noticed anything with mine, but the wife is hesitating about the next batch now.

 

 

You would be playing with fire.  The people who work in health care that disagree are on the low side and I've talked to some of them and would say they don't what they are talking about.  You can work in the investment industry and still not know how the stock market functions.  

 

By not vaccinating your children, you create two very big problems...one, they could develop illnesses that were virtually non-existent or controllable...two, every time someone is exposed to a virus, that virus can mutate as the body fights infection and create a form that may not be as treatable. 

 

The actual underlying risks from most vaccines that have been in use for at least a decade is somewhere around 0.001% or less.  If seatbelts provided such security, you probably would wear them without a second thought...yet seatbelts are nowhere near that effective...neither are anti-lock brakes...or actually even driving a car.  Cheers! 

[Parsad]

Body has barely gone cold and they've found a new saviour!  Like televangelists, there are always far too many to go around!  Cheers!

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/teen-hailed-charlie-kirk-prot-103244872.html

[backtothebeach]

56 minutes ago, Sweet said:

I never said Biden’s ‘goal was to encourage illegal immigration’.

 

I don’t think I’ve ever met someone consistently as disingenuous as you and I’ve argued a lot online (sadly).

 

I mean this seriously, but are you doing it on purpose, or is it unintentional?

 

If I’m wording something poorly I’ll try and correct it.

 

I admire your patience, but you are wasting your breath @Sweet.

[LC]

55 minutes ago, Sweet said:

I don’t think I’ve ever met someone consistently as disingenuous as you and I’ve argued a lot online (sadly).

 

I mean this seriously, but are you doing it on purpose, or is it unintentional?

 

If I’m wording something poorly I’ll try and correct it.

 

My perspective is that you are debating semantics at the expense of the plot. It is frustrating.

 

For example regarding Biden's immigration policy, I don't care how you want to label it:

 

"encouraging illegal immigration" 

 

vs your description:

 

"run on an illegal immigration friendly platform"

"incentivise them by saying we will provide you a pathway to citizenship"

"call them undocumented rather than illegals, and when you promise a pathway to citizenship for those undocumented"

 

The meaning is clear, whether you want to get caught up on semantics or not. 

[backtothebeach]

I don't even know why you guys are still discussing the subject. Here is an interesting stat:

Here are the estimated yearly migrant numbers who crossed through the Darien Gap from 2018 to 2025:

• 2018 and earlier: A few thousand per year on average.

• 2021: About 133,653 migrants crossed.

• 2022: Approximately 248,284 migrants crossed.

• 2023: A record high of around 520,085 migrants crossed. This surge more than doubled the 2022 figure.

• 2024: Estimated 302,203 crossings, a 42% decrease from 2023.

• 2025 (early months): A dramatic drop with only about 13 crossings in May and 10 in June, representing a 99.98% decline from the 2023 peak.

This is a 100km hike through the jungle controlled by drug cartels, with all kinds of dangers such as river crossings, also human trafficking, rape, murder, organ harvesting, all the worst one can imagine.

A blind person can see that Biden's border policy was a huge pull factor. Also when a record number of people show up at the US southern border, a record number will be rejected. If no one shows up, no one will be rejected. Not so difficult to understand.

[Sweet]

1 hour ago, Parsad said:

 

You would be playing with fire.  The people who work in health care that disagree are on the low side and I've talked to some of them and would say they don't what they are talking about.  You can work in the investment industry and still not know how the stock market functions.  

 

By not vaccinating your children, you create two very big problems...one, they could develop illnesses that were virtually non-existent or controllable...two, every time someone is exposed to a virus, that virus can mutate as the body fights infection and create a form that may not be as treatable. 

 

The actual underlying risks from most vaccines that have been in use for at least a decade is somewhere around 0.001% or less.  If seatbelts provided such security, you probably would wear them without a second thought...yet seatbelts are nowhere near that effective...neither are anti-lock brakes...or actually even driving a car.  Cheers! 

I agree with you.  My wife, usually sensible, and from a science background herself, has got the jitters.  Worse it’s affecting me too.  When you have kids you can’t think straight at times.  RFK talks rubbish but it’s got a hold on people.

She had relatives at the house today, and they were saying that they have noticed an effect from vaccines.  This was a closed discussion years ago and he’s opened it up. 
 

Edited September 30, 2025 by Sweet