US Political News and Trump’s China visit

[Hamartia Antidote]

The question is, what is "the right way" and what is "the wrong way"?

I'm pretty sure letting people jump the turnstiles of NYC's MTA subway stations in front of paying customers is not a smart idea to increase ridership.

Can we work on a better solution that doesn't involve giving people a pat on the head for taking shortcuts?

Dude, this is more complex than what you just said, economy migrate and evolve like people evolved, the issue here is we aren't in 1950 anymore, you can't base a service base economy on manufacturing, that's the reason why we loose all those to begin with.

Are you saying we have a shortage of people somehow? The third most populous country on this planet has a shortage of people and that is why our economy isn't great? Really? Is that the core issue?

As living standard increase, there are some job that aren't going to fill like it was used to be, again, if I offer you $40/hr to build a house, would you do it? That's a lot more than some mid level white collar job.

Well I'm sure those same jobs were around 40 years ago too when Reagan did the 3Million amnesty and oddly with the millions more people who have crept over the border in the past 4 decades it seems the people wanting to do those jobs still remains elusive...if not even worse. So there's no magic housing construction bullet being solved by letting people jump the border.

That's because when people are trusting the system, they will throw themselves at it, and they will work WITH the system, attending tribunal, attending court, and if it turns out unsuccessful, they are deported, again, that's because those illegal immigrants believe in the system that work for them

I understand your point...but this is like 1000 people jumping the fence at a Rolling Stones Concert because they didn't want to pay and having security announce will they all simply please leave on their own accord instead of having security scour the crowds looking for them. If they leave on their own there is no problem...if security needs to grab them then there will be.

What more can they do? Pay each of them $1000 to leave?

Yes, the system is against them. They brought that on themselves.
I'm sorry security isn't cuddling them better.

Trump offers illegal immigrants $1,000 to 'self-deport'

US officials say the incentive offers a "dignified" exit from the country for those who are there illegally.

www.bbc.com

 

[j_hungary]

I'm pretty sure letting people jump the turnstiles of NYC's MTA subway stations in front of paying customers is not a smart idea to increase ridership.

Can we work on a better solution that doesn't involve giving people a pat on the head for taking shortcuts?

Well, that's why I said we should change the law, the law has not worked for the last few decades, and keep trying to enforce the same law would not yield any different result.

Are you saying we have a shortage of people somehow? The third most populous country on this planet has a shortage of people and that is why our economy isn't great? Really? Is that the core issue?


Well I'm sure those same jobs were around 40 years ago too when Reagan did the 3Million amnesty and oddly with the millions more people who have crept over the border in the past 4 decades it seems the people wanting to do those jobs still remains elusive...if not even worse. So there's no magic housing construction bullet being solved by letting people jump the border.

I am not saying the US lacks people, but lacks a worker pool for all sorts of jobs. That's because living standard and the perceived work, in Australia, working in mining get paid more than most senior management (Last I heard they made up to A$150,000 a year), all you need to do is to know how to weld stuff, yet that is the job that no one go after. Because the condition is bad (I mean if you had ever use an arc welder you would know) and even if they paid out more than an average managerial position. People are still going to ignore those. Money is not really a factor in job market. This is going to be an issue with how you train people and how you can stimulate worker pool for different job, and until then, you either use imported worker, people who are willing to take those job. or hire anyone who are willing to have a go, including illegal.

If you want American to build house, getting rid of the illegal will not make American themselves willing to go into this business, you need a whole set of circumstance and atmosphere (from trade school training to youth engagement) to stimulate the interest, getting rid of illegal only means you have less option, unless those option are willing to be taken up by average American, that solved nothing.

I understand your point...but this is like 1000 people jumping the fence at a Rolling Stones Concert because they didn't want to pay and having security announce will they all simply please leave on their own accord instead of having security scour the crowds looking for them. If they leave on their own there is no problem...if security needs to grab them then there will be.

What more can they do? Pay each of them $1000 to leave?

Yes, the system is against them. They brought that on themselves.
I'm sorry security isn't cuddling them better.

Trump offers illegal immigrants $1,000 to 'self-deport'

US officials say the incentive offers a "dignified" exit from the country for those who are there illegally.

www.bbc.com

That's not comparable. Again, you can control something, say 1000 queue jumpers and you can enforce the law in that sense if you hire maybe 100 security guards. The venue is sealed, and there is no way they can come back in. That's enforceable. Because once you expelled them, they are gone, you can literally count them down to zero.

When you ALREADY had 12 million, maybe more, illegal in the US, remember, these people ALREADY ignored the law by coming to America illegally, are you really able to enforce the law with the agent you have? Bear in mind there is NO WAY you can fully secure the border, which mean everyday you are spending time and resource and play whack-a-mole with these illegal, that's the resource and time you won't spend to secure your border, it wouldn't help the situation in general, the situation itself is unenforceable if all of them decided to go underground. And then you also need to content with the fact that new illegal immigrants are going to come in every single day, so that's not the same case as 1000 queue jumpers in a concert.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Bear in mind there is NO WAY you can fully secure the border, which mean everyday you are spending time and resource and play whack-a-mole with these illegal,

Yes, so why should we give those already here illegally a soft pat on the head for causing us this financial hardship? As if we owe them some nicety?

 

[j_hungary]

Yes, so why should we give those already here illegally a soft pat on the head for causing us this financial hardship? As if we owe them some nicety?

Again, we are in financial hardship NOT because of illegal immigrants, you can deport them all, and we will STILL be in financial hardship. (Again, they are a positive contribution to our economy)

Just one example, illegal immigrants have been an issue since 1996 when they went off 300%, the current financial hardship did not start in 1996. Otherwise, we would have been in the shit by now.

The current financial hardship is a result of the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis-induced stock market crash, followed by the costs of two wars, and then further exacerbated by the COVID response. You can pin it on Illegal if you want, that did nothing

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Again, we are in financial hardship NOT because of illegal immigrants,

The general financial hardship angle whether high or low should not make a difference.

Again whether the Rolling Stones are making a profit or a loss at the concert that shouldn't affect whether security chases out the fence jumpers. Plus the "jumpees" shouldn't be making an assumption that it should. "ah Mick makes enough...he should feel damn happy I'm here cheering for him..even if I didn't pay".

you can deport them all, and we will STILL be in financial hardship. (Again, they are a positive contribution to our economy)

That's fine. Shouldn't make a difference whether our budget is in the back or red.

Just one example, illegal immigrants have been an issue since 1996 when they went off 300%, the current financial hardship did not start in 1996. Otherwise, we would have been in the shit by now.

That's fine but not highly relevant towards the issue at hand.

The current financial hardship is a result of the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis-induced stock market crash, followed by the costs of two wars, and then further exacerbated by the COVID response. You can pin it on Illegal if you want, that did nothing

I'm sure that is a big part of it...but again this is just a tangent.

 

[RabzonKhan]

I just wanted to take a moment to thank both of you for the way you're engaging. It’s been incredibly refreshing to read a debate that stays focused on the substance without descending into personal attacks. You're both demonstrating exactly what forums like this should stand for, intelligent disagreement, thoughtful reasoning, and mutual respect.

When debates are handled this way, it raises the bar for everyone. It doesn’t just make the forum a better space, it helps readers learn, reflect, and explore the issue from multiple angles, and I genuinely appreciate it.

I’m busy as usual, swamped, really, but today was a great one for me in the stock market. Later on, I’ll be hopping on a conference call with some stock market buddies to swap strategies. After that, I’ll be posting some of my own views on the topic you both have been discussing. Looking forward to joining in.

@j_hungary @Hamartia Antidote

 

[j_hungary]

The general financial hardship angle whether high or low should not make a difference.

Again whether the Rolling Stones are making a profit or a loss at the concert that shouldn't affect whether security chases out the fence jumpers. Plus the "jumpees" shouldn't be making an assumption that it should. "ah Mick makes enough...he should feel damn happy I'm here cheering for him..even if I didn't pay".

Again, you really should not use other examples to try to justify your point. They are under a different circumstances.

1.) Queue jumpers don't contribute to the concert, most illegal aliens did.
2.) You can control the perimeter of a venue, you can't with a country.
3.) The effort to try to control the perimeter of a venue is far beyond the stretches of border control.

If you have a balance deportation/illegal population, what you said theoretically can work, but the issue here is the original population is ALREADY entrenched, and they are integrated into the society, Things aren't as simple as you think, "you come here without a ticket, now you leave" first of all, you will need to have a check point and stop queue jumper and turn them around, and that's assuming you can man all the check point, in the immigrant case, THEY ARE ALREADY INSIDE THE VENUE, to use your analogy, security would need to go into the venue, ask to check EVERYONE their ticket, and then detain the person if they don't have a ticket and then expel them. Setting aside you will need other countries' cooperation to do that, let's just crunch the number here. You are talking about 12 million + illegal immigrants (Your queue jumper) living amongst 330 million American (Your legit concert goer), and you have less than 100,000 CBP/ICE agent (your security guard)

That is the circumstance if we were to use your concert goer/queue jumper example.

That's fine. Shouldn't make a difference whether our budget is in the back or red.

Then why do this to begin with?? If you already conceded that it shouldn't make any difference if our budget is in the black or red?

You do know doing this cost money and resource, right?

That's fine but not highly relevant towards the issue at hand.

Huh, how so?

You are basing the economic downturn on illegal immigrants, that's just wrong to begin with.

We have had illegal immigrant issue for ages, but the financial crisis is new, it doesn't take a economic genius to figure out both aren't really related.

I'm sure that is a big part of it...but again this is just a tangent.

This is not a tangent if you are basing the effect of the economy on illegal immigrants, this is what you said in the previous post...

Yes, so why should we give those already here illegally a soft pat on the head for causing us this financial hardship? As if we owe them some nicety?

I will say, if you are talking about removing all criminal illegal, I am 1000% with you, those people exploited the system and deserved to be removed, but that is not what Trump was doing, and what you are saying,. you are saying illegal alien contribute to your financial hardship. Well, as I explained before, the current financial hardship came from 2008 when we suffered a financial crisis and the fed had to bail out many banks and cooperation, lead to large laid off, budget blackhole and 4 rounds of QE, which we just basically on the edge of recovering in 2020, but then we were hit by COVID, when you have 20% production, government paying people to sit out their job for almost a year, you don't need a economic degree to know there are going to be economic reprecussion, you need to restart the business, lower the inflation by pumping up the interest rate, and let the economic stew. You anchor your economy on infrastructure project because those are largely government project, that's the reason why your neighbor don't have a job right now, that's not because of some illegal taken his place or used up some Federal assistance..

That view is flawed; again, you should deport people for the right reason within the right circumstances. That is not my point; that's Joe Rogan's point in this video

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Again, you really should not use other examples to try to justify your point. They are under a different circumstances.

1.) Queue jumpers don't contribute to the concert, most illegal aliens did.

What?....do you think they went through the trouble of jumping the fence just to sit quietly on their hands while everybody else is jumping up and down going crazy?

2.) You can control the perimeter of a venue, you can't with a country.

No..not automatically...if you don't have insane security manpower you aren't going to stop 1000 people from jumping a concert fence. Do you think the Whitehouse can stop 200 people from jumping the fence and rushing across the lawn?

I'm not sure why you are going down this road as it is a nonsensical tangent.

Things aren't as simple as you think, "you come here without a ticket, now you leave" first of all, you will need to have a check point and stop queue jumper and turn them around, and that's assuming you can man all the check point, in the immigrant case, THEY ARE ALREADY INSIDE THE VENUE,

This is very silly logic. What if every country in the world tomorrow says that every tourist of theirs currently in the US should overstay as long as possible. Do we say "oops...well not much we can do since they are already here..so let's do absolutely nothing".

I suppose after they are found they should expect us to give them a nice pat on the head too.

to use your analogy, security would need to go into the venue, ask to check EVERYONE their ticket,

Well something should be attempted to be done instead of simply throwing up your hands and doing nothing as the next concert will be even worse with 2000 if people learn security is lax once inside. Will doing something be 100% effective..obviously not.

and then detain the person if they don't have a ticket and then expel them. Setting aside you will need other countries' cooperation to do that, let's just crunch the number here. You are talking about 12 million + illegal immigrants (Your queue jumper) living amongst 330 million American (Your legit concert goer), and you have less than 100,000 CBP/ICE agent (your security guard)

Again doing something is far better than nothing. Does it have to be 100% effective to be worthwhile...no.

That is the circumstance if we were to use your concert goer/queue jumper example.

Then why do this to begin with?? If you already conceded that it shouldn't make any difference if our budget is in the black or red?

I'm saying whether a budget is in the red or black shouldn't make a difference.
Do we say it is okay to run red lights based on whether a town's budget is in the black or red? Why does the state of the budget have to be the determining factor?

If the US debt was eliminated tomorrow should we put a sign on the border fence saying "Welcome everybody...come on in!!!! Here's some free ladders!!!!"

You do know doing this cost money and resource, right?

Yes, obviously

Huh, how so?

You are basing the economic downturn on illegal immigrants, that's just wrong to begin with.

I never said that at all. All I said is we have plenty of low skilled unemployed US citizens struggling to find work and allowing tons more unskilled people in is not helping their cause. Nor has it been proven that "undesirable jobs" will magically be grabbed first over ordinary jobs which already have high competition.

If there is an economic downturn then shouldn't you be agreeing 1000% that unskilled US citizens are likely going to get hit the hardest??

We have had illegal immigrant issue for ages, but the financial crisis is new, it doesn't take a economic genius to figure out both aren't really related.

I'm not tying the cause of the financial crisis to llegal mmigration.

I will say, if you are talking about removing all criminal illegal, I am 1000% with you,

So we should remove the foreign tourist overstayers I mentioned above that do criminal acts and simply ignore the others? What? Sure we can concentrate on finding the troublemakers first but giving the rest a complete reprieve is not logical.

the current financial hardship came from 2008 when we suffered a financial crisis and the fed had to bail out many banks and cooperation, lead to large laid off, budget blackhole and 4 rounds of QE, which we just basically on the edge of recovering in 2020, but then we were hit by COVID, when you have 20% production, government paying people to sit out their job for almost a year, you don't need a economic degree to know there are going to be economic reprecussion

So the lower classes of citizens in the US are likely getting hit the hardest and you think allowing millions more mostly unskilled people into the worforce is going to help them? Low income housing shortages too...rent increases...

That view is flawed; again, you should deport people for the right reason within the right circumstances.

Yeah, it's called they shouldn't even be here to begin with. While I may agree they are solving some problems I think they are exacerbating others. It's not all "win-win". The people on the losing end are the most vulnerable.

 

[FuturePAF]

Good to see the democrat party is having its own “Tea Party Moment”. The pundits called the republicans out for a non-centrist ideology and going populist, and we saw how he won. Now it seems that movement is picking up steam on the democrats side, as Jeffries and other all talk dems don’t much real traction in the base. Democrat leadership will go kicking and screaming, they won’t give up easily.

Republicans main hope remains a divided democrat party. Democrat leadership not accepting where the base is, or else more will vote third party or sit out the vote if the candidates positions don’t match the base.

Will the Democrat party snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Pundit wrong last year, wrong this year.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The electorate is turning about how the deportations are being carried out and have turned on US support for Israel’s behavior.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[FuturePAF]

We might have an early gauge of how pissed the base really are, with the following election coming up. Establishment dems don’t look to be effectively combating Trump, so this southwest district maybe a harbinger of things to come in the democrat party.

Even if she doesn’t win, if the anti-Trump need is not satisfied by the establishment dem, she could run again in 2026 with even more wind in her sail. It the gap in the vote that will be interesting to watch, if she doesn’t win. If she wins it will be a blow to the gerentocracy that has hobbled the Democrat party, who still think the base are middle class people. Due to the economic hollowing out of the middle class, the base is the working class.

Her opponent has already been given the AIPAC Israel trip, in 2011; the long game. 20:40-28:40

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This is the 7th Arizona congressional district. Covers nearly the entire border in Arizona.

Primary Election July 15th; effectively the election for this election, this coming Tuesday.

2025 Arizona's 7th congressional district special election - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Btw, the democrats tried and tired consultant class recommended narrative will be put up to the challenge by this election.

John Stewart, who was a major voice in the GW bush and Obama era, is giving this advice to the Dems. So they ought to listen if they want to win again.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Substantial platforms, not just slogans , will attract voters.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[SolarWarden]

I just wanted to take a moment to thank both of you for the way you're engaging. It’s been incredibly refreshing to read a debate that stays focused on the substance without descending into personal attacks. You're both demonstrating exactly what forums like this should stand for, intelligent disagreement, thoughtful reasoning, and mutual respect.

When debates are handled this way, it raises the bar for everyone. It doesn’t just make the forum a better space, it helps readers learn, reflect, and explore the issue from multiple angles, and I genuinely appreciate it.

I’m busy as usual, swamped, really, but today was a great one for me in the stock market. Later on, I’ll be hopping on a conference call with some stock market buddies to swap strategies. After that, I’ll be posting some of my own views on the topic you both have been discussing. Looking forward to joining in.

@j_hungary @Hamartia Antidote

Dude I don't agree with most of your politics but so what? I hate people that cancel others because they have different political views it shouldn't be like this and at one point it wasn't like this in the US. Some of your post I've liked because I agree with youz.

 

[The SC]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[FuturePAF]

NY mayoral race update:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Btw, while this speaker is a trader from the UK, many of the points hold for NY as well. Especially about the young not being able to afford what the previous generation could afford; a broken social contract.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[j_hungary]

What?....do you think they went through the trouble of jumping the fence just to sit quietly on their hands while everybody else is jumping up and down going crazy?

Dude, I was talking about contribution, did they pay for the concert? Did they buy their refreshment from the stand? I am not talking about they went in there and enjoy the concert like everyone else

No..not automatically...if you don't have insane security manpower you aren't going to stop 1000 people from jumping a concert fence. Do you think the Whitehouse can stop 200 people from jumping the fence and rushing across the lawn?

I'm not sure why you are going down this road as it is a nonsensical tangent.

That's my point, how many border agents do you think you will need to secure 1750 mile of Mexican-American border? And that's just land border.....

You CAN'T have that "insane security manpower" to secure a nation, you can with any venue, you can hire 30,000 security guards to secure a Taylor Swift Concert with 100,000 attending, you can't hire 1 million border agents to secure the almost 2000 mile border.

This is very silly logic. What if every country in the world tomorrow says that every tourist of theirs currently in the US should overstay as long as possible. Do we say "oops...well not much we can do since they are already here..so let's do absolutely nothing".

In case of enforcement, YES, what can you do about it? Go into each community in any given city in the US and pull these tourist out??

In case of prevention, you can stop people from coming in.

I NEVER said you should do nothing, I said enforcement didn't work, YOU NEED TO TRY SOMETHING ELSE.

Well something should be attempted to be done instead of simply throwing up your hands and doing nothing as the next concert will be even worse with 2000 if people learn security is lax once inside. Will doing something be 100% effective..obviously not.

Again doing something is far better than nothing. Does it have to be 100% effective to be worthwhile...no.

First, you can't do that, in case you don't notice, that's why we don't have ID and you can't use SSN to work as ID to begin with, Law Enforcement cannot go to a community and ask people for ID without either a warrant or a probable clasue. You can do that in a concert because that's private venue.

Second, I am not saying you do nothing, again, Enforcement is not working, this HAD NOT BEEN WORKING since at least 1996, I suggested a legal reform, I did not suggest put your hands up and doing nothin'.

I'm saying whether a budget is in the red or black shouldn't make a difference.
Do we say it is okay to run red lights based on whether a town's budget is in the black or red? Why does the state of the budget have to be the determining factor?

If your department have a budget restrain then yes, it's easier to install a camera and send you a ticket when you run a red light than have a cop putting out roadblock and stop you when you are doing that.

Running a red light is not okay whether or not your budget is in red or black, HOW YOU ENFORCE THAT LAW is different when you have a budget of red or black.

If the US debt was eliminated tomorrow should we put a sign on the border fence saying "Welcome everybody...come on in!!!! Here's some free ladders!!!!"

What's that have to do with anything? I am talking about enforcement, I am not talking about whether or not you should welcome tourists or migrants (Whether or not they are legal or illegal).

You do know those are two separate issue, right?

I never said that at all. All I said is we have plenty of low skilled unemployed US citizens struggling to find work and allowing tons more unskilled people in is not helping their cause. Nor has it been proven that "undesirable jobs" will magically be grabbed first over ordinary jobs which already have high competition.

How's that's different than "those unskilled illegal people" taking US citizens job?

Think about it like that, if US Citizen are willing to do those job would you think it's easier to hire US Citizen to fill those job or it's easier to hire illegal?

Competition is only there because our citizens are not doing those job to begin with, as I said previously, would you go build houses if I offered you $40 an hour doing them? Those jobs get farmed out to illegal workers because it's low low-paying and people are unwilling to do them, not because they are unskilled. Construction and farm work require a lot of skill, you are talking about welding, bricklaying and soil science, those are very highly skilled, I can earn more as a welder than normal office job filing paper.

If there is an economic downturn then shouldn't you be agreeing 1000% that unskilled US citizens are likely going to get hit the hardest??

If there is an economic downturn then EVERYONE is going to be hit.

If I have to say, Unskill people probably better off because their career, if they have one, is not going to be bound by skill set, think about it like this, if we have bad economy, would you think we will be losing general job like burger flipping or dish washing or highly skilled job like accounting or engineering?

So we should remove the foreign tourist overstayers I mentioned above that do criminal acts and simply ignore the others? What? Sure we can concentrate on finding the troublemakers first but giving the rest a complete reprieve is not logical.

Yes, again, you CAN'T ENFORCE THEM ALL, it would take a huge undertaking to remove everyone with a criminal record, and you want to go look up every other illegal?

Again, it's not going to be like you round them up somehow and they identify themselves as one and make your job easier, you need to go find them, 12 million plus, you have 100000 CBP + ICE agent, you can't do both, you need to choose between removing people that needed removing or try to go after all of them and ignore some of those you need to remove, you can't remove them all, that's the issue. That's the reality.

So the lower classes of citizens in the US are likely getting hit the hardest and you think allowing millions more mostly unskilled people into the worforce is going to help them? Low income housing shortages too...rent increases...

Are you really saying rent increases because illegal immigrants are occupying low-income housing? I don't know how much you know about illegal immigrants, I used to work with them on my PD assignment, they don't rent houses thru agents, they don't use their own identity, they either live in shelter or someone is shelters them, or they were being exploited by organise crime gang. They don't live in Government housing (unless people who shelter them lives in one) they don't rent properties off the lots. Property market increases because we have more demand, that's is because we have an economic downturn and an older population, this has nothing to do with illegals........

Dude, you need to lay off Fox news

Yeah, it's called they shouldn't even be here to begin with. While I may agree they are solving some problems I think they are exacerbating others. It's not all "win-win". The people on the losing end are the most vulnerable.

Keep saying "they shouldn't be here" does not solve the problem, it might have worked when the population picked up in 1990s. It don't works anymore, you need to think of a way it work now, instead of 30 years ago. It also established that you cant enforce the law at all, again, do you want me to show you the ICE statistic again? There is a reason why the number are down instead of up, and you are talking yourself into a corner.

You may not like the situation, but as a fellow law enforcement officer, I can tell you this, if you keep pushing them, they will just go disappear, and that will not make your problem disappear, you need them to cooperate, because there are just too many of them ALREADY IN THE COUNTRY than you have in law enforcement, and if they lost trust in the law, this will turn into Mexico, because people will just not follow it, and since we are underhand, we can't enforce shit, do you want that to happen?

 

[j_hungary]

NY mayoral race update:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Btw, while this speaker is a trader from the UK, many of the points hold for NY as well. Especially about the young not being able to afford what the previous generation could afford; a broken social contract.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

That's the reason why people are being pull to further left, and that's also the reason why Harris campaign falls apart in 2024.

None of the major party is actively trying to solve the issue of cost of living crisis, Trump is pinning it on illegal (which works nothing) and Harris is pinning it on Trump inability to do stuff. Not a single party is there to help the young people, and that's the issue.

GOP is now shooting itself on the foot, but the Dem is not taking advantage on this, if they keep working on Orange Man bad, they aren't going to pull people back to their side, they need someone to start selling something people believe, instead of still championing social justice, if they had done that, people will flock to them and voting for a better future, instead of just saying Trump is bad, well, I know Trump was bad, I don't need a 24/7 constant reminder from the Dem telling me so, I want someone to tell me how you are going to solve the cost of living crisis........