Yes let’s be honest. Your concern for immigration is really just a cover for your racism, isn’t it? Yeah I thought so.

You really should get your TDS looked at before it becomes more debilitating

That’s all you got? People so concerned with crime are voting for a criminal, and all you can say is “TDS”! That must be how you deal with your cognitive dissonance.

Irrelevant. The issue here is the flaw in your thinking: you have been conditioned to believe that every desperate person who crosses that border illegally is a murderer, a rapist, an arsonist, a thief, a drug dealer, etc. You have been conditioned to think this way by a constant stream of propaganda.

undocumented immigrants have substantially lower crime rates than native-born citizens and legal immigrants across a range of felony offenses. Relative to undocumented immigrants, US-born citizens are over 2 times more likely to be arrested for violent crimes, 2.5 times more likely to be arrested for drug crimes, and over 4 times more likely to be arrested for property crimes. https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.2014704117

If someone believes that a person who crosses the border without authorization is by definition a criminal and is subject to consequences, that would be understandable if they weren’t also planning to vote a convicted felon into the Whitehouse.

See, I added that part as absurdist contrast to the sensational and terrifying news coverage of immigrants.

I’m not saying I disagree with you, but Putin was also positive about the other guy too. And as shitty as the democrats are, the other guy is not a better choice in my opinion.

Edit: and in addition to that, I recall Don calling Putin “genius” and “savvy” so it seems he has some admiration for someone who shares values with Biden and Harris?

That’s right. Dictators are supporting other dictators.

BBC News, Moscow 9 November 2016 Deputies in Russia’s parliament broke into applause at the news Donald Trump had been elected US president.

Vladimir Putin wasted no time sending his congratulations and state TV channels switched quickly from claims of fraud, to hailing the triumph of the “man of the people”.

Hmm.

This is horrible.

Also, https://www.abc4.com/news/southern-utah/st-george-man-arrested-as-suspect-in-his-wifes-death/

Police found Niki A. Sampson, 47, dead inside the home. Police said that the circumstances around her death were suspicious and upon further investigation, her husband, 50 year old Eric L. Sampson, notorious American and social security card-carrying U.S. citizen, was identified as a suspect and arrested.

I think intelligence/personality are about even for me. I think I would not have rejected my wife if she were average intelligence, but the fact that she has a science background, and the quick way she thinks are part of the package that I fell for. So I will say very important, but not the most important.

Is anyone on the fence going to be swayed by a debate anyway? I think the people who are really not sure about which way to vote at this point likely can’t be reasoned out of wasting their vote on some third party.

To anyone reading this that is considering voting 3rd party, my advice is to vote dem and then put as much political pressure on the democrats as possible the other 364 days of the year. The alternative, while maybe morally pure, is a lot less workable and doesn’t benefit others.

Straight from the abusers handbook: DARVO: Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender.

I’m interested and curious to see what happens with such a setup. I wonder if I will end up on the ban list as a result of mostly participating in the conservative community and being contrary.

Every little while ( more frequently these days) i hear the voice of Anita Hill in my head.

Well then I suppose thats a good example of why “Christian nationalism” and the whole idea of a Christian nation doesn’t make sense. Every single citizen of the Kingdom that is not of this earth is responsible for following the instructions of the King. Meanwhile here in America there are always excuses why we can’t heal the sick or feed the hungry.

Weird. So much talk about “Christian conservatism” and how this is a “Christian nation” from the “Christian nationalists” and they forgot to read Matt 25: 43-45.

Hmm yes maybe that’s what happened. My daddy did say book learnin don’t come to no damn good.

It’s like you guys are unaware of the ideological assumptions that color all of your opinions. Is it shocking to hear that social conservatives believe in hierarchy? Is it surprising to be told that religious conservatives believe there is an overarching authority to which all of humanity, and all of nature is subject? Is it news to you that inequality is seen as inevitable, and this is why liberal ideas about forcing equality on everyone are seen as foolish?

Why then is there any objection to feminism? Why the opposition to DEI programs? Whats wrong with migrant refugees getting US government assistance and why did Ronald Reagan complain about “welfare queens”? What is the problem some people have with young men becoming young women? Is there not some philosophical thread that connects these things as wrong or bad or out of order? It’s because they all seem to violate deeply held assumptions about social order.

If you’ve never heard of Edmund Burke (called by many the father of modern conservatism) you should absolutely read up on him. He definately makes a case for heirarchy. I’m sure you have heard of Jordan Peterson who tries to claim that hierarchy is part of the natural order by famously pointing to lobsters. Peterson is less of a political thinker, but an alt-right hero I suppose, who dresses up conservative christian talking points with academic sounding language.

Anyway I feel like I made my case, debate it or not I don’t care. it seems super funny to me that I am called on to justify a connection between conservatism and hierarchy. It’s like if I said “water is so important to fish” and immediately wintermute is like " what? I literally never heard a fish say anything about water you are making that up you got a cite forr that?"

I think the discomfort with this situation comes from very foundational conservative thinking. It is a tenent of conservatism that a well ordered and correct society should resemble a pyramid: there should be a few people with wealth, privilege and power (political and otherwise) at the top, supported by a broad base of people with less wealth and less power at the bottom. Including noncitizens in voting upsets this hierarchical model, where outsiders oughtn’t have any political clout at all.

But there’s another element of conservative ideology that is violated by including noncitizens in the electoral process. It is zero-sum thinking that posits any gain for one group results in a loss to another. So handing out rights and and opportunities for political participation will diminish the the rights and opportunities for the rest of us.

As a leftist, I can understand this reasoning and see that it is a functional way of organizing and dealing with people and situations, as long as you are ok with the consequences of of the hierarchal model. I feel that the advantages of such an approach are far outweighed by the disadvantages. It is, at it’s core, antidémocratic. I personally don’t think it’s worth it to accept those consequences, nor do I think zero-sum applies well to issues like rights or matters of common good.

Woah wait a minute, I didn’t see this. It doesn’t say that reading and writing is white supremacy. It doesn’t say that at all.

Crazy stuff.

Meanwhile in America, police kill black people on a regular basis. While the black population of America is about 13%, in the prison system black people make roughly 37% of the population (prison policy.org) and the average Black and Latino households earn about half as much as the average White household and own only about 15 to 20 percent as much net wealth (federalreserve.gov). So it seems equally ridiculous to me to insist (and I have heard ppl say this) there’s no more racism in America, that everyone has equal opportunity and everyone can prosper if they blah blah bootstraps and freedom and liberty. What’s funny is that it’s purveyors of bullshit pointing out someone else’s bullshit in such a bullshitty way.

I seem to remember there was a bipartisan bill that made the asylum application process more strict and harder to get in under but that bill got voted down for some reason. Maybe those who are really concerned about the border situation would be frustrated with the people who voted down that bill. Maybe because of the hypocrisy.

It wasn’t the Biden administration that stopped that bill. I’m really wondering, are people ok with things unfolding like this? I can imagine someone saying, well that’s just part of the game of politics. You have to act like there’s a great calamity to motivate your voter base, find a scapegoat and try to impeach somebody. -But when an actual attempt at solution comes along, oh no, we don’t want that solved, not till after the election.

What I don’t understand is, why wouldn’t that kind of dealing lose votes?