Again: No, they don’t. Maybe they used to, but they’ve abandoned that mission. And ICE has been so tainted that, when sane people get back into power, they’ll need to create an entirely new agency to do that. Reforming it won’t work, because it’s too tainted.
Why are people falling for all of RFK Jr’s health bullshit?
Sure, racism is part of nativism, but I think a more certain explanation is that their friends and relatives, who are even more surrounded by right-wing media than they may be, are hearing the anti-migrant story line, over and over.
Unauthorized immigration was way down in Biden’s last year. Is it racism that Trumpers don’t realize that? I don’t think so. It’s that they are in a right wing echo chamber.
…of racism.
Correct. I’m also for the institution of the Supreme Court and not for how it currently exists and behaves. Same for the Senate. For what the DOJ and even the CDC are now.
In none of these cases do I think abolishing the institutions is the appropriate fix for their current malfunction. And on the scale fixing ICE is a lesser challenge than most of the others.
It is also IMHO bad politics because my understanding is that while majorities are upset over how ICE is doing, and not doing, its jobs, the majority is also more concerned about immigration numbers, and the actual tasks of ICE than I am.
Opinions based on crap aren’t even worth that, though.
Their votes though are worth as much as yours is. frankly likely more. So dismissing them derisively while likely justified intellectually, would be a stupid policy position to promote.
I think most reasonable people would be happy if we pushed through common sense immigration reform, basically a more progressive version of Lankford’s bill, and restructured and renamed the entire DHS and its subsidiaries, with all field agents responsible for interacting with the public having qualification standards similar to the FBI’s. Make it the kind of agency CBS (well the old CBS) would want to make a 16 season procedural about.
Anyone who worked for ICE is free to apply to those new jobs, provided they meet the education, training, and fitness standards.
We aren’t ignoring the border, we’re taking it more seriously. Lean into making immigration control enforcement a high priority that requires talented professionals, and that it’s time to put the national shame of ineffective, incompetent, and dangerous agencies in the dustbin of history.
Sure. But that’s not what a slogan of “Abolish ICE” markets. Serious comprehensive immigration reform … beefed up processing, pathways to legalization, hard enforcement on drug and human trafficking … yeah. And almost had close to that during Biden with bipartisan support until Trump got GOP Congress critters to kill it so he could run on blaming the dysfunction on Biden.
That’s easy, because they live in places like North Dakota, thousands of miles from the border, and they get their news from right-aligned sources, and/or perk up when the mainstream media reports in an “even handed” manner on absurd GOP talking points.
I mean if you live in Bowman, ND, Mexico is a LONG way away, and when you hear David Muir talking about how some GOP politician or other is discussing how dire and dramatic of a crisis immigration is at the border, they have no reason to believe that this politician isn’t telling the truth- he’s a Congressman, and it’s on ABC World News, so it must be a thing.
Living in a border state, it’s not any more in the news here than it is in the national news, and honestly I’ve heard a LOT more Texas-related angry noise recently about the Trump administration trying to ram their border wall through the Big Bend region of Texas, including Big Bend National Park and several other state parks.
I kind of doubt that people in border states really fall for this nonsense, but that’s only four states, two red, two blue.
Also I think Coco was the first and last representation mainstream media representation of Mexico in fiction where violent crime wasn’t a major component of the narrative. I think about half the country thinks of Mexico as spicy Mordor.
All good.
I just remembered there is a murder in this Disney Pixar movie.
I thought the argument was over whether or not “Abolish ICE” is a good message to convey.
In any event, it seems some folks are looking at this as I do, and some are looking at it as Dr. Deth lays out in the above quote.
They are two very different things. the conflation of the two cause misunderstandings.
IMO, it is not interesting to discuss how the Dems would treat ICE when in power because obviously they would redo the whole agency.
OTOH, discussing how Dems are stratagizing for 2026 and 2028, trying out slogans, and which blocs they are pursuing is very interesting.
This is a bad comparison. Those are longstanding institutions whose brand is about doing things people support. The majority of people never even heard of ICE except under Trump. Most people think what ICE is doing know is what they exist to do. They see the murder wall.
Ultimately I agree with you what needs to happen under the hood. We need something that performs ICE’s previous function. It’s the branding I don’t agree with. I think continuing to have an organization called ICE is a bad idea. The brand is tainted.
ICE now is people wearing masks who power trip and harass and even kill people just because they think they are immigrants. And “Abolish ICE” is the stronger slogan, that seems more like something strong is being done to stop them.
Huh?
I was responding to this:
And further clarifying what I am for. The mission is important. The institution is currently perverting its mission but like the other institutions currently perverted from what they should be doing is not irredeemable.
The question about the potential efficacy vs harm of the slogan is a different question, to which I have already given my more than two cents on supported by polling data. Briefly when offered “reform” as an option more endorse that than “abolish” … especially among Independents.
And among Democrats specifically? ICE abuses matter but they are not remotely the top issue of concern. Way below the economy, threats to free and fair elections, healthcare …
That said focusing on the abuses without demanding the agency gets abolished may pick up some disaffected Republicans.
Another poll:
Asked which issues matter most to their vote in 2026, Americans put inflation and the cost of living first (26%), followed by democracy and elections (15%), jobs and the economy (14%), and deportations and immigration enforcement (12%).
Roughly 14% of 2024 Trump voters now say they will vote for a Democrat for Congress or are unsure and not leaning Republican. Asked why their opinion changed, these defectors cite the economy and cost of living first (49%), Trump’s personal conduct and rhetoric second (34%), ICE deployments to cities third (32%), and immigration enforcement and deportation policies fourth (27%). Defectors are younger than loyal Trump voters (median age 40 vs. 54), more diverse (54% White non-Hispanic vs. 76%), and more urban (64% in urban or suburban areas vs. 51%).
If a candidate is looking for a message that will carry in a general election, during midterms or next cycle, “Abolish ICE” will lose more swingables than it gains, and even in primaries it is very split between that and “Reform” and an opportunity cost from addressing the issues potential voters are caring about even more. Arguing strongly in a unified voice that deployment to cities has to stop, that the abuses have to stop, OTOH, only gains.
Well put. I wouldn’t mind them saying that they’re going to clean house at the agency, but I think maybe stopping shy of complete abolishment could be good like you describe.
That is another related position, I agree.
I agree with points you and DSeid have made. Independents, disappointed Republicans, ‘swingables’—whatever we call them, they are likely to be dismayed by the implication of “ABOLISH ICE” that there will be no immigration enforcement of any kind, if Dems get in.
As mentioned, that is not the reality of what Dems would likely do. They would NOT ‘open borders’ and cease all pursuit of drug lords, rapists, etc. who are here without papers. But Democrats wouldn’t get the chance to show that, if they don’t get voted in.
I wonder if a more positive slogan could work for the swingables as well as for the more lefty types. Something like
?
Right, exactly. That’s what ICE means for most people. For those people, “reform ICE” means “change the way that we’re harassing and killing random people”. That’s a nonstarter.
Some people do know what ICE’s mission is actually supposed to be. But those are precisely the people who look further than a two-word soundbite slogan. Don’t tailor your slogan to the people who aren’t swayed by slogans.
Republican “swingables” are nonexistent. Republicans come out and vote in the same, if not increasing, numbers every time and vote for the R candidate.
The idea that there is a pool of voters that would vote Democratic if only Democrats allowed a little fascism is appeasement fantasy.
Abolish ICE.
(A thought to ponder: Yes or No, did Trump receive more votes this time around than the first?)