Just read this article on Politico, Trump is winning the immigration debate. The salient point is that the Democrats need to recalibrate their absolutist position on immigration.
Is there really anything so terrible in recognizing that culture change is worrying to many voters? Condemning these people as racists isn’t the obvious way to win hearts and minds. So should Democrats change their policy or not?
There are plenty of non-racist reasons to want to preserve the national border and legal migration. I would agree that it would probably be a relatively easy policy change for a big win.
Realistically, the Liberal policy is that if people are here, they should be looked after. That doesn’t have to be antithetical to, “but they shouldn’t be here to begin with”.
On the other hand, I suspect that there is a reason that both parties are pro-illegal immigration. Big farming wants cheap, under the table labor and the middle class doesn’t want our food costs to rocket up. The first goes against a politicians bottom line, and the latter keeps him from being re-elected. The most efficient ways to fight illegal immigration would be to remove the minimum wage and to prosecute businesses for employing legals. The first is a Liberal no-no and the latter goes against a politician’s bottom line.
Granted, the Republican party said they wanted to make a better health care system, while meaning that they wanted to gut it. What a party puts down as their party platform doesn’t actually have to be what they’ll do. It just has to fleece the rubes on election year.
They should, but they won’t.
And to be fair their principle won’t let them, rightly enough. Better a 100 years of Trump than to seem mean.
They need the narrative of protecting the little guy — the foreign little guy, they don’t much care for the shiftless American little guy — not only to feel good but to vigorously foster diversity and radical cultural change. Plus they very much like scolding people opposing their positions in order to change their hearts and minds.
Can’t do that if one compromises.
The Democrats just need better rhetoric/messaging. Virtually no one is for literal open borders.
Right, I am for literal open borders but I readily admit that my views are not mainstream and do not line up with the Democratic Party platform.
The problem is that the immigration debate is not an honest one. The message should be that conservative fears about culture change are built on a foundation of lies peddled to them by politicians seeking to play on factual ignorance to create a wedge issue, but arguments based on facts will lose to arguments based on fear every day. Obama was about as tough as a president can be on immigration without being a complete monster; Hispanic immigration is down and steadily declining; overall immigration is below historical levels; immigrants tend to be more law abiding and more productive than the native population; immigrants are a net positive to the economy and to government revenue. Etc, etc.
The other side of it is what to do with existing undocumented immigrants. Deporting a 21 year old college student to country he doesn’t know just because his parents brought him here as a young child without going through proper immigration channels is cruel, inhuman, and completely lacking in empathy, and Democrats are right not to bend on that.
Yes they should. The Democrats have just been playing the ‘opposite game’ in response to the Republican policy of intolerance. We need more legal immigration, we need immigrants who want to be productive American citizens. The Republican tail has been wagging the Democratic dog on this issue for decades.
Can they afford to? Even though 6 of 10 according to a recent poll support a limited travel plan for some nations, part of the Democratic message is telling the poor, or minorities the game is rigged against you and you need our help and governmental support.
Well, the Danish Social Democrats have made precisely that policy turnaround, and is now for immigration restrictionism. Here’s a good review here by a political scientist in Denmark:
Also here:
And here (actually I’m impressed by how far the Social Democrats have come on immigration, although this is from two years ago):
Could somene explain in what sense the Dem position on immigration is “absolutist”?
[QUOTE=CarnalK]
Could somene explain in what sense the Dem position on immigration is “absolutist”?
[/QUOTE]
I’m not seeing it, but from the OPs linked article:
As to the OP, I’m unsure what he’s getting at. If we are talking about allowing in only those who are qualified or can show they can work (at least wrt immigrants…refugees would, of course, be a different matter), then that wouldn’t be that different than today (though another requirement in many cases is having lots of money to invest in the US business). And it’s not that different than other countries…Canada for instance. I’d like to see the numbers go up, but I can see wanting qualified and steady people to become new citizens. But I can see the other side too…pretty much unrestricted immigration in the past has made the country great, and if you look at the countries that are mainly doing the best in the world today, all of them allow (restricted) immigration to a high degree. Almost all of the countries that are doing poorly are those who put higher and higher restrictions on immigration.
I think that, even with all of the issues associated with immigration, the brain drain from other countries to the US due to our past immigration stances have immensely helped this country, and we should be encouraging it as much as possible.
Yes. The Democrats should certainly reverse their policy on immigration. They should try actually being pro-immigration for a change instead of Republican-lite.
Before the recent disaster put us on the inevitable slippery slope to the end of the American experiment I thought immigration would be the perfect cause for Democrats to champion. It could have been a great wedge issue to use against the Republican coalition. Use the moral angle to peel away some of the religious. Use the economic angle to draw away business. Use the fact that immigrants commit crime at lower rates to appeal to law and order types. Remind the Reganites that everyone wants to come to the shining city on the hill and by taking them in we “civilize” them.
I think it would have killed. Instead we wussed out and got killed instead. Lame.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I guess the Democrats should retreat from the position Republicans say they have and publicly adopt the position they actually have…
I think the great unwashed hick rubes in flyover Jesusland have had enough of the nonsense, it’s hurt the Democrats badly, not surprisingly because it is just nuts at every level. There are something like 90 million Americans recieving some sort of government or taxpayer funded welfare and millions who are unemployed.
There is simply no need whatsoever for importing unskilled labor by the millions. The native born believe rightly or wrongly they are being treated as “second class” citizens.
This is right, as to the white working class Christians who voted for Trump. They feel they are losing their white privilege.
Fortunately, the Democrats don’t have to join the GOP as the party of bigotry. They can just promise those folks higher minimum wage as well as Medicare and free college for all citizens paid for by taxes on billionaires. And then make those economic “ideas” the center of their political campaigns.
It doesn’t matter if the GOP Senators block those things. Actually, it’s better if they do, politically speaking.
In the end, that’s probably bad economic policy. But it’s not any more harmful than shutting down immigration or starting a war with North Korea or any of the other stupid shit Republicans want to do. And it probably won’t happen anyway. Win-win!
I think almost no one would say that, right now, we should change the law to throw the borders wide open.
On the other hand, I believe that many people would agree that open borders are a thing to strive for in the future.
Most people want to live in a world where the circumstances of one’s birth don’t dictate one’s destiny, and part of that means being able to move to countries where there’s opportunity.
That doesn’t mean we flip a switch on our immigration policy and create that world tomorrow, but it does mean that we should come up with a plan for getting there.
Yeah, there’s certainly room for some wonkery tweeks, i.e. not vote getting, on skills based immigration but there isn’t really a tonne of difference between the parties on legal migration istm. It’s great! Immigrants built this country! They are both “absolutists” on that. The difference is almost all on how harshly to deal with illegal immigration.
You illustrate their problem to a T. If you can’t engage in a debate on ideas, start calling people names. It’s just absolute poison to throw around these accusations, and deeply offensive, because the implied assertion is that there is no argument against illegal immigration, the person is racist or bigoted, benefiting from so-called white privilege.
Open borders or a wefare state. Can’t have both. Democrat leadership and the eggheads in media need to accept that the vast majority of Americans are sick of illegal aliens and are not robe wearing klansman. Ironically wages would be a lot higher without the tens of millions of foreign nationals competing for lower skilled jobs, certainly far more than $15 an hour.
If we only had a wall…
Seriously, though, neither the leadership of the Democrat**ic **Party, nor the eggheads in the media, are calling for illegal immigration. So, the vast majority of Americans should vote Democratic.
The business owners don’t want Americans.
Gee, I wonder why.
Do you lock your door at night? Keep the keys in your car? Leave money layimg around? We don’t lock our doors because we hate other people, it’s because we love our family.
As a practical matter it’s not just a “law” but a fundamental duty of the government - protect against invasian.