Being the minority party doesn’t mean that one’s stance makes no difference.
Otherwise this would be like Republicans in California saying, “We’re the minority, so whether we support gay marriage or not is irrelevant.”
I don’t believe the Soros conspiracy theorists one bit, but if this were a Soros-funded attempt to rally the vote in favor of Democrats it would be one of the most poorly thought out ones conceivable.
The timing is very suspicious. I doubt Trump himself is behind it; he’s too cheap and this is too subtle for him. But I strongly suspect some conservative PAC fronted the money to get these people on the move.
I don’t know about the Russians. I think Putin would be just as happy seeing the Democrats winning control of Congress with Trump remaining in office. Putin’s interest is in America having a dysfunctional government and conflict between Congress and Trump would further that.
Or on the other hand, it could become a huge wave:
After a month of walking, some will drop out, but several thousand will still be on the move.
And after a month of constant publicity, the final few days will draw a LOT of followers, and a LOT of TV news cameras.
As the caravan reaches, say, an easy 3 day walk to the US border, the thousands of Hondurans may find that thousands of local Mexicans join the bandwagon.
Some might just do it for a show of support, and then drop out.
But others will be trying to get to America,perhaps after being afraid to try on their own, but now feel emboldened and hopeful by being part of a large group.
So this may not fizzle out.On the contrary, it could become a huge political event.
Along with that, there are all those former migrants who have been deported before who can now join in. Heck anyone can. Even if they are not from central america but from places like the middle east or Africa.
So I suspect the numbers will swell as they get close to the border.
Oh yeah. Because people from Africa who can’t even get on a plane to Europe will be getting in one to Mexico. That’s some real amazing illogic there.
Even if they average about 20 miles per day – a tall order walking through mixed terrain with children and (possibly) elderly migrants – they wouldn’t get to the border until well after election day.
…and yet the Republicans are planning to cut aid to those countries. Because that totally makes sense…
I know, bad idea. Although I dont know what we could do to help them. People mention the war on drugs but would making drugs legal really help the mass poverty down there?
If you believe that it is a bad idea, don’t tell us about it-we already know. Write your congresscritters and your President and tell them what you think, or organize groups to get your point across, or vote people that support this crap out of office.
Unless of course your post is just lip service and you feel that, no matter how bad it gets, the ends justify the means as long as Your Team Wins.
I disagree that this is a good things for Republicans, or Trump. If they actually reach the border, it will be portrayed in the media in the worst possible light. Much like the the children being separated a few months ago.
The fact is that decades of weak enforcement of our immigration laws and caused this problem. But while we should help legitimate refugees, WE need to be in charge of who comes in and who doesn’t. The best thing Trump can do is make this Mexico’s problem and close the border. Not a good thing to do, but seems like it’s his best option.
After this episode is over, we should put more emphasis on helping countries like Guatemala and Honduras. And we should also do whatever we have to do to let people thinking about coming here in the future that you will NOT get in if you s=just show up at the border. Period
Since the recent Presidential election many Canadians are surprised this has not already happened.
Can someone explain why giving more money to these countries will make things better? It’s an honest question. If the basic problem is with corruption in the government, then giving the government more money could make things worse. Maybe there is a way to give aid in such a way that it’s sure to go to the people who need it and not end up in the hands of corrupt officials and/or gangs and cartels. If so, is that what we are doing now and do we know who to do more of it?
Legitimate questions. I’m not sure whether gov’t corruption can be separated from organized crime in those countries. I DO KNOW it would be a lot easier and cheaper to build walls down there than up here! 
Exactly. I know this was a huge problem in certain African countries, especially Somalia. I really don’t know much about Honduras and El Salvador, but I don’t generally think of then as hotbeds of liberal democracy. Costa Rica may be “the Switzerland of Central America”, but that’s Costa Rica.
NBC news is saying it’s an organization called Pueblo Sin Fronteras
Costa Rica mostly abolished their army, and broke the perpetual cycle of coup d’etats and juntas. Maybe the Founding Fathers were right about standing armies.
Not immediately, but it would make it possible for the people growing plant-based ones to sell them legally. Pharma, tobacco and fairtrade companies would be over that in a NY second.
John Mace, the aid doesn’t have to go through the government, and it doesn’t have to be in the form of money. Building schools and hospitals; urbanizing areas (roadworks, waterworks); sending Peace Corps people and other government-paid human resources; setting up channels for companies and other groups from different countries to network with each other; working with NGOs. All those are forms of aid which a government can do which are more targetted and less vulnerable to corruption than the “just give money to the government” which some people seem to think of when they hear “foreign aid”.
The networking thing doesn’t have to be for commerce: the guy handling garbage disposal in my Costa Rican customer wanted to try his hand at composting but didn’t even know how to begin, I knew my local garbage-disposal people back home did compost and were in fact considered cutting-edge for it, so I introduced them to each other; being a non-profit government organization, “my” garbage-disposal people were super-happy to help (plus I suspect they didn’t mind a chance at another publishable study).
Thanks.
So what is the stance of Democratic candidates on this caravan so far? We know what the Republican stance will in all likelihood be - don’t let them in - but have any of the D’s said anything publicly yet?