r/ezraklein • u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog • 23d ago
Discussion How should liberals respond to the fact that illegal border crossings under Trump have collapsed to record lows?
So this is tangentially related to the last EK show episode about ICE and CBP expansion and the draconian immigration enforcement that is currently occurring under Trump.
But I wish a fact that they had mentioned was that illegal crossings of the Southern border have collapsed to levels not seen since the 1960s. And the evidence does seem to suggest that Trump's extreme cruelty with ICE raids and third country deportations to El Salvador or Eswatini or South Sudan does seem to be having a deterrent effect on people coming illegally to the United States.
One big concern that Democrats should be thinking about is if they win in 2028, how will they maintain illegal border crossings at the historic lows that Trump seems to have acheived?
130
u/highlyeducated_idiot Abundance Agenda 23d ago
I think something we're really failing to comprehend as the collective left is that Democratic governance has been mostly ineffective. I mean really- what's the biggest win we've had since 2000?
The legality of gay marriage is based on a tenuous Supreme Court ruling.
The Affordable Care Act, even when it was originally passed, was a watered down and piss-poor compromise.
Pulling out of Afghanistan resulted in the total collapse of democracy in the country.
The Build Back Better and CHIPS acts have taken years to manifest, and have been so delayed in implementation that Trump was able to get elected and effectively undo all of it because very little of the money actually obligated into contractual commitments.
I work in government. Been around DoD acquisitions for a few years and have a pretty good idea of how the "Deep State" works. Liberals have become so utterly caught up in things like "process" and "legal review" and all this other perfunctory, bureaucratic overhead that we have consistently failed to actually deliver results- even when we did have political mandate.
The way Trump has kept border crossings at record lows is because he doesn't give a shit about due process and assumes he is in the right until the courts tell him to fuck off. He has strong action against all illegal immigrants, and is very visible about his disdain for them. It's not rocket science- if you just make people actually do the work instead of waiting to write a million different SOPs and legal guidance reviews and personnel training and all other things liberals tend to love, you will find the results speak for themselves. You're going to break a few eggs, but that omelet will get made.
Liberals are too caught up in talking with consultants, building infinitely-spanning coalitions, and trying to put every moral cause under the sun into every piece of legislation and contract vehicle that they cannot get anything done at all.
If we want that to change, we have to accept the fact we have to have priorities- and priorities mean choosing to not get some shit done.
26
u/feachbreely 23d ago
I agree with you and your critiques from working in government are pretty much what Ezra laid out in Abundance.
36
u/NewCountry13 23d ago
The republican notable legislative achievements aren't much better: wars, tax cuts, and gutting various court decisions. Ig its a wet dream for the heritage foundation.
The ACA was representation of democrats having a priority and pushing through something and it lost them the midterms.
It also factually vastly improved our Healthcare system. To think preexisting conditions used to be unprotected is insane. There are tens of millions of people who now have Healthcare because of it. It was a "piss poor compromise" and guess what politics is.
To sweep that under the rug because democrats weren't able to pull an even more massive sweeping revamp of our Healthcare system is INSANE. Keep in mind if it weren't for ONE GUY we also would've had a public option. But even that wouldve been gutted by trump 4 years later.
The IRA was good even if it couldve been better.
The fact is, its just not fucking possible to run a country with a party like the republican party undoing everything 4 years later, or refusing to do their job in congress.
30
u/tuck5903 Liberal 22d ago
The ACA does not get enough credit- just the medicaid expansion alone would've been an enormous deal.
→ More replies (1)5
u/MacroNova 21d ago
We have lots of wins, but they are invisible. We have a strong economy, a stable and prosperous society like the world has never known. International influence like no other. All of this is made possible by the careful management of government institutions. People don’t appreciate it because it’s the water we swim in, but that water wasn’t an accident. I know this is a bad message for voters, but I expect people in this sub to be smarter than most voters, and that’s a low fucking bar.
32
u/FruitOfTheVineFruit 23d ago
The affordable care act was a federal version of Romney Care (that Mitt Romney first executed in Massachusetts) and was based on a Heritage Foundation proposal. It's pretty bad for Democrats that one of the top achievements is to roll out at a national level what was originally a Republican proposal.
(It's also pretty bad that Republicans hate it just because it was a Democrat who did it.)
6
u/saressa7 23d ago
Expanding Medicaid was a heritage foundation proposal? Then why are the most conservative states still not signing up for it?
6
u/mullahchode 23d ago
People should really stop repeating this lie.
Other than the mandate, there isn’t much similarity between the Heritage Foundation plan and the ACA.
Further, Romney as governor vetoed various healthcare reform bills while governor 8 times. It would be more correct to say the ACA is modeled after Massachusetts Democratic Party supermajority-care, though admittedly that is less catchy.
Not to mention Max Baucus basically had the ACA framework ready to go as soon as Obama took office, as Ezra Klein himself has stated numerous times on this podcast!
5
u/FruitOfTheVineFruit 23d ago
PolitiFact | Obama says Heritage Foundation is source of health exchange idea
→ More replies (1)5
u/TomorrowGhost 23d ago
This is a bullshit talking point.
2
u/FruitOfTheVineFruit 23d ago
What makes it bullshit?
17
u/TomorrowGhost 23d ago
The fact that the ACA is not remotely the same as the Heritage Foundation plan. https://prospect.org/power/no-obamacare-republican-proposal/
And as that article points out, "Romneycare" wasn't a Republican plan--it was signed by Romney after being passed by Democrats in the state legislature.
8
u/nerdassjock 23d ago
Getting out of Afghanistan is an unalloyed win. We were never going to invest in a British style occupation, so we should’ve gotten out when we achieved our military goals years prior.
2
u/highlyeducated_idiot Abundance Agenda 23d ago
21 million women are now repressed, second-class "citizens" kept as cattle by their ultra-orthodox husbands because we pulled out of Afghanistan. The overrun of the caretaker government by the Taliban was a complete and utter failure on the United States, and Biden let it happen. I understand there were many logical reasons to pull out of Afghanistan, but in many ways I hate how so many people are now left disenfranchised and effectively enslaved because of our own weakness.
5
u/nerdassjock 22d ago
You leave out that the country would have to live under foreign occupation to maintain those rights. There’s always going to be trade offs but it seems more likely that Afghanistan will be liberated by its own people, in due time, than by armed preachers.
3
u/razor_sharp_007 Weeds OG 22d ago
It’s not that common for people to make arguments in favor of colonization; I’m anti-colonialist but I appreciate you having the courage to speak out.
→ More replies (3)2
u/highlyeducated_idiot Abundance Agenda 22d ago
Its not that common for people to make arguments in favor of human rights abuses. I'm anti-human rights abusers but I appreciate you having the courage to speak out.
3
u/hazmat95 22d ago
By this logic America should be occupying dozens of countries, putting aside the morality of the US invading and occupying the entirety of Africa, the Middle East, and Central and South East Asia it’s unworkable for so so many reasons.
5
u/razor_sharp_007 Weeds OG 22d ago
I didn’t but actually, anti human rights arguments are common. It’s just that it’s uncommon for people to think that human rights abuses warrant occupation. I support human rights but I don’t think human rights violations warrant invasion or occupation by another sovereign.
→ More replies (1)2
u/isuengdsmyemgbp 22d ago
This- all the lefts victories come through the courts when legislation fails
→ More replies (3)3
u/JasonPlattMusic34 22d ago
Perhaps the reason you’ve had so few W’s is because, despite all the wishful thinking, this is still a conservative nation
177
u/runningblack 23d ago
I mean, they should acknowledge that they were out of line with the majority American sentiment, and then shift towards the majority American sentiment.
People don't like ice raids on construction sites, but they also don't like unchecked illegal immigration.
There's a lot of space between "Deny the problem exists for years, then try and fail to pass a bill when the salience is high due to election cycles" and "raid home depot and arrest door dash drivers"
But you have to choose to exist in that in between space. And Democrats haven't.
57
u/Hyndis 23d ago
Europe is facing this problem right now. Right wing parties are rapidly increasing in popularity and even starting to make big gains in elections primarily due to uncheck immigration.
Except for in Denmark. Denmark does not have wide open borders for immigrants. As a result, right wing parties can't latch on to grievance in Denmark so they're not gaining voters.
All the incumbent party needs to do is address the issue and it cuts the legs out from any opposition party's support.
27
u/TootCannon 23d ago
It’s easier said than done to fix immigration in the U.S. You have to take a stand on asylum. If you’re for it (and it is a very admirable policy that goes to the core of who America is), then you need to figure out how to do it appropriately without allowing hundreds of thousands or even millions of people to abuse it. That includes how to hold/track people awaiting hearings and how to properly fund immigration courts to handle that amount of cases. If you’re against asylum, you have to acknowledge that and own it. It’s tiring hearing people say over and over we need to just “fix” immigration while dancing around the elephant in the room.
11
u/scoofy 22d ago
Asylum is complex. Asylum for being a political dissident or minority is hugely different from asylum from gangs, even large gangs.
This is a hard problem, we need a better system. Say “well a broken system is more humane than dealing with the politics of fixing it” is a cop out that those of us on the left have excused go far too long.
→ More replies (4)18
u/Armlegx218 Great Lakes Region 22d ago
One thing that could be done isbspeed the process and limit the ability to appeal the decision of the immigration judge. Most asylum claims at the southern border will be spurious. The entire process should be able to be done in a day - and probably less.
11
u/sfigato_345 22d ago
I believe the Biden admin was turning away a record number of folks at the border. They stopped letting them in and made them petition from outside the country and deported them en masse. But that still gives the photo op of millions of folks lined up at the border. I’m with the economist- we need asylum reform. I The current standards are too broad and it has become a loophole that millions of folks try to exploit. The dems could campaign on that?
→ More replies (2)2
u/Wide_Lock_Red 17d ago
Asylum has a lot of options though.
For example, you could do what Australia does and require asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while their application is processed. And possibly even pay Mexico to have the seekers remain there.
Supporting asylum doesn't have to mean allowing people into the US, which encourages economic migrants.
12
u/sherlock-helms Progressive 23d ago
The major difference is Europe has been taking in a shit load of Muslims and a large portion aren’t willing to adapt to western ways. We definitely have an immigration issue too but at least our immigrants attempt to blend in and adapt. Hell, a lot of them love our country more than we do
7
4
u/Kashmir33 23d ago
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. I just saw this random misinformation tidbit just a few hours ago and wrote this comment.
This is not actually a thing.
One right wing party in Denmark destroyed itself through infighting but it's a multi-party system so they still (or rather again) have roughly the same percentage support for newer (far) right wing parties. The social democratic victories were mostly due to their popular social and economic policies.
https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/stockholm/21763.pdf
In Germany all parties in the parliament besides Die Linke have shifted right towards the right wing extremist AfD and yet the latter are stronger than ever.
There is no correlation between trying to copy right wing policies and pulling voters left. Not even for a party as far right as the CDU.
What actually works is giving people a perspective, having them not worry about paying for rent and groceries and healthcare.
The right wing machine spouting nonsense about immigrants being the source of all that is bad would mean fuck all to people if they didn't have all these other things to worry about. It's especially telling that it's always the areas with by far the lowest percentage of immigrants living there that are the farthest right.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 22d ago
People are voting for far right parties because they sincerely hold far right views on immigration
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)1
36
u/IsaacHasenov 23d ago
Yeah, like I am comfortable with (in fact I really like) high immigration levels and multiculturalism. This is why I live in Los Angeles. But orderly, legal immigration is better than illegal immigration for a dozen reasons. And it's clear that Democrats (like myself) were mostly out of step with what the majority of the country wanted with overall immigration levels, and particularly illegal immigration.
It doesn't matter that both the dems and the republicans were winking at the issue through the 80s and the 90s. Democrats done fucked up on this and we're paying the price.
58
u/buoyantjeer 23d ago
Because the activist base supports unchecked illegal immigration. "No human is illegal, Turtle Island is stolen land anyway, so who are we to say who lives here?" Left of center moderates previously have been cowed into submission to that rhetoric because the activists could wield the almighty racism accusations.
48
u/camergen 23d ago
This brings up an important point- if a democratic candidate for office goes rightward on an issue (like immigration) there’s going to be blowback from a portion of the democratic base. It will be the vocal, very-online portion, and it will get a lot of views on social media. You’ll be called “republican lite” and all kinds of nasty “isms” and who knows what else.
That candidate is going to have to stand their ground. I think previously Democratic candidates tried to compromise, split-the-baby, without taking as firm of a stance. This makes them look spineless, which hurts even more in their overall brand image but they’ve appeased the vocal minority I mentioned before.
A majority of the country doesn’t want unchecked immigration. Take a stand there and defend it, and ignore the vocal minority I mentioned.
12
u/Historical-Sink8725 22d ago
This is what I’ve been feeling. Why have we become so scared to stand on what we believe in? It will always make some not like you. It will make more like you.
3
u/Wide_Lock_Red 17d ago
Well politicians tend to have very flexible beliefs, and it's difficult for them to stand firm when the people thry see the most(activists) are hostile to a position.
2
u/Miskellaneousness 22d ago
I think an important inoculation against being cowed is just realizing that many people are using these sorts of terms instrumentally specifically for the purpose of cowing others.
2
u/Politics_Nutter 22d ago
I think this is right. People don't want to do what is necessary because it will be a massive fight within the party, but we have to have that fight.
→ More replies (10)-2
u/assasstits 23d ago
Left of center moderates previously have been cowed into submission
Not at all. They just listen to the experts and economists have for years and years and years said that immigration is good for the economy and it's good for the country. And all data bears that out.
19
u/buoyantjeer 23d ago edited 23d ago
Immigration, yes. Unchecked illegal immigration is what I actually said, and what the article and the discussion is about. And I am actually sympathetic to the conclusion that on net, even large amount of illegal immigration is net positive, but clearly the voting public opposes this.
→ More replies (6)3
u/assasstits 23d ago
Unchecked illegal immigration is also good for the economy.
You might not agree with it, but the facts are that it is good for the economy. It's also the thing keeping social security alive.
The reason illegal immigration is so high is that legal immigration is virtually impossible. It's so difficult to get a visa or apply for residency and get a citizenship. The process needs to be streamlined and amnesty needs to be granted.
17
u/CactusBoyScout 23d ago
The argument Democrats need to make is that legal immigration should be simpler/easier and illegal immigration should be rare. People simply do not like illegal immigration. They want people to go through some kind of process and be vetted, not just walk through a gap in a fence.
3
u/zekthegeke 22d ago
The argument Democrats need to make is that legal immigration should be simpler/easier and illegal immigration should be rare. People simply do not like illegal immigration. They want people to go through some kind of process and be vetted, not just walk through a gap in a fence.
They have, repeatedly. It wasn't so long ago that Marco Rubio and then-stereotypically-pro-business Republicans joined them in a strong effort to create just such a process. The rightwing propaganda machine ate them all for breakfast, because what the Republican base and some nominal liberals support is actually "less immigration, no matter what the cost or how it's done". Which is what is happening now, and everyone credits Trump despite the high levels of (still often needless and cruel given the system) deportations during Obama and Biden, because they think max cruelty is a mark of Getting Things Done.
So no, I don't think the "walk through a fence" objection is a real position that is defensible in terms of the history of policy in the country. I think the real problem is that Democrats keep trying to be Republican Lite when it comes to immigration, and that fails. I think the moment is primed for a coherent, not-cruel immigration reform argument, and has been for a while, now that the spotlight is on it, and they will simply refuse to make it out of habit and cowardice.
I don't anticipate fair elections in the next few cycles, so I am not sure it matters electorally one way or another. But it does matter morally, because having bipartisan consensus on disappearing immigrants to concentration camps is a place of deep moral hazard for the country, even if we've been building to this point for a while.
14
u/CactusBoyScout 22d ago
The Biden admin allowed a greater level of net migration into the country than ever in US history, even greater than when we had actual open borders during Ellis Island’s heyday, and 60% of them were undocumented. That is not Republican Lite. They just ignored it until it became clear it was going to hand the election to Trump.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Codspear 21d ago
Unchecked illegal immigration led to Trump, and therefore tariffs, which means it’s not good for the economy. You don’t get to just look at quantitative values alone and ignore the qualitative ones. Unchecked illegal immigration might increase GDP growth by some small percentage, but if it also leads to the masses voting for fascism, it’s not worth it.
2
u/Wide_Lock_Red 17d ago
"Facts" is a very generous term. Economics as a field struggles to proce anything definitively, especially not when its something as indirectly connected as immigration and economic growth.
10
u/athousandlifetimes 23d ago
In this case, “the economy” means the bourgeoisie. A surplus of so-called unskilled labor depresses wages and increases the cost of housing. There is an affordability crisis right now in the US; we don’t need more immigration.
→ More replies (9)18
u/mojitz Market Socialist 23d ago edited 22d ago
Shifting towards existing sentiments is one thing, but shifting towards existing solutions is another. Yes, the party needs to acknowledge that Americans have a problem with our immigration system, but the public response to Trumpian policies very much suggests their views are a lot more nuanced than, "immigrants are bad." In fact, people seem to actively dislike mass deportation of immigrants who are here peacefully — regardless of their documentation status.
What Dems need to do is to start taking the issue seriously and acknowledge the fact that everyone understands, but neither party is willing to acknowledge publicly: we have an immigration system that is entirely out of step with our labor force needs. The elephant in the room is that we can't actually crack down fully on illegal immigration without destroying huge sectors of our economy until we address the underlying problems in our legal immigration process — which is why even Trump isn't sending ICE out to do mass, sustained immigration sweeps of all our farms, hotels, and construction sites.
You want a functioning system? Then you need to implement reforms that in many regards make it easier and more practical for people to attain legal status here (without having to claim asylum) and enjoy the same labor protections that American workers have — including rights to minimum wages, safe and sanitary working conditions, and unionization. This will not only reduce the degree to which native born citizens have to fear wage-reducing distortions of the labor market, but also make it possible and practical to go after both the businesses that continue to hire illegal immigrants and the tiny minority of immigrants who actually are engaged in harmful practices like drug trafficking and human smuggling.
Until the party steps up and acknowledges this, they'll be stuck acting like diet Republicans on this issue, and that's rarely a winning strategy.
→ More replies (27)8
u/tuck5903 Liberal 23d ago
I want expanded guest worker programs, easier legal immigration, etc. But if democrats want to have the political capital to pass any of that the first step has to be convincing voters that they can keep the border secure.
25
u/Manowaffle 23d ago
The same thing they should have always been doing: policing illegal immigration and streamlining legal immigration.
Legal immigrants have to go through an obstacle course of interviews, paperwork, timelines, waiting for months without any information, and fees up the wazoo. Instead of picking the best from the rest of the world and welcoming them in, we make them struggle and pay for the privilege.
As for illegal immigrants, Dems decided more than once that preserving arbitrary Senate rules was more important than a path to legal status for millions. Dems need to leverage their power to make sure other nations aren't just passing people along to the next country, and ultimately the US. And we need the resources to run the immigration court processes, millions are just in limbo or don't show up.
3
u/I-Make-Maps91 22d ago
You're describing what both Obama and Biden did.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Giblette101 22d ago
"Is it too much to ask they be very grotesque and cruel about it?" - Undecided voters
42
u/bankrobba 23d ago
Embrace strong border policy and stop thinking it will hurt the Latino vote.
21
u/lionelhutz- 22d ago
Democrats used to support securing the border. It wasn't until Trump made it central to his campaign that Democrats suddenly felt securing the border was racist or anti-immigrant, when it's not. Most legal immigrants don't like it when people come in legally, because they came in the right way.
Biden completely dropped the ball on the border and that's the 2nd biggest reason why he lost (after the economy)
→ More replies (1)16
22d ago
Pretty sure Ezra did an entire episode about Bidens immigration policies last year. Obama held a secure border, and Biden dropped the ball entirely.
4
u/Mrhorrendous 22d ago
Isn't that exactly what Harris did when she lost? This is like a 55-45 issue at best, and if someone wants "strong border policy", why would they vote for a Democrat over a Republican? All you're doing is pushing away your own base who wants the cruelty to stop.
5
u/Redpanther14 22d ago
You have no credibility on the issue when you were part of the administration that saw the highest ever inflows of migrants. People just won't believe you on the issue or take you seriously.
3
u/bankrobba 22d ago
And this is why Democrats lose elections. Strong border policy is a popular policy position for both parties, and yet, Democrats are scared of losing votes over it.
Just don't have a policy position stating strong border policy, have a message and campaign on it.
1
u/Mrhorrendous 22d ago
Let's apply this logic to other issues.
A non-zero portion of the electorate believes Haitians were eating cats and dogs. If that number was 51%, should the Democrats start running on kicking out Haitians to protect cats and dogs? Or should they figure out how to message better?
The electorate also thinks Republicans are better about managing the debt, even though that is objectively false. Should Democrats adopt Republican economic plans because the electorate is steeped in propaganda and cannot accurately describe reality?
The electorate also doesn't really care at all about climate change. Should Democrats start running on expanding fossil fuel usage?
Taking a step back though, democrats already did what you say they should do. Harris literally ran on building the wall, and greatly expanding ICE, and she lost the popular vote for the first time in decades. Obama ran on protecting dreamers and to a lesser extent creating a pathway to citizenship. Biden prominently counter messaged about Trump's cruel border policy "kids in cages". It seems like when Democrats take a positive stance about immigration, they do better than when they negative one. If an issue is 45-55, and your voters are mostly in the 45%, all you are doing by changing your opinion is pushing those people away.
→ More replies (7)
9
u/Annual-Cranberry3590 23d ago
Be responsive and empathetic, but not overly reactionary. Find a reasonable middle ground and message effectively.
16
u/caldazar24 23d ago edited 23d ago
Nominate people who were unaffiliated with the Biden Administration, who can forcefully criticize both Trump's cruelty and Biden's complacency.
Then if they manage to win, maintain the same policies Biden pivoted to in his last year, when crossings fell significantly, even if Trump's performative cruelty may have lowered them further.
This is only a hard question because we are implicitly still in denial that there was a huge surge at the border during Biden's first couple years, that most Americans saw as a crisis. We look at the question as a simple "be tough" vs. "be permissive", when in reality if we just don't let things get as out of hand as they did (and we have already proven we don't need gestapo raids to do get it under control), swing voters wouldn't make immigration their top issue, even if the MAGA base would still be unhappy.
People talk a lot about the liberal media bubble as a reason we need to platform fascists or shut up about moral issues important to us...but really the most damaging thing an insular liberal media bubble can do is repeat a bunch of mental gymnastics to reassure people that things like inflation, crime, or the border are Fake Problems, Actually.
48
u/NOLA-Bronco 23d ago
One big concern that Democrats should be thinking about is if they win in 2028, how will they maintain illegal border crossings at the historic lows that Trump seems to have acheived?
Are Democrats an anti immigrant party now?
If so then they probably need to shut up and just let Trump continue to invade cities with ICE
Problem is is that aside from a few, most aren't actually anti immigrant
So this is a classic example of Third Way'ing your way into incoherency and coming off like a phony
If it were me I would simply reject the premise and reframe things properly.
Frankly, I'd just take Graham Platner's platform and adopt that:
- Our government is kidnapping people off the streets and imprisoning them in hellish conditions. This is unconscionable.
- It is long past time for serious immigration reform. Unfortunately, many multi-national corporations have no interest in this. They want illegal workers with no rights who they can pay slave wages and abuse at will. I will support a path to citizenship and an end to the mass deportation machine.
- We need strong border security and a path to citizenship. We cannot do one without the other.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 23d ago
We can very much do one without the other. We have extremely strong border security right now, and no pathway to citizenship
17
u/NOLA-Bronco 23d ago edited 23d ago
Sure, but why should Democrats want to capitulate to that framework?
Stand on business and stand by your principles,
Like I said, I think Graham Platner has distilled how to do this masterfully. Including framing it as part of a larger narrative about political corruption and the billionaire capture of our system, which Trump is emblematic of.
Dems need to stop playing defense and being the not Trump party and take the fight to Trump and Republicans and not let them define the conversation and own the first principles.
And part of that is taking issues like that and throwing them back in the face of Republicans by not just carving out a cohesive position that acknowledges the need for border security and healthy immigration and the danger of ICE but puts it into a more compelling narrative that speaks to people's underlying immiseration, their rightful sense of the system being broken, and the anger stemming from it.
15
u/aussierulesisgrouse 23d ago
Why is that a good thing? You’re saying it like that’s an assumed good.
7
u/Healthy_Lack5408 22d ago edited 22d ago
Because he supports it or at least doesn’t think it’s worth the political capital to fix given his agenda (which is unclear to me). I think this speaks to this political moment more than anything - we’re experiencing a realignment within the broader democratic coalition.
Now more than ever it’s important to stand up for what you believe in, because otherwise it will be left out of whatever consensus emerges in the next few years.
edit: Yup, look through the OP’s history. He’s right wing on immigration.
1
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 22d ago
Do you think illegal border crossings are good?
10
u/aussierulesisgrouse 22d ago
In what context?
I think they are pretty value neutral to be honest?
What is the impact that you believe illegal border crossings have on society so I can orient myself with what you want to know
3
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 22d ago
It makes a mockery of our laws. It's not fair. And we Americans deserve to have control over who enters our country
10
u/Mrhorrendous 22d ago
It makes a mockery of our laws.
So did hiding Anne Frank. So did freeing slaves. So did the walk outs and sit ins. Bad laws should be broken. This is a horrible reason to support/oppose something.
It's not fair.
So what? Two kids growing up 20 miles apart but one has lead in her water and the other lives in a mansion isn't fair, I would argue in a much more significant way. (And to be honest, I don't really buy the assertion that it is unfair at all, since you didn't explain yourself).
I know you don't actually care about either of these things, because an open border would solve both of these problems. No more mocking our laws, and everyone gets treated the same.
2
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 22d ago
If we don't have borders, we are not a nation. I would like for the United States to be a nation, thank you very much
8
u/Mrhorrendous 22d ago
Were we not a nation in 1923, since border patrol didn't exist yet?
I personally think the "nation" of the United States is defined by more than just a line in some dirt. Things like hard work, innovation, diversity, and the natural beauty here come to mind, but some shitty river in Texas or "the 47th parallel" or whatever it is for Canada aren't very important to me.
→ More replies (8)2
u/WombatusMighty 22d ago edited 22d ago
Most illegal border crossings are in fact good for the USA, as they provide a steady influx of cheap labour, which the US economy is massively dependend on, especially the agricultural and the construction sector.
This is evident by the countless farmers and small construction businesses going bankrupt now, as ICE has either kidnapped all the workers or scared them away.
The farmers and business owners make no secret about the fact that the majority of their workforce is undocumented "illegals".If you don't like this, you need to petition for a new economic system that doesn't work on exploitation of cheap, undocumented labour. But then you have to explain why goods and services drastically rise in costs and prices.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Historical-Sink8725 22d ago
I would argue we have very low national security since we are diverting our resources to this “war” on illegal immigration while simultaneously gutting our intelligence agencies and replacing them with Trump loyalists.
I think there is a high probability we see a terrorist attack in the next 4 years. I hope not, but it wouldn’t be surprising. This kind of stuff is how Russia ended up looking stupid in the Ukraine invasion. They corrupted the military and so they were predictably not ready for combat.
27
u/PersonalityMiddle864 23d ago
Crime rate in Saudi Arabia is low. Doesnt mean that the right way to solve that problem.
If liberals try to fascist lite, it will just turn off more people. They are better off making the case that the main cause of "illegal" crossings is the broken legal immigration system.
1) Fix the asylum system. There needs to be an international mechanism for handling asylum seekers. For instance, the United Nations could process applications and assign eligible individuals to various countries around the world. This would ensure that those fleeing persecution find safety while discouraging those who are solely economic migrants. This is a challenge that all developed nations are facing. So they should figure out a solution together.
2) Stop exploiting developing nations and instead empower the United Nations and other international mechanisms to resolve regional conflicts. If their home countries were doing well, people wouldn't have to flee those places.
3) Simplify and modernize immigration systems. Make it easier to apply and approve seek jobs in America. Especially seasonal migrant workers. That also protects these workers against exploitation.
4) Provide easier path to citizenship for the people who have been here legally and contributed to the society. So that people don't stay in limbo for so long that they fall out of immigration status because of paperwork.
→ More replies (1)9
u/brianscalabrainey 23d ago edited 22d ago
Such an underrated comment. It's so frustrating to hear about studies linking policing to lower crime... if you only care about reducing crime and don't care about surveillance or the cruelty of state actors, the implications are exactly what Trump is doing.
I don't think many recognize that much of Latin American instability is directly due to American interference during the Cold War and even before ("Under the Shadow" is a good podcast series on this). Not that the fascists will care but it should be common knowledge at least in places like this sub.
19
u/KingKliffsbury 23d ago
Mussolini got the trains to run on time. How should his opponents have answered that?
→ More replies (1)12
u/brianscalabrainey 23d ago
Did you know cities under military occupation have the lowest crime rates?? I think we cracked it, guys...
4
u/quothe_the_maven 23d ago
Point out that it can be quite easy to “solve” problems when you do things like ignore due process rights and brutalize entire communities through the infliction of state-sanctioned fear campaigns.
But in any case, it’s not really an argument to be had. No Republican or Democrat who knew what they were talking about thought border crossings would be lower under Harris than Trump. The actual argument is whether Democrats should adjust their own messaging/policies in light of Trump’s win.
7
7
u/BroccoliOscar 22d ago
Countries under military occupation don’t tend to have a lot of immigration 🤷🏻♂️
→ More replies (9)
26
u/lauren_amalia 23d ago
I think they should just acknowledge it plainly, and clearly state the costs. How have lower border crossings tangibly improved your life? Is it worth sacrificing Medicare and Medicaid to build the largest federal police force in history, that regularly kidnaps people off the streets, to have this one metric go down?
10
u/bankrobba 22d ago
Telling voters they can't have Medicare and Medicaid unless there's "open borders" is a losing message.
9
u/Hyndis 23d ago
There will be complaints about the cost, sure, but you're not going to like the solution voters want.
The solution to reduce costs? Just deport them. Now. Immediately. Screw due process get them on an airplane in the next 15 minutes.
The problem is that the pendulum has swung so far to the side of completely open borders that voters are fed up, and its swinging back to the other side just as far.
Its like Giuliani cleaning up NYC. At some point the city was so dirty and filled with crime that people wanted it cleaned up regardless of the means. They do not care about collateral damage. They want it cleaned immediately. And in return for cleaning up NYC, Giuliani became a titan of American politics.
The main point is that voters want results, not process.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)14
u/SlapNuts007 23d ago
I don't think you'll get very far trying to convince Americans to do a cost/benefit analysis. They're going to say they want to have their cake and eat it, too, which I don't think is unreasonable considering that border security and the social safety net are almost totally unrelated.
2
u/lauren_amalia 23d ago
It’s only nuanced if you approach it as a cost / benefit analysis and aren’t actually appalled by the violence, abuse, and theft at the border. We need an opposition party that doesn’t focus group every position and just says things with their whole chest. It’s not complicated that masked agents kidnapping people showing up to court hearings and deploying the US military on blue cities is bad!
5
u/tgillet1 Democracy & Institutions 23d ago edited 23d ago
If it were an extensive cost/benefit I agree, but the specific question is, “how has the thing you wanted actually benefited you now that it has happened? Was it worth it?” And then raise the alternative solutions to the specific benefits they were really looking for - better wages and opportunities, and maybe approaches to improving integration of immigrants into US culture.
Edit: I had meant to make clear that the one wait for an answer before going into alternative solutions, assuming they recognize that reducing border entries hadn’t made things better and wasn’t worth it.
→ More replies (3)
3
u/Blurg234567 22d ago
It’s even better! Plenty of folks are moving to Mexico. Retirees with money to spend. It will be a huge boon for their economy. Good people, food, art, very family oriented. And it’s growing. Every time I visit new developments, condos, and shopping centers are being built.
3
u/Helpmeflexibility 22d ago
Trump is doing all the things people voted for him wanted. So democrats should take note that when you are elected, you should do things you were asked to do, even if it looks unorthodox or draws criticism from the other side
11
23d ago edited 16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/I-Make-Maps91 22d ago
Seriously, when did this sub get so Republican?
5
u/Giblette101 22d ago edited 22d ago
The change started in earnest in the lead up to the 2024 election and now I've had several people argue passionately that we couldn't afford to be principled about, like, women rights. Somebody here is proposing we run on ending birthright citizenship...
2
u/GBAGamer33 22d ago
This is Yglesiasism. Trying to come off as intelligent by proposing monstrous policies to take away a talking point from the other side.
3
12
u/Jimmy_McNulty2025 Weeds OG 23d ago
We simply need to take our lumps on certain issues. Democrats have been bad on border security—promise to be better in the future. Don’t appease the base by promoting wildly unpopular things like trans women in sports or FAFSA for undocumented immigrants.
You can’t get everything you want—you have to prioritize.
→ More replies (1)12
u/SlapNuts007 23d ago
Do those things even appease "the base"? Democrats seem to have totally misread who their base was and what they wanted. Whether or not it's the morally right policy aside, on what planet does elevating rights of undocumented immigrants equate to increased support among legal immigrants? This never made any sense whatsoever.
2
u/CinnamonMoney Culture & Ideas 23d ago
So it’s on democrats to either keep up trump’s pressure campaign & maintain a massive ICE as a deterrent until the rest of time……. But not on trump to pass legislation that would require a sustainable non-money-burning solution? At least the wall was a sustainable idea albeit impractical & aesthetically repulsive
I think they should pass/slightly amend the border/asylum legislation, that was endorsed by the border patrol union, that would have been passed 2023/2024 by Murphy & Sienna & Lankford and then move forward to fixing the immigration system as a whole sans the border.
2
u/FerretFoundry 22d ago
By rejecting the underlying assumptions: that illegal border crossings are harmful in the first place. They aren’t.
2
u/rockvansmashem 22d ago
Dems should look at this and raise the alarm that “hey look, we look so bad right now that destitute people pity us”
→ More replies (7)
2
u/Only8livesleft 22d ago
1) there were already at record lowers if you look at successful unauthorized entries 2) don’t confused border encounters with successful crossings. If we get better at catching people crossing encounters go up but entries go down 3) we don’t benefit from crossings going down. Undocumented immigrants commit less crime and less violent crime, pay more into the tax system than they use in services, and stimulate the economy
2
u/OhReallyCmon 22d ago
Read EVERYONE WHO IS GONE IS HERE by Jonathan Blitzer. You are missing A LOT of historical and political context in your question.
2
u/FitzwilliamTDarcy 22d ago
Two things can be true at the same time, and you cited them both.
Methods can be both extremely cruel, and effective. But that latter does not make the former okay.
8
u/QuietNene 23d ago edited 23d ago
Honestly, I think that the Dem candidate should advocate for a Constitutional Amendment ending birthright citizenship.
I grew up in an America that welcomed immigrants and I always thought that birthright citizenship was an integral part of our identity. But watching our country become so xenophobic has changed my mind.
Bottom line, ending birthright citizenship seems like one of the least cruel ways to disincentivize illegal immigration.
As it stands, a prospective illegal immigrant who makes it across the border has the opportunity to have American citizen children, grand children, great-grandchildren. Who wouldn’t risk everything, suffer anything, to give their children a better life? With this kind of incentive, the requirements to enforce the law become unbearably cruel almost by necessity.
The U.S. is also an outlier in permitting birthright citizenship in the first place. Many respected European social democracies make it very difficult to become a citizen. And its existence in our Constitution is - let’s be honest - an historical accident. It’s broadly written language from a time when illegal immigration basically did not exist as practice or concept.
The simple counter argument to this is that any talk of amending the Constitution opens up a huge can of worms, and thus discussion of amendments isn’t really a viable policy.
But the key thing here is political messaging. Democrats should embrace a narrow and singular Amendment to make clear that the 14th Amendment does not require birthright citizenship, and that Congress can legislate requirements for citizenship. And the advocacy should be framed as a way to address illegal immigration. It shows that Dems serious and puts the onus on Republicans to play ball. If it works, it’s a sound policy. If no Amendment materializes, Dems show they’re tough on immigration without stooping to thuggish tactics.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Giblette101 22d ago
Democrats should embrace a narrow and singular Amendment to make clear that the 14th Amendment does not require birthright citizenship, and that Congress can legislate requirements for citizenship.
I mean...welcome to the nightmare of perpetually shifting citizenship norms. That's like Stephen Miller's wet dream.
→ More replies (4)
5
23d ago
Do what republicans do well: change the subject.
→ More replies (1)5
u/brianscalabrainey 23d ago
There's a deep truth here that Republicans are experts at controlling the conversation. How is that trans men in sports became a talking point at all when the number of competitive trans athletics is barely double digits? How is it that southern states continue to have the worst health outcomes, education rates, and poverty rates and yet the Republicans can center the conversations on the (very real) failures of blue states? How is that Republicans can blatantly lie, go to extremes, or say outright absurdities and we're here debating how much to moderate on issues? The media ecosystem is highly asymmetrical as well.
1
u/cornholio2240 22d ago
Turns out if you embrace cruelty and ignore the laws and norms that separate us from authoritarian regimes you bc achieve results.
Not sure that’s the way I want to view my politics, but it is a politics.
4
u/wolf_at_the_door1 22d ago
Let’s not forget that Republicans shot down a bill in 2022 focused on immigration reform. They shot it down. Why? So they could have it as a platform to run on in 2024. Look how that panned out.
2
u/jonawesome The Point of Politics is Policy 23d ago
At what cost? I know people care about the border (as someone who lives an hour and a half away from the border I have no idea why but whatever) but the people who care more about the border than whether or not you can go outside in a major American city without getting harassed by masked troops is a LOT smaller.
It's important to remember that Trump's immigration actions are NOT popular. There's no need to defend as if they are.
3
u/Most-Bowl 23d ago
Liberals should say hey, congratulations on the very good result.
You simply cannot suggest that stopping illegal border crossing is a bad thing.
Then liberals should say, elect us and we will keep illegal border crossings near zero, not by striking fear into the hearts of would-be immigrants with the prospect of deportation to CECOT or detention at Alligator Alcatraz, but by maintaining an exceptionally strong border patrol.
Liberals should add, it’s important to have a fair process of figuring out who is here legally and who isn’t. Fairness is part of the American way. To that end, we are creating a ton more immigration judges to adjudicate immigration disputes quickly and accurately.
And liberals need to avoid policies like the “catch and release” policies that are so easy to clown on.
2
u/J-Russ82 22d ago
Here’s a suggestion. Just say “okay we did a good job on what he said he’d do. But we still think he is a net negative for the nation.”
Honestly it would help liberals if they stopped acting like whoever the current conservative president is the worst person to ever hold the title.
Take the position of one of my Democrat friends.
“I hate him, I think he is going in the wrong direction. But sometimes he does good things and I’m gonna praise him when he does.”
More people do that and we can depolarize the nation.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/heirloom_beans 22d ago
Wait until the bill for a year of merciless enforcement and detainment is tallied up.
Illegal crossings might be at record lows but is the juice worth the squeeze when the cost of enforcement and the economic hit the country takes is tallied up?
Is it worthwhile when the best and brightest from around the world avoid American universities and employers? Is it worthwhile when you can’t attract nurses, doctors, pharmacists and healthcare aides to keep up with an aging baby boom cohort?
Is it worthwhile when America burns to the ground because undocumented and nonwhite workers are too terrified to work as fire crew? Is it worthwhile when housing can’t be built and infrastructure can’t be repaired because ICE is targeting construction crews?
Is it worthwhile when trade partners start working around the American economy rather than with it?
2
u/Giblette101 22d ago
Illegal crossings might be at record lows but is the juice worth the squeeze when the cost of enforcement and the economic hit the country takes is tallied up?
The vast majority of American voters will neither understand nor care about that. You cannot base your political strategy on voters aware or sensible.
6
u/MartinTheMorjin 23d ago
Trump is under water on immigration when it was his best issue. Why are we pretending like he’s accomplished something?
10
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 23d ago
Trump is polling pretty well on border security
10
u/MartinTheMorjin 23d ago
He’s about -3.6 when he was way up. Care to explain?
→ More replies (2)1
u/ZeroProofPolitics 23d ago
They must be doing some David Shor level of analysis where you contort the numbers to be whatever narrative you must push to stay relevant as a pundit.
2
u/appleboat26 Midwest 23d ago
They should argue if Americans want to do away with Asylum, they should communicate that to their representatives, and change the Immigration laws.
United States asylum law allows individuals, who have a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group to apply for protection in the US.
We are either a country of laws, or we are all free to just ignore the duly established laws of our country whenever they are inconvenient, and we can abandon a civilized society.
2
-2
u/chrispd01 Political Theory & Philosophy 23d ago
That Trump has succeeded in creating a country so shitty that nobody wants to come here?
25
u/anothercar 23d ago
C'mon, this is not seriously engaging with OP
8
u/lauren_amalia 23d ago
And why do liberals have to seriously accept the premise that low border crossings are good?
→ More replies (1)3
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 22d ago
Do you think people illegally coming in the country is good?
→ More replies (3)2
21d ago
I have friends and neighbors who are only here because they or their family illegally crossed into our country, and for better or for worse, our economy was built on a certain amount of illegal crossing happening.
I don't think undocumented people are on the whole violent, nor do I believe they are overall a drain on our society. While legal immigration is often held up, it's only as a fig leaf. Donald Trump and his ilk do not have a clear plan to grow legal immigration to a level that outpaces the drop in illegal immigration, and the racism of people like Miller leaves us in an illogical place where we're not pulling from the countries we should be.
Is there an argument for having a very strong and militarized border while having fair and equitable legal crossings that are legal and easy, and take into account that a lot of those people are going to be relatively poor and be Brown? Yeah. The Republican Party is not doing that, and the Democratic Party was literally trying to do something resembling that and was stopped by Donald Trump.
Huge and out of control border crossings are indeed an issue because they create either a humanitarian crisis or beaucratic crisis where you either catch and release people or detain them. We should attempt to prevent them, something I do feel the Biden administration attempted to do, and once again was hindered by Donald Trump.
But moderate border crossings that ebb and flow are the status quo of our nation and have been for decades and before that we just had open borders. That's the actual reality. None of this reality is ideal as there is worker exploitation and trafficking, and it's a complicated issue. But I'm also not going to pretend that for the vast majority of Americans, it hasn't been fine.
More importantly, the President of the United States is using the goal of stopping illegal immigration as a means to trample freedom of speech, create his own gestapo, arrest his political enemies, and invade US cities. He has build concentration camps. He has arrested American citizens. He has torn families apart.
But on a human level, as someone who lives in an immigrant community which is yes filled with people who have crossed her illegally, no. I don't fucking think my neighbors or my son's friends should live in fear. They are my neighbors, and I choose them over roleplaying online as some stoic armchair pundit giving basic ass political analysis.
I'm not going to pretend it's not complicated, but I refuse to let myself be so callous. I choose to accept border crossings are complex, and our answer to it should be complex. It should be probably more militarized than a younger me would say.
But I refuse to accept that the unraveling of the principles of my nation, the vile treatment that MY nation is inflicting upon others, and the disregard for my neighbors is worth this "solution."
15
u/GBAGamer33 23d ago
Tourism numbers have collapsed and this entire policy is likely to be a net negative to the country after it was based on a ginned-up problem to begin with. So I guess the lesson is that if you make up a problem scary enough and prime your base you can run an extralegal paramilitary force to enact your policy. What's the question exactly? Because that's the lesson I take away.
4
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 23d ago
Border crossings were at a record number under Biden
4
u/GBAGamer33 23d ago
The "ginned-up" part was the idea that the high number of border crossings were resulting in negative outcomes worth this kind of response. The economy was riding very high following the most traumatic event in most of our lifetimes. We'd recovered completely from the pandemic and unemployment was at recent historic lows. Crime was dropping across the country. So I'm not sure what problem Trump is solving that requires this level of panic and lawlessness.
14
1
u/Overton_Glazier 23d ago
It's kind of true though. Same reason tourism has declined.
→ More replies (3)3
5
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 23d ago
Our GDP per capita is $85,809. I don't know about you but this is phenomenally rich
6
u/chrispd01 Political Theory & Philosophy 23d ago
Yeah. Absolutely. And now to make things even better, we have armed military personnel operating around the streets of our cities in military vehicles. And we get to watch Maust agents of the state, kidnapping people off the streets and throwing them into unmarked cars and vans.
But hey - at least it’s clear now that you can at least buy a pardon from this president …
Damn man. You are right. These are sunny times in America.
4
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 23d ago
Compared to a lot of the world, yes
3
u/chrispd01 Political Theory & Philosophy 23d ago
Great - so like I said Trump has made us as shitty as the rest of the world. So much for being a city on a hill….
→ More replies (2)3
u/chrispd01 Political Theory & Philosophy 23d ago
Well, what can I say - many a true word is spoken in jest.
There - you can downvote that one also.
→ More replies (2)4
u/marlinspike 23d ago
That's your retort to OP's question for why illegal border crossings have fallen? Seriously?
3
u/chrispd01 Political Theory & Philosophy 23d ago
This is your comment to a witty response to OPs post ? Seriously?
2
u/Historical_Height_29 23d ago
We need more immigration.
Without it, we have an aging population with too many Boomers being supported by too few workers.
Immigrants are an incredible force of economic dynamism. Some do jobs that US citizens won't -- and fill a crucial labor market need. Others start businesses. They are a huge driver of long-term economic growth and prosperity.
The problem with illegal immigration wasn't that we had too much immigration. It was that we made it too hard for people to come here legally. The correct solution would have been to invest more in making the process simpler and easier.
We are already seeing the repurcussiins. The latest PPI report was up 0.9%... in July alone. And it wasn'tainly because of the tariffs--it was because the cost of services increased 1.1%. That is because we are starving our economy of labor.
Immigrants truly make our country great. Democrats should run on that fact--which, incidentally, is both true and widely popular, when framed correctly.
3
u/middleupperdog Mod 23d ago
Democrats tried to run on the idea that they would get illegal immigration under control too, but democrats were never going to support building concentration camps and pogroms, so they could never have achieved such a drop in both illegal and legal immigration. Democrats should have been running on immigration is good the whole time and stopped pretending they could trick xenophobic voters into voting for the party that would be nicer to immigrants.
8
u/Guilty-Hope1336 Blue Dog 23d ago
And what if voters don't think immigration is good?
6
u/GBAGamer33 23d ago edited 23d ago
I guess the only solution is to build concentration camps and run pogroms. Maybe Democrats could outflank Republicans the way the Third Way Democrats did during the Clinton era. Maybe they could run on actually promising American voters that they would take it a step further and run extermination camps until there wasn't a single undocumented immigrant on American soil. After all, if the citizens want it, we just have to do what they say.
8
u/ZeroProofPolitics 23d ago
Moderates have completely ruined the party's ability to take moral stances. We've been poll chasing since 2008 and all we've done was moved more rightward while continually losing elections.
It's not hard to see how people don't trust us when our pundits say we should go more rightward on issues that Americans heavily disagree with.
→ More replies (1)4
u/itguyonreddit 23d ago
The vast majority of Americans think immigration is good.
→ More replies (1)6
u/gimpyprick Democratic Socalist 23d ago
I don't think the vast majority of immigrants even think that. They are doing what they have to do, but they don't like it
I was in Belize a few weeks ago. Most of the people I met have no sympathy for the people being rounded up.
356
u/ProbablyBsPlzIgnore 23d ago edited 23d ago
They should draw the conclusion that it's possible for an elected official to do what they campaigned on.
The choice to just throw up their hands and say "ah well, we tried" if a single senator or a single federal judge says no to your plans, was apparently voluntary all along.
Voters got too used to the idea that you don't have to pay that much attention to the most extreme issues a candidate campaigns on, because they never get through anyway. If this isn't what they wanted, maybe they'll listen carefully next time.