What did Democrats do wrong?

[The Great Zaganza]

GOP logic: "violent immigrants can get super easily into our country! When they commit a serious crime, we don't want to put them on trial and in prison, but send them back to the place from where they have no problem getting here in the first place!"

 

[W.D.Clinger]

you compared that to contemporary conservatives, then cut that part out of the quote and avoided bringing any of them up

Twenty years ago, he wouldn't have done that. No one would even think of doing anything like that. People back then actually made an effort to explain their view points honestly, and accepted the rational views of others with perfect equanimity. And no one ever used words like "bootlicker" or "racist", even when referring to a bootlicker or racist. And were especially careful to avoid such words when speaking to them directly.

I agree. 20 years ago I could have a fairly good debate with people I disagreed with. People actually made effort to explain their view points and i could accept when people had rationalized explanations even if I didnt agree with them. Back then, being called a bootlicker and racist was not the automatic kneejerk response that it is today. The standards these days just aren't the same as they used to be.

 

[Tero]

Trump voters have about two things in common: 1 amused and entertained by Trump, think somewhat like him about...oh, shower heads. 2 they do not believe in government.

So I asked Google, pretending I would be the social studies professor, how would I test Trump voters.

Me: How would I test the critical thinking of Trump voters? These are after all people who share some beliefs in politics. But they will aslo gree with Trump two times when he gives two contradictory statements.

Google AI (gives sources)

Google: Testing the critical thinking of voters who support a candidate with contradictory stances often reveals more about social psychology than a lack of intelligence. Research suggests that voters across the political spectrum frequently prioritize group identity and "motivated reasoning" over pure logic.

Link: https://secularhumanism.org/exclusi...cial-movement-a-social-psychological-analysis

1. The "Blind Attribute" Test

Present a policy or statement without naming the source.

• Method: Ask for an evaluation of a specific stance (e.g., "The government should have the power to seize private land for national projects") without mentioning Trump.
• Goal: Determine if the voter evaluates the logic of the policy or relies on the source to decide if it's "correct".

2. Neutral Domain Testing

Use non-political logic puzzles or math problems to gauge baseline reasoning skills.

(I have some more saved)

 

[Emily's Cat]

GOP logic: "violent immigrants can get super easily into our country! When they commit a serious crime, we don't want to put them on trial and in prison, but send them back to the place from where they have no problem getting here in the first place!"

As opposed to DNC logic: "violent immigrants can get super easily into our country, and if they move to a sanctuary city we'll help protect them from ever being deported. When they commit a serious crime, they'll serve a shortened sentence and we will intentionally refuse to inform ICE of their illegal status in the US and we'll do everything in our power to ensure that they stay in the US as long as they want. We'll release them back into the general public, and we'll block any proposals to make it harder for more violent immigrants to enter the US."

 

[The Great Zaganza]

glad you admit that Republicans are spending tens of billions on a catch-and-release scheme that murders Americans.

 

[johnny karate]

As opposed to DNC logic: "violent immigrants can get super easily into our country, and if they move to a sanctuary city we'll help protect them from ever being deported. When they commit a serious crime, they'll serve a shortened sentence and we will intentionally refuse to inform ICE of their illegal status in the US and we'll do everything in our power to ensure that they stay in the US as long as they want. We'll release them back into the general public, and we'll block any proposals to make it harder for more violent immigrants to enter the US."

I enjoy that MAGA continues to make these delusional claims while Republican credibility on immigration gets torched by the fully-realized MAGA vision of enforcement.

Americans hate what Republicans are doing on immigration and their only response is to pretend like it’s still the 2024 campaign.

Stick your head deeper in the sand, weirdos.

 

[dirtywick]

earlier in this thread i asked emily’s cat for her thoughts on stephen miller. she said she had never heard of the guy and took a hiatus from the topic. now that she’s back and ready to talk immigration again, i would be curious if she had anything to say. because i don’t think you can speak towards immigration without talking about the guy that’s crafting the policy. i mean, can you really speak towards republican policy on immigrants without at least acknowledging there’s a white nationalist crafting its policy? not really imo without sounding like an idiot

grizzly up above dodged it by cutting his name out of the post when he quoted it. I mean, you can’t defend him so pretend he doesn’t exist. am i supposed to pretend along? or is it you don’t like the man but you like his policies? because we’ve been down that road too

 

[Emily's Cat]

earlier in this thread i asked emily’s cat for her thoughts on stephen miller. she said she had never heard of the guy and took a hiatus from the topic. now that she’s back and ready to talk immigration again, i would be curious if she had anything to say. because i don’t think you can speak towards immigration without talking about the guy that’s crafting the policy. i mean, can you really speak towards republican policy on immigrants without at least acknowledging there’s a white nationalist crafting its policy? not really imo without sounding like an idiot

grizzly up above dodged it by cutting his name out of the post when he quoted it. I mean, you can’t defend him so pretend he doesn’t exist. am i supposed to pretend along? or is it you don’t like the man but you like his policies? because we’ve been down that road too

Would you object to policies about who can participate in which sports leagues being crafted by Rep. McBride? Would the fact that they are inherently biased give you pause and make you discard their policies, or would you instead consider the policy on its own merits?

 

[dirtywick]

it really was you don’t like the white nationalist but you like his immigration policies lol

 

[johnny karate]

it really was you don’t like the white nationalist but you like his immigration policies lol

Not so sure about that first part.

 

[Emily's Cat]

it really was you don’t like the white nationalist but you like his immigration policies lol

Alternatively, it's possible for someone to be a racist scumbag and still have policies that are reasonable and appropriate.

Thus my question to you that you completely ignored. You could very plausibly get policies that look to increase the penalties for sexual assault and rape from a person who actually truly hates males - that doesn't make it a bad policy in and of itself.

 

[dann]

Establishment Democrats plan to move even further to the right than Harris in 2024:
WHAT THE F*CK IS THISSS8923U089U8 (Secular Talk on YouTube, April 7, 2026 - 22:39 min.)


The first ten YouTube comments:
"It's not mental illness, it's corruption. They want the oligarchs' donations, so they are trying to appease them."
"This is what class warfare looks like. We live in a corrupt oligarchy. We need ranked-choice voting, ballot access, and more parties."
"The primaries need to be a purge. We can't have any of the old party left, they're all compromised."
"Democrats are controlled opposition...Look how hard they fight the actual left, yet keep chasing the right .. they are already right wingers... It's theatre - it's "illusion of choice""
""Come meet me in the middle" said republicans. Democrats move middle. Republicans take a step back. "Come meet me in the middle" Said Republicans."
"We need democrats to lean left. We need universal health care."
"Chuck Schumer is an AIPAC employee"
"It's the bribes from oligarchs corrupting every worthless fk in our government.Repeal citizens United. TAX THE RICH. THEN TAX THEM MORE. TAX THE OLIGARCHY OUT OF EXISTENCE."
"If you still had a shred of doubt about whether or not the Democrat party is controlled opposition… we have no real representation."
"They aren't incompetent, they're collaborators"

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Alternatively, it's possible for someone to be a racist scumbag and still have policies that are reasonable and appropriate.

Thus my question to you that you completely ignored. You could very plausibly get policies that look to increase the penalties for sexual assault and rape from a person who actually truly hates males - that doesn't make it a bad policy in and of itself.

even if you agree with the policies, do you think they are being correctly implemented?

Are deportations cost efficient?
Are ICE and Border Patrol Agents getting enough training?
Should they be masked?
Should they ignore laws and Court Orders, or should the appropriate laws be changed first?
Is the murdering of Migrants and Americans just something to have to accept to the Greater Good?

Do you think it's reasonable to go full steam ahead with deportations, only looking at numbers and nothing else?

 

[dirtywick]

hitler built the highways.

anyway, what’s everyone’s favorite reasonable white nationalist immigration policy?

 

[Donal]

As opposed to DNC logic: "violent immigrants can get super easily into our country, and if they move to a sanctuary city we'll help protect them from ever being deported. When they commit a serious crime, they'll serve a shortened sentence and we will intentionally refuse to inform ICE of their illegal status in the US and we'll do everything in our power to ensure that they stay in the US as long as they want. We'll release them back into the general public, and we'll block any proposals to make it harder for more violent immigrants to enter the US."

Did you ever try not being completely wrong? At all? Just try saying something based in fact. See how it feels

 

[Donal]

Would you object to policies about who can participate in which sports leagues being crafted by Rep. McBride?

the federal government doesn't need to worry who is in my local bowling league.

Would the fact that they are inherently biased give you pause and make you discard their policies, or would you instead consider the policy on its own merits?

No, because none of these exist in a vacuum.

 

[johnny karate]

Alternatively, it's possible for someone to be a racist scumbag and still have policies that are reasonable and appropriate.

Thus my question to you that you completely ignored. You could very plausibly get policies that look to increase the penalties for sexual assault and rape from a person who actually truly hates males - that doesn't make it a bad policy in and of itself.

It wasn’t that long ago that even implying Republicans were racist triggered outrage and condemnations.

Now we’ve moved on to the “Sure they’re racist, but maybe they have some good ideas” phase.

Also, would love to see just one real world example of a good policy by racist scumbags. Just one.

 

[johnny karate]

Would you object to policies about who can participate in which sports leagues being crafted by Rep. McBride? Would the fact that they are inherently biased give you pause and make you discard their policies, or would you instead consider the policy on its own merits?

It always comes back to this same obsession with these freaks.

 

[Donal]

I keep saying, the typical white woman will sacrifice an appendage to maintain her second class citizenship, so long as there are third, fourth and fifth classes for her to look down on.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

As opposed to DNC logic: "violent immigrants can get super easily into our country, and if they move to a sanctuary city we'll help protect them from ever being deported. When they commit a serious crime, they'll serve a shortened sentence and we will intentionally refuse to inform ICE of their illegal status in the US and we'll do everything in our power to ensure that they stay in the US as long as they want. We'll release them back into the general public, and we'll block any proposals to make it harder for more violent immigrants to enter the US."

Trump's immigration enforcement surges have taken resources and manpower *away* from activities by DEA, the FBI, and even Homeland Security Investigations that were actually dedicated to things like stopping drug trafficking, human trafficking, etc. All to round up people en masse who are mostly not violent criminals. There's even been a push to expand the pool of mostly-non-criminal targets by going after visas, birthright citizenship, the naturalization process, etc.

It was never about "violent immigrants". It is about rounding up arbitrary quotas of people who look and talk funny and making them go away.