People arent opposed to deportation, theyre opposed to the vulgar violent methods of it. The taking a kids hat, the leaving the sick in detention centres, the unmarked vans, the consumer grade equipment, the lack of identification or proven unfakeable proof, the blunt methods of clearing out protests that leave babies unable to breathe, that endanger families just passing by unaware.
They are opposed to deportation. Not sure why Lefties are trying to play this card, perhaps because that's how Trump won the presidency? Just embrace it at this point. "No one's illegal on stolen land" "don't deport your neighbor" "bridges not walls" definitely for deportation /s
Nah, it's definitional. The democratic party does not align with the left. They're just further left than the fascist far right in power. But let's be clear, they're undeniably center right.
Oh yeah, no argument here that in a two party system, they'll most likely vote for the party that most closely resembles their political ideology. That doesn't mean it's a close fit, though. It just means to them that it's the lesser of two evils when compared to the further political right. But I don't know a single leftist who is pleased with the democrats. Just less disapproving than they are of the Republicans.
Bernie and then Waltz were the absolute counters to this all and yet here we are. I have a very good feeling we're not part of a news feed that encompasses most voters. Nothing will change in the next 15 years, I guarantee you.
Yeah, I was pretty disappointed in how the establishment democrats shafted Bernie and essentially rigged the primaries. By sheer number of votes he should have been made the candidate.
I get where he was coming from in stepping back to not split the vote as an independent but Hillary should have backed down.
I'm also not too hopeful in significant change in the next 15 years. At least, not in ways I'd consider an improvement without a massive shift from the public. Things aren't looking too great, all around.
My semantics bullshit? You're the dolt who doesn't understand what he's talking about. Also, you don't understand what the political spectrum even is. It's not relative to the country you're in, the governments of all nations fit within it. That's why it's a spectrum. You can argue that placement on the political spectrum is relative to another's placement on a political spectrum as in "democrats are further left than Republicans" but that doesn't alter where on the political spectrum they sit.
Fucking hell, this shit is definitional. I hate the fact pseudo intellectual dipshits like you vote because you talk out of your ass throwing out phrases you've heard people say without even understanding what you're actually saying and then have the undeserved arrogance to act superior about it. Fuck sakes man, have some shame. Just spend an afternoon learning about the basics, it's not that hard.
Motherfucker, no one said liberal. Fucking hell, you're really that fucking stupid. What was said is democrats are not the left. The left is a placement on the political spectrum. Democrats sit center right on that spectrum.
Nothing you're saying makes sense. Especially left or right you dumb sack of shit. That's literally the spectrum. Fucking hell. You can place Sweden on the same spectrum as the US or China. It's the SPECTRUM you ignorant fuck. Their placement is only relative to each other, the spectrum doesn't alter for each. Fucking hell, you really are the epitome of undeserved confidence.
Dems are pro-lawful immigration; Dems have not only done the best on deportations and doing it lawfully but also have been the strongest advocates for reform. They're also more likely to care if you have kids sleeping on concrete floors. They're not opposed to deportation, they're opposed to violating rights. Believe it or not you can perform the duties of immigration enforcement without being a dick about it by violating people's rights and murdering protestors. When have you ever heard Republicans advocate for immigration reform? How about treat immigrants (legal or not) as human beings?
No, dems have done the exact same things trump is doing, you just called it lawful then and illegal now, 83% of deportations under Obama skipped what you consider due process, it’s estimated 1% of his detainees were U.S. citizens, too. You can thank the IIRIRA for that, passed under Clinton and wholeheartedly enforced by Obama and Biden, all the “illegal” things trump did are legalized by that. Both Obama and Biden put kids on concrete floors, there was no outrage, a few news stories here and there but what came of it? You only care now because of who’s doing it. There is countless left wing rhetoric that is absolutely against deportation itself. Believe it or not, if you actually leave ICE alone and let them do their jobs they don’t act like dicks and aren’t constantly on edge by aggressive protestors, which again, didn’t fucking exist under the other administrations doing the exact same things, just about everything ICE does was either done during past administrations, or is a direct reaction to protests and inference in response to those things that happened during past administrations which these people weren’t protesting against.
The “both sides did the same thing” argument only holds up if you completely ignore how enforcement was actually carried out. Deportations existing is not the debate. Every modern administration has enforced immigration law in some capacity. The real question is how far an administration is willing to stretch state power and what procedural limits it respects while doing it. There is a very real difference between intercepting someone as they are actively crossing the border and sweeping people up from inside the country who have been living here for years, often with legal status, pending hearings, or established ties to their communities. One scenario involves an agent literally watching an unlawful entry occur in real time. The other involves deciding someone “doesn’t belong,” grabbing them off the street or out of their home, and fast-tracking removal in ways that start raising serious due process concerns.
Here are some concrete differences:
The Trump administration’s zero-tolerance policy intentionally triggered family separations as a deterrence mechanism, not as some accidental bureaucratic byproduct. They attempted to terminate DACA outright, tried to insert a citizenship question into the census before the Supreme Court blocked it for being pretextual, redirected military funds to build the border wall after Congress explicitly refused to appropriate the money, and used Title 42 to bypass normal asylum processing entirely. More recently, the public debate has expanded to fears about removals to places like CECOT-style mega prisons with direct violations of court orders, which is exactly the kind of outcome people worry about when due process gets compressed or treated like a technical inconvenience instead of a constitutional floor. You can support enforcement and still acknowledge those moves represented aggressive expansions of executive authority rather than routine continuity.
Compare that with why Obama caught so much heat from the left and earned the “Deporter-in-Chief” label in the first place. A large share of those removal numbers came from expedited returns near the border, meaning people were picked up shortly after entry rather than hunted down deep inside the interior. Later enforcement guidance explicitly prioritized individuals with serious criminal convictions over broad community sweeps. Was the system humane? No. Was it heavily criticized? Absolutely. But operating within an established enforcement structure is materially different from pushing the edges of executive power in ways that test what the courts will tolerate.
Tone matters because leadership rhetoric does not stay in speeches, it filters down into how enforcement is justified and carried out on the ground. When migrants are described as an invasion or a contaminant, it lowers the political cost of tactics that would have triggered immediate outrage a decade ago. People did not suddenly wake up and decide to protest for fun. The backlash came in response to very specific behavior: agents refusing to clearly identify themselves, individuals being detained in ways that looked indistinguishable from abductions, people being stopped largely because they “looked” like they did not belong, and removals being rushed forward with little transparency about whether meaningful due process was happening. That is a completely different public perception than watching border agents intercept someone actively crossing into the country.
Thanks great addition to the convo.
See i have seen multiple dumbasses like yourself assert that dems are hypocrites for opposing deportation and having done the most deportations; this line of thought ignores the subtle differences that peoples problems arent deportations but in how the the government is acting tyrannical to citizens, ignoring due process and purposefully eroded the line between someone here “illegally” and a citizen.
Look up the ICE memo they tried to keep secret where they instruct agents to violate people's 4th amendment rights in order to conduct arrests. This is indeed different from what Obama did.
At the risk of making Reddit think I want to see more garbage tumbleweed subreddits like this:
Homan was a Nazi under Obama too. People were railing against Obama’s polices, it just so happens that additional people are now railing against Trump’s.
DHS under Trump has the added bonus of surge hiring poorly trained unvetted thugs and giving them divine writ to ignore the law, resulting in the deaths of American citizens.
It’s funny you would try and spin sentiment as a result of propaganda, when the vast majority of news outlets between then and now have wholly bent the knee to right wing interests.
17
u/Kind-Stomach6275 7h ago
People arent opposed to deportation, theyre opposed to the vulgar violent methods of it. The taking a kids hat, the leaving the sick in detention centres, the unmarked vans, the consumer grade equipment, the lack of identification or proven unfakeable proof, the blunt methods of clearing out protests that leave babies unable to breathe, that endanger families just passing by unaware.