I don't claim to know very much about illegal immigration to the USA, but it seems to me that if one genuinely wanted to attack the problem one would go after the employers, who have much more to lose than the illegal immigrants.
I'm going to guess that Trump hasn't done that. Tell me if I'm wrong.
2025-10-14 16:04:26
Non-partisan discussion of Biden's border policies.
The summary is that Biden went back to policy before Trump, which hadn't much differed between Republican and Democratic administrations. Calling that an "open-border policy" is not factual.
So if you like Trump, yes, you'll think Biden wasn't cruel enough. But you wouldn't switch from your previous support for Democratic candidates because Biden agreed with the presidents you'd previously supported.
2025-10-14 01:03:13
bc:
1) Legal immigration was lower under Biden than Trump. As to the effects of Biden's "open border policy" on illegal immigration: there were none, because there was no such policy.
2) Trump was and is keen on deficit-funded tax cuts. Biden was keen on deficit-funded spending. Biden at least was spending the money to boost an economy which had been depressed by COVID (and it worked). Neither should be attractive to a deficit hawk.
7) Yes, the US is a net exporter of natural gas, a net importer of oil. But the oil imports are not because of reduced domestic production - it reached a record high in 2023 (the last year I've found data for).
6) (I left this out before because I didn't know about it). So far as I know, shoplifting is not a federal matter - it's nothing to do with the president.
I imagine we could get somewhere near a consensus on these things, if we discussed them for long enough. And that at most it would support Ackman's preference for some of Trump's policies where they favour the things Ackman likes, such as burning fossil fuels. And we could go through the whole list similarly.
The one thing I clearly agree with him about is his distaste for the Ds' nomination of Biden in 2024. That's a reason to vote for the obviously dementing Trump rather than Harris?
One more jab: (3) is ridiculous - he voted for Trump because Biden implemented the withdrawal from Afghanistan which Trump had committed to?
2025-10-13 18:02:07
I understand the reasoning that the best vote-winning arguments are ones which appeal to voters' legitimate self-interest. But there are other things which must be said loud and often:
this Administration is not normal. Every other President in my lifetime has represented himself as serving in the interests of all Americans: this one is for his people only.
Troops are the streets should be there only to address an urgent crisis, not because the President has been confused by old videos.
Everyone who is not reasonably suspected of serious crime should be immune from being dragged from their bed by government agents.
corruption is rampant in this Administration.
election procedure should not be a partisan matter.
The Supreme Court has abandoned any shred of legitimacy. During the Biden administration it adopted a "major questions doctrine" to stop him doing things which the literal text of the law allowed. For Trump, the Court is using its emergency docket to allow him, without explanation, to do things which the literal text of the law and the Constitution disallow. The Court must be radically reformed.
2025-10-13 17:41:17
1) Immigration. Immigration was higher in Trump's first term than in Bidens. Ackman is wrong.
2) Trump in his first term showed himself to be indifferent to the national debt. Ackman is wrong.
7) The USA has been a net fossil fuel exporter since 2019. Ackman is wrong.
I could go on - there are very few valid points. Yes, it's important to understand why people voted for Trump. But what this tells me about the other side is that influential people on it are unconcerned with reality. I hope that most of the electorate thinks otherwise.
2025-10-10 01:57:08
We should call Trump and his collaborators what they are. I learn that he's been hosting an "anti-antifa roundtable". To support that the contention that "antifa" is an actual organization, one speaker announced that "Antifa is real. Antifa has been around in various iterations for almost a hundred years in some instances going back to the Weimar Republic in Germany."
So that's clear, they're proudly against the opponents of fascism. "Anti-antifascist" is a clumsy way of expressing what they actually are - pro-fascist.
These people are evil. But - I want to write that in big letters - half the voting population of the USA votes for them. I don't believe - I'm not willing to believe - that half the voters are evil. We need to talk to them respectfully and sympathetically. We've all been taken in at some time by liars: it's our side's job to point out the lies, not to judge the liars' victims.
I don't claim to know very much about illegal immigration to the USA, but it seems to me that if one genuinely wanted to attack the problem one would go after the employers, who have much more to lose than the illegal immigrants.
I'm going to guess that Trump hasn't done that. Tell me if I'm wrong.
Non-partisan discussion of Biden's border policies.
The summary is that Biden went back to policy before Trump, which hadn't much differed between Republican and Democratic administrations. Calling that an "open-border policy" is not factual.
So if you like Trump, yes, you'll think Biden wasn't cruel enough. But you wouldn't switch from your previous support for Democratic candidates because Biden agreed with the presidents you'd previously supported.
bc:
1) Legal immigration was lower under Biden than Trump. As to the effects of Biden's "open border policy" on illegal immigration: there were none, because there was no such policy.
2) Trump was and is keen on deficit-funded tax cuts. Biden was keen on deficit-funded spending. Biden at least was spending the money to boost an economy which had been depressed by COVID (and it worked). Neither should be attractive to a deficit hawk.
7) Yes, the US is a net exporter of natural gas, a net importer of oil. But the oil imports are not because of reduced domestic production - it reached a record high in 2023 (the last year I've found data for).
6) (I left this out before because I didn't know about it). So far as I know, shoplifting is not a federal matter - it's nothing to do with the president.
I imagine we could get somewhere near a consensus on these things, if we discussed them for long enough. And that at most it would support Ackman's preference for some of Trump's policies where they favour the things Ackman likes, such as burning fossil fuels. And we could go through the whole list similarly.
The one thing I clearly agree with him about is his distaste for the Ds' nomination of Biden in 2024. That's a reason to vote for the obviously dementing Trump rather than Harris?
One more jab: (3) is ridiculous - he voted for Trump because Biden implemented the withdrawal from Afghanistan which Trump had committed to?
I understand the reasoning that the best vote-winning arguments are ones which appeal to voters' legitimate self-interest. But there are other things which must be said loud and often:
1) Immigration. Immigration was higher in Trump's first term than in Bidens. Ackman is wrong.
2) Trump in his first term showed himself to be indifferent to the national debt. Ackman is wrong.
7) The USA has been a net fossil fuel exporter since 2019. Ackman is wrong.
I could go on - there are very few valid points. Yes, it's important to understand why people voted for Trump. But what this tells me about the other side is that influential people on it are unconcerned with reality. I hope that most of the electorate thinks otherwise.
We should call Trump and his collaborators what they are. I learn that he's been hosting an "anti-antifa roundtable". To support that the contention that "antifa" is an actual organization, one speaker announced that "Antifa is real. Antifa has been around in various iterations for almost a hundred years in some instances going back to the Weimar Republic in Germany."
So that's clear, they're proudly against the opponents of fascism. "Anti-antifascist" is a clumsy way of expressing what they actually are - pro-fascist.
These people are evil. But - I want to write that in big letters - half the voting population of the USA votes for them. I don't believe - I'm not willing to believe - that half the voters are evil. We need to talk to them respectfully and sympathetically. We've all been taken in at some time by liars: it's our side's job to point out the lies, not to judge the liars' victims.