Obama Deportations Continue with New Wave of Raids

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

The sole regrettable portion of the Obama Presidency has been his deportation agenda. Appears it will be ramping up yet again in record numbers. Sad!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0Y32J1

[dead0man]

Don't expect this to get any traction.  It doesn't play into either side's playbook so it will be ignored by everybody.

[President Johnson]

That's panic because of big Don.

[Virginiá]

I don't understand why this is even news (ok, politics, sure, but still bs).

We still have immigration laws and it's selfish as hell for Hispanics to demand we just halt all deportations, presumably forever. It's even sadder that Democrats are hispandering like crazy and promising to not deport anyone but criminals on live tv!

I consider myself pretty liberal and a loyal Democrat but I cannot agree with this. Hispanic activists are taking advantage of politicians they know are desperate for their vote and demanding selfish concessions on immigration that are not necessarily good for this country at this current time. Did these people ever consider how the USA is to take care of so many people/children fleeing central/south America? Did they ever consider if it's our duty or in our best interests to do this? Because doing so encourages even more people to immigrate here illegally.

[Asian Nazi]

I don't understand why this is even news (ok, politics, sure, but still bs).

We still have immigration laws and it's selfish as hell for Hispanics to demand we just halt all deportations, presumably forever. It's even sadder that Democrats are hispandering like crazy and promising to not deport anyone but criminals on live tv!

I consider myself pretty liberal and a loyal Democrat but I cannot agree with this. Hispanic activists are taking advantage of politicians they know are desperate for their vote and demanding selfish concessions on immigration that are not necessarily good for this country at this current time. Did these people ever consider how the USA is to take care of so many people/children fleeing central/south America? Did they ever consider if it's our duty or in our best interests to do this? Because doing so encourages even more people to immigrate here illegally.

As long as there are "liberals" who think like this, Trump has already won.

[RFayette]

I don't understand why this is even news (ok, politics, sure, but still bs).

We still have immigration laws and it's selfish as hell for Hispanics to demand we just halt all deportations, presumably forever. It's even sadder that Democrats are hispandering like crazy and promising to not deport anyone but criminals on live tv!

I consider myself pretty liberal and a loyal Democrat but I cannot agree with this. Hispanic activists are taking advantage of politicians they know are desperate for their vote and demanding selfish concessions on immigration that are not necessarily good for this country at this current time. Did these people ever consider how the USA is to take care of so many people/children fleeing central/south America? Did they ever consider if it's our duty or in our best interests to do this? Because doing so encourages even more people to immigrate here illegally.

Now this is my kind of Democrat!

[Kingpoleon]

Well, as we know, supporting deportation makes Republicans racist.


The only people who mention this will be the Libertarians.

[dead0man]

That's panic because of big Don.

A.Obama isn't running against Trump.
2.Obama was doing this before the current election cycle
III.a third thing

[Seneca]

I don't understand why this is even news (ok, politics, sure, but still bs).

We still have immigration laws and it's selfish as hell for Hispanics to demand we just halt all deportations, presumably forever. It's even sadder that Democrats are hispandering like crazy and promising to not deport anyone but criminals on live tv!

I consider myself pretty liberal and a loyal Democrat but I cannot agree with this. Hispanic activists are taking advantage of politicians they know are desperate for their vote and demanding selfish concessions on immigration that are not necessarily good for this country at this current time. Did these people ever consider how the USA is to take care of so many people/children fleeing central/south America? Did they ever consider if it's our duty or in our best interests to do this? Because doing so encourages even more people to immigrate here illegally.

As long as there are "liberals" who think like this, Trump has already won.

Are we sure this isn't sarcasm?

[Virginiá]

As long as there are "liberals" who think like this, Trump has already won.

I'm not for completely open borders, but I want the current illegal immigrants to stay and become citizens. In fact, I just can't understand why it's suddenly bad in my party to not want to suspend all deportations just because other people's countries are so screwed up that they are sending their kids / themselves to our country en masse. Why are we responsible for all of them? I'm not against taking in some of them, but we can't take in everyone that shows up at our door. Most of my party leaders have no backbone at this point and have given in to everything Hispanics want on immigration. What about everyone else? They are essentially allowing 13% of the electorate to dictate the country's immigration policy.

I don't even understand how this ties into being liberal, either. That "liberal" implication seems to be that I'm not really a liberal unless I support open borders and no deportations. How did this get baked into liberalism?

Sorry, but just because a bunch of Hispanic activists wants to stop all deportations does not make it right. They have an agenda that isn't acceptable to me.

Now this is my kind of Democrat!

I think you would find me much more acceptable than meets the eye. Just have to get to know me is all

[Boston Bread]

Yet another issue where Clinton is running to the left of Obama (and to my own left, considering I share the same position as Obama on the issue). Still everyone tries to pretend Clinton is running to the right of Obama for some reason.

[Mr. Smith]

As long as there are "liberals" who think like this, Trump has already won.

I'm not for completely open borders, but I want the current illegal immigrants to stay and become citizens. In fact, I just can't understand why it's suddenly bad in my party to not want to suspend all deportations just because other people's countries are so screwed up that they are sending their kids / themselves to our country en masse. Why are we responsible for all of them? I'm not against taking in some of them, but we can't take in everyone that shows up at our door. Most of my party leaders have no backbone at this point and have given in to everything Hispanics want on immigration. What about everyone else? They are essentially allowing 13% of the electorate to dictate the country's immigration policy.

I don't even understand how this ties into being liberal, either. That "liberal" implication seems to be that I'm not really a liberal unless I support open borders and no deportations. How did this get baked into liberalism?

Sorry, but just because a bunch of Hispanic activists wants to stop all deportations does not make it right. They have an agenda that isn't acceptable to me.

Welcome to Identity Politics 101.

[Boston Bread]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Doesn't that make you share the same position as Obama and Sanders? I wouldn't worry about losing your liberal credentials

There isn't that much difference between the party elites on immigration. They just use different types of rhetoric to maintain the identity politics war.

[Virginiá]

Welcome to Identity Politics 101.

Thanks professor! I would have gotten to class sooner, but I was trying to use the bathroom and these people were blocking it while arguing about which one to use

[Santander]

I don't understand why this is even news (ok, politics, sure, but still bs).

We still have immigration laws and it's selfish as hell for Hispanics to demand we just halt all deportations, presumably forever. It's even sadder that Democrats are hispandering like crazy and promising to not deport anyone but criminals on live tv!

I consider myself pretty liberal and a loyal Democrat but I cannot agree with this. Hispanic activists are taking advantage of politicians they know are desperate for their vote and demanding selfish concessions on immigration that are not necessarily good for this country at this current time. Did these people ever consider how the USA is to take care of so many people/children fleeing central/south America? Did they ever consider if it's our duty or in our best interests to do this? Because doing so encourages even more people to immigrate here illegally.

My God, maybe it's not time for me to leave the Democratic Party just yet.

[RINO Tom]

^ After all, you'd have to change that (awful) signature.

[Clark Kent]

In principle, I actually support open borders, even though it's not completely feasible right now. Ideally we'd have something like the EU in place with Canada, Mexico, etc.

[Adam Griffin]

When you get to the core of it all regarding this issue, this is how I believe "the Democratic establishment" sees it:

Latinos are a fickle voting bloc. I don't mean just in terms of turning out as levels equal to their citizen voting age population. I also mean in terms of embracing or identifying with the political system. Coming from a predominantly-Latino city and speaking as a political organizer, it has been my experience that practically all Latino civic organizations are either hostile to the two-party system or afraid to be seen as associated with one or the other. It appears to be this way everywhere else as well. They want to be "independents" because they dislike the structure. Well, you can perch on the fence all you want for whatever reason, but that comes with a price.

It's clear that the Latino community has one clear choice in terms of who is best equipped to represent them not just on this issue, but many others, but representation is a two-way street. Latino civic and political leaders disproportionately avoid embracing or encouraging communities to turn out and vote for the party they wish to enact much of their desired legislation. Turnout rates continues to be abysmal. They continue to attack the Democratic Party. Democrats, if they were to overreach too much on this issue, will pay an electoral price far greater than the minuscule increase from cycle to cycle at present in terms of Latino votes. What exactly is in it for Democrats?

This is the way the system works. You identify with one or the other, or nobody really cares about you. Every minority community and demographic has come to this conclusion at some point or another, as well as coming to the conclusion that you actually have to, you know, vote and organize around a party in order to make politicians care. Now of course the voters who are turning out right now seem to be heavily-aligned with us, but that brings up another interesting point...

The Republicans, at the same time, are not worried about the Latino community short-term because while it might make the overall margins less pretty for them, the fact is that Romney could have won anywhere from 11% to 44% of the Latino vote in 2012 and it wouldn't have flipped a single state other than Florida (where half of the Latino population doesn't care about many "traditional" Latino issues in the first place). In short, the Latino community - despite its electoral growth - isn't in any real position to influence presidential election outcomes outside of Florida, or many others for that matter. That'll change in the coming years (and would also change with increased civic participation here and now), but it's a sobering reminder that their 10% of the electorate is clustered almost exclusively in states that are safe one way or another.

So, more Democratic politicians will be willing to embrace these issues more wholeheartedly once a) community leaders in the position to actually impact voting and civic habits get off the fence and stop worrying about being edgy independents/non-partisans, b) once Latinos embrace the same civic process that every other immigrant and minority constituency has had to dance with over the decades and centures, c) once they begin voting more regularly in elections where the consequences of actions on these policies are truly felt and d) once the net benefit in terms of raw votes coming through these changes surpasses the potential punishment Democrats will face at the ballot box (because old, angry white people vote in every election).

[ag]

When you get to the core of it all regarding this issue, this is how I believe "the Democratic establishment" sees it:

Latinos are a fickle voting bloc. I don't mean just in terms of turning out as levels equal to their citizen voting age population. I also mean in terms of embracing or identifying with the political system. Coming from a predominantly-Latino city and speaking as a political organizer, it has been my experience that practically all Latino civic organizations are either hostile to the two-party system or afraid to be seen as associated with one or the other. It appears to be this way everywhere else as well. They want to be "independents" because they dislike the structure. Well, you can perch on the fence all you want for whatever reason, but that comes with a price.

This is exactly were the African-American community was circa 1960. The had voted Eisenhower both times, most leaders avoided partisan affiliation and many were, actually, ancestrally Republican. MLK never endorsed Kennedy in 1960, and his father actually switched endorsement from Nixon to Kennedy at the last moment. It was estimated that they voted 60% Dem that year, and it was a major success. And look at it now. Clear effort on behalf of a community can do wonders. And remember, as a share of electorate blacks were far smaller back in 1960 than Hispanics are now, and attracting them was far costlier in terms of the white vote.

[ag]

Obama does what he has to do by law: as has done every US president in this respect. The question is how to change the law, not how to disregard it.

[Virginiá]

Latinos are a fickle voting bloc. I don't mean just in terms of turning out as levels equal to their citizen voting age population. I also mean in terms of embracing or identifying with the political system. Coming from a predominantly-Latino city and speaking as a political organizer, it has been my experience that practically all Latino civic organizations are either hostile to the two-party system or afraid to be seen as associated with one or the other. It appears to be this way everywhere else as well. They want to be "independents" because they dislike the structure. Well, you can perch on the fence all you want for whatever reason, but that comes with a price.

For the life of me, I just don't understand why. Maybe it would be more understandable generations, even decades ago, but how can they still be like that right now? You have one party who won't really do anything for them and has a base of voters who view them with contempt (yes, on paper, they don't like illegal immigrants but that trickles down to all Hispanics for a lot of people), then you have another party who seems to be bending over backwards to bring them into the fold. There are no other viable choices.

They either go out and vote, and get as many of the others to vote as well, or they don't and suffer from political neglect and see their policy wishes go unfulfilled. It doesn't take a genius to understand this.

What am I missing here?

The Republicans, at the same time, are not worried about the Latino community short-term because while it might make the overall margins less pretty for them, the fact is that Romney could have won anywhere from 11% to 44% of the Latino vote in 2012 and it wouldn't have flipped a single state other than Florida (where half of the Latino population doesn't care about many "traditional" Latino issues in the first place).

I see what you're getting at here, and I don't doubt it. They are being really dumb for adopting such a strategy.

Their party has been coming off as hostile to Hispanic voter interests for years and now Trump has essentially shown them that some of their family and friends are literally not welcome anymore. This is going to turn an entire generation, maybe more, of Hispanic voters (Millennials) against the GOP. It almost reminds me of the last great migration of African American voters to the Democratic party in 1964.

You can't treat them this way / ignore them for so long then just 'patch it up' later. Voter preferences stick, and as I was saying on AAD, this is the absolute worst time to pull this bs. Practically half their share of eligible voters are at the age(s) where their political leanings are developed.

What are Republicans going to do when the eligible Hispanic voter population continues exploding in size and they all stubbornly vote 70% - 80% Democratic?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The irony is the Democrats are now openly acknowledging the primary reason why many of us oppose comprehensive immigration reform. They will ignore the laws, let another group in and in turn, claim said group cannot be deported and must be legalized through "reform" of a broken system. A system they broke in the first place, intentionally. This is called cyclical amnesty, and it is no way to run a country. There is no way to control who is coming in and weed out the bad apples. I agree whole heartedly with the reformers that the system is broken and needs to be fixed, but in order to fix it we need to understand who broke it in the first place. If self-serving Democrats, epitomized by Clinton, would do the right thing, I would be fine with legalizing most of those who are here right now because I could believe it is the amnesty to end all amnesties. But of course, they won't and such will just perpetuate their breaking of the system.

The Democratic Party is entirely in the tank for open borders and it would be a great service to the country to have them lose an election over this and bring them to their senses.

Obama I will credit, has at least, contrary to the right-wing propaganda, been far more reasonable on this issue than Clinton, and now, most every other Democrat as well. He endorsed penalizing employers and ran to her right in 2008 in the primary on enforcement.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

In principle, I actually support open borders, even though it's not completely feasible right now. Ideally we'd have something like the EU in place with Canada, Mexico, etc.

I am glad I don't consume alcohol, because this post would make me want to.

In the age of terrorism is that is completely impossible and I have no faith in Mexico to properly secure their system so as to avoid creating a legal channel for ISIS to exploit to enter the US and blow innocent civilians up.

Even generally speaking, a nation has a responsibility to its citizens to regulate the flow of people into the country, vet them for security and other concerns and ensure that the overall numbers remain at a controllable and assimilatable level. Open borders run contrary to this responsibility.

Referencing the EU, doesn't help make your case, Kent.

[President Johnson]

That's panic because of big Don.

A.Obama isn't running against Trump.
2.Obama was doing this before the current election cycle
III.a third thing

He wants to help the Hill. That's all.

[Mr. Smith]

Latinos are a fickle voting bloc. I don't mean just in terms of turning out as levels equal to their citizen voting age population. I also mean in terms of embracing or identifying with the political system. Coming from a predominantly-Latino city and speaking as a political organizer, it has been my experience that practically all Latino civic organizations are either hostile to the two-party system or afraid to be seen as associated with one or the other. It appears to be this way everywhere else as well. They want to be "independents" because they dislike the structure. Well, you can perch on the fence all you want for whatever reason, but that comes with a price.

For the life of me, I just don't understand why. Maybe it would be more understandable generations, even decades ago, but how can they still be like that right now? You have one party who won't really do anything for them and has a base of voters who view them with contempt (yes, on paper, they don't like illegal immigrants but that trickles down to all Hispanics for a lot of people), then you have another party who seems to be bending over backwards to bring them into the fold. There are no other viable choices.

They either go out and vote, and get as many of the others to vote as well, or they don't and suffer from political neglect and see their policy wishes go unfulfilled. It doesn't take a genius to understand this.

What am I missing here?

The Republicans, at the same time, are not worried about the Latino community short-term because while it might make the overall margins less pretty for them, the fact is that Romney could have won anywhere from 11% to 44% of the Latino vote in 2012 and it wouldn't have flipped a single state other than Florida (where half of the Latino population doesn't care about many "traditional" Latino issues in the first place).

I see what you're getting at here, and I don't doubt it. They are being really dumb for adopting such a strategy.

Their party has been coming off as hostile to Hispanic voter interests for years and now Trump has essentially shown them that some of their family and friends are literally not welcome anymore. This is going to turn an entire generation, maybe more, of Hispanic voters (Millennials) against the GOP. It almost reminds me of the last great migration of African American voters to the Democratic party in 1964.

You can't treat them this way / ignore them for so long then just 'patch it up' later. Voter preferences stick, and as I was saying on AAD, this is the absolute worst time to pull this bs. Practically half their share of eligible voters are at the age(s) where their political leanings are developed.

What are Republicans going to do when the eligible Hispanic voter population continues exploding in size and they all stubbornly vote 70% - 80% Democratic?

I think you're forgetting that a huge part of the Democratic base has a lot to lose from immigration and is thus quite hostile themselves. Said part of base is the minority bloc that was given support in the 60's. The other part of the base epitomizes condescending compassion.

This leaves Latino civic organizations with either aligning with a party that completely holds them in contempt, or aligning with a party that only once in a while throws a good policy their way that won't cause backlash and still has a huge part that hates them.

This is in the inevitable outcome of a big tent party with a bunch of quarreling and a nationalistic party being the only two options.


@ag: No, the black vote went to Stevenson by a comfortable margin, actually Nixon got more black support in '60 than Ike got in '52 (even with the Democrats having a segregationist on spot #2)