minigubben's lemmy
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • heart
    Support Lemmy
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
givesomefucks@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.worldEnglish · 9 months ago

Top Muslim-voter organization endorses Harris as Middle East conflict escalates

apnews.com

external-link
message-square
27
fedilink
1
external-link

Top Muslim-voter organization endorses Harris as Middle East conflict escalates

apnews.com

givesomefucks@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.worldEnglish · 9 months ago
message-square
27
fedilink
One of the nation's largest Muslim voter-mobilization groups is endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris' presidential bid.
  • Zerlyna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Trump obviously doesn’t want any brown people in this country. Building a wall, Muslim ban. I don’t understand how he is even considered an option.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Building a wall

      …

      Vice President Kamala Harris likes to portray herself as tough on the border and immigration.

      Recent TV ads highlight her time as a “border state prosecutor” who aggressively targeted criminal cartels and drug smugglers, as well as her support for “the toughest border security bill in decades.”

      That bill, which failed in the Senate in February and again in May, included $650 million for new border wall construction. Images of the border wall built during the Trump administration are featured in the Harris ads, yet Harris repeatedly criticized the wall over the years, describing it as an affront to both hers and America’s values.

      https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/04/politics/kfile-harris-border-wall-asylum-contradicts-progressive-immigration-positions/index.html

      Muslim ban

      I know Biden wants to codify what Trump used for his ban, but I don’t think Kamala has disclosed her stance on if a president should have the power to unilaterally close the border for all refugees or just a subset.

      But that’s why some people can’t pick, because the Democratic party has become significantly more “conservative” since 2012.

      • abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Doesn’t make much sense. Harris did X while the other guy would quadruple that (or worse than quadruple), so the other guy is the better option?

        Like, you have a legitimate argument why Harris isn’t as good as, say, Sanders or AOC, but why would this give support to someone even worse on the subject?

      • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        But that’s why some people can’t pick, because the Democratic party has become significantly more “conservative” since 2012.

        My god your penchant for historical revisionism is insufferable:

        In an unexpected move Thursday night [August 5, 2010], Senate Democrats won approval of a $600 million bill that includes money for 1,500 new border personnel, a pair of unmanned drones and military-style bases along the border. The bill by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), which fulfills a request from President Barack Obama, heads to the House for a final vote as early as next week.

        There was no single provision of the 1996 law [signed by Clinton] that was as dramatic as the 1986 “amnesty” law, signed by President Reagan, which is why he gets credit for the last major immigration reform. But the ‘96 law essentially invented immigration enforcement as we know it today — where deportation is a constant and plausible threat to millions of immigrants. It was a bundle of provisions with a single goal: to increase penalties on immigrants who had violated US law in some way (whether they were unauthorized immigrants who’d violated immigration law or legal immigrants who’d committed other crimes).

        Also: https://www.npr.org/2019/02/19/694804917/democrats-used-to-talk-about-criminal-immigrants-so-what-changed-the-party

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          So I said the party has become more “conservative” since 2012…

          And you quoted something from 2010 and some stuff about the 90s?

          Then another link from 2019 before Biden and Kamala?

          Like, it’s 2024…

          The party has become more “conservative” from 2012.

          If we started the clock in the 90s when Clinton was in office, then it would be different. If we started the clock in 2020 after Biden moved the party to the right. It would be different.

          I picked 2012 to highlight any gains made under Obama have been erased.

          I was implying that is the reason why we still can’t out perform Obama’s 08 and even 12 results.

          Does that make sense now?

          • Match!!@pawb.social
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            i think their relevant point, that in 1996 Clinton set the current anti-immigration policy that is the standard today, is lost in a big wall of text

            • abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              Yep, came here to say exactly this!

          • abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Hard disagree. 2008 was before the GOP took control of statewide redistricting to gerrymander and maintain power in a bunch of states and cement an advantage that they still have (which took place in 2010). 2012 was just two years into the effort, but the weaker result there is already showing off the results.

            The reason for the rightward shift? It’s because of that.

politics @lemmy.world

politics@lemmy.world

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@lemmy.world

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 16 users / day
  • 32 users / week
  • 601 users / month
  • 3.3K users / 6 months
  • 0 local subscribers
  • 24.2K subscribers
  • 17.1K Posts
  • 439K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
  • aidan@lemmy.world
  • jordanlund@lemmy.world
  • 🌱 🐄🌱 @lemmy.world
  • Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
  • JuBe@lemmy.world
  • Lasherz@lemmy.world
  • BE: 0.19.7
  • Modlog
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code
  • join-lemmy.org