GOP slouches into the Crazy -IMMIGRATION | Trump Firehose of anti-immigrant posts and rhetoric

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 938
  • Views: 29K
  • Politics 
mpaer said:
I guess G-d doesn't make Haitian babies
Click to expand...
Well, from reading many Facebook posts from Evangelical women about their kids, you get the clear impression that their little darlings just came straight from God and were never conceived through something as low and sinful as sex, so maybe they think Haitian kids are different.

And on a serious note, yes, we're now in the straight up using racism and nativism and sexism and xenophobia phase of the Trump campaign. At this rate they may well be using the "n" word openly by mid-October. My guess is that both Trump and Vance's campaign staffs have concluded that their only chance to win now is to try and drive their base into an absolute frenzy of fear and terror over immigrant hordes overrunning their towns and cities such as they claim as happened in Springfield, and so they're going all out on the racism/nativism/xenophobia angle. It's a very simple and very brutal and very nasty message: Vote for Democrats and black or brown immigrants will take over your town and do terrible things to you and your family and your white neighbors. Trump has been preaching that message since he came down that escalator in 2015, and with Springfield he's going to try and ride that issue to victory yet again.
 
Mulberry Heel said:
Well, from reading many Facebook posts from Evangelical women about their kids, you get the clear impression that their little darlings just came straight from God and were never conceived through something as low and sinful as sex, so maybe they think Haitian kids are different.

And on a serious note, yes, we're now in the straight up using racism and nativism and sexism and xenophobia phase of the Trump campaign. At this rate they may well be using the "n" word openly by mid-October. My guess is that both Trump and Vance's campaign staffs have concluded that their only chance to win now is to try and drive their base into an absolute frenzy of fear and terror over immigrant hordes overrunning their towns and cities such as they claim as happened in Springfield, and so they're going all out on the racism/nativism/xenophobia angle. It's a very simple and very brutal and very nasty message: Vote for Democrats and black or brown immigrants will take over your town and do terrible things to you and your family and your white neighbors. Trump has been preaching that message since he came down that escalator in 2015, and with Springfield he's going to try and ride that issue to victory yet again.
Click to expand...
Yep

The GQP campaign(s) strategies have been reduced to :

1 ) Amp up fear that black and brown people are coming to get you ( and your pets )

2 ) Voter suppression/nullification

such a sad, pathetic , and dangerous party...
 
HeelingAg said:
GD, this is George Wallace without the n-word.
Click to expand...
What I remember about people like Wallace, when speaking publically, instead of finishing the n-word with "ger," they would finish it with "gra." And to them, making this slight change in pronunciation somehow cleansed a vile word. But because of the vileness of the people who believed the "gra" ending make the word acceptable for public use, the "gra" ending always made me more angry than the "ger" ending.
 
05C40 said:
What I remember about people like Wallace, when speaking publically, instead of finishing the n-word with "ger," they would finish it with "gra." And to them, making this slight change in pronunciation somehow cleansed a vile word. But because of the vileness of the people who believed the "gra" ending make the word acceptable for public use, the "gra" ending always made me more angry than the "ger" ending.
Click to expand...
One of my grandfathers used “nigra” for that reason. Even as a kid, I’d say to him, “They’re black, not nigra.”
 
The Trump strategy is simple: if they get people thinking about immigration, they are thinking about Trump's best issue and it helps him.

But they miscalculated. What people are really thinking about is that Trump and Vance are assholes who are making fools of themselves and trying to gaslight voters. They didn't push immigration to the front of people's minds; they pushed their own incompetence to the front of people's minds.

They also committed a major political sin. For years the GOP messaging is about "the border." That's intentional. Almost nobody lives at the border. Talking about "the border" dehumanizes the issue. People don't have to think about the migrants in their own lives, because they have been trained to think about it in really abstract terms. So Trump and Vance come along and they bring "the border" home. Well, now they are humanizing the problem. We're not talking about abstract people any more. We're talking about people's doctors, or taxi cab drivers (I used to work in Princeton NJ , and all the cab companies there were Haitian), or customers, or restaurant staff -- and people just generally don't hate those people. I mean, the hardcore racists probably do, but I think we're seeing that you can't win a presidential race on hardcore racism alone.

By focusing the immigration issue on a specific place with specific people, they fucked up their messaging. They fucked up their framing. "The border" allows them to focus on "security" or "stopping trafficking" or any number of other issues that are not related to actual human beings. Hell, they can even say that gangs are pouring across the border, again because we're not talking about anyone specifically. But now they found actual people in an actual community and it turns out that the "illegal aliens" are not illegal and they are valued in the community and people generally like them. And it destroys the fear factor entirely. It allows journalists to go to Springfield and ask people about the Haitians, and then people say, the Haitians are wonderful and it blew up in their face.

AND, by doubling down and saying they will deport them, they are sending a message to all Americans: we intend to come for people in your community and send them back. Are they members of your church? Doesn't matter, they're gone. Do they run the landscaping business? Gone. Do they fix your flat tires? Doesn't matter, gone. This is not effective messaging. People don't want to go to their auto dealer, look at the mechanic and think, "I want him out of the country." Not swing voters anyway. They want him to fix their car, and if he does, then they are happy to have him. It's the hordes they want to keep out, but we're not talking about hordes any more.
 
superrific said:
The Trump strategy is simple: if they get people thinking about immigration, they are thinking about Trump's best issue and it helps him.

But they miscalculated. What people are really thinking about is that Trump and Vance are assholes who are making fools of themselves and trying to gaslight voters. They didn't push immigration to the front of people's minds; they pushed their own incompetence to the front of people's minds.

They also committed a major political sin. For years the GOP messaging is about "the border." That's intentional. Almost nobody lives at the border. Talking about "the border" dehumanizes the issue. People don't have to think about the migrants in their own lives, because they have been trained to think about it in really abstract terms. So Trump and Vance come along and they bring "the border" home. Well, now they are humanizing the problem. We're not talking about abstract people any more. We're talking about people's doctors, or taxi cab drivers (I used to work in Princeton NJ , and all the cab companies there were Haitian), or customers, or restaurant staff -- and people just generally don't hate those people. I mean, the hardcore racists probably do, but I think we're seeing that you can't win a presidential race on hardcore racism alone.

By focusing the immigration issue on a specific place with specific people, they fucked up their messaging. They fucked up their framing. "The border" allows them to focus on "security" or "stopping trafficking" or any number of other issues that are not related to actual human beings. Hell, they can even say that gangs are pouring across the border, again because we're not talking about anyone specifically. But now they found actual people in an actual community and it turns out that the "illegal aliens" are not illegal and they are valued in the community and people generally like them. And it destroys the fear factor entirely. It allows journalists to go to Springfield and ask people about the Haitians, and then people say, the Haitians are wonderful and it blew up in their face.

AND, by doubling down and saying they will deport them, they are sending a message to all Americans: we intend to come for people in your community and send them back. Are they members of your church? Doesn't matter, they're gone. Do they run the landscaping business? Gone. Do they fix your flat tires? Doesn't matter, gone. This is not effective messaging. People don't want to go to their auto dealer, look at the mechanic and think, "I want him out of the country." Not swing voters anyway. They want him to fix their car, and if he does, then they are happy to have him. It's the hordes they want to keep out, but we're not talking about hordes any more.
Click to expand...
I’m about 99% sure you’re right here, and 100% hoping that’s the case. Seems to me like a desperate swing and miss on a ball in the dirt.
 


“… It’s not clear what, exactly, Vance believes is “illegal” about the Biden administration granting and extending Temporary Protected Status to allow Haitians legal entry into the United States—beyond the fact that he wants to keep casting them as a threat to his constituents, rather than more constituents he ought to be serving.

“Who in this room, who is this country consented to allowing millions of aliens to come into this country unchecked, unvetted?” he said in Raleigh. “None of us did.” …”
 


Hilariously, Trump famously loathes dogs and has never had a pet dog or cat.

www.wmagazine.com

Donald Trump Says It Would Be "a Little Phony" to Get a Dog Now

"How would I look walking a dog on the White House lawn?"
www.wmagazine.com www.wmagazine.com

“After two years, one of the most persistent mysteries of Donald Trump‘s presidency is his unexplained aversion to pets. As it stands, he is one of only fourU.S. presidents not to have brought some sort of furry friend to the White House: Neither James K. Polk nor Andrew Johnson had any known pets (though Johnson did reportedly feed the mice he found around his bedroom), and Martin van Buren was given two tiger cubs as a gift while in office, but was forced by Congress to donate them to a zoo.

…
According to Time, Trump was praising the abilities of drug-sniffing dogs at the U.S.’s southern border when he turned the attention to his own canine-free status. “You do love your dogs, don’t you? I wouldn’t mind having one, honestly, but I don’t have any time,” he said. “How would I look walking a dog on the White House lawn?” he continued, grimacing. “I don’t know…I don’t feel good. It feels a little phony, phony to me.”

Trump went on to say that, though he’s been repeatedly advised to get a pet, he doesn’t want to, claiming that the presence of a dog in his life would somehow taint his connection to his base, contradicting data showing that nearly 70 percent of American households own at least one pet. “A lot of people say, ‘Oh, you should get a dog.’ Why? ‘It’s good politically.’ I said, that’s not the relationship I have with my people,” he said.

Other reasons not mentioned during Monday’s rally include how an advisor once said Trump was “embarrassed” by Mike Pence’s “low-class” decision to move several of his many pets with him to Washington, D.C.; Ivana Trump’s revelation that her ex-husband is “not a dog fan”; and that, quite frankly, it’s difficult to imagine Trump taking care of anyone other than himself, let alone a helpless little puppy. …”
 

Springfield, Ohio, Braces for a Possible Trump Visit, Though Details Are Scarce​

Donald Trump promised to visit the city “in the next two weeks.” Some residents welcomed a visit, but others were opposed, as officials said preparations were underway.

www.nytimes.com

Springfield, Ohio, Braces for a Possible Trump Visit, Though Details Are Scarce

Donald Trump promised to visit the city “in the next two weeks.” Some residents welcomed a visit, but others were opposed, as officials said preparations were underway.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

"... Standing in line to pick up items at a mobile food pantry run by the nondenominational Central Christian church, Dave Ryan, 46, welcomed a Trump visit.

“I think it’s good if a soon-to-be president comes here to see how the Haitians are affecting people here and how to fix it,” Mr. Ryan said.

He said Mr. Trump needed to see the situation firsthand, adding, “The Haitians affect everyone. People are scared. Their way of life is different than ours.”

Ann Walters, who was volunteering at the food pantry, disagreed, and said Mr. Trump’s presence in Springfield would be bad for the city.

“I think there’s been enough attention already,” she said. “It would just create more violence and problems.” ..."

----

"next two weeks" is usually Trumpese for "never"
 
www.theguardian.com

Ohio city’s mayor issues emergency order over false migrant rumors

Springfield mayor Rob Rue says the order will allow city officials to ‘acquire resources to address potential threats’
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Ohio city’s mayor issues emergency order over false migrant rumors​

Springfield mayor Rob Rue says the order will allow city officials to ‘acquire resources to address potential threats’
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top