The Economist endorses Kamala Harris

[danieldemol]

In my view to hide their racist support for Trump certain MAGA claimed their vote was about the economy which The Economist and Forbes have debunked, so they claimed it was about the border which this report from the CBP shows is better than its ever been;

CBP Releases September 2024 Monthly Update

Securing America's Borders

www.cbp.gov

Looks to me like MAGA are running out of excuses for supporting Trump.

 

[Twilight Hue]

In my view to hide their racist support for Trump certain MAGA claimed their vote was about the economy which The Economist and Forbes have debunked, so they claimed it was about the border which this report from the CBP shows is better than its ever been;

CBP Releases September 2024 Monthly Update

Securing America's Borders

www.cbp.gov

Looks to me like MAGA are running out of excuses for supporting Trump.

Actually what MAGA is saying right now is a little too late and is something they should have done right from the start three and a half years ago.

To bad it takes an election for Biden and Co. get their lazy asses off the couch and start doing their jobs.

Also the BP union is endorsing Trump.

Trump receives unanimous endorsement from Border Patrol Union

The president of the National Border Patrol Council announced that the union for border patrol agents was fully supporting former President Trump.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Wandering Monk]

Maybe. Chrysler products and I usually don't get along. (Electrical glitches.)

Boy do I understand!

 

[danieldemol]

Actually what MAGA is saying right now is a little too late and is something they should have done right from the start three and a half years ago.

To bad it takes an election for Biden and Co. get their lazy asses off the couch and start doing their jobs.

Also the BP union is endorsing Trump.

Trump receives unanimous endorsement from Border Patrol Union

The president of the National Border Patrol Council announced that the union for border patrol agents was fully supporting former President Trump.

www.yahoo.com

I personally see a strong border as important, but also a band aid solution that doesn't fix the root causes of the problem in my view.

Biden has somehow managed to get the border more secure and looked at the root causes of migration at the southern border all while being great for the economy as well in my view, and to me that shows the kind of long term thinking and compassionate thinking towards the plight of migrants that I don't see in Trump to be honest.

 

[F1fan]

Actually what MAGA is saying right now is a little too late

They aren't very competent.

and is something they should have done right from the start three and a half years ago.

Accept the election results?

To bad it takes an election for Biden and Co. get their lazy asses off the couch and start doing their jobs.

So you admit that Trump lost in 2020?

Also the BP union is endorsing Trump.

The union. Well they must have felt sorry for Trump in not getting many endorsements.

 

[crossfire]

Actually what MAGA is saying right now is a little too late and is something they should have done right from the start three and a half years ago.

They were too busy "primarying" the honest common sense conservatives and tightening their social controls. (Which demonstrates what their true priorities actually are.)

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I personally see a strong border as important, but also a band aid solution that doesn't fix the root causes of the problem in my view.

Biden has somehow managed to get the border more secure and looked at the root causes of migration at the southern border all while being great for the economy as well in my view, and to me that shows the kind of long term thinking and compassionate thinking towards the plight of migrants that I don't see in Trump to be honest.

When are people going to get sensible about "borders?" Anybody think the Great Wall of China will keep out attackers with modern weapons of war? It was a tremendous feat, no doubt -- 21,196 miles ( 13,171 km) long. Millions, literally, of slave labourers to build it -- many of them buried within it. Is that what America wants?

America's border with Mexico is 1,954 mi (3,145 km) long. How tall should the wall be that keeps people out? How thick? How deep, so nobody can dig under it? The border with Canada is even longer -- 5,525 mi (8,891 km). Should it be as tall, thick and deep?

Okay, what if you don't build walls? How many people will it take to guard that total of 7,479 miles of border? One person per quarter mile, maybe? Would that do it -- especially in hilly or forested countryside? I doubt it, even though that would be 30,000 people.

And not only that -- not all, not even close, of your illegal immigrants, or the drugs, cross the borders on land. They're coming by boat and plane through your ports and airports. They say they're visitors -- they just don't go home.

And why can't Americans admit the truth -- they don't really want all those immigrants gone, because their crops will rot in the fields and orchards with nobody to harvest them!

See, Donald Trump's solution is simplistic to the point of being ludicrous. Ya'll need to really spend a bit of brain-power thinking about the problem, and even how much of it IS a problem.

 

[Subduction Zone]

When are people going to get sensible about "borders?" Anybody think the Great Wall of China will keep out attackers with modern weapons of war? It was a tremendous feat, no doubt -- 21,196 miles ( 13,171 km) long. Millions, literally, of slave labourers to build it -- many of them buried within it. Is that what America wants?

America's border with Mexico is 1,954 mi (3,145 km) long. How tall should the wall be that keeps people out? How thick? How deep, so nobody can dig under it? The border with Canada is even longer -- 5,525 mi (8,891 km). Should it be as tall, thick and deep?

Okay, what if you don't build walls? How many people will it take to guard that total of 7,479 miles of border? One person per quarter mile, maybe? Would that do it -- especially in hilly or forested countryside? I doubt it, even though that would be 30,000 people.

And not only that -- not all, not even close, of your illegal immigrants, or the drugs, cross the borders on land. They're coming by boat and plane through your ports and airports. They say they're visitors -- they just don't go home.

And why can't Americans admit the truth -- they don't really want all those immigrants gone, because their crops will rot in the fields and orchards with nobody to harvest them!

See, Donald Trump's solution is simplistic to the point of being ludicrous. Ya'll need to really spend a bit of brain-power thinking about the problem, and even how much of it IS a problem.

The Canadians are more likely to build a wall to keep the Americans out if Trump wins.

 

[Heyo]

When are people going to get sensible about "borders?" [...]
Ya'll need to really spend a bit of brain-power thinking about the problem, and even how much of it IS a problem.

The real problem is that nobody wants a solution.
Both sides don't want a perfect catastrophe go to waste. As it is now, both sides can rally their bases with the problem. One point that would be lost if the problem was solved.
And even if one side tries to do something about it (like the Dems did with their border bill), it's going to get shut down by the other side because they don't want the others to take the credit.

 

[Estro Felino]

I bet this magazine endorses her too

 

[danieldemol]

When are people going to get sensible about "borders?" Anybody think the Great Wall of China will keep out attackers with modern weapons of war? It was a tremendous feat, no doubt -- 21,196 miles ( 13,171 km) long. Millions, literally, of slave labourers to build it -- many of them buried within it. Is that what America wants?

America's border with Mexico is 1,954 mi (3,145 km) long. How tall should the wall be that keeps people out? How thick? How deep, so nobody can dig under it? The border with Canada is even longer -- 5,525 mi (8,891 km). Should it be as tall, thick and deep?

Okay, what if you don't build walls? How many people will it take to guard that total of 7,479 miles of border? One person per quarter mile, maybe? Would that do it -- especially in hilly or forested countryside? I doubt it, even though that would be 30,000 people.

And not only that -- not all, not even close, of your illegal immigrants, or the drugs, cross the borders on land. They're coming by boat and plane through your ports and airports. They say they're visitors -- they just don't go home.

And why can't Americans admit the truth -- they don't really want all those immigrants gone, because their crops will rot in the fields and orchards with nobody to harvest them!

See, Donald Trump's solution is simplistic to the point of being ludicrous. Ya'll need to really spend a bit of brain-power thinking about the problem, and even how much of it IS a problem.

That may not be a strawman of Trump's position, however it does not accurately reflect my position in my view.

My position would be more like strengthening security at the Ports of Entry and doing something to ensure that those who stay at places they are useful such as farms are welcome whilst people who show up to overstrain overcrowded cities that do not have the time to develop to accommodate such a large inflow of people are kept out.

I admit my position is largely irrelevant to US elections since I'm not one of the candidates for POTUS, but just pointing out that strengthening the border doesn't have to be ridiculous in my view.

 

[Pogo]

I bet this magazine endorses her too

Put it back under your mattress and go back to sleep.

 

[Twilight Hue]

They were too busy "primarying" the honest common sense conservatives and tightening their social controls. (Which demonstrates what their true priorities actually are.)

No. The left didn't even want to do it's job nor their sworn oath to protect American citizens for that matter.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I personally see a strong border as important, but also a band aid solution that doesn't fix the root causes of the problem in my view.

Biden has somehow managed to get the border more secure and looked at the root causes of migration at the southern border all while being great for the economy as well in my view, and to me that shows the kind of long term thinking and compassionate thinking towards the plight of migrants that I don't see in Trump to be honest.

Nope. He delayed what was possible right from the start, and only did it later on because of the election, so I know who the honest one actually is.

 

[danieldemol]

Vote for the economy, vote for Harris in my view.

 

[danieldemol]

The crickets are chirping from MAGA in response to the in my view demonstrably better economic policy of Harris.

Don't gamble the economy away by voting any other way than Harris in my view.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I prefer Forbes anyways. The Economist clearly regressed back to the third grade.

Says the guy who supports the candidate with the endless third grade insults.
You're projecting again.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Says the guy who supports the candidate with the endless third grade insults.
You're projecting again.

We will see who's projecting when the election results care announced.

Your living in your echo chamber again.

 

[SkepticThinker]

We will see who's projecting when the election results care announced.

Your living in your echo chamber again.

We can see who's projecting right now.
It's you.

 

[Twilight Hue]

We can see who's projecting right now.
It's you.

I can't hear you from your Echo chamber.

The reverb is horrendous!