4 ms·

Almost everything in your comment is factually wrong. Reagan passed landmark immigration liberalization in 1986. Clinton was an immigration hawk. https://hac

Almost everything in your comment is factually wrong. Reagan passed landmark immigration liberalization in 1986. Clinton was an immigration hawk. https://hackinglawpractice.com/blog/20-year-law-signed-continues-to-harm-immigrants/ https://hackinglawpractice.com/blog/20-year-law-signed-conti... GWB fought hard against his own party for immigration reform and liberalization. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration/senate-kills-bush-immigration-reform-bill-idUSN2742643820070629 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration/senate-ki...

reallydude 8y ago
> Almost everything in your comment is factually wrong That is, in itself, incorrect. > Reagan passed landmark immigration liberalization in 1986 Yes, bringing it to the forefront, but without a way to communicate effectively, the party in power passed landmark legislation without a national consensus. Most people were unaware, until it passed and had no recourse after. > Clinton was an immigration hawk. I'm not sure what you believe, but that's incorrect, imo. He gave strong lip service in "securing borders" but was instrumental in toothless legislation that paved the way for the current passive acceptance alongside the tripling (ish) of the illegal immigration. The insistence that legal immigration continued to outpace illegal immigration year-over-year before and after his presidency is classic Clinton doublespeak meant to push an agenda by interpretation, which he maintained after his presidency. See his last John Stewart Daily Show appearance. Winners write the stories, so this will likely just be forgotten by the future. > Migration is the other way round: most people don't give a fuck, but have a loud vocal base that will even hurt themselves to make a point and you will be heard. GWB's reforms were not well supported, so the initial point I made stands, regardless of what was reported. The idea that GWB was doing anything but appealing to a wider base. What he did, was speed up deportations (ending catch and release) and stopped talking about it after his election. So you can interpret that how you will, but it certainly wasn't "fighting hard".

reallydude 8y ago

> Almost everything in your comment is factually wrong That is, in itself, incorrect. > Reagan passed landmark immigration liberalization in 1986 Yes, bringing it to the forefront, but without a way to communicate effectively, the party in power passed landmark legislation without a national consensus. Most people were unaware, until it passed and had no recourse after. > Clinton was an immigration hawk. I'm not sure what you believe, but that's incorrect, imo. He gave strong lip service in "securing borders" but was instrumental in toothless legislation that paved the way for the current passive acceptance alongside the tripling (ish) of the illegal immigration. The insistence that legal immigration continued to outpace illegal immigration year-over-year before and after his presidency is classic Clinton doublespeak meant to push an agenda by interpretation, which he maintained after his presidency. See his last John Stewart Daily Show appearance. Winners write the stories, so this will likely just be forgotten by the future. > Migration is the other way round: most people don't give a fuck, but have a loud vocal base that will even hurt themselves to make a point and you will be heard. GWB's reforms were not well supported, so the initial point I made stands, regardless of what was reported. The idea that GWB was doing anything but appealing to a wider base. What he did, was speed up deportations (ending catch and release) and stopped talking about it after his election. So you can interpret that how you will, but it certainly wasn't "fighting hard".