4 ms·

The irony is that one of the main rails upon which the MAGA train rides is States rights. But then, Trump was always going to be a rule breaker, not least to hi

The irony is that one of the main rails upon which the MAGA train rides is States rights. But then, Trump was always going to be a rule breaker, not least to his own supporters, in the end all that will be left will be absolute fealty to the chief

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
Does Newsom have the right to defederalize the National Guard? Put another way, who is currently the supreme commander of the California National Guard?
jxjnskkzxxhx 1y ago
> The irony is that one of the main rails upon which the MAGA train rides is States rights. No it's not. They just like slavery. If it was about states rights they wouldn't support sending in the military. What I find shocking about comments like yours is the reminder that propaganda works. Someone in the republican party decided "guys, advocating for slavery openly doesn't go over well, let's tell them it's actually about states rights", and loads of people actually believed it.
- LightHugger 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - BryantD 1y ago
    Huh. The most recent Democratic Presidential nominee was clear that she supported comprehensive immigration reform, seeking pathways to citizenship for immigrants in the U.S. without legal status, with a faster track for people living in the country illegally who arrived as children. So sort of not without legal status at all. And as one might not realize given the rhetoric, border crossings in 2024 plummeted (although not reaching pre-pandemic levels) thanks to increased arrests on the US side of the border and more efforts from Mexico to control the flow of refugees.
    - LightHugger 1y ago
      This isn't popular. People don't want to reward illegal behavior with citizenship, the process should be relaxed for people who want to come in the future but if someone has already broken the law of the land to come here they should already be disqualified. Maintain criminality checks but increase the numbers allowed in each year. This is perfectly viable. Have you thought about why trump's voterbase includes so many legal immigrants? immigrants who put in the immense effort to come here properly are tired of people sneaking into the country and the democratic party conflating legal and illegal immigrants and acting like the two groups are the same.
      - BryantD 1y ago
        You didn't say it was popular, you said it seemed to you like Democrats were trying to reconstruct a form of slavery. That's incorrect. I have thought about what Trump got a lot of legal immigrant votes. I believe it's because a) he lied, playing on fear in order to get people to think he could save them from a non-existent threat and b) people didn't think he was going to do what he promised to do. Ileana Garcia, Florida State Senator and co-founder of Latinos for Trump, just said "This is not what we voted for." She's wrong -- it was very clear to me during the campaign that Stephen Miller's goal was exactly what we're seeing now. However, I am fundamentally sympathetic to people who were fooled.
        LightHugger 1y ago
        > you said it seemed to you like Democrats were trying to reconstruct a form of slavery. That's incorrect. Uh, no? I was replying to someone who brought up slavery and i pointed out if something is similar, importing in a large underclass of exploitable cheap labor is certainly similar. Illegal immigration is not a form of slavery, not sure where you got that, but when we're already in the realm of absurd analogies it's definitely more similar by comparison.
        BryantD 1y ago
        "It kinda seems like the democratic party is more aligned with slavery these days, intentionally bringing in an underclass of workers who can't protect their rights to work for cheap for their megacorp donors." Come on now.
- onlyrealcuzzo 1y ago
  > If it was about states rights they wouldn't support sending in the military. I'm not in support of administration or MAGA. But, to be pedantic, you can be for states' rights, but against states overstepping Federal powers. Immigration is, currently, a Federal power. Who is and is not a citizen is not a state's decision. Just because you're in favor of state's rights (I am), does not mean you think every single issue should be a state's issue. Maybe you'd like each state to fund their own SS and Medicare. But that's not how it is. And it's unlikely to ever happen.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  “States Rights” ,as a political slogan in the US, has always been code for the dominant White population’s privilege to oppress others, originally primarily via slavery, but over time through other alternative means (mostly designed to approximate the effect of slavery without the precise legal condition.)
- avoutos 1y ago
  > Someone in the republican party decided "guys, advocating for slavery openly doesn't go over well It was the Democratic party that historically supported slavery and opposed the civil rights movement. The "states rights" euphemism was invented by the Democratic party not the Republican party.
vkou 1y ago
The only states rights they care about is the rights of their states when they control their legislatures. There's no need to give legitimacy to the lie.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

Does Newsom have the right to defederalize the National Guard? Put another way, who is currently the supreme commander of the California National Guard?

jxjnskkzxxhx 1y ago

> The irony is that one of the main rails upon which the MAGA train rides is States rights. No it's not. They just like slavery. If it was about states rights they wouldn't support sending in the military. What I find shocking about comments like yours is the reminder that propaganda works. Someone in the republican party decided "guys, advocating for slavery openly doesn't go over well, let's tell them it's actually about states rights", and loads of people actually believed it.

LightHugger 1y ago
[flagged]
- BryantD 1y ago
  Huh. The most recent Democratic Presidential nominee was clear that she supported comprehensive immigration reform, seeking pathways to citizenship for immigrants in the U.S. without legal status, with a faster track for people living in the country illegally who arrived as children. So sort of not without legal status at all. And as one might not realize given the rhetoric, border crossings in 2024 plummeted (although not reaching pre-pandemic levels) thanks to increased arrests on the US side of the border and more efforts from Mexico to control the flow of refugees.
  - LightHugger 1y ago
    This isn't popular. People don't want to reward illegal behavior with citizenship, the process should be relaxed for people who want to come in the future but if someone has already broken the law of the land to come here they should already be disqualified. Maintain criminality checks but increase the numbers allowed in each year. This is perfectly viable. Have you thought about why trump's voterbase includes so many legal immigrants? immigrants who put in the immense effort to come here properly are tired of people sneaking into the country and the democratic party conflating legal and illegal immigrants and acting like the two groups are the same.
    - BryantD 1y ago
      You didn't say it was popular, you said it seemed to you like Democrats were trying to reconstruct a form of slavery. That's incorrect. I have thought about what Trump got a lot of legal immigrant votes. I believe it's because a) he lied, playing on fear in order to get people to think he could save them from a non-existent threat and b) people didn't think he was going to do what he promised to do. Ileana Garcia, Florida State Senator and co-founder of Latinos for Trump, just said "This is not what we voted for." She's wrong -- it was very clear to me during the campaign that Stephen Miller's goal was exactly what we're seeing now. However, I am fundamentally sympathetic to people who were fooled.
      - LightHugger 1y ago
        > you said it seemed to you like Democrats were trying to reconstruct a form of slavery. That's incorrect. Uh, no? I was replying to someone who brought up slavery and i pointed out if something is similar, importing in a large underclass of exploitable cheap labor is certainly similar. Illegal immigration is not a form of slavery, not sure where you got that, but when we're already in the realm of absurd analogies it's definitely more similar by comparison.
        BryantD 1y ago
        "It kinda seems like the democratic party is more aligned with slavery these days, intentionally bringing in an underclass of workers who can't protect their rights to work for cheap for their megacorp donors." Come on now.
onlyrealcuzzo 1y ago
> If it was about states rights they wouldn't support sending in the military. I'm not in support of administration or MAGA. But, to be pedantic, you can be for states' rights, but against states overstepping Federal powers. Immigration is, currently, a Federal power. Who is and is not a citizen is not a state's decision. Just because you're in favor of state's rights (I am), does not mean you think every single issue should be a state's issue. Maybe you'd like each state to fund their own SS and Medicare. But that's not how it is. And it's unlikely to ever happen.
dragonwriter 1y ago
“States Rights” ,as a political slogan in the US, has always been code for the dominant White population’s privilege to oppress others, originally primarily via slavery, but over time through other alternative means (mostly designed to approximate the effect of slavery without the precise legal condition.)
avoutos 1y ago
> Someone in the republican party decided "guys, advocating for slavery openly doesn't go over well It was the Democratic party that historically supported slavery and opposed the civil rights movement. The "states rights" euphemism was invented by the Democratic party not the Republican party.

vkou 1y ago

The only states rights they care about is the rights of their states when they control their legislatures. There's no need to give legitimacy to the lie.