2028 ELECTION THREAD
I'll try, but only if you promise to stop using extreme outliers as the basis for your retorts.
ICE is not out there looking for grandmas who have been here for 40 years.
The only story I could find that resembled this claim was this lady who self-deported:
Home Depot parking lots are a great place to find illegal aliens, and you might not like that we're deporting people here to work, but there are a multitude of reasons why it's a net positive. Ignoring the fact those people are being taken advantage of, they're enabling the lowest of pond-scum in the contracting world to take work from legitimate businesses.
I'll try, but only if you promise to stop using extreme outliers as the basis for your retorts.ICE is not out there looking for grandmas who have been here for 40 years. The only story I could find that resembled this claim was this lady who self-deported:
Home DepoThe extreme outliers are what people worry about. Also I can provide sources but there was a recent investigation about how people being detained are being fed goddamn maggot-filled food and being fed once a day. You don’t know what’s going on when people are being black-bagged en masse. And stopping a home depot while people are shopping is going to terrorize people. Duh!
That's some pretty messed up data-****ery work, but I wouldn't blame Luciom one bit for making the claim using the provided data.
As far as the beige lines from the NYT version go:
Then the coronavirus pandemic hit, and Mr. Trump used powers unlocked by the Covid health emergency, known as Title 42, to immediately expel border crossers from the country. Mr. Biden continued the practice until the end of the public health emergency in May 2023.
Title 42 expulsions made up a vast majority of removals during the pandemic years, but their totals can be misleading. Because these expulsions carried fewer penalties than a formal removal order, many people who were expelled simply attempted to cross again.
...
Mr. Biden was able to deport more people in part because there were more new arrivals to deport. The number of people trying to cross the border skyrocketed after he took office.
It's way too much work to find the truth these days, and I'm just as guilty as anyone else of being bamboozled by easily-accessible charts and graphs that fail to tell a complete story.
I watched supercut this morning of every single prominent democrat for the last 30 years giving speeches in their official capacity as congressional leaders, POTUS, etc, about what a threat illegal immigration and open borders are, and what they're going to do about it.The oldest one was Bill Clinton, and half of the clips were Obama as president.Crazy how quickly things change
To be fair, the progressives in the party opposed Obama's immigration policies and nicknamed him "Deporter-in-Chief."
And I believe it was the NYT who called out Obama for the "Kids in Cages" fiasco.
That said, until Trump became President in 2017, Senator Sanders was an outspoken opponent of unbridled immigration/open borders. He thought such a policy would be very bad economically for blue-collar citizens of America.
Arrests are way up, but deportations as a percentage are down compared to Obama or Biden.The reasons are simple: Trump's ICE is gathering up people who are already in the system with stagnant/neglected cases and thus have red tape to overcome.Biden and Obama were primarily deporting people who had recently crossed the open border. Crossings are down more than 90% compared to
The bolded is the KEY to anyone truly serious about illegal immigration imo.
The extreme outliers are what people worry about. Also I can provide sources but there was a recent investigation about how people being detained are being fed goddamn maggot-filled food and being fed once a day. You don’t know what’s going on when people are being black-bagged en masse. And stopping a home depot while people are shopping is going to terrorize people. Duh!
The extreme outliers are what emotional women and low beta soy boys (=leftist base voters) worry about. It's identical in every other topic. It's the super typical over-reaction looking at the worst cases. Same with airplane crashes so people fear flyign even if it's far safer than all other forms of transportation per km, same with covid under 40 if you didn't have horrible pre-conditions, same with literally everything about safeteism.
And it's the same when some criminal committing heinous crimes is an immigrant: that convinces people far more than cold numbers.
People who cannot rationally comprehend anything in abstract, average, detached terms look at the most salient, visible, powerful anecdotes, helped by partisan shaped narratives, and focus on what no 1 should give a **** about: outliers. Which are the last thing you ever want to spend a second about when discussing a topic, if you want to understand reality and shape it.
To be fair, the progressives in the party opposed Obama's immigration policies and nicknamed him "Deporter-in-Chief."And I believe it was the NYT who called out Obama for the "Kids in Cages" fiasco.That said, until Trump became President in 2017,
There is a giant gap between supporting open borders and advocating for higher levels immigration than the status quo and understanding the positive effects there.
I think I am going to make a thread titled the Tragic Death of California, or maybe just the California Crossroads or something. The state has had a perfect storm of **** ups going from a surplus in 2019 to a 12b deficit - when their budget heavily reflects what the stock market is doing and stocks are now at ATHs, folks leaving, businesses closing up, credible envirnmental issues, medi cal/calfresh being impacted (for more bullshit reasons)...
Gavin's **** ups (while many admitted by him) + Trump seriously impacting their ability to bring in new labor for bullshit reasons and in bullshit ways + about 65463 issues can lead to california having a real battle in the future.
THis will send right wingers up the wall but california needs more immigration rn if it wants a future.
Go ahead and curb the govt benefits if you want to watch the budget, but the businesses that won't be leaving are going to need a lot more of that work - whcih can lower costs and bring in revenue, and help keep people from leaving when you can supply service better at a lower price.
Polymarket opened markets for the 2028 elections some time ago.
Presidential winner in 2028
Vance 28, Newsom 14, AOC 11, Buttigieg 9, Rubio 6 (bets all pay 100 if they are a yes) are the current frontrunners.
Democrat nominee market
Newsom 21, AOC 16, buttigieg 12.
Yes there are 3 years of money being locked it priced in those bets so we shouldn't do conditional odds on par but, for the sake of it... that basically means that the market is already pricing whomever is going to be the democratic candidate will have a significant edge over whomever is going to be the republican candidate.
Polymarket opened markets for the 2028 elections some time ago.Presidential winner in 2028
Vance 28, Newsom 14, AOC 11, Buttigieg 9, Rubio 6 (bets all pay 100 if they are a yes) are the current frontrunners.Democrat nominee marketNewsJust looked at this and most of these people seem overvalued
probably a good market for longshots
newsom and vance both very weak favorites
Just looked at this and most of these people seem overvalued
probably a good market for longshots
newsom and vance both very weak favorites
Vance is clearly way ahead of everyone else. He's got the tech and the financial backers, he's less trumpy and still straight GOP. Is there a never Vance movement? Newsome looks like a darling which will help but he's going to battle with votes in places east of highway 5.
Vance is clearly way ahead of everyone else. He's got the tech and the financial backers, he's less trumpy and still straight GOP. Is there a never Vance movement? Newsome looks like a darling which will help but he's going to battle with votes in places east of highway 5.
I don't see how Newsome plays at all in the Rust Belt needed to win a Presidential general election. Ads we seen here in Pennsylvania in the 2024 election pounded the fact that Kamala Harris was a "California liberal." The ads will be identical against Newsome, that he will let illegals flood over the border.
I don't see how Newsome plays at all in the Rust Belt needed to win a Presidential general election. Ads we seen here in Pennsylvania in the 2024 election pounded the fact that Kamala Harris was a "California liberal." The ads will be identical against Newsome, that he will let illegals flood over the border.
It will of course still come down to what Trump does in the next 3 years, but also what happens with the economy - which will always be the secret weapon for determining who wins.
I think that despite what social media or any trump hater here says, Bush, in either term, was way worse for the country and the world than Trump's first term and ff we had today's social media back then, Bush would have had a much more difficult road to winning.
But the problem with the dems is that the country just doesn't want one running the show and they've clearly stated that they will settle for a narcissistic man child over the opposition. Its' also going to be an issue that their competition is only going to get worse after Trump.
Vance is clearly way ahead of everyone else. He's got the tech and the financial backers, he's less trumpy and still straight GOP. Is there a never Vance movement? Newsome looks like a darling which will help but he's going to battle with votes in places east of highway 5.
Still another 2.5 years untl Iowa is a long time and he is over 50% to get the nomination
A lot could happen in that time. I think the market just assumes since he is Trump VP, Trump will endorse him and that will be the end of it I guess
As far as Newsome goes, he isn't dead money like Buttigieg/AOC in 2nd/3rd but I do think there is a good chance Americans get sick of his american psycho Patrick Bateman vibes pretty quickly once he is on the national stage.
I don't know much about Wes Moore or Andy Bashear but they seem like decent longshots
If we operate on the assumption that there is an election and trump isn’t running or we get to that point and there aren’t shenanigans in place that would allow for trump’s 3rd term I’d put it all on newsom. The DNC’s biggest ****up was signing off on Harris as the backup candidate instead of newsom. And I say this as a California resident who ****ing hates newsom and would still vote for him if left with no choice
There is no world where the DNC will sign off on anyone other than a straight white man as the candidate, and there is no world where trump’s stupid bill hasn’t made life terrible for people by Election Day
If we operate on the assumption that there is an election and trump isn’t running or we get to that point and there aren’t shenanigans in place that would allow for trump’s 3rd term I’d put it all on newsom. The DNC’s biggest ****up was signing off on Harris as the backup candidate instead of newsom. And I say this as a California resident who ****
I think 2028 will either find Newsome getting the nomination or someone most folks have never heard of getting it. A Jimmy Carter/Bill Clinton scenario.
Newsome vs The Field, I think I would bet Field.
(Full disclosure: My predictions are always wrong.)
Why do you think he would run only if he's a HUGE favorite?
2028 might be his best shot. Not sure why he'd have a BETTER shot in 2032 or 2036.
Being 70+ years old near being crazy or Invalid is plus EV since 2016 .
and there is no world where trump’s stupid bill hasn’t made life terrible for people by Election Day
I don't know how much that really matters. The Republican playbook against Newsome seems like it would be pretty straight forward -- that he is a Caliornia liberal that would flood the country with illegals.
I mean, fine, but how well does that play when:
1. The Dems aren’t running a candidate who isn’t viscerally hated across the board (yet, at least)
2. MAGA chuds aren’t as inspired by the charisma voids that are Vance or Rubio
