this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
522 points (98.5% liked)

News

35724 readers
2713 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign has reignited fears among undocumented migrants with promises of “mass deportations” and migrant communities are bracing for uncertainty and a new wave of nativism.

His administration plans to target those deemed public safety or national security threats, potentially reinstating workplace raids and using military resources.

Advocates warn that “collateral arrests” could sweep up migrants without criminal records.

Many, like “Dreamers” protected under DACA, fear family separations, while others, such as Carlos in NYC, hope Trump’s economic policies might benefit them.

"A lot of Latinos, those who can vote, did so because they think he [Trump] can improve the economy. That would be very good for us too," said Carlos, an undocumented Mexican who lives in New York City.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes everyone understands all that. But are you saying we people that vote blue should keep trying the same failing tactics?

If our strategies (manly from leadership and keyboard warriors) keeps failing against literal Nazies, shouldn't we change tactics?!

What other options do we have!? Keep openly ignoring solutions that the majority of Americans want? Or go crying about the none voters that feel the is no party representing them?

You don't like it but look around!

Seriously, what why do you think the none nazi party can get more votes? Times running out and we are losing! Either come up with another answer or keep saying things that obviously lost us an election to Nazies.

Support Universal health care or get the Nazies again. What side are you on?

Support a 2 state solution in Palestine or get the Nazies again. What side are you on?

Support redistribution of wealth or get the Nazies again. What side are you on?

Support the removal of money in politics or get the Nazies again. What side are you on?

Support justice system reform or get the Nazies again. What side are you on?

If you expect a different result with what we've been doing than we truly are doomed. What's the definition of insanity again?

[–] Senal@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes everyone understands all that. But are you saying we people that vote blue should keep trying the same failing tactics?

No, but if your tactic changes haven't been implemented by the time voting comes around and the choice remains "nazi's vs not nazi's" then you should be voting "not nazi's".

"The Dems continue to fuck up repeatedly, so i can understand why people chose nazi this time" isn't a tenable argument.

I'm not disagreeing with your disappointment in, well, everything.

I'm disagreeing with this part of your previous reply

Anyone else other than literally Nazie’s (aka Trump, JD, the majority of RNC members and leaders, and some of their voters), shouldn’t be blamed.

If a person understands that the choice is nazi vs not nazi and then actively chooses to not vote, they are tacitly choosing nazi.

"If i vote for the not-nazi's, they won't understand how disappointed in them i am" is not a good argument.

"Their policies don't align with what i want" is not a good argument

"They don't represent my values" is not a good argument

There is no good beginning half to the sentence "< INSERT REASON HERE >, so i tacitly enabled the nazi's"

Except maybe, "I genuinely believe the alternative is worse, so i tacitly enabled the nazi's".

Even then i'd probably disagree, but it would be a substantive argument.

[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My argument is. Why keep doing a failed strategy? We know how a center right Democratic party ends. Either they lose and Nazies run ramped or they win and the Nazies gain ground until the next election.

[–] Senal@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

Sure, as i said, i don't disagree with that.

What does that argument have to do with whether or not people should assigned some responsibility for how they voted (or didn't) ?