Open link in next tab
Just a moment...
https://www.axios.com/2024/02/07/biden-border-security-blame-trump
https://www.axios.com/2024/02/07/biden-border-security-blame-trump
Good. Hammer him on the hypocrisy. It won't affect GOP voters, but it might affect low-information Independents.
It might make a difference in the house, because it might start to affect district voters.
Ah, who knows?
Pssst: the people for whom immigration is an issue won't care about the hypocrisy, but trying to be more tough on immigration will just piss of the people on the left.
This is just stupid politics.
Pssst: the people for whom immigration is an issue won’t care about the hypocrisy,
You'd be surprised. Over 70% of Americans buy into the idea that the border is in crisis. Only about 33% are Trump bootlickers, so that leaves at least 37% of people who can be reached on the issue of the border, Trump, and hypocrisy.
It's fucking absurd. But immigration law can be unfucked later. Ukraine can't be uninvaded. We have to do what we must to get Ukrainian aid through and prevent a Trump regime which would... quite permanently fuck immigration law.
Ukraine is lost. Ukraine squandered their best in Bakhmut, and Avdviivka is falling tomorrow, if not today.
Ukraine is trying to require citizens with duel citizenship get deported back to fight, and they're drafting 50 year olds.
No amount of money or weapons will fix the manpower issue, at this point. Even without Israel, the US + Ukraine cannot outproduce Russia on artillery shells, which is deciding the war when neither side has air superiority, which is what NATO strategy is completely dependent on possessing.
But it sounds like you're one of those people that likes to think what is right is what will happen, simply because it is right. This is not a real thing. Bad things happen when the enemy is better prepared, and more capable. Moral superiority conveys no strategic advantage.
But it also sounds like you're one of those people people that believe you can outright the right. Show me one example of where this has ever worked. The last time I can sort of see it is Clintons election, and frankly, I think that was more because of Perot.
This is the classic triangulation strategy, that only works if you don't understand that people are people.
For example, I think the border situation is fucked. Because it is. Mainly through Republican sabotage and a lack of judges, and also because Obama thought he could outflank the right on immigration, and the deporter in chief left us in a bad position for Trump, who then intentionally made it worse. So yes, I would be one of those 70% who thinks the border is fucked. And no, going to the right doesn't win me over. This will lose Biden core support amongst his base, and gain him nothing from the increasingly shinking "Low information voter that still actually votes" pool. But most of the people that care about the border are people that may not be a Trump bootlicker, but also would never vote for a Democratic candidate.
Do you actually think that that 70%/37% stat is actually overlapping?
Ukraine is lost. Ukraine squandered their best in Bakhmut
Fucking lmao.
Either stop swallowing Chomskyite propaganda or go lick boots elsewhere.
Either stop swallowing Chomskyite propaganda or go lick boots elsewhere.
That is unintentionally hilarious.
Yet Chomsky’s world-view does not leave space for Ukrainian agency. It is the “US and Britain” who have “refused” peace negotiations in Ukraine, Chomsky tells me, in order to further their own national interests, even as the country is being “battered, devastated”. That negotiations with Russia would mean de facto abandoning millions of Ukrainians to the whims of an aggressor that has shown itself capable of extraordinary brutality, such as in Bucha and Izyum, is dismissed. “Ukraine is not a free actor; they’re dependent on what the US determines,” he says, adding that the US is supplying Kyiv with weapons simply to weaken Russia. “For the US, this is a bargain. For a fraction of the colossal military budget, the US is able to severely degrade the military forces of its only real military adversary.”
According to Chomsky, Russia is acting with restraint and moderation. He compares Russia’s way of fighting with the US’s during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, arguing that large-scale destruction of infrastructure seen in that conflict “hasn’t happened in Ukraine”. He adds: “Undoubtedly Russia could do it, presumably with conventional weapons. [Russia] could make Kyiv as unliveable as Baghdad was, could move in to attacking supply lines in western Ukraine.”
Chomsky is constantly beating the drum "Amerikkka Bad!", and now the one fucking time we're on the right side of an issue, he still only has one note. And all edgy little contrarians hang off his every word so they can feel like an intellectual. So yeah, I think Chomsky and all his fanclub are shitheads, and it disgusts me how much traction they get online.
Having an actual view over what events are currently happening in the world, and being interested in war and the history of wars is not licking boots. It's also not licking boots to recognize that bad things happen to good people and the bad guys sometimes win, especially if they have the manpower and resource advantage.
Rejecting facts you don't like is something the right does. It also doesn't change the reality of the situation. It is useful only for Ad hominem attacks when you want to deny what the other person is saying.
https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-avdiivka-fall-donetsk-1866925
Avdiivka is the key to holding the Donbas region, and specifically Donetsk.
Explain to me how a country that used up most of its fighting age men wins? The average age of a soldier in Ukraine is in the high 40's. Who do you think will manage and use the weapons we supply?
But, I'm guessing your knowledge of the war is simply "Russia Bad, Ukraine Win!" and any actual material analysis of the war is just propaganda. Do yourself a favor. Read up on the war, look at a fucking map, and think critically on the facts and come up with your own opinions rather than just sucking yours from someone elses tit.
The average age of a soldier in Ukraine is in the high 40’s.
Because mobilization age is 27, dumbass.
"Ukraine, having lost 100,000 casualties out of a population of 38 million, is now out of men!!!"
Keep licking those boots.
Adviivka fell.
And so that means the Donbass is under Russian control.
Also, I should have pointed out:
Because mobilization age is 27, dumbass
That's not how averages work. Please take a remedial statistics course.
Also, it's 25.
I'm sure this is propaganda, too, right? The Washington post being that bastion of leftist thought.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/08/ukraine-soldiers-shortage-infantry-russia/
Also, who do you think is going to be the leader of Ukraine tomorrow, Zelensky or Zaluzhny?
I'm curious, did you even know who the second name is? Or are you literally just "Ukraine good! I know nothing else, but Ukraine good!"
the whole border is a vanity project. There's not a single dollar gained by sending a bunch of dumbasses to guard one of the world's largest imaginary lines. You can build a giant fence but unless you can watch it the whole time it will be easily circumvented with a length of rope.
You can't outright the right, and trying just alienates your base.
This is Biden thinking he's playing 12d chess, but he's just shooting himself in the foot.
It basically comes down to if you want a Coke, are you going to pick RC cola when you have a choice between the two?
No, you're going to go with Coke.
I really don't like Coke at all. I'd try the RC its been a couple decades since the last time I had any.