Horn21

So the strength of your conviction behind the nonsense that you spout on Surly is strong enough to maintain anonymity on a message board, but not strong enough to stand up to your friends when they go counter against those convictions due to it making things uncomfortable for you. And you've accused me of being weak-willed. Pretty telling admission about how much you actually believe the shit you peddle around here.

I’d wager that as a group, evangelical Christians are more afraid of illegal aliens (but in reality, more broadly, people who aren’t white) than any other demographic. The truth is that the GOP looks nothing like Jesus, and they’ve largely abandoned his teachings. They are perfectly content to take their marching orders from their party leaders rather than their savior.

“Two thousand miles away, at the Pentagon, officials privately derided the deployment as an expensive waste of time and resources, and a morale killer to boot.” Yeah, but you’re assuming the Pentagon knows better than Chrispy and Trump about how to handle this dangerous caravan. Are you saying that you don’t believe this extremely valuable training session for the troops isn’t worth the potential $200 million price tag? Nice try, lefty.

Interesting take. Here's how the identity politics is defined in the dictionary... i·den·ti·ty pol·i·tics noun noun: identity politics a tendency for people of a particular religion, race, social background, etc., to form exclusive political alliances, moving away from traditional broad-based party politics. I haven't aligned exclusive political movement. I have, however, pointed out that the only growing segment of Trump supporters are uneducated white men (a particular group as listed above). Meanwhile, educated white men, educated white women, and all peoples of non-white races/cultures are running away from Trump. One of these groups of people is growing stronger in its sameness, while the other is not. So, Mr. Identity Politics, you tell me which group is forming an exclusive political alliance based on identity.

And there it is. The time-honored tradition of a beaten person refusing to use logic or reason and instead choosing to close with some variation of "Despite putting quite a bit of energy into this conversation, I now realize I have no leg to stand on, so I'll pretend that this conversation is now beneath me and bolt so that I don't actually have to answer any difficult questions." Well done. Up to this point, you have yet to answer what specific issue I have capitulated on (other than questioning why so many Republicans refuse to question Trump) or why you are content to not question him. But you have successfully continued to deflect and call me a lefty, which is telling.

You do know that Trump isn't actually a Republican, right? Not sure if you've heard of it, but there's this thing called pandering for votes. Trump is on record as pro choice, pro gay marriage, pro ban on assault weapons, pro universal healthcare, pro high taxes / taxes on wealth. You think he just saw the light? Or would that be considered malleable and weak willed? Or maybe he saw an opportunity to cash in his chips with the uneducated masses in America and realized he could say whatever he wanted and they would never question him. What have I capitulated on exactly? I've stated that I am against bigotry. Is that what you are referencing? Have I capitulated by questioning why so many Republicans refuse to stop and question Trump about anything? Are you that threatened by someone who questions why people would blindly follow their party's leadership?

I live among them. And I even behave myself around them. I look different than the people around me, trust me. Okay, so I don't technically live among them (which I previously used as a reason why I can't possibly be a xenophobe). But come on...I have to look at them in their cars when they drive by sometimes, cut me some slack.

Kinda odd for a staunch Trump supporter to use the word "malleable" in a negative light, don't you think? If I were to change my official party affiliation, oh I don't know let's pull out a random number...5 times, would that be considered malleable in your view? https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/full-list-donald-trump-s-rapidly-changing-policy-positions-n547801 The only thing I am identifying you as is a person content to choose party over critical thinking. You aren't alone. Like I said, uneducated white males are your only teammates growing in number in that fight. You stand shoulder to shoulder with bigots and those whose only message is one of fear. I choose to not keep that sort of company, and yet there are so many in the GOP who wear it like a badge of honor. I was okay with Trump being elected. I was naive enough to give him a chance. He's failed, and failed miserably, at being a leader.

This is fantastic. I'm a lefty because I don't blindly follow a political party down a road of lies and bigotry. There is a reason why the only demographic in which Trump is gaining votes are the uneducated, white males. He's losing ground with EVERY single demographic who wants to see our country move forward and not backwards. Godspeed on handing over your brain and your morals to anyone with an R next to his name.

Ah, the old "I have black/Mexican friends, so I'm free to spout scare tactics about them" routine. I'm not on the left, by the way. But the Republican Party did abandon me and many others with their refusal to stand up against hatred and bigotry.

Asylum requests at ports of entry are still valid and must be processed, just fyi.

Good call. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/11/09/migrant-caravan-mexico-president-trump-us-southern-border-immigration-asylum-central-americans/1939241002/ "The migrants, who number between 4,000 and 5,000 and include women and children, will be on foot along a heavily traveled highway after they failed to secure buses from United Nations officials to get them to the U.S. southern border. About 200 marched to a local UN office to demand buses to transport them." I don't know anything about you as a person. But you take a pretty callous and shitty view of your fellow humans. That's nice and all that you're afforded the opportunity to brag about not using your kids as a shield. It's very macho of you to take that position. Most of the world, however, was born into shit and squalor. And some of those people are seeking a life that doesn't include being killed if they don't join the local gang. In your super brave point of view, what would you have them do? Accept the fate of their family being murdered? Would that be the honorable choice in your estimation? But hey, those poor fucks aren't contributing to their society, so they got that shit coming, am I right? I am assuming most of us on this thread were born on 3rd base here in America, and some of you assholes seem think you hit a triple. At their current pace and destination of Tijuana, the majority will arrive in ~95 days. Even if some break off to Laredo, they're still more than a month away. Adding to the countless reasons why this is such a stupid move to send the military, the rhetoric has made uneducated Americans even MORE fearful of those of different color/culture/ethnicity. What a sad thing to walk around in fear of someone different than us. Don't get things twisted, that is exactly what this is about. No one wants to admit it, though. If some gang had taken over Winnepeg and we had 5k Canadians walking to Minnesota, this wouldn't even be a blip on anyone's radar.

Such fake news. I was in that car. My friend was driving with his foot on the brake going less than 2 mph. Some drunk moron not watching where he was going walked into the fender of the car. And then he started screaming. Immediate mob mentality because some idiot wasn't paying attention. Within 10 seconds there are 5+ people banging on my friend's vehicle, red-faced and yelling. My friend rolled up the windows when another moron threatened to break off the passenger window. Mind you, my friend's 8 and 9 year old daughters are in the vehicle while grown men are screaming into the car. So, the original moron then decided that he hadn't caused enough of a scene, so he walked in front of the vehicle, took 2 steps backwards and dramatically flailed onto the hood. At that point, the people he was with ran up to the cop. The cop stops us and says "I don't think you're in the wrong, but people out here are drunk and angry. That was a tough loss and a lot of these people are looking for a fight. But if someone gets hurt and you're involved, it won't matter if you didn't do anything wrong. No one is going to side against a pedestrian. So, I'm gonna chat with you for a bit until the people who are pissed are long gone." About this time some guy who looked like a Texas student walked up and said "I saw the whole thing, and those people were assholes. You didn't do anything wrong." Long story short: Laura Smith is a liar.

47,220 gun incidents in the U.S. in 2018, resulting in 11,984 deaths 3.1% of the cases were guns used as a defense. I don't care what your political view is, this shit is devastating. And it's not slowing down with rhetoric.

You seem to think that you have a "gotcha" here somewhere because I identified myself as a lifetime Republican/Independent. Is the gotcha that I haven't identified as a Democrat and therefore have been okay with those bombings? Your response to my pointing out Republican hypocrisy is to point out additional Republican hypocrisy, it seems. Congrats? The U.S. has committed atrocities across every manner of political party affiliation, so I'm at a loss as to what your point is here. Here is my point: Republicans have defended the family separation because "illegal" and have stated they're okay with it. "Keep them out" Twitter, message boards, in person. You name it. They've defended the practice. Many of them. It seems as though you are trying to connect the dots that I have defended the act of bombing innocent people. I haven't.

Are you under the assumption that I support it? I don't. Does that answer your question?

It's certainly telling when a bunch of well-off white men are outraged that a well-off white man had to face some tough questions and claim that his life was ruined. These same people largely turn a blind eye to brown children being torn from their parents and whose lives will ACTUALLY be altered in a devastating way, perhaps forever. Trump has publicly stated that family separation was used as a deterrent. He's on record as saying that. As a lifelong Republican/Independent, it is unconscionable to me that the party of pro-life can be so cavalier about the real impact on the lives of innocent children being used a political toy for our president. But hey, he's got an R next to his name, so we're all good.

Spare me the martyr routine. I've been a registered voter for 22 years and yesterday was the first time I've voted for a number of Democrats. I've seen it your way for decades. Continuing the "agree to disagree" in lieu of seeking the truth is lazy. These caravans have been coming to our border for 2 decades. Trump made it an issue as a fear-mongering tactic to get his base to vote. And then he made up a story about it being a threat worthy of military deployment. And then he publicly gave authorization to fire on someone throwing a rock. You're fucking A right that words matter. In 20 years of seeking asylum through these caravans, they WILLINGLY turn themselves in at the border every time. EVERY. TIME. In what world is the President of the United States sending troops and giving orders to fire when there is ZERO threat necessitating such an action not a dirty trick?

Huck has sufficiently dismissed your odd position, but if you don't believe us, perhaps you'll believe retired military leaders... https://www.npr.org/2018/11/05/664492127/several-former-military-leaders-speak-out-against-troops-sent-to-u-s-mexico-bord DUBIK: What makes it different is the timing. There's certainly nothing unusual about using federal troops in support of domestic authorities. That's done many, many times. What's abnormal is the timing of this deployment in relationship to the midterm elections. ...... KELLY: And so again, what bothers you about this particular deployment at this particular time? DUBIK: Well, again, the timing because it didn't appear to have any military purpose. There's no military invasion. There's - didn't appear to be any invasion, actual invasion probabilities. So why send them?

Am I to understand that your position is that sending 8k troops was not a political move? Sending the troops to combat something that has taken place regularly for...20 years? Let's be clear. There is ZERO threat posed by this caravan. It has reduced significantly in number (as it ALWAYS does). Trump completely made up this idea that it's full of MS13 and general "Middle Easterners" and even if it was, he sent the troops while this scary caravan was 1,000 miles away. He did it before the election because....wait for it...it was a dirty trick.

Were you stimulated and or turned off by the dirty trick of sending nearly 8k armed troops to the border under a false pretense and a complete fabrication of the truth?

His reasoning on this is incredible. Where are the Republicans willing to take a pause on this line of thinking?... If they are going to investigate us (me), we (I) are going to investigate them. He's saying that House Dems need to be investigated for shady things like releasing classified docs, but the only reason for investigating them that he is giving is....because they are investigating me. In what world does this make the tiniest bit of sense from a truth-seeking angle?

I actually felt somewhat the same as you after Trump won. I didn't care for him, but I thought it was unfair that everyone who voted for him was given some demeaning label. And then Republicans spent the next two years either ignoring or explaining away Trump's behavior. Not one GOP party leader has had the guts to call him out when he makes a racist or misogynistic comment. They bend the knee. Over. And. Over. And. Over. I gave Trump a chance. And he showed his true colors. You say you don't like being unfairly labeled. And I get that. What I don't get is that you're so offended by those labels that you're willing to vote for someone (who you don't even like) who falls in line with a man who spews hatred and vitriol, and you're willing to do it simply out of spite.

I wrote in Willie in '16.

Pretty incredible that we're outpacing 2016 at this point. I couldn't find any hourly comparisons for 2014, but I found the totals: Early Voting: 145,201 Election Day: 124,804 Total: 270,005