General Question

KNOWITALL's avatar

Did Kamala Harris say the wrong thing or was she just being honest?

Asked by KNOWITALL (25960points) June 9th, 2021
69 responses
“Great Question” (1points)

Do you agree with the ‘ultraliberal squad’ of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, that Kamala Harris was out of line with her recent statement to immigrants at the southern border?

Obviously this has been a long-term issue for all administrations in the U.S. for quite some time and there may be no easy fix.

I’m curious to hear where you fall in this disagreement as many strong opinions have been expressed here in the past on this issue. Please keep it civil and on topic.
“Do not come. Do not come,” the vice-president warned illegal immigrants, adding: “If you come to our border, you will be turned back.”

“The right to seek asylum is not just legally protected. It is a foundational universal human right,” tweeted Minnesota congresswoman Ilhan Omar, who was born in Somalia.

Michigan’s Rashida Tlaib also hit out at Ms Harris, writing: “This whole ‘stay there and die’ approach is not how our country will promote a more humane and just immigration system.”

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the influential New York City Democratic congresswoman, called the remark “disappointing”.
“First, seeking asylum at any US border is a 100% legal method of arrival,” she tweeted.
“Second, the US spent decades contributing to regime change and destabilisation in Latin America. We can’t help set someone’s house on fire and then blame them for fleeing.”

Observing members: 0
Composing members: 0


elbanditoroso's avatar

I think that VP Harris was accurate and honest and correctly represented US policy. She is totally correct in what she said.

AOC and the other two are out-of-line here. If they have policy objections, then work them through Congress or lobby the president. What you don’t do is stab the VP in the back when she’s overseas.

Omar, AOC, and Tlaib are saying idealistic and aspirational things. That may be their job. But the VP (and the president) are sworn to carry out the policy as it is today.

kritiper's avatar

The VP was being honest. What others may say does not reflect conditions here in the US. For example, some say we have lots of room for immigrants and that we should let them in. No mention is made, however, that the southwestern US is experiencing severe water shortages at this time, not to mention shortages of so many other things in all other areas of the country.
The US needs to become much more selective about the amount of people we let in. The whole world is being over run with people and it’s time Americans as well as all of Mankind realized that fact.

zenvelo's avatar

VP Harris remarks were not at the Southern Border, They were made in Guatemala, and essentially were saying “stay here and thrive here, don’t risk your life walking through Mexico to the border.”

JLeslie's avatar

What Harris said is fairly aligned with what I have said all along. A lot of people coming into the country don’t meet the requirements for asylum and should not be trekking across countries to try to come into the US. Did she offer solutions the US will put in place to help people in Guatemala and Nicaragua.

I applaud Harris for going down to the countries and speak directly to the people who might be considering coming.

I hope we can set up a way for people to apply for asylum or visas in country and make more working visas available.

I wonder if Trump supporters will take note that Biden and Harris, the Democrats put into office, are not puppets of the squad like they want to believe.

I wonder if Democrats understand how their extreme reaction to Trump on immigration will backfire. He deserved criticism on separating children and some other points, but he was not completely wrong about discouraging convoys of people marching up to the border.

I do think we should remember asking for asylum at the border is legal.

It’s complicated.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie Agreed. We have sent a few relief packages to Nicaragua and elsewhere to help address root issues, too.

product's avatar

Harris is merely expressing the bipartisan consensus. People acted like Trump marked a great shift, when in reality there is very little distinction between Dem and Rep immigration policies. Even here on Fluther we pretty much see agreement.This is why we need an opposition party.

Anyway, borders are violence. It’s obscene to spend decades destroying these countries only to keep those fleeing US actions from entering the US.

sorry's avatar

It makes sense to go to the countries where people are fleeing from to tell them that you’ll work with them to stop the need for the people fleeing. The populations are basically the victims from the US intervening in their leadership and politics anyway back in the 60’s and 70’s. Fall out is a bitch.

product's avatar

^ Far more than just the 60s and 70s. Don’t forget that we overthrew their democratically-elected government in 1954. The 80s and 90s were full of all kinds of beautiful CIA operations there. And the whole time (including today), corporate extraction continues.

And “telling them” that you’ll suddenly work with the Guatemalan people to stop destroying them in hopes that you’ll keep them from running from our mess doesn’t cut it.

LostInParadise's avatar

The tone was a little harsh, but she did point out that you can apply for asylum. It is a good idea to try to work with the governments of these nations to improve the conditions that we are partially responsible for – much better than Trump’s decision to withdraw aid, which only makes situation worse.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL The relief packages I guess help with food scarcity for the poor, but it doesn’t address the violence and real dangers some people live in. I hope we can do something to help with that.we aren’t great at it in our country.

Demosthenes's avatar

Harris didn’t say anything inaccurate or out of line. But the Squad are the voice of opposition within the Democratic party, so of course they’re going to criticize it. They’re the MTG/Matt Gaetz of the Democrats, not afraid to go against the party consensus and go further to the left. I can’t say that I’m bothered by fracturing within the two-party system.

crazyguy's avatar

Kamala has said different things before. I don’t blame her, because all politicians change their tune after they are in office.

However, Kamala is more clueless than most politicians. Just watch her interview with Lester Holt, if you need any confirmation.

crazyguy's avatar

@Demosthenes What Kamala said now is what Biden and Harris should have been saying all along. What they said before was “Don’t come now” leaving the impression that later was ok.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie I do think we should remember asking for asylum at the border is legal.

Technically you are correct. And the former President let asylum seekers ask for asylum, but then he made them stay in Mexico. What Biden does is release asylum seekers into the US, sometimes even without a court date.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy I’m not sonsure that is completely accurate. Trump did have some people waiting in detention centers, and I assume Biden does also like it has been under every president in my life time. It depends on the situation of the particular person trying to come in.

Maybe immigration policy does not need to be so divided in politics. What If there is actually a lot on both sides of the aisle we agree on or can agree on?

filmfann's avatar

Kamala was toeing the White House line. She was not speaking her heart.
I am sure she is conflicted here. She wants to be honest, but must kowtow to official policy.

stanleybmanly's avatar

The pressure to escape punishing destitution is going to be the defining characteristic world wide between the stable thriving places and their desperate hellish counterparts. We’re going to be forced one way or another to reconcile our laws with this fact. There is no question that measures to retard the influx through denial of entry will grow ever more draconian and repressive as this country devolves increasingly toward an ever more repressive police state with privacy and personal freedom a bygone notion and openly identifiable proof of citizenship affixed to our exteriors. It’s just too simple to flee even at the risk of death for a chance, regardless of how slim at salvation and safety. Meanwhile anyone who supposes our problem may be eliminated through sealing off our Southern borders should have a look at a globe or map and consider the miles of coastline encompassing our enormous land mass.

Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy Probably, the best thing that could happen is politicians work together to improve the situation rather than use it to fire up there base and get votes. My guess is Biden and Harris are more on board with doing that than Trump ever was. The question is what about our congressmen? Can they be civilized and put the country first and be as humane and understanding as we possibly can be? Most of our congressman have well over a million dollars in the bank, nice homes, and can get jobs if they lose their seat. They can stand to risk not winning their next election for the good of the country. It is the moral thing to do. Let’s see what happens.

Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
mazingerz88's avatar

I don’t think Kamala said the wrong thing. So far I’m ok with Biden’s and her approach on this.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@stanleybmanly @crazyguy Please don’t de-rail an interesting and productive thread again with personal attacks and modded comments. Thanks! :D

seawulf575's avatar

Harris is right and wrong. What she said is what should be happening. But what she and Sleepy Joe have put into practice is 180 degrees out from that. As for “The Squad”, their comments show how entirely clueless they really are.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie As long as one party pretends there is no problem with illegal immigration, that it is perfectly legal to be illegal, I am not sure there can be a meeting of the minds. Oh, excuse me, I am supposed to say undocumented, not illegal.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy It doesn’t sound like Biden and Harris are doing that, so you don’t have to worry about it. If Republicans still want to say Democrats are doing that to keep their base worked up I am sure they can have the majority of their followers believing whatever they promote. They can focus on AOC and some left wing commentator in media to do their spin machine, or they can actually look at what is really happening right now in government and by the leader of the Democratic Party the current US president. The masses of people can be manipulated so easily to believe whatever their news source wants them to. I hear Trump constantly throwing out the names Omar and AOC, etc., and your crowds go wild. Democrats do some of the same BS with Greene and Gaetz. Maybe we should all ignore the fringes and get some good work done while we have moderate in office who wants to get some work done.

Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie As I recall, it was you who stated: I do think we should remember asking for asylum at the border is legal. It was Biden who said, in his first address to the Congress that the “vast majority” of the “over 11 million undocumented folks” in the U.S. overstayed a visa. But immigration experts estimate that most people living in the U.S. illegally crossed the southern border without authorization. See

It was Biden who canceled the former President’s Stay in Mexico policy. Didn’t that encourage illegal immigration?

After Harris was selected as Biden’s running mate, this is what was written about the Buden-Harris immigration stance in Harris generally adopts the same pro‐​immigration agenda of Biden. But in the primaries and now, Biden’s plan was more clearly pro‐legal immigration than Harris whose plan barely mentions the subject. Her plan mostly details how she would use executive authorities to allow illegal immigrants to obtain legal status or deferred action. This reflects the majority of her time in the Senate, which has focused mainly on the treatment of illegal immigrants in the United States. This is a reversal from her time as a prosecutor where she worked with ICE to deport juveniles who were not charged with a felony.

So, @JLeslie, I am not certain where and how you ascertain that Biden and Harris are not pretending that there is no problem with illegal immigration.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated
KNOWITALL's avatar

@crazyguy @stanleybmanly Like I told Stan, arguing with people on the internet is like intentionally stepping into dog poo when you can simply walk around. Silly.

sorry's avatar

*America….1776 and before: builds an economy on slave labour… Looses the free labour in 1863. Present day America: builds economy on exploited cheap labour from people they can call illegal and marginalise.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
KNOWITALL's avatar

@sorry You aren’t wrong. Even a crap job with 10 guys to a motel room eating beans, rice and tortilla’s every single night with no family and a less than welcoming atmosphere is a step up.

sorry's avatar

@KNOWITALL Yep. It doesn’t take a genius to realise that if they allow groups in and tell them it’s only their employer who is keeping them out of jail and being deported that that employer can do what ever the hell they like to exploit those workers. The US continues to build their economy on the exploitation of workers. It needs another revolution.

crazyguy's avatar

@sorry @KNOWITALL What would you guys rather do? Put them up at the Ritz and give them executive positions?

Caravanfan's avatar

The borders should be opened and everybody who wants to should be allowed to immigrate. There should be free flow of people, ideas, money, and commerce across the borders. It should be as easy to get to the US as it is to get from Utah to Wyoming.

So I disagree with Harris, and what she said was weak sauce.

crazyguy's avatar

If I lived in Mexico and could live in the US, where do you think I would live? Just how many Mexicans would have to immigrate before our living standards drop to Mexico levels?

Caravanfan's avatar

“Just how many Mexicans would have to immigrate before our economy is revitalized?”

There. FIFY

You obviously never read that book.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy Our laws and social systems are different than Mexico. I don’t completely agree with @Caravanfan (I need to read that book, what’s the title?) but immigration by people who want to live in the United States, they want the US to be the US. Don’t you feel that way as someone who immigrated to the US?

stanleybmanly's avatar

No one stops to realize there was a time when the border required no walls. Mexicans were for the most part poor yet content, with the majority of them subsistence farmers. What changed and WHY? And who might be responsible? Why don’t some of you research gurus look into that and get back to us. Americans are inexcusably ignorant of their country’s past, and as a consequence blissfully oblivious concerning what we have wreaked on Latin America.

product's avatar

@crazyguy: “If I lived in Mexico and could live in the US, where do you think I would live? Just how many Mexicans would have to immigrate before our living standards drop to Mexico levels?”

This is the system you support. You support global capitalism, which requires imperialist exploitation and destruction, resource extraction, and labor exploitation that creates conditions that make the US more desirable for many people in the global south. This is precisely why you are able to have your standard of living. Now you sit here and play golf while doing your best to argue that the people who gave you your life should be kept in the misery you created.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@crazyguy They do that so they have the maximum money to take or send home. It’s self-sacrifice and they work hard. Sometimes they sleep in shifts.
It may not resonate with you, but here we respect that work ethic and family first mentality.
No one messes with them here, whether they are legal or not.
A few weeks ago on the scanner, a lady and two kids in rags were going through trash for food. Spoke no English. Its horrible because we have so much help here for them but they can’t even ask.
When we discuss immigration, we cant forget these are human beings worthy of love and compassion. I don’t know about you but I’m a Christian first.

mazingerz88's avatar

American voters should demand from their politicians and big money entities that support them to stop the BS political footballing of the border issues.

And craft a policy that most Americans would support for a considerable amount of time. A policy that may not be perfect but workable to both sides. There are other issues that need facing.

Seems Americans are distracted by drama through political sports. Too much social media, less temporary or permanent solutions to move forward.

Not sure but maybe the question had been asked here in Fluther before. What would such a policy that can be signed into law look like? What would the Dems and Reps get and not get?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@mazingerz88 My perspective is the Repubicans won’t support anything if security and laws are not enforced. No sanctuary cities hiding from cops, no pedophiles or murderers living next door without being known/ registered. I think Democrats would be surprised how receptive Reps are if security issues were actually addressed.

mazingerz88's avatar

^^These politicians had been talking about the same things for years now. After all this considerable amount of time, you probably had read something about what the Dems want, not just the Reps.

So why the lack of a policy after all these years?

Unless there is zero chance of anything in the minds of jaded voters. They had tuned this issue out as having no solution.

That would be hell, except for those who are benefiting from this debacle for seemingly in perpetuity.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@mazingerz88 Perhaps because resolution isn’t as useful keeping we the people divided.

mazingerz88's avatar

^^Depressingly un-American imo. I need a drink.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@crazyguy Don’t fool yourself that the designation “undocumented” is just a liberal trick to duck the label of “illegal”. The REAL reason to avoid “illegal” is the implication that we might be required to lock all these people up. We clearly have neither the jails nor the money to pull that one off. What’s worse, is the likelihood that were we to institute such policies, we might find ourselves flooded with people eager to trade their existence at home for the relative comfort and security of a Federal cell. If you actually give our situation some thought, you will come to understand that these migrants have us in a bind. Either this a nation of immigrants or it isn’t. The current reality is that as with everything else in the country, it is becoming a land for affluent legal immigrants. It’s time, whether we want to or not, address this issue at its source.

seawulf575's avatar

Illegal: Prohibited by law or Prohibited by official rules. If someone enters this country to live, they are an immigrant or an alien (Owing political allegiance to another country or government; foreign. OR Belonging to, characteristic of, or constituting another and very different place, society, or person; strange. synonym: foreign.). This country has laws describing how to enter to become a citizen. If a person enters this country outside of the proscribed rules with the intent of living hear permanently, they are, by definition, illegal immigrants or illegal aliens.
The idea that that word offends and brings up the permutations that they need to be locked up doesn’t change the facts. And part of the law states they should be sent back to where they came from. Abiding by the law would result in the illegal immigrants being sent packing. So at some point, to argue against the term illegal alien, one seems to be arguing against the law, trying to diminish or dismiss it. There are ways to change the laws, but in this case it brings us back to Congress having to act. Which is what President Trump was trying to do and which the left screamed about.

So which is it? Do you want to change the law, in which case Trump was right, or do you want to keep the law as it is resulting in all these people being in violation of it? Just trying to change the term is a weasels way out.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@seawulf575 Right, and the more they (Dems) try NOT to use the term, the more the conversation is diverted from solutions to partisan bickering again.

I’m so tired of society being stalled on progress by verbiage.

Like @Jleslie said above, both parties have to give and take, and (gasp) maybe even compromise on this issue to get anywhere.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL What is your perception regarding the Republican party when George Bush (the younger) was president. He seemed more in line with Democrats on the issue of immigration, and it seemed to me the Republican party in general was not supportive of him. He has an entire art exhibit dedicated to immigration.

To tie it back to today, do you think the Republicans were always ready to compromise on immigration, or do you think they have moved now to wanting to compromise? It seems like part of the party is even more heals dug in to not want to let anyone into the country, but maybe that is only a small portion of the party. Do you see a race or culture issue or fear that Republicans are afraid that people coming in who they perceive as culturally different will change the country somehow? Or, is that just a few loud voices and not the popular thinking?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie I loved Baby Bush (remember I voted for Clinton so not a true Rep in that sense.) We are a nation of immigrants and it makes us stronger in every way.

I think many people misunderstand many Republicans on the issue of immigration. As I said above, address the security issues, and I think you’d be surprised how many back off.

To be frank, I think the sanctuary cities and Dems not being willing to address any VALID concerns the American people have, as well as other legal immigrants, has been the primary issue. When you ignore everything about the violence, rapes, gangs and horrible thing’s that some illegals have done it, creates an atmosphere of mistrust as well as defensiveness. Yes many are good people, and there are some really bad people too, just like us. It feels like Dems are sanctioning the breaking the law, in other words. And laws are created to protect people.

I don’t perceive many people being afraid of anything culturally myself.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL I have asked about sanctuary cities on fluther before, and I am still confused about this issue. I don’t think any Democrats are ok with criminals coming into the US or being harbored in the US. Mind you, Democrats are not including illegal immigration as a crime in that discussion, or am not anyway.

That was part of the problem I think in the discussions in the past few years is Republicans were calling undocumented immigrants criminals, but did they mean just the act of crossing the border made them criminals? Or, actual felony crimes like rape and grand theft auto? I really think this is an important point in terms of communicating well between the two political parties especially on social media. I don’t mean you and me specifically, but rather the discussion in general out there in the online world.

My personal opinion is I am against local police enforcement asking for papers or ID regarding whether someone is legal in the country. I am in favor of someone convicted of a crime being turned over to ICE. It doesn’t mean they will be automatically deported, they might be jailed here, or some other decision by an immigration judge in coordination with local officials with deportation being a definite option.

I want people here without papers to feel safe going to the police if they are victims of a crime or witness a crime. I want people here without papers to be able to get a covid vaccine without worrying about being sent back to their country. There are many instances where it protects our citizens to allow undocumented immigrants to feel secure they will not risk deportation.

Many people working here come on a tourist visa and work illegally, so they are documented, just working illegally. They do deport people for that, and put a ten year block usually on their ability to apply again for any type of entry. Most people overstay a legal visa of some type.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie You won’t like my answer, but I’ll give it to you. Entering the country illegally is a crime. If you don’t believe me, try to get into Iran or Russia or even Canada illegally and see what happens. In Mexico they meet you at Customs with an entire troop or armed soldiers.

Sanctuary cities are to limit cooperation with Federal immigration enforcement. I don’t see how you can be a proponent of sanctuary cities and still feel like you’re respecting the law or the citizens already in the US. So yes, that’s a HUGE disconnect.

No offense, but it sounds like you are justifying illegal behavior due to empathy, and while I understand it, that’s not how the world works.

If you need to stay longer you must leave Mexico and return for another 180 days. However, if you happen to overstay your visa limit, it normally involves paying a fee at the airport on the way out of the country.

Fine. This is the most often penalty for overstaying a visa. ... However, if you are caught after you have illegally remained in the Schengen for a longer time, aside of a fine being applied to you, you will also be banned from entering the Schengen Area for an appointed period of time, or even forever.

Overstaying can lead to not only the loss of your current privileges or immigration status but can also eliminate your ability to ever become a permanent Canadian citizen. ... In this case, you would be denied a visa or Electronic Travel Authorization, refused entry to or removed from Canada.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie You make an assumption about Democrats and Sanctuary Cities that I don’t see any support for. Democrats seem to have a hierarchy for their pet things. You say they don’t want criminals, yet those sanctuary cities have, in fact, turned violent criminals loose rather than turning them over to ICE. So your premise is starting off wrong. In the end, Democrats so want no borders they will protect violent criminals that enter this country illegally and put other citizens at risk rather than admit that the open border idea is not good.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL It’s not about whether entering illegally is a crime, it is a matter of do you need to fear for your safety and possessions because someone crossed the border without a visa? That is how I look at it in terms of being able to work on this immigration problem and the feelings around immigration in the country. The Republicans lumping in people here without papers with people who murder will shut down the conversation full stop. That is the way I perceive it anyway. We don’t put together am eight year old who steals a candy bar with a 30 year old who kills someone. We can separate crimes and it still acknowledges both crimes happened.

Trump’s wording has too many people feeling someone who enters without papers is a danger to society. Like everyone who comes in illegally is MS13. I would bet there are a lot of MS13 members who are here legally. I am all for deporting and jailing them, including deporting members here legally. when you have a visa or green card here you cannot commit felonies, it is cause for deportation. It can even be cause to have citizenship revoked if somehow a felon slipped through the system.

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 I honestly don’t know what people want for sanctuary cities. I don’t understand it.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie But that is partially what it’s about, even if it’s uncomfortable for you to discuss.
Do you think you can go anywhere in the world you want and not check in through customs? Everyone tightened up after all the Taliban attacks, not just the US.

It’s not Trumps words that caused this, it’s Democrats not wanting to understand for decades that life isn’t lollipops and rainbows. A murderer or rapist can cross just as easily as an innocent mother with her children. The only thing Trump did was accurately read and tap into the feeling’s of betrayal many feel at the Democrats playing loosy goosy with the law when it suits them.

If you are fine with deporting real criminals, then how can you justify sanctuary cities that have literally hid people or snuck them out from the Feds?

“The Republicans lumping in people here without papers with people who murder will shut down the conversation full stop.”
I’ll assume this conversation has ended because that’s exactly what it’s about.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie As much money and effort as is put into making Sanctuary Cities, you need to ask the tough question…why do it? There is a gain for someone somewhere. When you dig deeply enough you will find the answers.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL I am not saying anything about sanctuary cities, because I really don’t understand everything that is meant by a sanctuary city. As far as crossing the border illegally, I fully except it is illegal, I am saying calling it a crime, using that word, and also talking about rape and murder in the same sentence muddies the conversation.

We have a whole bunch of people out there picturing undocumented people as drug dealers, killers, gang members, that is what I take issue with. I am not saying undocumented people should be able to just wander in the country. As you said undocumented can be hard working loving mothers or a bad person. It is the same for citizens and any person here legally, there are good and bad people. I completely agree there is a gang element coming up from Latin America that has to be addressed, but that is not the majority of immigrants.

Most Democrats support securing the border, then you have someone like @Caravanfan arguing for open borders, but he is in the minority, and also conservative on a ton of issues. He is one of the most politically independent in our collective in my mind and I mean that as a compliment.

Why is it important to call an undocumented person as a “criminal?” Why can’t we just say undocumented or illegal or without papers or I don’t even care about being the most PC I just care about putting them in the same group as murderers. The Republicans brought up the story of the guy who killed a woman in San Fran I think who had been deported a few times and kept coming back. How is that not messaging that illegal immigrants are murderers and we need to build a wall to keep them out? That was said over and over and over again.

I just want people to stop using the word, use a different word. Why can’t the Republicans do that? When you roll through a stop sign are you a CRIMINAL? When you fail to report $750 you made babysitting during the year are you a CRIMINAL? The word is loaded.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie With all due respect, they will stop saying it when Democrats decide to enforce the laws of our country.
Not being mean, just honest.
No one I know hates anyone for coming for a better life. They just want to know the neighbor isn’t El Chapo.
And if it was El Chapo, it’d be great if he wasn’t hidden in a sanctuary city by our fellow Americans.

This really wasn’t my intent with this Q, and you know I respect your opinion.

JLeslie's avatar

I really didn’t want to derail or help derail, so I am fine just letting the discussion end here for now. It was a good Q, and I think there is room for both sides of the aisle to make headway. I think a lot of the miscommunication is just semantics and the fringes of the political parties causing problems.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie Probably. Good night, friend.

Response moderated
sorry's avatar

@KNOWITALL In the counties you give examples for, you’re not talking about asylum seekers. You’re just talking about people who overstay visas. They are two very different situations and treated very differently.

Answer this question




to answer.

Mobile | Desktop

Send Feedback