Biden presidency and 2024 election campaign

[David]

Hardly unexpected, but the key point of interest here is that the ruling was unanimous and backed by the Dem-appointed justices (with only mild reservations) – so this wasn’t merely an ideological or partisan decision by a right-shifted court, and presumably would have gone the same way regardless of its make-up:

https://amp.abc.net.au/article/103545028

[Pies4shaw]

The latest polls have Biden and Trump more or less even (the pluses and minuses are generally within sampling error margins).

[David]

Super Tuesday is done and Trump has taken home 14 of 15 states, all but clinching the Republican nomination. Haley narrowly won Vermont 50% to 46%, which is fairly inconsequential in the contest but nonetheless historic: the first time a female candidate has ever won a state in a Republican primary (after she won DC the other day).

Biden of course won all his contests, with the only point of interest being whether there would be other protest "uncommitted" votes against him after Michigan. That’s proven to be the case in Minnesota, where nearly 20% of Democratic voters selected that option. North Carolina returned a 12% protest vote and Massachusetts 9%. Given Michigan and Minnesota are both key swing states, this could be significant.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/05/us/politics/biden-uncommitted-protest-vote-minnesota.html

[Jezza]

Haley expected to suspend her campaign soon.

[David]

And she's out:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-06/nikki-haley-suspend-campaign-republican-primaries-donald-trump/103557060

[What'sinaname]

The House on Thursday passed a bill that would require the detention of any migrant who committed burglary or theft, legislation that House Republicans named after a Georgia student who police say was killed by a man who illegally crossed the border.
The measure — dubbed the Laken Riley Act — cleared the chamber in a 251-170 vote, with 37 Democrats joining all Republicans present in voting “yes.”
All 170 votes against were Democrats. 37 are seeing the light that Border control is a huge issue in the US and the one that will likely decide the Election

[stui magpie]

Just a little historical interest, an analysis of when and how the Republican and Democrat parties essentially swapped sides.

https://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.html

[David]

[What'sinaname]

They are illegals and should be immediately deported.
Why should someone illegally in the country be treated the same as a citizen.

[David]

If so (and it's not that simple; there are various laws and appeal processes around this), then that has nothing to do with whether or not they've committed crimes. The two matters should be dealt with separately.

[What'sinaname]

If you're an illegal, that's bad enough.
Commit a crime...and you MUST be detained.
Not sure what is so objectionable about that.

[Magpietothemax]

[Magpietothemax]

The conflation of crime and immigrants is a standard amalgam of fascists and extreme right wing demagogues. However, It is also the norm for the socalled mainstream political parties and "incremental reformers" that Piestillidie pins his hopes upon. 2 weeks ago, Biden called on Trump to "join me" in an effort to promote the Democrats'crackdown on poverty stricken Central American asylum seekers to try to outflank Trump from the right.
We saw a similar phenonomen here in Australia recently when the Albanese government attempted to imprison asylum seekers who had just been released from detention on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations of "criminal offences".

[What'sinaname]

[David]

The very concept of an illegal immigrant is racialised. In the US it’s Central Americans; here it’s primarily people from Asia and the Middle East. When people like Sussan Ley talk about migrants committing crime, she’s not talking about Europeans who overstayed their visa, and that’s not the picture she’s trying to form in the heads of her audience either. It’s the swarthy Other we need to be looking out for.

To me it’s pretty simple: if you’re not racist, and don’t think that brown/black/Hispanic/etc. people are inherently more dangerous, why wouldn’t you have faith in the criminal justice system to prosecute any crimes committed by non-citizens of those backgrounds normally? Why would you even be talking about "migrant crime" as some kind of distinct phenomenon requiring special intervention? I think we both know the answer.