If the hypothetical "blanket amnesty" was enacted as discussed upthread, then no, I don't think a ten-figure influx of migrants anticipating the next amnesty is out of the question for the ensuing six months.
If the hypothetical "blanket amnesty" was enacted as discussed upthread, then no, I don't think a ten-figure influx of migrants anticipating the next amnesty is out of the question for the ensuing six months.
Well you're right that it's not based in reality. It's based on a hypothetical. Read upthread for the appropriate context. Nonetheless, the bottom line: Just as signaling relaxed border policy during the 2020 campaign and in 2021 executive orders led to an unprecedented boom in border crossings, amnesty for those already here illegally would signal pending amnesty for those yet to come. And you know, it's not my place to tell you if that's the right public policy or not. But I can say with greater confidence that it's not the right policy for those who want to win elections.
The last amnesty was accompanied by much tougher conditions for new undocumented arrivals. Any new one would quite obviously be, too. But the boogeyman is gonna get us...
Hypotheticals still exist under an understanding of reality. I am fully aware of the context of the discussion and it was with that understanding that I stated that your view on this is absurd. Your take is delusional.
If we want to talk about the electoral impact of policies we need to actually have a grounded understanding of reality to make that assessment. It is easy to flippantly toss out absurd numbers to support whatever policy positions align with our worldview, but that doesn't make it a view based in reality. Being negative is not synonymous with being realistic, even if outcomes for us on the left can often be disappointing.
If splitting hairs about the numbers I floated as a hypothetical helps you believe you're on the right side of public opinion, then by all means, die on that hill.
Don't straw man. I never stated an opinion on the electoral repercussions of an amnesty law. I stated an opinion that your numbers were delusional and that they were inappropriate because they and your language to communicate said numbers were all but lifted from conservative talking points.
If the hypothetical "blanket amnesty" was enacted as discussed upthread, then no, I don't think a ten-figure influx of migrants anticipating the next amnesty is out of the question for the ensuing six months.
That's simply not based in reality and frankly is delusional.
Well you're right that it's not based in reality. It's based on a hypothetical. Read upthread for the appropriate context. Nonetheless, the bottom line: Just as signaling relaxed border policy during the 2020 campaign and in 2021 executive orders led to an unprecedented boom in border crossings, amnesty for those already here illegally would signal pending amnesty for those yet to come. And you know, it's not my place to tell you if that's the right public policy or not. But I can say with greater confidence that it's not the right policy for those who want to win elections.
The last amnesty was accompanied by much tougher conditions for new undocumented arrivals. Any new one would quite obviously be, too. But the boogeyman is gonna get us...
Hypotheticals still exist under an understanding of reality. I am fully aware of the context of the discussion and it was with that understanding that I stated that your view on this is absurd. Your take is delusional.
If we want to talk about the electoral impact of policies we need to actually have a grounded understanding of reality to make that assessment. It is easy to flippantly toss out absurd numbers to support whatever policy positions align with our worldview, but that doesn't make it a view based in reality. Being negative is not synonymous with being realistic, even if outcomes for us on the left can often be disappointing.
If splitting hairs about the numbers I floated as a hypothetical helps you believe you're on the right side of public opinion, then by all means, die on that hill.
Don't straw man. I never stated an opinion on the electoral repercussions of an amnesty law. I stated an opinion that your numbers were delusional and that they were inappropriate because they and your language to communicate said numbers were all but lifted from conservative talking points.