This is a subverse designed to encourage adult discussion spanning the entirety of the political spectrum. All are welcome, from Libertarians to Authoritarians, Democrats to Republicans, An Caps to Anarchists, Socialists to Fascists to Communists, Green, Blue, Black, White, Purple with Yellow Polka dots, whatever color, persuasion, or affiliation, this is a place for you to post your thoughts, articles, and engage in discussion meant to foster understanding.
Politics is best when we try to avoid personal attacks, limits on discussion, censorship, trolling, shilling, racism, homophobia, antisemitism, or any other forms of bigotry and malfeasance.
Election 2020 Politics Sticky
Politics 2017 Christmas Theme sticky
Nov 2016 sticky on new CSS
This subverse belongs to the community of users. Users are invited to post meta-threads about v/politics and I will gladly sticky them. @flyawayhigh
Use the "Report Spam" link to report spam and someone will review the report. J-mods have the ability to remove duplicate noncommercial spam.
v/politics is for all politics.
v/uspolitics is for US politics only.
v/worldpolitics is for international or non-US politics.
v/politicalnews is dedicated to virtually censor-free politics and news
v/news is for news around the world.
v/usnews is for domestic news only.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] collegetoker [S] 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
That is exactly why it would work. It is the counter balance of one extreme to another. With those two radically opposing viewpoints, the consensus these two diametrically opposed viewpoints is immigration reform as it would allow for asylum or migration for those who need it/ would be a net positive to society while allowing for a screening of bad actors.
[–] sp00kygh0st ago
Fuck that, Trump doesn't get half his votes if he backs down on immigration, including mine
[–] collegetoker [S] 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago (edited ago)
This country was founded from dozens of different immigrant communities, from the Irish to the Chinese, Spaniards, Italians, English French, etc all the way to people who were brought here from the slave trade and later assimilated. i'm not saying that allowing in immigrants unilaterally is good as there are clearly groups of people who's entire philosophy and ideology are at odds with our own, but without immigrants, there would be no United States.
I think there is a difference between allowing any person to enter the United State's and creating a pathway for citizenship for those who are benign and potentially even a net positive.
[–] BoiseNTheHood 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
You do realize that a successful campaign has to stay on message, right? What are voters supposed to expect when Trump talks about deportations and walls but his running mate promises amnesty?
[–] collegetoker [S] ago (edited ago)
The Obama Campaign disagrees with you.
[–] collegetoker [S] ago (edited ago)
He also said he would let a certain amount of Syrian refugees in. In my opinion, that is closer to opening pandora's box than allowing a path to citizenship for mexican immigrants.
Mainly because it isn't like it would be difficult for Islamist sleepers to sneak through, not to mention the swaths of immigrants from other neighboring countries would could easily get falsified documents or claim that they lost them in the chaos. Even if it goes off without a hitch, plenty of countries accepting these immigrants have been noticing "problems".