this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2025
140 points (100.0% liked)

politics

24758 readers
2373 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 days ago (3 children)

According to Madrid, "The polling data confirms what should have been obvious to any seasoned political observer: Americans reached a nuanced position on immigration that the Trump administration completely misread."

[–] [email protected] 42 points 2 days ago (1 children)

He didn't misread anything. We can see now. It was never just about immigration. Trump, but more likely one/some of his sycophants, explained how hard-line immigration enforcement could help in removing political opposition with the help of a corrupt and stacked Supreme Court. The ability to revoke birthright citizenship so he can ship you off to whatever hellhole country he wants or you die in a concentration camp waiting to be deported, either is acceptable.

[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Trump, but more likely one/some of his sycophants, explained how hard-line immigration enforcement could help in removing political opposition with the help of a corrupt and stacked Supreme Court

It's definitely Stephen Miller. Zero doubt. He is the true believer in racist/white supremacy and the New York Times' recent story had multiple anecdotes about the DOJ and DHS/ICE being directly controlled by him, while Bondi and Noem are only interested in making TV appearances.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 days ago

I think the only position on immigration Trump cares about is Stephen Miller's. Also, someone who's supposed to be term limited, and will definitely rig the election if he somehow runs again anyway, doesn't really need to care about public opinion too much. It's not like there seems to be much risk of anybody overthrowing the government.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago

I wouldn't call it nuanced. Many Americans just didn't really think about how immigrants impact their lives or what the words Trump said would mean in practice. They didn't have deep thoughts about how things should work and militarized raids are not it, they just kind of didn't think about it but now they have to and they don't like it.