Then…
Which republican policy should I be most concerned with here in Maine?
What do your vague political gypsy curses have to say about that?
I don’t know, but maybe one of your neighbors could answer that. And if they come up with one, are you going to call them a libtard?
I’m sure there are some residents of your city and/or state who would take issue with how Republicans deal with abortion. When Trump had previously mentioned a ban on people from certain Muslim nations, I’m sure some of your neighbors took issue with that.
I have asked my neighbors the same thing, including the politicians. Just yesterday I asked the city council president to explain the mechanism that stops a non-citizen from voting in Maine elections. He has not responded.
Republicans have little influence over abortion policy in Maine, thanks to Dobbs.
Trump did not have a Muslim ban, to characterize a covid-era travel restriction as such is silly.
Meanwhile, around 25 percent of the kids at my high school understand math after 25 years of unabated progressive policy enactments.
1 Like
So far. I know Trump said it should be a state issue but not all Republicans agree. It is a concern, whether you feel that way or not, for many women in Democrat controlled states.
Executive Order 13769. It was characterized as a Muslim ban though it didn’t affect all Muslim nations. It was signed in 2017, before Covid was a thing.
You must be confusing me with a tin foil hat Trumper. I would start by analyzing the state by state comparison, then county by county and look for anomalies.
No, not necessarily.
I’m not sure if you’re aware of this, but there are more than seven countries that have Muslim people living in them. It would seem that the order is more concerned with people who believe in blowing things up than people who believe Mohammed was a prophet.
Thanks for the reminder of another well-intentioned Trump executive policy that prioritizes the wellbeing of the country and is guaranteed to be mischaracterized by his critics. I predict he will do a better job navigating his opponents this time, given that they are well-understood to be mostly composed of silly people in 2024.
2 Likes
I’m sure this is being done. But Kamala was not liked. Yesterday at work I was surprised by how many were glad she lost (not that Trump won).
I’m sure you’re ignoring what was going on at the time when it was characterized, by both sides, as a Muslim ban.
The former believe in the latter. So I guess it should have been called a partial Muslim ban.
Likewise, Trump is hated. But that only addresses ‘20 to ‘24. What about ‘16 to ‘20?
Before we draw conclusions, the data should be reviewed. It’s a very very significant outlier.
Agreed! Which is why I’m not doing it. LOL
How were the countries chosen? Was there a reason given? If I remember, none of the countries included the ones that the 9/11 guys (and other terrorists) were from, right? I feel like that was something that was being said at the time to question the decision.
I think a lot of the reasoning followed Obama era policy, which followed on Bush-era policy. It was about known terrorists, not feelings of hatred towards race or creed.
Sort of like how “kids in cages” became a moral catastrophe when Trump’s administration enforced the border, but was totally not “kids in cages” when Obama’s administration did it.
I get that, but I’m saying if they really were just trying to stop terrorists from entering, why not include the countries where (extremely successful) terrorists have come from?
Venezuela and NK were also included in this ban. IIRC, it had more to do with these countries inability to screen and document outbound travelers. I’m pulling from limited recollection, but I recall specifics that each country had to meet in order be lifted.
2 Likes
My whole thought process for understanding public policy begins with ignoring whatever it is being called and examining the substance of what it does.
Calling the Parental Rights in Education bill “Don’t say gay” is a perfect example.
When you hear the word “voting rights” it isn’t talking about 20th century activism. Every US Citizen has voting rights. When you hear a leftist say “voting rights”, they are talking about eliminating the very concept of citizenship.
That’s why any of the random Johns from other states who come to Lewiston to pick up street walkers could have also taken 10 minutes out of their Tuesday activities to vote in our election with zero chance of being caught.
Usually, perception is the point more than substance.
I also remember it being characterized as a Muslim ban by people who thought that was a good thing as well as by people who thought that was a bad thing.
Lots of Muslims were scared, for good reason.
I don’t consider Trump racist, but he aligns himself to benefit from people’s racism, bigotry, etc by being the natural guy for them to support.
Which I am OK with. I would much rather a President that can surf all the waves rather than one that labels significant masses of Americans as deplorables.
The way I remember it, there was a “Muslim ban” with a few countries to start off with, and the number of countries might grow or shrink depending on … (I don’t know, but the phrase “we’re gonna look at it” comes to mind)
Well, the number of countries shrunk.
Muslims were feeling heat at first, but by the time Covid hit, many were feeling like accepted Americans for the first time since 9/11.
He broke the unwritten rules by going for a Muslim ban in the first place, and iirc the courts did overturn them eventually, but I don’t think he wanted to be remembered as the most racist President in modern history. Going to an extreme before letting nature push back to a better direction would be the most healing-full thing to do. So the deplorables became less deplorable so to speak. I suspect he did that intentionally. I consider Trump a healer. Willingness to get way darker than the unwritten “rules” allow is a part of that, imo.
I don’t think he wanted to be remembered as the most racist President in modern history, but I notice he was willing to be seen that way, which can be terrifying and tremendously healing.
We agree on something. Salaams.
We agree on a bunch actually. Wa’alaikum assalam wa rahmatullah
I think you’re falling into the narratives a bit here with the “most racist president” and “natural guy for them to support”. Racists can support good policy, too.
Regarding the amount of racist or xenophobic intent of the so-called Muslim ban, I would say it is roughly as racist as, say, Egypt’s travel policy for people from Palestine or even some of those same countries.
That 9/11 reflected poorly on Muslims is not a problem with non-Muslims, in my opinion. You have to admit, Muslims can say and do some pretty crazy stuff that doesn’t exactly align with liberal western democratic societies. It reminds me of the old Norm McDonald Muslim blowback joke that completely sailed over his guests’ heads.
For actual racism, I present Maine Democrat activists who are cynically exploiting non-citizens, mostly Muslims, into committing a felony in Maine by guiding them through the voting process.
Once you peek behind the rainbows, glitter and declarations of anti-racism, you can see a system that perversely commoditizes the most needy people in the community and also requires importing as many needy people as possible. Your brothers and sisters in faith are instruments of power and revenue streams to Maine Democrats, as long as they continue to be useful to Maine Democrats in that regard.
I’m unsure of how a white liberal woman processes a Somalian man wearing a MAGA hat, but I’m sure it is is an ugly mental process.
Jared Golden (D) just won re-election to the House by 2000 votes. I am 1,000 percent certain there have been at least that many non-citizen votes cast in that election, likely far more. I am hoping that the Trump DOJ will investigate Maine because I believe there is deep corruption here.