Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On September 14 2024 06:14 EnDeR_ wrote: Sounds like on the whole, there were some negative impacts and some positive impacts. Easy to argue that with the increase in jobs and wealth generation you can mitigate or even eliminate the negative impacts you have highlighted, so saying that Springfield will benefit from immigration is not an outrageous thing to posit.
Btw, not to get too off topic, but isn't Spain demonstrating against tourists at the moment? That's a group of people that literally just go to a country for a short time, spend a bunch of money, and leave. Should we make posts about how it's obviously a net benefit for the economy and therefore the Spaniards should shut up and deal with it?
Personally I prefer to consider that maybe there are other things they are upset with and they don't just simply hate foreigners. In fact, I was planning to go to Spain next week but I've changed my plans when I heard about the demonstrations. So now I'm going to Portugal. Although it's possible the Portuguese have a similar sentiment as the Spanish and the news just hasn't made it to me yet, in which case they will have to tolerate me.
On September 14 2024 06:14 EnDeR_ wrote: Sounds like on the whole, there were some negative impacts and some positive impacts. Easy to argue that with the increase in jobs and wealth generation you can mitigate or even eliminate the negative impacts you have highlighted, so saying that Springfield will benefit from immigration is not an outrageous thing to posit.
Btw, not to get too off topic, but isn't Spain demonstrating against tourists at the moment? That's a group of people that literally just go to a country for a short time, spend a bunch of money, and leave. Should we make posts about how it's obviously a net benefit for the economy and therefore the Spaniards should shut up and deal with it?
Personally I prefer to consider that maybe there are other things they are upset with and they don't just simply hate foreigners. In fact, I was planning to go to Spain next week but I've changed my plans when I heard about the demonstrations. So now I'm going to Portugal. Although it's possible the Portuguese have a similar sentiment as the Spanish and the news just hasn't made it to me yet, in which case they will have to tolerate me.
Yeah BJ tourism is a good thing and the locals should also have their opinion heard on the negative effects mass tourism is having on their lives. They aren't against any tourism and if anyone came out that they want the border closed to not allow any tourists in they would be told to shut up and deal with the fact that tourists are necessary to their economy.
Would you like to theoretically apply your attitude of tourism to your attitude of the people migrating to america? Just as a theoretically thought experiment of the locals having to tolerate your legal and benifiical commercial action?
On September 14 2024 06:14 EnDeR_ wrote: Sounds like on the whole, there were some negative impacts and some positive impacts. Easy to argue that with the increase in jobs and wealth generation you can mitigate or even eliminate the negative impacts you have highlighted, so saying that Springfield will benefit from immigration is not an outrageous thing to posit.
Btw, not to get too off topic, but isn't Spain demonstrating against tourists at the moment? That's a group of people that literally just go to a country for a short time, spend a bunch of money, and leave. Should we make posts about how it's obviously a net benefit for the economy and therefore the Spaniards should shut up and deal with it?
Personally I prefer to consider that maybe there are other things they are upset with and they don't just simply hate foreigners. In fact, I was planning to go to Spain next week but I've changed my plans when I heard about the demonstrations. So now I'm going to Portugal. Although it's possible the Portuguese have a similar sentiment as the Spanish and the news just hasn't made it to me yet, in which case they will have to tolerate me.
Yeah BJ tourism is a good thing and the locals should also have their opinion heard on the negative effects mass tourism is having on their lives. They aren't against any tourism and if anyone came out that they want the border closed to not allow any tourists in they would be told to shut up and deal with the fact that tourists are necessary to their economy.
Wow, you're so close. Just substitute the word "tourism" for "immigration" and you can begin to tear down the strawmen you've created
On September 14 2024 06:14 EnDeR_ wrote: Sounds like on the whole, there were some negative impacts and some positive impacts. Easy to argue that with the increase in jobs and wealth generation you can mitigate or even eliminate the negative impacts you have highlighted, so saying that Springfield will benefit from immigration is not an outrageous thing to posit.
Btw, not to get too off topic, but isn't Spain demonstrating against tourists at the moment? That's a group of people that literally just go to a country for a short time, spend a bunch of money, and leave. Should we make posts about how it's obviously a net benefit for the economy and therefore the Spaniards should shut up and deal with it?
Personally I prefer to consider that maybe there are other things they are upset with and they don't just simply hate foreigners. In fact, I was planning to go to Spain next week but I've changed my plans when I heard about the demonstrations. So now I'm going to Portugal. Although it's possible the Portuguese have a similar sentiment as the Spanish and the news just hasn't made it to me yet, in which case they will have to tolerate me.
It's complicated. On the one hand, they come, spend money and leave. Purely transactional it's a net benefit. However where they spend their money and what they spend it on is important. But before we go off on that tangent, it's important to note that there are some minor similarities (e.g. tourists' use of public transport has been heavily criticized, and would be an example of public infrastructure that is being pushed beyond its limits by the influx of people), but mostly the problem and potential solutions are very different.
For starters, the people of Springfield don't seem worried that their local supermarkets are being turned into Haitian specialty stores, whereas that is one of the problems with overtourism: selling souvenirs to tourists is more profitable than selling food to locals. The people of Springfield however do seem worried about long lines for the doctor, which is not an issue that comes with tourism (except maybe for medical tourism, which is another issue entirely).
But I am glad to hear you say that the economy is not the be-all-end-all for a community. How refreshingly uncapitalistic of you, for the second time in a few pages.
On September 14 2024 04:35 Gorsameth wrote: [quote]Because the entire reason your talking about this is because of Trumps comments about illegals eating pets.
The entire reason we're talking about this is because you and Serm offered the ridiculous hot take that the population of Springfield has been unchanged and I couldn't let that go. Then it just spiraled from there.
So we can read the future and totally didn't know you were going to bring up illegals from Springfield?
Wow, I should use this magical power to earn some money.
What are you talking about? Go back and read the thread. I was in the middle of a conversation about inflation and then Serm went off a pet-eating tangent.
On September 13 2024 00:49 Sermokala wrote: Its really werid to try and "um actually" greedflation not being a real thing and a campaign prop when you have one of the candidates screaming that black people are eating dogs and cats. A bunch of the scaremongering about legal immigrants coming into Springfield is about the increased strain on public resources and housing when the population of the town hasn't increased that significantly
Sermokala brought the topic up, the topic is now being discussed, and somehow I am to blame? Give me a break
So it is, seems I skimmed over that. My apologies.
Still an incredibly stupid thing that no one would be talking about if not for Trumps (and other Republicans) mad screeching.
Yes technically true. If Trump didn't mention it at the debate there would never be a genesis to the discussion. But the discussion also never would have happened if Serm just said "Trump said immigrants are eating cats. What a moron." He had to add the claim that "the population of the town hasn't increased significantly" that I objected to.
@MP
A recent surge in immigration has been too fast and recent to be captured yet in population estimates.
"What didn't happen, according to interviews with a dozen local, county and officials as well as city police data, was any general rise in violent or property crime. Wages didn't collapse, but surged with a rising number of job openings in a labor market that remained tight until recently."
This doesn't look like a crisis to me, more like the opposite.
Right, it all looks good when you cherry pick out one paragraph and ignore the 2 previous paragraphs of the article
"Enrollment in Medicaid and federal food assistance and welfare programs surged. So did rents and vehicle accidents, including a collision last year when a Haitian without a U.S. driver's license drove into a school bus, killing 11-year-old Aiden Clark and injuring 26 other children.
The number of affordable housing vouchers fell as landlords moved to market-based rents that were rising in the face of higher demand, a blow to existing residents relying on them."
To me it looks like the following: Vance allowed all those migrants in...
What are you referencing here? Does JD Vance have some gatekeeper powers for who gets into Ohio that I'm not aware of?
Does he not? As a senator isn't the immigration quota and such things his responsibility? I mean someone has to make that decision.
“It just exploded into something I didn’t mean to happen,” Erika Lee, a Springfield resident, told NBC News on Friday...
Newsguard, a media watchdog that monitors for misinformation online, found that Lee had been among the first people to publish a post to social media about the rumor, screenshots of which circulated online. The neighbor, Kimberly Newton, said she heard about the attack from a third party, NewsGuard reported.
So this genius thought she was just spreading a local racist rumor to her community and never intended for it to go viral and turn into anything serious and now that it has NOW she's feeling sorry for it.
How about don't spread such stupid shit on social media in the first place?
We can also put it to bed that there was any basis in fact for these ridiculous stories in the first place. The woman who first posted it is straight up admitting she was just rumor mongering what her neighbors were saying without actually doing any evidence gathering.
This is straight up a bunch of karens in a group chat gossiping and it got out on the internet and Trump found it. If it wasn't so unbelievably stupid and sad it would be pretty funny.
On September 14 2024 06:14 EnDeR_ wrote: Sounds like on the whole, there were some negative impacts and some positive impacts. Easy to argue that with the increase in jobs and wealth generation you can mitigate or even eliminate the negative impacts you have highlighted, so saying that Springfield will benefit from immigration is not an outrageous thing to posit.
Btw, not to get too off topic, but isn't Spain demonstrating against tourists at the moment? That's a group of people that literally just go to a country for a short time, spend a bunch of money, and leave. Should we make posts about how it's obviously a net benefit for the economy and therefore the Spaniards should shut up and deal with it?
Personally I prefer to consider that maybe there are other things they are upset with and they don't just simply hate foreigners. In fact, I was planning to go to Spain next week but I've changed my plans when I heard about the demonstrations. So now I'm going to Portugal. Although it's possible the Portuguese have a similar sentiment as the Spanish and the news just hasn't made it to me yet, in which case they will have to tolerate me.
It's complicated. On the one hand, they come, spend money and leave. Purely transactional it's a net benefit. However where they spend their money and what they spend it on is important. But before we go off on that tangent, it's important to note that there are some minor similarities (e.g. tourists' use of public transport has been heavily criticized, and would be an example of public infrastructure that is being pushed beyond its limits by the influx of people), but mostly the problem and potential solutions are very different.
For starters, the people of Springfield don't seem worried that their local supermarkets are being turned into Haitian specialty stores, whereas that is one of the problems with overtourism: selling souvenirs to tourists is more profitable than selling food to locals. The people of Springfield however do seem worried about long lines for the doctor, which is not an issue that comes with tourism (except maybe for medical tourism, which is another issue entirely).
But I am glad to hear you say that the economy is not the be-all-end-all for a community. How refreshingly uncapitalistic of you, for the second time in a few pages.
And, enjoy your holiday, Portugal is fantastic
My disdain for crowds overrides my love for capitalism lol. Thanks
On September 14 2024 04:52 BlackJack wrote: [quote]
The entire reason we're talking about this is because you and Serm offered the ridiculous hot take that the population of Springfield has been unchanged and I couldn't let that go. Then it just spiraled from there.
So we can read the future and totally didn't know you were going to bring up illegals from Springfield?
Wow, I should use this magical power to earn some money.
What are you talking about? Go back and read the thread. I was in the middle of a conversation about inflation and then Serm went off a pet-eating tangent.
On September 13 2024 00:49 Sermokala wrote: Its really werid to try and "um actually" greedflation not being a real thing and a campaign prop when you have one of the candidates screaming that black people are eating dogs and cats. A bunch of the scaremongering about legal immigrants coming into Springfield is about the increased strain on public resources and housing when the population of the town hasn't increased that significantly
Sermokala brought the topic up, the topic is now being discussed, and somehow I am to blame? Give me a break
So it is, seems I skimmed over that. My apologies.
Still an incredibly stupid thing that no one would be talking about if not for Trumps (and other Republicans) mad screeching.
Yes technically true. If Trump didn't mention it at the debate there would never be a genesis to the discussion. But the discussion also never would have happened if Serm just said "Trump said immigrants are eating cats. What a moron." He had to add the claim that "the population of the town hasn't increased significantly" that I objected to.
@MP
A recent surge in immigration has been too fast and recent to be captured yet in population estimates.
"What didn't happen, according to interviews with a dozen local, county and officials as well as city police data, was any general rise in violent or property crime. Wages didn't collapse, but surged with a rising number of job openings in a labor market that remained tight until recently."
This doesn't look like a crisis to me, more like the opposite.
Right, it all looks good when you cherry pick out one paragraph and ignore the 2 previous paragraphs of the article
"Enrollment in Medicaid and federal food assistance and welfare programs surged. So did rents and vehicle accidents, including a collision last year when a Haitian without a U.S. driver's license drove into a school bus, killing 11-year-old Aiden Clark and injuring 26 other children.
The number of affordable housing vouchers fell as landlords moved to market-based rents that were rising in the face of higher demand, a blow to existing residents relying on them."
To me it looks like the following: Vance allowed all those migrants in...
What are you referencing here? Does JD Vance have some gatekeeper powers for who gets into Ohio that I'm not aware of?
Does he not? As a senator isn't the immigration quota and such things his responsibility? I mean someone has to make that decision.
Anyone in the United States is free to travel and settle in any other state. There’s nothing at the borders between states except “Welcome to [state] signs and maybe a visitor center. Of the millions of people let into the country recently nobody is controlling if any of them go to Springfield Ohio.
On September 14 2024 05:31 Magic Powers wrote: I'm highly confused right now. I can't find confirmation that Springfield, Ohio has seen a population increase in the last four years. Quite the opposite, it still seems to be slightly declining (although much less than over several decades). It used to have a population of over 70 000 and is at risk of dipping below 58 000.
Am I mistaking the city in this discussion with a different one, or is the following source false?
The method probably has a blindspot, maybe between censuses they're just adding births and subtracting deaths. Not a single word on that page was typed by a human, it's all templates and scraped data.
Ok, so at least I got the city correct? I'm not mistaken about that?
It states that from 2021 to 2022 there has been a population decline of 0.588% That is not congruent with the information that it has increased. Every single source that I can find shows a continuous decrease until 2024.
So someone is lying. I don't know who's the liar, but someone is a liar.
If you think this is a population decrease you should see the census of cats and ducks.
On September 14 2024 06:14 EnDeR_ wrote: Sounds like on the whole, there were some negative impacts and some positive impacts. Easy to argue that with the increase in jobs and wealth generation you can mitigate or even eliminate the negative impacts you have highlighted, so saying that Springfield will benefit from immigration is not an outrageous thing to posit.
Btw, not to get too off topic, but isn't Spain demonstrating against tourists at the moment? That's a group of people that literally just go to a country for a short time, spend a bunch of money, and leave. Should we make posts about how it's obviously a net benefit for the economy and therefore the Spaniards should shut up and deal with it?
Personally I prefer to consider that maybe there are other things they are upset with and they don't just simply hate foreigners. In fact, I was planning to go to Spain next week but I've changed my plans when I heard about the demonstrations. So now I'm going to Portugal. Although it's possible the Portuguese have a similar sentiment as the Spanish and the news just hasn't made it to me yet, in which case they will have to tolerate me.
It's complicated. On the one hand, they come, spend money and leave. Purely transactional it's a net benefit. However where they spend their money and what they spend it on is important. But before we go off on that tangent, it's important to note that there are some minor similarities (e.g. tourists' use of public transport has been heavily criticized, and would be an example of public infrastructure that is being pushed beyond its limits by the influx of people), but mostly the problem and potential solutions are very different.
For starters, the people of Springfield don't seem worried that their local supermarkets are being turned into Haitian specialty stores, whereas that is one of the problems with overtourism: selling souvenirs to tourists is more profitable than selling food to locals. The people of Springfield however do seem worried about long lines for the doctor, which is not an issue that comes with tourism (except maybe for medical tourism, which is another issue entirely).
But I am glad to hear you say that the economy is not the be-all-end-all for a community. How refreshingly uncapitalistic of you, for the second time in a few pages.
And, enjoy your holiday, Portugal is fantastic
My disdain for crowds overrides my love for capitalism lol. Thanks
Depends where you go in Portugal -- Lisbon is not that far behind Barcelona with the amount of tourists. I'd recommend heading towards the northern region if you want to avoid crowds -- then you can also visit Galicia and bring in some of that tourist money to a place that needs it
My main criticism here is that to have an honest discussion about immigration, both positive and negative impacts need to be considered. It does not help that the well is well and truly poisoned right now.
Spain, like the rust belt apparently, has a load of towns that are simply disappearing -- having a bunch of immigrants show up would be a lifeline.
Do you think that if the benefits of immigration had bipartisan support that perhaps the flow of migration could be better managed and coordinated in the US?
Funny, because this is far from the first time I’ve brought up immigration in this thread. Most of the previous times it’s in reference to NYC and the pill of regret they are having to swallow from inviting migrants into their city and creating a crisis. Their mayor, Eric Adams, has gone on record saying the migrant crisis is destroying the city.
Yet all the times I’ve talked about that in this thread nobody claimed NYC was not actually receiving a significant amount of immigrants because of data they’ve sourced from the 2020 census. Nobody questioned whether their resources for policing, housing, schooling were being strained due to the migrant crisis. Nobody questioned the mayors motivations in using extreme language like “this is destroying our city.”
But suddenly it happens in bumfuck Ohio and it’s all either “they haven’t had that many migrants come in but even if they did it’s not a big deal. They are only disgruntled cause they don’t like black people.”
Amazing how that works.
Not really, because the "They're eating cats" came from random facebook, which was then picked up and repeated by republican talking heads. The mayor and sheriff of bumfuck Ohio both indicated that it wasn't an actual issue that was actually happening, and was fabricated.
That's what makes the republicans look like they're disgruntled racists. They were so excited that black people were finally doing something abhorrent that they forgot to fact-check that it was actually happening, first. They just assumed it was actually happening because OF COURSE IT WOULD.
Hopefully that explains the difference between those for you.
So if Trump and other Republicans said immigrants in NYC were eating cats would that then mean that people in this thread would argue a) NYC actually didn't receive a large influx of immigrants because their population has remained steady b) There aren't any significant problems with the (non-existent) large influx and c) NYC Mayor Eric Adam's is retroactively made a racist for his comments that migrants are destroying NYC?
Are you asking me 'if a different thing happened, would people other than you argue differently?'
What does that question do other than highlight the extreme levels of whataboutism you're throwing at this?
Just trying to make sense of your point. My question was why were people denying that Springfield received a large influx of Haitian migrants and there are problems related to that that have nothing to do with race. Your response is essentially because Trump and others said people are eating cats. I just don’t see how Trumps statements changes reality on the ground for whether Springfield Ohio is dealing with legitimate problems or not.
My point is that the chain of information that resulted in "haitian migrants are eating people's pets" was a far cry from an NYC mayor saying there were issues with migration.
I'm not questioning the validity of Springfield's issues. I'm questioning how quickly we got to "haitian migrants are eating people's pets" and how that path is anything other than racist. Saying "What about the NYC mayor?" doesn't do anything because we didn't hear about this from Springfield's mayor. We didn't hear about this from a credible source, the news feed started with a facebook post and was picked up by some idiots, then made its way to a former president.
DPB (I think?) posted sources for 'eating pets' being a hoax even before the debate.
oBlade's source says the AG was critical of 'media' for not using all the sources available to them, and ends with a statement that the mayor said there were no credible reports.
If Republicans were interested in pointing to an immigration issue and not being racist about it, I'm sure they could have figured that out. Instead, they picked up a story about someone in Ohio eating some geese and turned it into many hatian migrants eating cats and dogs.
You just seem really fixated on the pet-eating thing whereas my question has to do with the broader discussion of how immigration is affecting the town of Springfield and people's denial of the problems they face.
If you want conclude that Springfield has had a large influx of Haitian immigrants, there are problems associated with said influx, and the problems aren't imagined just because they are black... and also Trump and others are morons then I'm happy to agree with that. It's obvious that most people in the thread seem to only want to agree with the last portion of that while sticking their head in the sand about everything else.
I hear you.
My objection is that you CANNOT use "Hatians eat cats" as a springboard into an actual reasoned topic without fully disavowing the overtly racist thing. You can't go from someone saying "Yeah well all these hatians are eating our cats", have a response be "That's extremely racist", and then come in with "Well, no, they've got a point."
It HAS TO BE "There is no evidence that haitian migrants in Springfield are eating cats. That said, I am hearing that Springfield is experiencing some strain from immigration. Maybe that's where these stupid rumors are coming from, and maybe something we should pay attention to."
People (shouldn't be) denying that there are potential issues in Springfield, they're refusing to enter a critical conversation thats opening premise is mask-off racist and not backed by evidence.
“It just exploded into something I didn’t mean to happen,” Erika Lee, a Springfield resident, told NBC News on Friday...
Newsguard, a media watchdog that monitors for misinformation online, found that Lee had been among the first people to publish a post to social media about the rumor, screenshots of which circulated online. The neighbor, Kimberly Newton, said she heard about the attack from a third party, NewsGuard reported.
So this genius thought she was just spreading a local racist rumor to her community and never intended for it to go viral and turn into anything serious and now that it has NOW she's feeling sorry for it.
How about don't spread such stupid shit on social media in the first place?
We can also put it to bed that there was any basis in fact for these ridiculous stories in the first place. The woman who first posted it is straight up admitting she was just rumor mongering what her neighbors were saying without actually doing any evidence gathering.
This is straight up a bunch of karens in a group chat gossiping and it got out on the internet and Trump found it. If it wasn't so unbelievably stupid and sad it would be pretty funny.
I think this is easy to say from a distance, but also probably most of us have at least one embarrassing moment in our internet lives that would make us look real stupid if a former president shouted it in a debate. I don't think we can ever stop people from being stupid and racist, and it's the idiots afterwards platforming this message that turned it into a real big racism. She's to blame for saying a racist thing for sure, but 1/1,000,000,000 for it to somehow end up in the mouth of a former president. Many people had to believe and/or repeat the message for that to happen.
In Springfield, Ohio, 20,000 illegal migrant Haitians have descended upon a town of 58,000 people, destroying their way of life. They’ve destroyed the place,” Trump said during a rambling press conference at his golf course in Los Angeles. “People don’t like to talk about it. Even the town doesn’t like to talk about it, because it sounds so bad for the town. They live there … for years it was a great place. Safe. Nice. Now they have 20,000 and I actually heard today it’s 32,000.”
He later added: “We will do large deportations from Springfield, Ohio, large deportations. We’re gonna get these people out. We’re bringing them back to Venezuela,” stating the incorrect country where most of the immigrants are from.
This sounds like a great way to initiate the debate and not racist in the slightest.
In Springfield, Ohio, 20,000 illegal migrant Haitians have descended upon a town of 58,000 people, destroying their way of life. They’ve destroyed the place,” Trump said during a rambling press conference at his golf course in Los Angeles. “People don’t like to talk about it. Even the town doesn’t like to talk about it, because it sounds so bad for the town. They live there … for years it was a great place. Safe. Nice. Now they have 20,000 and I actually heard today it’s 32,000.”
He later added: “We will do large deportations from Springfield, Ohio, large deportations. We’re gonna get these people out. We’re bringing them back to Venezuela,” stating the incorrect country where most of the immigrants are from.
This sounds like a great way to initiate the debate and not racist in the slightest.
Trump doubling down instead of backing off in typical fashion.
This story has to be the most stupid since pizza gate. That top Repulicans still run with it is a sign of desperation from a losing team imo.
I hope Trump voters realize how this makes THEM look.
Edit: Musicians are having a field day with the quote from the debate:
Yet some people are spinning this as a win, mocking liberals and animal activists for not showing up. Trump fans are really dissappointing some times:
In Springfield, Ohio, 20,000 illegal migrant Haitians have descended upon a town of 58,000 people, destroying their way of life. They’ve destroyed the place,” Trump said during a rambling press conference at his golf course in Los Angeles. “People don’t like to talk about it. Even the town doesn’t like to talk about it, because it sounds so bad for the town. They live there … for years it was a great place. Safe. Nice. Now they have 20,000 and I actually heard today it’s 32,000.”
He later added: “We will do large deportations from Springfield, Ohio, large deportations. We’re gonna get these people out. We’re bringing them back to Venezuela,” stating the incorrect country where most of the immigrants are from.
This sounds like a great way to initiate the debate and not racist in the slightest.
Lol. Is he really saying that Springfieldians coming out to say that no, Haitians are not eating their pets, are lying to cover it up?! Wtf? That's a new take on "I hear your problems and will work to fix them": I will ignore everything you say, and work on fixing the strawman I made up instead!
Although given his actual record on border issues, he doesn't plan on fixing even his strawman, just using it as a big bad boogeyman to campaign with...
E: in fact isn't that the epitome of the nannystate criticism that is often (justifiably) leveled against the Democratic party? That they don't listen to the citizens and instead lecture them about what their real problems are?
“It just exploded into something I didn’t mean to happen,” Erika Lee, a Springfield resident, told NBC News on Friday...
Newsguard, a media watchdog that monitors for misinformation online, found that Lee had been among the first people to publish a post to social media about the rumor, screenshots of which circulated online. The neighbor, Kimberly Newton, said she heard about the attack from a third party, NewsGuard reported.
So this genius thought she was just spreading a local racist rumor to her community and never intended for it to go viral and turn into anything serious and now that it has NOW she's feeling sorry for it.
How about don't spread such stupid shit on social media in the first place?
We can also put it to bed that there was any basis in fact for these ridiculous stories in the first place. The woman who first posted it is straight up admitting she was just rumor mongering what her neighbors were saying without actually doing any evidence gathering.
This is straight up a bunch of karens in a group chat gossiping and it got out on the internet and Trump found it. If it wasn't so unbelievably stupid and sad it would be pretty funny.
I think this is easy to say from a distance, but also probably most of us have at least one embarrassing moment in our internet lives that would make us look real stupid if a former president shouted it in a debate. I don't think we can ever stop people from being stupid and racist, and it's the idiots afterwards platforming this message that turned it into a real big racism. She's to blame for saying a racist thing for sure, but 1/1,000,000,000 for it to somehow end up in the mouth of a former president. Many people had to believe and/or repeat the message for that to happen.
I think you are correct here. People write stupid shit on the internet. That is not ideal, but also not really preventable.
Presidential candidates have a duty to make sure that the thing they say is not just a stupid thing someone said on the internet, but actually a real thing that is happening.
“It just exploded into something I didn’t mean to happen,” Erika Lee, a Springfield resident, told NBC News on Friday...
Newsguard, a media watchdog that monitors for misinformation online, found that Lee had been among the first people to publish a post to social media about the rumor, screenshots of which circulated online. The neighbor, Kimberly Newton, said she heard about the attack from a third party, NewsGuard reported.
So this genius thought she was just spreading a local racist rumor to her community and never intended for it to go viral and turn into anything serious and now that it has NOW she's feeling sorry for it.
How about don't spread such stupid shit on social media in the first place?
We can also put it to bed that there was any basis in fact for these ridiculous stories in the first place. The woman who first posted it is straight up admitting she was just rumor mongering what her neighbors were saying without actually doing any evidence gathering.
This is straight up a bunch of karens in a group chat gossiping and it got out on the internet and Trump found it. If it wasn't so unbelievably stupid and sad it would be pretty funny.
I think this is easy to say from a distance, but also probably most of us have at least one embarrassing moment in our internet lives that would make us look real stupid if a former president shouted it in a debate. I don't think we can ever stop people from being stupid and racist, and it's the idiots afterwards platforming this message that turned it into a real big racism. She's to blame for saying a racist thing for sure, but 1/1,000,000,000 for it to somehow end up in the mouth of a former president. Many people had to believe and/or repeat the message for that to happen.
I think you are correct here. People write stupid shit on the internet. That is not ideal, but also not really preventable.
Presidential candidates have a duty to make sure that the thing they say is not just a stupid thing someone said on the internet, but actually a real thing that is happening.
I was thinking of this, and somehow, I don't think Trump will be losing as much as he should because of this. His fans can just pick 1 of 3 takes, whichever suits them best:
#1: Face value. Actually believe there is pet-eating going on, and that Trump is completely right to bring this up.
#2: Ignore it. It is Trump being Trump, lying a bit to try to win, but support the Republicans because of immigraton/taxes/guns/abortion, so vote for him no matter what he says.
#3: He is actually trolling the Democrats, "where are the leftist animal rights groups when you need them?".
Republicans can just pick whichever they think is best, I suspect most will run with #2, maybe with some of #1 sprinkled in (immigration does indeed cause some real problems).
The question is if he is actually winning any votes by spewing bullshit like that. He is certainly hurting the reputation of the US if he wins, if there is anything to save there anyway.
“It just exploded into something I didn’t mean to happen,” Erika Lee, a Springfield resident, told NBC News on Friday...
Newsguard, a media watchdog that monitors for misinformation online, found that Lee had been among the first people to publish a post to social media about the rumor, screenshots of which circulated online. The neighbor, Kimberly Newton, said she heard about the attack from a third party, NewsGuard reported.
So this genius thought she was just spreading a local racist rumor to her community and never intended for it to go viral and turn into anything serious and now that it has NOW she's feeling sorry for it.
How about don't spread such stupid shit on social media in the first place?
We can also put it to bed that there was any basis in fact for these ridiculous stories in the first place. The woman who first posted it is straight up admitting she was just rumor mongering what her neighbors were saying without actually doing any evidence gathering.
This is straight up a bunch of karens in a group chat gossiping and it got out on the internet and Trump found it. If it wasn't so unbelievably stupid and sad it would be pretty funny.
I think this is easy to say from a distance, but also probably most of us have at least one embarrassing moment in our internet lives that would make us look real stupid if a former president shouted it in a debate. I don't think we can ever stop people from being stupid and racist, and it's the idiots afterwards platforming this message that turned it into a real big racism. She's to blame for saying a racist thing for sure, but 1/1,000,000,000 for it to somehow end up in the mouth of a former president. Many people had to believe and/or repeat the message for that to happen.
I think you are correct here. People write stupid shit on the internet. That is not ideal, but also not really preventable.
Presidential candidates have a duty to make sure that the thing they say is not just a stupid thing someone said on the internet, but actually a real thing that is happening.
I was thinking of this, and somehow, I don't think Trump will be losing as much as he should because of this. His fans can just pick 1 of 3 takes, whichever suits them best:
#1: Face value. Actually believe there is pet-eating going on, and that Trump is completely right to bring this up.
#2: Ignore it. It is Trump being Trump, lying a bit to try to win, but support the Republicans because of immigraton/taxes/guns/abortion, so vote for him no matter what he says.
#3: He is actually trolling the Democrats, "where are the leftist animal rights groups when you need them?".
Republicans can just pick whichever they think is best, I suspect most will run with #2, maybe with some of #1 sprinkled in (immigration does indeed cause some real problems).
The question is if he is actually winning any votes by spewing bullshit like that. He is certainly hurting the reputation of the US if he wins, if there is anything to save there anyway.
That is also correct. This should be a thing that just ends a presidential campaign, but Trumps shit is so far gone beyond facts that it will barely matter. It is just more of the same shit he has always been doing. Republicans have managed to brainwash their voters in a way that nothing except winning matters anymore. The idea that Trump could just not be fit to be president doesn't really compute in that framework.
In Springfield, Ohio, 20,000 illegal migrant Haitians have descended upon a town of 58,000 people, destroying their way of life. They’ve destroyed the place,” Trump said during a rambling press conference at his golf course in Los Angeles. “People don’t like to talk about it. Even the town doesn’t like to talk about it, because it sounds so bad for the town. They live there … for years it was a great place. Safe. Nice. Now they have 20,000 and I actually heard today it’s 32,000.”
He later added: “We will do large deportations from Springfield, Ohio, large deportations. We’re gonna get these people out. We’re bringing them back to Venezuela,” stating the incorrect country where most of the immigrants are from.
This sounds like a great way to initiate the debate and not racist in the slightest.
Does any republican really think a town has a 25% population increase of exclusively illegal immigrants and no one is doing anything about it? A few percentage points could hide maybe, but not 25% in a few years.
People cannot be this dumb right? Maybe they had a large influx of population but in no way would they all or even most be illegal immigrants... wtf.
On September 14 2024 15:54 EnDeR_ wrote: So this is Trump's nuanced take after the debate: www.theguardian.com
In Springfield, Ohio, 20,000 illegal migrant Haitians have descended upon a town of 58,000 people, destroying their way of life. They’ve destroyed the place,” Trump said during a rambling press conference at his golf course in Los Angeles. “People don’t like to talk about it. Even the town doesn’t like to talk about it, because it sounds so bad for the town. They live there … for years it was a great place. Safe. Nice. Now they have 20,000 and I actually heard today it’s 32,000.”
He later added: “We will do large deportations from Springfield, Ohio, large deportations. We’re gonna get these people out. We’re bringing them back to Venezuela,” stating the incorrect country where most of the immigrants are from.
This sounds like a great way to initiate the debate and not racist in the slightest.
Does any republican really think a town has a 25% population increase of exclusively illegal immigrants and no one is doing anything about it? A few percentage points could hide maybe, but not 25% in a few years.
People cannot be this dumb right? Maybe they had a large influx of population but in no way would they all or even most be illegal immigrants... wtf.
In my experience plenty of conservatives do in fact believe Trump's lies, because it confirms their prior convictions about migration. Those who are skeptical will consider their support for Trump as a necessary means to an end, as defeating Kamala is too important. This is fueled by misinformation about the Democrat agenda. So it's a two-pronged attack of elevating Trump while denigrating Kamala. It works despite having no basis in reality. The tactic is to spread lies that cause a mud slinging contest among the population, completely ignore the fact checkers, then spread even worse misinformation based on the same lies. It becomes a game that people themselves feel the need to win individually. It excites them to participate in the process. So they associate their own efforts with those of Trump/Kamala, and they completely lose sight of reality because losing is too painful after they've invested so much of themselves into the fight.
By the way I'm counting a total of eight lies in Trump's claims, roughly two per sentence. That should be fairly close to his personal best.
This article explains in detail why exactly Trump supporters fail to acknowledge that Trump's lies should disqualify him. It's quite a comprehensive quick guide on the mechanisms behind it.
On September 14 2024 15:54 EnDeR_ wrote: So this is Trump's nuanced take after the debate: www.theguardian.com
In Springfield, Ohio, 20,000 illegal migrant Haitians have descended upon a town of 58,000 people, destroying their way of life. They’ve destroyed the place,” Trump said during a rambling press conference at his golf course in Los Angeles. “People don’t like to talk about it. Even the town doesn’t like to talk about it, because it sounds so bad for the town. They live there … for years it was a great place. Safe. Nice. Now they have 20,000 and I actually heard today it’s 32,000.”
He later added: “We will do large deportations from Springfield, Ohio, large deportations. We’re gonna get these people out. We’re bringing them back to Venezuela,” stating the incorrect country where most of the immigrants are from.
This sounds like a great way to initiate the debate and not racist in the slightest.
Does any republican really think a town has a 25% population increase of exclusively illegal immigrants and no one is doing anything about it? A few percentage points could hide maybe, but not 25% in a few years.
People cannot be this dumb right? Maybe they had a large influx of population but in no way would they all or even most be illegal immigrants... wtf.
In my experience plenty of conservatives do in fact believe Trump's lies, because it confirms their prior convictions about migration. Those who are skeptical will consider their support for Trump as a necessary means to an end, as defeating Kamala is too important. This is fueled by misinformation about the Democrat agenda. So it's a two-pronged attack of elevating Trump while denigrating Kamala. It works despite having no basis in reality. The tactic is to spread lies that cause a mud slinging contest among the population, completely ignore the fact checkers, then spread even worse misinformation based on the same lies. It becomes a game that people themselves feel the need to win individually. It excites them to participate in the process. So they associate their own efforts with those of Trump/Kamala, and they completely lose sight of reality because losing is too painful after they've invested so much of themselves into the fight.
By the way I'm counting a total of eight lies in Trump's claims, roughly two per sentence. That should be fairly close to his personal best.
This article explains in detail why exactly Trump supporters fail to acknowledge that Trump's lies should disqualify him. It's quite a comprehensive quick guide on the mechanisms behind it.
One way of fighting this is attacking the intent behind the lies instead of the lies themselves. Trump is a bullshitter, if any Haitians actually ate pets or not is irrelevant. The intent, is clear though: find a reason for his base to harass an already vulnerable, weak group. It was "Haitians from Springfield because they eat pets" this time, but who will be next? Noone should be considered safe from this tactic, which is why noone should want such a person in the White House.
I think it is right to mock Trump for this, as it is utterly ridiculous, but there are some very dark truths about the Trump campaign lurking in the background.
On September 14 2024 04:54 Gorsameth wrote: [quote]So we can read the future and totally didn't know you were going to bring up illegals from Springfield?
Wow, I should use this magical power to earn some money.
What are you talking about? Go back and read the thread. I was in the middle of a conversation about inflation and then Serm went off a pet-eating tangent.
On September 13 2024 00:49 Sermokala wrote: Its really werid to try and "um actually" greedflation not being a real thing and a campaign prop when you have one of the candidates screaming that black people are eating dogs and cats. A bunch of the scaremongering about legal immigrants coming into Springfield is about the increased strain on public resources and housing when the population of the town hasn't increased that significantly
Sermokala brought the topic up, the topic is now being discussed, and somehow I am to blame? Give me a break
So it is, seems I skimmed over that. My apologies.
Still an incredibly stupid thing that no one would be talking about if not for Trumps (and other Republicans) mad screeching.
Yes technically true. If Trump didn't mention it at the debate there would never be a genesis to the discussion. But the discussion also never would have happened if Serm just said "Trump said immigrants are eating cats. What a moron." He had to add the claim that "the population of the town hasn't increased significantly" that I objected to.
@MP
A recent surge in immigration has been too fast and recent to be captured yet in population estimates.
"What didn't happen, according to interviews with a dozen local, county and officials as well as city police data, was any general rise in violent or property crime. Wages didn't collapse, but surged with a rising number of job openings in a labor market that remained tight until recently."
This doesn't look like a crisis to me, more like the opposite.
Right, it all looks good when you cherry pick out one paragraph and ignore the 2 previous paragraphs of the article
"Enrollment in Medicaid and federal food assistance and welfare programs surged. So did rents and vehicle accidents, including a collision last year when a Haitian without a U.S. driver's license drove into a school bus, killing 11-year-old Aiden Clark and injuring 26 other children.
The number of affordable housing vouchers fell as landlords moved to market-based rents that were rising in the face of higher demand, a blow to existing residents relying on them."
To me it looks like the following: Vance allowed all those migrants in...
What are you referencing here? Does JD Vance have some gatekeeper powers for who gets into Ohio that I'm not aware of?
Does he not? As a senator isn't the immigration quota and such things his responsibility? I mean someone has to make that decision.
Anyone in the United States is free to travel and settle in any other state. There’s nothing at the borders between states except “Welcome to [state] signs and maybe a visitor center. Of the millions of people let into the country recently nobody is controlling if any of them go to Springfield Ohio.
Abbott has been erecting barbed wire and checkpoints between Texas and New Mexico to prevent new Mexicans entering Texas from that route.
EPT
