pull down to refresh
You and @coffeebadger both look at the evidence and make exceptions for it based on what you want to believe. For what it’s worth, I put you both together. I do a lot of research, so I use AI to bring it all together.
Regardless, at least I know that English is important to you both, and you have ideas about a civil society full of American virtues and shared culture that has never existed.
It's not an "evidence" kind of question. Republicans want to close the border because a lot of migrants from third world countries hate Americans and want to kill us. Democrats want it open for the same reason. It doesn't make sense to talk about which policy is better for the economy when we have fundamental disagreements over what success looks like.
Exactly my point. No evidence. Just false statements.
What other reason could there possibly be to accept migrants from Libya into the United States except to inflict harm on citizens?
Evidence-free fearmongering
How is it fearmongering? This was a real debate. Trump banned migration from Libya and several other failed states, and the entire Democrat establishment, with a ton of money and influence backing them, screamed that this was somehow a racist policy. We can't have a serious negotiation with these people because they can't accept the most basic of common-sense safety measures that a country needs to survive.
You claimed Democrats accepted Libyan migrants to harm Americans.
That’s an extraordinary claim. Show the evidence.
Fair enough:
Here is what I took away from our discussion:
"civic ideal” - no idea what this means
assimilation - speaking English (although not constitutionally required, but wanted by the right), obeying the law, and civic engagement.
“American values,” "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."