[BET] Trump or Harris 2024, Poker Player vs suchmoon

[suchmoon]

If you think you've seen this before it's because you have.

This is a new bet that originated here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5208356.msg64575392#msg64575392

Contract:

Code:

suchmoon's address: 18pTKHyCFyr5Gk3LHN4wKke1hUaT3wUnjb
Poker Player's address: bc1qlqawpy5yl7t3z9vfusuyxk9h0n42r8y8jwrd9s

suchmoon agrees to pay 0.01 BTC to Poker Player if Donald J Trump wins the 2024 US presidential election, and Poker Player agrees to pay 0.01 BTC to suchmoon if Kamala Harris wins the 2024 US presidential election.

Decision logic:

Election result is considered decided by the Electoral College meetings. After the 2024 US presidential election, if the Electoral College elects Donald J Trump then Poker Player wins this bet, and if the Electoral College elects Kamala Harris then suchmoon wins this bet, except for the draw conditions listed below.

Conditions for a draw (neither side pays the other side):

    If there is no presidential election in 2024.
    If neither of the candidates gets 270 or more Electoral College votes by midnight January 31, 2025.

Additional terms:

    EC vote total is final regardless of popular vote, pledged electors, unfaithful electors, Congress being mobbed, etc.
    No presidential election in 2024 (martial law, martians invading, etc) means a draw.
    If Donald J Trump is elected but doesn't get sworn in (dies, goes to prison, moves to Slovenia, etc) Poker Player wins.
    If Kamala Harris is elected but doesn't get sworn in (dies, goes to prison, moves to Haiti, etc) suchmoon wins.
    If a third candidate wins or gains enough EC votes to prevent both Trump and Harris from reaching 270 EC votes - it's a draw.
    Loser pays transaction fees.

Signed 2024-09-27

Signature: IEnRzFbmfG3Do64fRlzjTOidiLqCI/ja4VwDrZ1WDoI4D2C8I2BUbydpdxcXbzY1uWlVMTzTDLqyWBt20902xeI=
(signed with my address 18pTKHyCFyr5Gk3LHN4wKke1hUaT3wUnjb)


Local rules: this particular bet, as well as betting on 2024 presidential election in general, and discussing the election itself is on topic. Everything else, including the usual P&S bullshit (you know who you are) is not.

[suchmoon]

Reserved.

[Poker Player]

To put things in context, I was commenting in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election Bets thread in the Gambling section and I thought of proposing a small bet just for fun but no one took it up. Yesterday I saw that the previous eddie13 vs suchmoon thread had been bumped and it occurred to me to propose the bet to suchmoon.

As I have repeatedly said in the forum I don't like Trump as a person and I don't like some of the things he has done in the past, but I think many of the policies he is proposing are better than what Kamala is proposing and that's what I will defend in this thread.

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I accept the 0.01BTC bet vs suchmoon under the conditions set forth in the following message:
https://loyce.club/archive/posts/6457/64578127.html
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
bc1qlqawpy5yl7t3z9vfusuyxk9h0n42r8y8jwrd9s
J8qS5RP5KeAofR5G3p/wxQMUYr2v0BFhS4k7wZ7wj4aoVUwIosK7Zp2ovoRuIl8MYd/Rxl5oNSGtdgRMIXkO9hE=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

[ibminer]

The heat is on!  

I'm disappointed in this election, but it seems a lot is at stake. Feels like the extreme sides of the left and right are up for election, with no other options available.  smh.

Good luck gentlemen!

[Poker Player]

Feels like the extreme sides of the left and right are up for election, with no other options available.  smh.

Tbh I don't see them being much more radical than Jimmy Carter vs Ronald Reagan.

In the case of Kamala, what worries me is that she is on the way to Peronism, which is a kind of social communism, a variant, with disastrous results, like all of them.

It consists of demonizing the rich and making an ever increasing percentage of the population dependent on state aid with more and more state control, which in Kamala's case would be aided by CBDCs, a non-stop increase in government spending and a fast-paced devaluation of the currency. The US has been able to export its inflation for many decades, but this does not have to last forever.

Filling the country with millions of immigrants by leaps and bounds to whom you are going to give state aid and accelerate the process to obtain residency and/or citizenship, the Democrats do it from a business perspective (disguised as humanitarianism), thinking, correctly I believe, that a great majority of those immigrants once their situation is regularized will vote for Democrants for life.

This is not exclusive to the USA; in the UK, for example, the new government is also taking giant steps in this direction, accompanied by an obvious, radical and generalized tax increase, that has already begun to expel capital and talent from the country.

[suchmoon]

As I have repeatedly said in the forum I don't like Trump as a person and I don't like some of the things he has done in the past, but I think many of the policies he is proposing are better than what Kamala is proposing and that's what I will defend in this thread.

TBH I don't even know what Trump's real policies are, he's talking nonsense most of the time and has been trying to distance himself from the only somewhat-policy-like document that I know of ("project 2025"). That said, I think some of Kamala's "policies" seem to be targeted at Trump's voters (she's gonna reduce grocery prices because that's what Fox News has been talking about) and have little to do with how the real world works. Dumb and dumberer type of deal we got going on.

Still, the two GOP weirdos are the most absurd and pathetic presidential ticket I've seen in my lifetime, and that includes Reagan, both Clintons, a bunch of Bushes, and Sarah Palin. So just as a sign of faith in the sanity of the electorate I have to make this bet.

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I accept the 0.01BTC bet vs suchmoon under the conditions set forth in the following message:
https://loyce.club/archive/posts/6457/64578127.html
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
bc1qlqawpy5yl7t3z9vfusuyxk9h0n42r8y8jwrd9s
J8qS5RP5KeAofR5G3p/wxQMUYr2v0BFhS4k7wZ7wj4aoVUwIosK7Zp2ovoRuIl8MYd/Rxl5oNSGtdgRMIXkO9hE=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Verified.

[Poker Player]

TBH I don't even know what Trump's real policies are, he's talking nonsense most of the time and has been trying to distance himself from the only somewhat-policy-like document that I know of ("project 2025").

Well, leaving aside what he may or may not say, I think it is quite clear that he is going to lower taxes and simplify administrative procedures, as well as give authorizations and stimulate the drilling of oil instead of reducing it by going green as Biden did and then having to beg dictators like Maduro or the Al Saud to extract the oil that the USA had stopped extracting because of his policies. He already did that when he was in office and has said he will do it again.

In the case of Bitcoin I don't trust much what he is going to do, it seems to me that he doesn't understand it and has repeatedly shown signs of it. I also think that he went to the BC for pure electoral interest. But I do believe he will stop the launch of CBDCs.

That said, I think some of Kamala's "policies" seem to be targeted at Trump's voters (she's gonna reduce grocery prices because that's what Fox News has been talking about) and have little to do with how the real world works. Dumb and dumberer type of deal we got going on.

I quite agree, it seems to me that in this election many will vote for one candidate or another not so much because they believe they are ideal but because they believe they are the least bad.

Wanting to control prices on the basis of a political decree has been known not to work since the edict of Diocletian. Price controls can only work in short periods of time or in very specific sectors. The idea that food prices are going to be lowered with price controls is either not knowing anything or knowing that it does not work and making populism out of it.

Still, the two GOP weirdos are the most absurd and pathetic presidential ticket I've seen in my lifetime, and that includes Reagan, both Clintons, a bunch of Bushes, and Sarah Palin. So just as a sign of faith in the sanity of the electorate I have to make this bet.

So just to understand you better, what would be your ideal candidate, Sanders? I would have preferred Ron de Santis on the Republican side, which I guess for you is almost as evil as Trump.

[paxmao]

Ok, so given these conditions it would seem that it is not an equilibrated proposal. I mean, both are near in the polls, popular vote an swing vote are largely undecided and it is fine to bet 1:1. But, given the conditions, there is an advantage to Suchmoon - that is, If any of the candidates dies before the election, the other player is certain to get a draw or a win. For now two attempts have been made on Trump vs zero for Kam so...

[suchmoon]

Well, leaving aside what he may or may not say, I think it is quite clear that he is going to lower taxes and simplify administrative procedures

Yeah he lowered taxes in 2017 (or rather signed the bill republicans cooked up; I doubt he knows what's really in it) and then added tariffs which allegedly "gyna" was supposed to pay but we all know it's just another tax on consumers. Not to mention that the massive budget hole will have to be plugged with taxes in the future, and the tax breaks have expiration built-in wheres tariffs don't, but that's their usual kick the can 4 years down the road thing, nothing new there.

There is a lot more problems with it, such as the federal tax rate already being at rock bottom for most Americans, so further cuts are quite useless to them and will likely result in higher taxes at state/local level to compensate for reduced federal spending (IIRC federal taxes are already less than half of average person's taxes).

That's not to say there isn't government waste that needs to be addressed but Trump and trumpists aren't trying to do anything about it. Just pandering to the base, we'll cut taxes, and someone else will pay for it.

So just to understand you better, what would be your ideal candidate, Sanders? I would have preferred Ron de Santis on the Republican side, which I guess for you is almost as evil as Trump.

I don't know if I have the "ideal" candidate, just some less bad than others. I don't recall what specific policies Sanders was proposing. I would definitely support a serious candidate who would offer e.g. a proper healthcare reform. But that's unlikely to happen in my lifetime, what with healthcare lobby being probably third most powerful after defense and gun lobbies.

Also anyone with a backbone to stand up to the whole racist immigration rhetoric would always have my support for obvious reasons.

[Poker Player]

Ok, so given these conditions it would seem that it is not an equilibrated proposal. I mean, both are near in the polls, popular vote an swing vote are largely undecided and it is fine to bet 1:1. But, given the conditions, there is an advantage to Suchmoon - that is, If any of the candidates dies before the election, the other player is certain to get a draw or a win. For now two attempts have been made on Trump vs zero for Kam so...

Why do you say that? I don't see anything explicitly about that in the conditions, and suchmoon told me by PM that if one of the two died at this point they would still be on the ballot the same. Maybe he tried to scam me, lol.

I don't know if I have the "ideal" candidate, just some less bad than others. I don't recall what specific policies Sanders was proposing. I would definitely support a serious candidate who would offer e.g. a proper healthcare reform. But that's unlikely to happen in my lifetime, what with healthcare lobby being probably third most powerful after defense and gun lobbies.

I am going to agree on this. Although I am generally in favor of leaving things to the private sector, I am not so much in healthcare because demand is inelastic. If the prices go up in a restaurant or the service gets worse you can go to another one or eat at home, you have several options. But if you have a heart attack you need to be treated now and you are not going to shop around.

Besides, things like this indicate that there is something sick, never better said, with how things work in the USA:

100 million people in America are saddled with medical debt

Medical bills account for 40% of bankruptcies (this article is old but I assume things haven't changed much).

The gambling sector has not historically given examples of good self-regulation either, and in this case I also believe that state intervention is a good thing.

Also anyone with a backbone to stand up to the whole racist immigration rhetoric would always have my support for obvious reasons.

Well, the racist rhetoric like “they are eating the cats” is worthy of an asshole but here I think we will differ because uncontrolled immigration processes, massive in a period of time, bring problems and historically it has been so (ghetto formation, non-integration, pressure on public services, etc.).

In the same way that saying “they are eating the cats” is a bullshit that wants to demonize all immigrants, thinking that if you put in millions of immigrants in a short period of time without background checks they will all be wonderful people who will not cause any problems is another bullshit. And I believe that in the case of the Democrats they do it from a business perspective as I explained above, it is a way to buy voters.

[suchmoon]

In the same way that saying “they are eating the cats” is a bullshit that wants to demonize all immigrants, thinking that if you put in millions of immigrants in a short period of time without background checks they will all be wonderful people who will not cause any problems is another bullshit. And I believe that in the case of the Democrats they do it from a business perspective as I explained above, it is a way to buy voters.

Immigrants can't vote until they're citizens. Contrary to popular belief in some qanon circles, there is no fast-track citizenship for asylum seekers (which is I think what most anti-immigration rhetoric is focused against). They have to apply for permanent resident status, which comes with all background checks and everything else that any permanent resident has to go through. There is even a medical exam involved for some reason. After that, getting a criminal conviction can result in deportation. Even something as benign (for a citizen) as DUI or being homeless can mean deportation (for a permanent resident). At the end of all this, after 5 years, one can apply for citizenship. Once they have it, I don't know why they would need to vote for one party or the other. But if one party claims they're eating dogs and cats, I can see how they might be reluctant to vote for it.

The US needs ~1 million immigrants every year just to sustain population size and economic growth. Trump killed immigration reform bill so that he could continue to use this issue as a campaign slogan. That's pretty much all there is to know about his immigration policies.

If the goal was to somehow increase the "quality" of immigrants so that that don't cause "problems", Trump and his party are really terrible at expressing those ideas because I haven't heard anything of the sort. The reality is that they just want to rile up the base against brown people without explicitly saying so.

If the goal is stop immigration or slow it down that only certain demographics can come in, then they will kill the economy but that's again just another can down the road.

IIRC ~100 million Americans are first or second generation immigrants, and they tend to be (particularly 2nd gen) around average or better than average on metrics like income, education, crime, etc and tend to vote similar to other people in their age range, so it seems that the evil Democrat plan to buy votes is a big failure.

This country was built on immigration and hopefully with continue to be, otherwise we're all fucked and not in a pleasant consensual way.

[Hispo]

In the same way that saying “they are eating the cats” is a bullshit that wants to demonize all immigrants, thinking that if you put in millions of immigrants in a short period of time without background checks they will all be wonderful people who will not cause any problems is another bullshit. And I believe that in the case of the Democrats they do it from a business perspective as I explained above, it is a way to buy voters.

...
IIRC ~100 million Americans are first or second generation immigrants, and they tend to be (particularly 2nd gen) around average or better than average on metrics like income, education, crime, etc and tend to vote similar to other people in their age range, so it seems that the evil Democrat plan to buy votes is a big failure.

This country was built on immigration and hopefully with continue to be, otherwise we're all fucked and not in a pleasant consensual way.

I was aware immigration was an important part of the building of the United States as a nation, but regularly I had this impression they did not actually outperform the average when came to those metrics you are talking about, but it makes sense when one keeps in mind the huge brain drain there are in many developing countries.
For example, I am from Venezuela and I live in Venezuela, with the lastest humanitarian parole and other means people have managed to move to the United States I am impressed with the amount of enginners from my college who have decided to give the big step and move to that country, it is not only desperate people seeking to flee from poverty, but actual professionals who just want to have their family a better future while at the same time working their ass off in humane conditions.

In contrast, though I must mention it is unfortunate Tren de Aragua has managed to get some of their people there in the States. Criminals from this country are really something else. There is no country in which there are no criminals, though. Perhaps, the Vatican city?

[Poker Player]

Immigrants can't vote until they're citizens. Contrary to popular belief in some qanon circles, there is no fast-track citizenship for asylum seekers (which is I think what most anti-immigration rhetoric is focused against). They have to apply for permanent resident status, which comes with all background checks and everything else that any permanent resident has to go through. There is even a medical exam involved for some reason. After that, getting a criminal conviction can result in deportation. Even something as benign (for a citizen) as DUI or being homeless can mean deportation (for a permanent resident). At the end of all this, after 5 years, one can apply for citizenship. Once they have it, I don't know why they would need to vote for one party or the other. But if one party claims they're eating dogs and cats, I can see how they might be reluctant to vote for it.

Well, I said that this would be accompanied by reforms to make nationality and/or residency easier to acquire, for example:

Kamala Harris as President would make it easier for you to move to the US

If Kamala Harris were to become President in 2025, the landscape for legal immigrants and international students might differ significantly from what would be expected under a Trump administration. Harris, who has consistently advocated for more inclusive immigration policies, would likely implement reforms aimed at expanding opportunities for immigrants and international students.

The process for obtaining work visas, green cards, and citizenship might be streamlined and made more accessible, with an emphasis on family reunification, support for skilled workers, and protection of immigrant rights. International students would likely find a more welcoming environment, with policies aimed at making the U.S. an attractive destination for higher education and post-graduate opportunities.

I don't know if the site is a right-wing nut conspiracy but it is certainly not the first time I hear something like this and it is in line with the plans of the Labor party in the UK and the socialist parties in Europe. Fill the country with lots of immigrants, very fast, and speed up the procedures for them to get citizenship and residency. Besides, I don't know if expulsions are carried out in the USA, but in many European countries they are a dead letter due to the quota system. Almost nobody is expelled.

The US needs ~1 million immigrants every year just to sustain population size and economic growth. Trump killed immigration reform bill so that he could continue to use this issue as a campaign slogan. That's pretty much all there is to know about his immigration policies.

The million immigrants are easy to get even if the Mexican border is closed tight. According to CNN (which sees it as wonderful, of course) net immigration in 2023 was 3.3 million people. That's 2.3 more than needed.

IIRC ~100 million Americans are first or second generation immigrants, and they tend to be (particularly 2nd gen) around average or better than average on metrics like income, education, crime, etc and tend to vote similar to other people in their age range, so it seems that the evil Democrat plan to buy votes is a big failure.

Well, maybe I'm looking at this from a European perspective but and I'm focusing mostly on mass migration processes that occur in short periods of time. In Europe that has led to ghettoization, not integration, and obviously the second generation is not coping any better than the first generation. The ghettos of Marseilles would be an example, but there are many others.

This country was built on immigration and hopefully with continue to be, otherwise we're all fucked and not in a pleasant consensual way.

Yes, but we are not discussing that here. All prosperous countries need immigration, the question is how many people come in and how fast.

I was aware immigration was an important part of the building of the United States as a nation, but regularly I had this impression they did not actually outperform the average when came to those metrics you are talking about, but it makes sense when one keeps in mind the huge brain drain there are in many developing countries.
For example, I am from Venezuela and I live in Venezuela, with the lastest humanitarian parole and other means people have managed to move to the United States I am impressed with the amount of enginners from my college who have decided to give the big step and move to that country, it is not only desperate people seeking to flee from poverty, but actual professionals who just want to have their family a better future while at the same time working their ass off in humane conditions.

So you mean they are fleeing the wonderful communist country of Venezuela, to go to the shitty capitalist country of the USA where the American dream no longer exists, workers can't get ahead because they are oppressed by capitalism and the like? I thought the logical thing would be the other way around. And especially if Trump wins I predict that there is going to be an emigration of tens of millions from the USA to Venezuela.

In contrast, though I must mention it is unfortunate Tren de Aragua has managed to get some of their people there in the States. Criminals from this country are really something else. There is no country in which there are no criminals, though. Perhaps, the Vatican city?

Now more seriously (unlike the previous comment). That's what happens, if you let in millions of people unchecked, there will be a majority like the engineers you were commenting on who are simply looking for a better life by earning it honestly but you are also letting in gangs of criminals.

[coolcoinz]

Great idea to bet on that, good luck to you both!

To be completely honest, I'm more of a Trump guy. I think they both suck and the US could use a better president, but like I said a few times before, I'd never support a socialist.

The US needs ~1 million immigrants every year just to sustain population size and economic growth. Trump killed immigration reform bill so that he could continue to use this issue as a campaign slogan. That's pretty much all there is to know about his immigration policies.

Trump loses a point here and that's not the only thing I dislike him for.

He's known for his sexist comments, low level jokes, quoting made up facts and statistics... But on the other hand, I'd rather see him argue with leaders like Putin, because Harris is going to fail at it just like Biden did. I'd rather see that grumpy stubborn man confront other stubborn men than a woman who thinks her country maintains strong relations with North Korea  

Harris is going to be a 'fake it till you make it' kind of leader.

[suchmoon]

I don't know if the site is a right-wing nut conspiracy but it is certainly not the first time I hear something like this and it is in line with the plans of the Labor party in the UK and the socialist parties in Europe. Fill the country with lots of immigrants, very fast, and speed up the procedures for them to get citizenship and residency. Besides, I don't know if expulsions are carried out in the USA, but in many European countries they are a dead letter due to the quota system. Almost nobody is expelled.

The quote you posted literally refers to skilled workers, students, etc. Exactly the kind of migrants any country needs. So this would be a sensible immigration reform that republicans would be vehemently against just because it takes away their talking points, not because it's somehow bad for the country. They would rather launder money through the pointless wall construction and threaten mass deportations and other PR bullshit, keeping the base energized with the migrant flow through the southern border instead of actually trying to solve the issue.

[Hispo]

...

I am not sure this is communism, socialism or capitalism, all I know this is a kleptocracy, people in power use their position of power as leverage to steal as much money as possible from income coming from both oil fields and gold mines, which is already against the basic rules of classic capitalism and socialism.
The former head of our national petroleum industry (basically the minister of petroleum) was caught red-handed with 30 billion dollars in cash, cryptocurrency and literal gold bars in his property...

I am expecting some people to come back if Trump wins in November, specially those who are there undocumented Even some who are there legally thanks to the Humanitary parole program will reconsider to come back after earning some money, nobody wants to live and work in a country in which they are going to be considered aliens and unwanted.

This country is literally kidnapped by crooks.

[paxmao]

Ok, so given these conditions it would seem that it is not an equilibrated proposal. I mean, both are near in the polls, popular vote an swing vote are largely undecided and it is fine to bet 1:1. But, given the conditions, there is an advantage to Suchmoon - that is, If any of the candidates dies before the election, the other player is certain to get a draw or a win. For now two attempts have been made on Trump vs zero for Kam so...

Why do you say that? I don't see anything explicitly about that in the conditions, and suchmoon told me by PM that if one of the two died at this point they would still be on the ballot the same. Maybe he tried to scam me, lol.
[...]

Not at all, it is just my interpretation of what you contract says. Let's say Trump is successfully removed from the gene pool of humanity violently, then another candidate will take his place. In this case, either Kam wins and Suchmoon wins the bet provided all goes without unexpected events or the other Rep candidate wins in which case another candidate got the majority of the votes an it is a draw (impeded the others to reach 277).

Great idea to bet on that, good luck to you both!

To be completely honest, I'm more of a Trump guy. I think they both suck and the US could use a better president, but like I said a few times before, I'd never support a socialist.

The US needs ~1 million immigrants every year just to sustain population size and economic growth. Trump killed immigration reform bill so that he could continue to use this issue as a campaign slogan. That's pretty much all there is to know about his immigration policies.

Trump loses a point here and that's not the only thing I dislike him for.

He's known for his sexist comments, low level jokes, quoting made up facts and statistics... But on the other hand, I'd rather see him argue with leaders like Putin, because Harris is going to fail at it just like Biden did. I'd rather see that grumpy stubborn man confront other stubborn men than a woman who thinks her country maintains strong relations with North Korea  

Harris is going to be a 'fake it till you make it' kind of leader.

There is no free meal in foreign politics. Trump can stop the war just like I could stop the war if elected for President. All you need to do is give half of Ukraine to Putin and ensure that it cannot join NATO nor have a proper army so that Putin takes the other half after licking his wounds from this war.

Everyone has a peace plan, it is that some of these guarantee a war in a few years.

[suchmoon]

Not at all, it is just my interpretation of what you contract says. Let's say Trump is successfully removed from the gene pool of humanity violently, then another candidate will take his place. In this case, either Kam wins and Suchmoon wins the bet provided all goes without unexpected events or the other Rep candidate wins in which case another candidate got the majority of the votes an it is a draw (impeded the others to reach 277).

AFAIK it's past the deadline to add someone new to the ballot in most states (keep in mind that mail-in voting has already started; ballots are likely being printed in states/counties; etc). So Trump would stay on the ballot even if he's dead.

Also I wouldn't be so sure that if it was possible for Trump to drop out, Kamala would automatically win. Seems like many Kamala voters are energized by anti-Trump feelings.

At any rate, if such an improbable thing were to happen, maybe involving courts / SC, I think we would find an amicable solution. Probably call it a draw.

[ibminer]

Feels like the extreme sides of the left and right are up for election, with no other options available.  smh.

Tbh I don't see them being much more radical than Jimmy Carter vs Ronald Reagan.

I may have been disappointed with that election too, I wasn't born yet but I'd guess it was also a different time and the left/center/right lines of the country may have been different in terms of what they tolerated. Trump has occasionally been closer/more tolerant to white supremacy groups than any president in 2024 should ever be, plus has said some pretty crazy shit about people in general which doesn't line up to American values. Then the other side seems to want to destroy the economy through spending and taxing the rich, who then just seem to pass their additional costs onto the middle class and we all get so broke we start needing free food programs, free housing, and then we're heading into communism. They also don't seem to have any clue on how to handle conflicts in the middle east, so the only thing I feel like I can agree with them on these days is "Trump isn't a good choice", which he's not, nor is Kamala, and that's why this election sucks.

After watching the VP debate, I'd rather see both of these guys running for president, but I'd probably vote Vance there because he just makes more sense to me. I think Trump (cleverly) picked a VP who is more centered, but the reality is Trump will still make the decisions and Vance will have to go along with it. It's sad because I kinda feel like both of the VP's are more passionate about the country than either presidential candidate.

Immigrants can't vote until they're citizens. Contrary to popular belief in some qanon circles, there is no fast-track citizenship for asylum seekers (which is I think what most anti-immigration rhetoric is focused against). They have to apply for permanent resident status, which comes with all background checks and everything else that any permanent resident has to go through. There is even a medical exam involved for some reason. After that, getting a criminal conviction can result in deportation. Even something as benign (for a citizen) as DUI or being homeless can mean deportation (for a permanent resident). At the end of all this, after 5 years, one can apply for citizenship.~

I feel like this somehow has to be done before they come into the country. I'm all for immigration and agree the country was built on it, and many immigrants have helped the country, but it feels like these days many are inside of the country (without being vetted at all) and posing a burden on local resources without contributing to taxes or otherwise, at a much higher rate than ever before, while all of this is happening for (at least) 5 years?   This is assuming they apply and don't just find ways to make it on their own on the streets, which also isn't what we want. When people get background checks just to work somewhere, they're usually not living in the building until they are cleared... there must be other safe places (maybe ally countries?) we can have them go until they are cleared?

[suchmoon]

I feel like this somehow has to be done before they come into the country. I'm all for immigration and agree the country was built on it, and many immigrants have helped the country, but it feels like these days many are inside of the country (without being vetted at all) and posing a burden on local resources without contributing to taxes or otherwise, while all of this is happening for (at least) 5 years?   This is assuming they apply and don't just find ways to make it on their own on the streets, which also isn't what we want. When people get background checks just to work somewhere, they're usually not living in the building until they are cleared... there must be other safe places (maybe ally countries?) we can have them go until they are cleared?

Among other things (like which country would agree to this?), there are laws that establish due process for asylum. And Trump killed the immigration reform bill, which would have reduced the asylum case backlog with a combination of more resources to process those cases and more authority for the CBP to turn people away at the border. Trump should know that immigration laws have to followed (or changed) because his own executive order attempting to circumvent the law was shot down by courts in 2017... or 2018 or whenever that was.

The bottom line is, regardless how you feel about immigration, Trump and GOP are not going to solve any of the problems with it. They will milk the publicity as much as they can and then forget it until the next election when they can use it again.