Bitcoin Forum
February 23, 2026, 12:25:04 PM *
News: Community awards 2025
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: American Immigration Bush/Regan Presidential Debate 1980 - Trump/Harris 2024  (Read 53 times)
_Miracle (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1182
Merit: 705


Do due diligence


View Profile
February 17, 2026, 08:49:06 PM
 #1

The difference between 1980 - 2024


George H. W. Bush And Ronald Reagan Debate On Immigration In 1980 | TIME
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsmgPp_nlok


‘They're Eating the Dogs:' Trump Makes False Claim About Migrants | WSJ News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHycpIhnFcU

BTW I'm not for open borders but for better processes for our migrant workers.
Against masked federal agents in our streets taking people without due-process.
My political views are:

Remove money from politics
Ranked Choice Voting

There 'used' to be more truth in forums than anywhere else. TikTok Miracle2aT  Spock: "I am expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously. To which are you referring?"  INTJ-A
longyenthanh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1272
Merit: 250


View Profile
February 18, 2026, 04:00:36 AM
 #2

When you compare the 1980 Reagan–Bush debate on immigration with today’s rhetoric, the shift in tone is striking. In 1980, even within a Republican primary, the conversation focused on practicality, economic realities, and treating immigrants with a degree of dignity. There was recognition that migrant labor plays a role in the economy and that the system itself needed reform.

Fast forward to 2024, and much of the debate has become emotionally charged and sensationalized. Claims like migrants “eating pets” dominate headlines instead of serious policy discussions. Whether someone is conservative, liberal, or independent, that kind of rhetoric doesn’t help solve real problems.

For me, this isn’t about open borders. I don’t support open borders. I support better processes. If we rely on migrant labor in agriculture, construction, and service industries, then we should have functional, legal pathways for people to work here. That reduces exploitation, weakens cartels, and strengthens the rule of law.

At the same time, due process matters. Federal agents operating with masks and detaining people without transparency or clear accountability raises serious constitutional concerns. Enforcement should exist, but it should follow clear legal standards and respect civil liberties.

More broadly, I think part of why our politics has become so extreme is structural. Money dominates campaigns, which rewards outrage over solutions. Reforms like removing big money from politics and implementing Ranked Choice Voting could incentivize more serious, policy-focused candidates instead of those who thrive on division.

We can have secure borders and humane processes at the same time. Those goals are not mutually exclusive. The real difference between 1980 and 2024 isn’t just policy it’s the tone and incentives driving the conversation.


A very interesting and substantive post. But what's most impressive is that you wrote all this in just 6 minutes, because your previous post was this one:

...

You must really enjoy this topic. You should consider writing such texts professionally!

Sorry for the off-topic, but such talents are worth noting.
_Miracle (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1182
Merit: 705


Do due diligence


View Profile
Today at 04:59:41 AM
 #3

When you compare the 1980 Reagan–Bush debate on immigration with today’s rhetoric, the shift in tone is striking. In 1980, even within a Republican primary, the conversation focused on practicality, economic realities, and treating immigrants with a degree of dignity. There was recognition that migrant labor plays a role in the economy and that the system itself needed reform.

Fast forward to 2024, and much of the debate has become emotionally charged and sensationalized. Claims like migrants “eating pets” dominate headlines instead of serious policy discussions. Whether someone is conservative, liberal, or independent, that kind of rhetoric doesn’t help solve real problems.

For me, this isn’t about open borders. I don’t support open borders. I support better processes. If we rely on migrant labor in agriculture, construction, and service industries, then we should have functional, legal pathways for people to work here. That reduces exploitation, weakens cartels, and strengthens the rule of law.

At the same time, due process matters. Federal agents operating with masks and detaining people without transparency or clear accountability raises serious constitutional concerns. Enforcement should exist, but it should follow clear legal standards and respect civil liberties.

More broadly, I think part of why our politics has become so extreme is structural. Money dominates campaigns, which rewards outrage over solutions. Reforms like removing big money from politics and implementing Ranked Choice Voting could incentivize more serious, policy-focused candidates instead of those who thrive on division.

We can have secure borders and humane processes at the same time. Those goals are not mutually exclusive. The real difference between 1980 and 2024 isn’t just policy it’s the tone and incentives driving the conversation.


A very interesting and substantive post. But what's most impressive is that you wrote all this in just 6 minutes, because your previous post was this one:

...

You must really enjoy this topic. You should consider writing such texts professionally!

Sorry for the off-topic, but such talents are worth noting.

Well it was nice that someone posted a response. And even better than my post so I'll repost in appreciation for the summary.

There 'used' to be more truth in forums than anywhere else. TikTok Miracle2aT  Spock: "I am expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously. To which are you referring?"  INTJ-A
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!