Yep, America's the Titanic and many of us can see the iceberg but they are ideologically stuck to their course.....boomer myths allied to demographic change mean that even with never ending Trump presidencies it's going to slip below the waves eventually...probably states splitting from the union over time.

Their sinking is far more gradual than the two and a half hours for Titanic and without a secession crises it'll be an almost cringey self denying decline taking decades but when I look at it dispassionately it's only going one way.....far too many feeding off the corpse of a once great country......The immigration change in 64 marked the beginning of the end.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Aug 2023 2.43pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Edited by Mattconrov (02 Aug 2023 4.14pm)

" You're not laughing now are you". Nigel Farage 2016.

It wasn't successful. It is still in place. It is just being managed with more compassion. The only way to really stop this is at source. Not at the border. That demands working with the countries involved and dealing with the gangs who both drive people to attempt this, or traffic them. If it was simple it would have been done years ago.

It's just a right-wing mud-slinging myth to suggest it is encouraged for votes. That's a real delusion worthy of a Trump supporter.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

No difference at all once they're in America to stay. Forget about illegal immigrants voting. The point is that many registered voters will be influenced to go for the party they think will try to do the most about the problem and that won't be the Democrats.

That may be true but wasn’t the point being made or which I was commenting on.

If true then the accusation being thrown at the Democrats that they are deliberately allowing illegal immigration to harvest votes rather falls on its face.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

It’s interesting and to be taken seriously given its author. Somewhat surprising to see it appearing here in the Mail though.

That the USA is in a politically divided mess is beyond question. How this can be repaired an even bigger question.

Looking at it from here though I cannot see that being achieved by setting a higher bar for criminal prosecution for ex Presidents than for the rest of the people. Dershowitz argues for a Nixon” standard before a case proceeds.

For me that would take them further down the slippery slope into the swamp and not help a climb out of it. Surely everyone needs to be equally accountable under the law as a basic tenet of democracy?

That Trump may well be able to present a defence of believable deniability is true, as is that he is profiting politically from these prosecutions. That though is no reason for them not to be brought. Indeed it would be allowing politics to interfere with the law should they NOT be brought. Which is the exact opposite of what Trump and his supporters are claiming.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.