In the background, it’s disturbing to see how far left the Democrat Party has gone, and rapidly. Neophyte Alexandria Acacio-Cortez’s win in a Democratic primary against veteran Joe Crowley in [...]]]>
In the background, it’s disturbing to see how far left the Democrat Party has gone, and rapidly. Neophyte Alexandria Acacio-Cortez’s win in a Democratic primary against veteran Joe Crowley in New York was pretty shocking, given her extreme socialist views, but the district has become hispanic in recent years and the Democrats didn’t take the restaurant worker seriously.
In fact, the “Abolish ICE” open-borders movement has become remarkably mainstream in a short time, and it now includes well known Democrats like Senators Kamala Harris and Kirsten Gillibrand as well as an assortment of House members.
But even among the new pack of radicals, the extremism of Democrat gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum is noteworthy because of his support for ending borders and police.
The worst news is that he presently polling as the future governor of Florida, described in Tucker Carlson’s report:
TUCKER CARLSON: Tonight we take a closer look at the gubernatorial candidate in Florida: he’s named Andrew Gillum. He’s the mayor of Tallahassee, and currently ahead in the polls, amazingly, and if elected, he has an agenda that Florida has never seen before.
So Florida has more than half a million illegal immigrants living within the state’s borders: his response to this is to describe immigration enforcement of any kind as immoral. He’s called for abolishing ICE for example. Watch:
CNN REPORTER: Ron DeSantis, the Republican nominee, had a statement last night about you, Andrew Gillum: he says you want to abolish ICE. You do, correct?
FLORIDA GOVERNOR CANDIDATE ANDREW GILLUM: We want to replace ICE with the Department of Justice entity that has not been tarnished in the same way.
CNN REPORTER: So again he says you want to abolish ICE — you say you want to replace it — that’s basically the same thing.
CARLSON: That’s basically the same thing and he’s not embarrassed about it, but why would he be? He also has long-standing ties with a group called the Dream Defenders; it’s a radical left-wing group based in the state of Florida. Dream Defenders have denounced the very existence of police and prisons and called for the elimination of national borders. They have also called America the planet’s biggest bully.
Gillum’s response has been to brag about sneaking food to the Defenders when they occupied the capital of Florida. Gillum is also a big fan of genuinely radical billionaire George Soros. Watch this:
NBC NEWS HOST CHUCK TODD: You were supported by two billionaires who came in and helped your campaign, and largely your campaign early on was funded by them, George Soros and Tom Steyer. How do you square sort of a populist progressive campaign that wants to get big money, you know among other things, get big money out of politics, get dark money out of politics, and yet it’s billionaires that have to prop up your campaign?
GILLUM: Well I’ll tell you, I’m obviously deeply appreciative of Mr. Soros as well as Mr. Steyer, both men whom I’ve known for some time.
CARLSON: Well he’s not shy about it anyway, and although it has nothing directly to do with running the state of Florida, Gilliam thinks that Trump is a racist — racist! — who must be impeached.
GILLUM: This president is wrong for Florida on almost every issue, and as governor I will fight against each and every one of his wrongheaded racist and sexist policies. Donald Trump should be impeached now.
CARLSON: Racist! That guy could be running the state of Florida — not a small thing, not a small state.
Spare audio:
]]>Below, ICE agents arrest a foreign criminal.
A recent trash talker was New York Governor Andrew Cuomo during a campaign debate, where he stated, “New York state is the state that is suing Donald Trump for ripping babies from the arms of the mothers. New York state is the state that said we will not cooperate with ICE, they’re a bunch of thugs.”
That’s rather extreme, even for a Democrat.
Furthermore, a recent poll from the Associated Press suggests there is a limit to Trump Derangement Syndrome, and Democrat voters may not be as crazed against borders and ICE as their leaders. Only around a quarter of the public, including Democrats, supports abolishing ICE. So it’s been a curious political ploy for Dems to pursue.
]]>Border Enforcement: ICE and Family Separation, Associated Press, August 2018
The August 2018 AP-NORC Poll asked 1,055 adults what they think about U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, family separation, and how Trump is handling the issue of immigration.
In May, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a “zero-tolerance” policy toward people entering the United States illegally. It resulted in over 2,000 children being separated from their parents before the policy was reversed on June 20, 2018.1 Asked how the Trump administration is doing in its efforts to reunite families separated at the border, 58 percent say the administration is doing too little, 33 percent say it is doing the right amount, and 8 percent say it is doing too much. Majorities of Democrats (85 percent) and independents (64 percent) say the administration is doing too little, while a majority Republicans say it is doing the right amount (64 percent).
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency responsible for enforcing the country’s immigration laws and known as ICE, was at the forefront of much of the coverage of family separations and is seen more negatively than positively overall. Thirty percent say they have a favorable view of ICE compared to 37 percent who hold an unfavorable view. A substantial number – 33 percent – say they have no opinion on the agency. Fifty-seven percent of Democrats view ICE unfavorably, while 57 percent of Republicans view it favorably. Independents most often say they have no opinion (46 percent).
Protests have emerged calling for abolishing ICE, but few Americans support such a change. Just 24 percent of the public supports abolishing the agency, while 40 percent oppose and 34 percent have no opinion. In this instance, there is little difference across partisan lines, with similar minorities of Democrats, independents, and Republicans favoring abolishing the agency. (Continues)
The demographics of [...]]]>
The demographics of New York’s 14th congressional district are helpful to Ocasio, being 49.8 percent hispanic.
But more important was the tiny turnout, in part because New York is alone in splitting its state and federal primaries. Out of 214,750 active registered Democratic voters in the district, only 27,744 voted, just 13 percent of the total. With 98 percent of precincts counted, Ocasio-Cortez accrued 15,897 votes.
This is simply too small a sample of voters to base a refocus of a political party, but it shows how lost the Democrats are regarding their message. Ocasio is on the far edge of the fringe, favoring bilingual campaign posters and abolishing ICE.
]]>Most voters stayed home for stunning Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez win, New York Post, June 28, 2018
Here’s what you get when you hold primary elections in June: A tiny percentage of party voters determine the congressional candidates.
Even in the most competitive races Tuesday, more than 80 percent of eligible voters stayed home.
In the race that caused an earthquake in the Democratic Party, 28-year-old newcomer Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez upset longtime Rep. Joe Crowley, 57 percent to 42 percent.
But only about 13 percent of registered Democrats turned out to vote in the 14th Congressional District that takes in parts of Queens and the Bronx, according to a preliminary city Board of Elections tally.
There are 214,750 active registered Democratic voters in the district. Only 27,744 voted, and Ocasio-Cortez won by more than 4,000 votes.
[. . .]
Voters generally turn out in much higher percentages in the general election than primaries.
But New Yorker powerbrokers make matters worse by holding two separate primaries — one for congressional races in June and another for state legislative races in September — preceding the general election in November.
“It’s voter burnout — not voter turnout,” [Steve] Romalewski said.
“The state Legislature could change the date of the primary to encourage higher turnout, but they don’t.”
The year’s results generally mirror the low turnout of prior years, Romalewski said.
That’s odd, since Democrats once claimed to represent working Americans, but that message has disappeared with [...]]]>
That’s odd, since Democrats once claimed to represent working Americans, but that message has disappeared with the party’s rush to diversity and maximum immigration of varying legalities. Clearly those issues cannot coexist, since workers benefit when employment markets are not overwhelmed with job seekers. The principle of supply and demand still rules in the economic universe.
Ex-President Obama recently appeared at a Democrat fundraiser, exhorting party members to get a message beyond just Resistance to Trump, but specifics about what that message should be were not reported.
On Friday, Tucker Carlson sketched out the new Democrat territory.
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: For centuries, America fought crime by hiring police, but now Democrats have a new plan: fire the police and redefine lawbreaking as an act of virtue. If there’s no enforcement, there’s no crime. Well with shocking speed this has become normal on the left to demand the abolition of ICE and the 20,000 agents who work therein and enforce our immigration laws. Just a few weeks ago, it was only a few activists on the far left who were calling for this, and then this week on Tuesday, congressional candidate Alexandria Acacio-Cortez won a Democratic primary against Joe Crowley in New York.
She ran on abolishing ICE, and now in a flash ambitious Democrats are scrambling aboard the bandwagon. Last night for example Senator and career opportunities Kirsten Gillibrand of New York said that she favors abolishing ICE, the opposite of her opinion from a few years ago. Kamala Harris of California says she’s open to that as well. Bill de Blasio, the mayor of New York, has also called for abolishing ICE. So have seven Democrats in the House. This is gathering steam, this idea, and yet no one who’s advocating for it seems to be thinking even for a moment about what the effect would be if we abolished ICE.
For example, as we speak, millions of people want to enter this country. The entire city of Tijuana Mexico is already filled with tens of thousands of would-be asylum seekers from all over the world — Central America, Africa, everywhere, as well as as many as a half a million people who’ve been deported from the United States. The net effect — Tijuana is not a pleasant place to live. What will happen when word gets out that nobody in any country on the globe has anything to fear from our immigration authorities?
If you can make it past our Border Patrol and get a tourist visa you can overstay, and you can never be deported. Once people know that, how many people will move here illegally every year — a million, five million 10 million? Who knows? How many that might be criminals or extremists or future welfare dependents? We don’t know that either. We do know it won’t be long if that happens until dozens of US cities resemble what Tijuana looks like right now.
None of these new anti-ICE lawmakers seem to be asking any of these questions; they don’t seem to care what the answers might be because they’re irrelevant. They know that if we abolish ICE and our borders become irrelevant, they’ll get what they want — a new body of voters who can shove aside the troublesome people who are already American citizens. People demanding the abolition of ICE aren’t looking out for those.
Ordinary Americans don’t want ICE abolished. A new poll from Harvard shows that even 60 percent of Democrats don’t want ICE abolished. it’s a radical position, but it’s also the new normal on the left.
Tucker Carlson presented some remarks on Thursday about the insanity of the left’s anti-borders movement and the anarchy it would create.
What’s frightening is that the Abolish ICE rhetoric is becoming more mainstream among Democrats. Anything to attack President Trump.
]]>TUCKER CARLSON: There was an ideological revolution on the left this week, and hardly anybody noticed it. For months, you may have noticed, members of the progressive fringe had been calling for abolishing ICE — that’s the agency responsible for enforcing our immigration laws. That’s not a mainstream position obviously, and Democratic leaders seemed embarrassed by it. Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer opposed the idea; so did many others. And then everything changed.
Two days ago, a self-described socialist called Alexandria Acacio-Cortez unexpectedly won a Democratic primary in New York. Acacio-Cortez ran on abolishing ICE. Suddenly, in days, getting rid of ICE is something many Democrats say they are for. Now midterm elections are approaching, so it’s time for the rest of us to take this idea seriously.
What exactly would happen if the left killed ICE? Well here’s some of the facts about ICE. ICE is responsible for all immigration enforcement within the United States. Last year, ICE arrested 32,958 illegal immigrants with criminal records; almost 5,000 of those were members of violent gangs. Without ICE, all of those criminals would still be at large within our borders. Last year ICE also seized 2,370 pounds of fentanyl: that’s the narcotic that is driving the single deadliest drug crisis in the history of this country. That’s enough fentanyl to kill every single American citizen by overdose. Without ICE that fentanyl would still be in circulation.
And of course ICE is also the body responsible for deporting anybody illegally inside the United States. Last year ICE removed more than 226,000 people who broke American law. ICE did that because ICE is the only agency we have to do it. Without ICE, criminal aliens could stay in this country with impunity; that would include gang members, drug smugglers, child molesters, convicted murderers — they could not be deported. Companies, meanwhile, could bring in an unlimited number of illegal workers that would crash wages for American citizens, even more than it already has. It would be a disaster, but it’s the point.
The campaign against ICE is a campaign for open borders, and some are honest enough to admit that. During protests against the administration, activists have chanted this: “No borders, no nations, stop the deportations.” No borders, no nations — one leads to the other, always. Without borders, nations are impossible.
If we passed a law tomorrow allowing strangers to live in your house would it still be your house? No it would not be; it would be everybody’s house. Soon it would be nobody’s house.
That’s the left’s plan for America. Finally they are saying it out loud.