The CHC’s Tuesday proposals also come as the group has been purposefully excluded from Senate negotiations on border policy, which reportedly have centered on ways to curtail asylum and further fortify the border without addressing calls to overhaul the legal immigration system and appeals to give longtime undocumented immigrants a path to apply for legal status.

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240205133352/https://thehill.com/latino/4437280-hispanic-caucus-immigration-senate-talks-biden-border/

  • queermunist she/her
    link
    fedilink
    -28 months ago

    That’s my point! Democrats did this bipartisan bill to appeal to right-wingers and they do not care that it alienates their base.

    What part of that do you disagree with?

    • @Rapidcreek
      link
      -38 months ago

      Bipartisanship means that you seldom satisfy all of your base. It does mean you get shit done, usually.

      • gregorum
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Their point is that the Republicans in the house were not going to pass a bill no matter what the Democrats or a bipartisan group did. Therefore, they should not have wasted their time.

        I don’t happen to agree with this, but that’s what their point is

        • @Rapidcreek
          link
          -28 months ago

          Yes, it was a bluff that failed by Republicans.

          • @Ensign_Crab
            link
            English
            -18 months ago

            And we’re not talking about funding Ukraine anymore. Republicans got what they wanted. Democrats get nothing. So both sides are happy.

      • @agitatedpotato
        link
        08 months ago

        Oh so its gonna pass because it’s bipartisan?

        • @Rapidcreek
          link
          -28 months ago

          Didn’t see the “usually” part?

          • @agitatedpotato
            link
            0
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            So it sounds like you’re agreeing it’s not gonna pass, so why should they be bipartisan with the bill if it doesn’t move the needle?

            • @Rapidcreek
              link
              -28 months ago

              I’m of the opinion that indicators are that it won’t go to the floor of the house for a vote because it would pass. But, the fat lady hasn’t sung yet. Bipartisan work usually does move the needle, but obviously not with MAGA Mike.

      • @Ensign_Crab
        link
        English
        -18 months ago

        The only shit Democrats got done here was kissing Republicans’ asses and getting nothing out of it at all.

        So centrists will soon be calling it the most progressive shit ever.

        • @Rapidcreek
          link
          08 months ago

          Not at all. Democrats called their bluff. Republicans said they wanted a border bill, and they got one. Now they’ve proven it wasn’t about the border at all.

          • @Ensign_Crab
            link
            English
            08 months ago

            Hooray. We proved the obvious. We also proved that Democrats will do what Republicans want for the sheer joy of getting nothing out of it.

      • queermunist she/her
        link
        fedilink
        -58 months ago

        Seldom satisfy? This shit was so bad it’s enough to make people not vote for them. If this bipartisan bill had been successful it would have resulted in an extremely bad policy.

        Fortunately Republicans would rather get nothing done than get everything they want if it means Democrats can’t have a “win”.

        • @Rapidcreek
          link
          -28 months ago

          So in the end, you complain that you don’t like the terms of a bill that won’t pass anyway. Sounds like a good use of time.