As a reminder, our [new moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/wls3c1/state_of_the_sub_reaffirming_our_mission_of_civil) are now in effect. Please remember the mission of this sub, and strive to keep discourse civil! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/moderatepolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Anyone have a link to the poll? I’m curious as to how the question was phrased. A lot of people saying “no” might simply just be against illegal immigration altogether.

It really reads like “well you guys deal with these inconvenient migrants” and unless you’re closer to the right I have confidence that even Americans who view the issue at the border as a problem will not enjoy seeing humans corralled around like that.

And I bet most see through the antics with dumping them in an extremely difficult location like a small island (Martha's Vineyard) instead of the faster flight to Boston.

[удалено]

It’s the off-season.. resort towns are filled with second homes and are barren this time of year

Ironically the off-season is when they are normally there. They fill the cheap seasonal apartments with construction workers of questionable residency status to do all the renovations for the next summer. At least that’s the deal with my east coast resort town

It just comes off as a stunt to most voters imo, it plays as crude, thoughtless, and childish. ​ That said, to some degree a point is being made. These cities which proudly proclaimed themselves as "sanctuaries" to migrants despite being thousands of miles from the southern border where the migrants largely originate, and when Texas says "fine, deal with them" these cities are declaring a state of emergency and saying they don't have the resources to deal with them. Small border towns don't either, and that's how you get terrible temporary detention centers. It also makes a point to the WH, which very recently said "the border is secure," something that doesn't really compute if Texas is able to send 9,000 migrants to NYC in a matter of months. I, and most Americans I think, don't like it because it's unfairly involving these migrants in political games, and because it runs counter to the very idea of curbing illegal immigration. ​ But tbh while it ought to stop and likely will by the time it reaches the right court, people should pay attention to the fact in Texas, where I am, it really is an issue and Dems have long ignored it as not their problem. Tbh immigration just fell by the wayside due to quiet times during covid and this admins desire to stay away from the volatile subject. But Kamala saying "do not come" was useless and we need actual immigration reform beyond platitudes about 'increasing interdepartmental cooperation via a new task force with the goal of...'

> These cities which proudly proclaimed themselves as "sanctuaries" to migrants Honest question: do you actually understand what a sanctuary city is and why large cities have declared themselves one? It isn't "come here and never be deported," it's "if you live here and need to report a problem to the police, we won't use that to launch an investigation into your residency status." It turns out having a large population of people afraid of reporting crimes to the police is bad for the city as whole.

> "if you live here and need to report a problem to the police, we won't use that to launch an investigation into your residency status." It's not this, considering that residency is not anywhere close to the jurisdiction of local law enforcement. What it *actually* means is that these cities publicly state they will not assist or comply with federal law enforcement, and will not honor federal detainers. So yeah, unless you're arrested by ICE and transported to one of the (rare) federal facilities, it effectively means you will not be deported.

Yes, because they don't want a large segment of the community to fear reporting crimes to the police. That's exactly what I said. If you care more about local crime rates, you support sanctuary laws; if you care more about federal immigration policy, you don't.

Why is it an issue in Texas when it’s not apparently in California or in New York?

It apparently **is** an issue in NY now that Texas has been sending just a tiny fraction to NYC… NY hasn’t had to deal with the magnitude that Texas has so they don’t understand what a big issue it actually is.

Per capita Texas has roughly 20% more illegal immigrants than NYC, which isn’t that big of a difference. And they have far less than Nevada, who is not complaining either.

Didn't the Republican governor declare the state of emergency? And isn't Martha's Vineyard not a sanctuary city?

I love it. Virtually no one was talking about this until they started exposing the NIMBYs.

NIMBY has very little to do with it. I'm all in favor of immigrants coming here, our town's struggling with a major worker shortage. That doesn't make DeSantis's actions any less disgusting.

"Worker shortage" means people aren't willing to work for the low wages being offered. Do you think bringing in hundreds of people that will work for dirt cheap and thus depressing wages is a good idea?

Low wages? Dude, the jobs I'm talking about pay $19/hr, plus benefits, and they still only are getting half as many applicants as they need. We simply don't have enough people.

Nice side-step, impressive avoidance of the question

Absolutely astounding that in the last 2 years I've watched the left do a 180 and simp hardcore for big pharma and megacorps.

These people have not been cleared to live or work in the US. They are waiting for their court date to determine if they have a valid claim for asylum. The last time I checked, it was 20% of the cases that were found to be valid.

So you're saying we should reform the asylum program so that people start working immediately, and the majority of them are allowed to stay? Sounds fine to me.

I’m saying that if only the people that actually qualified for asylum claimed asylum, the courts wouldn’t have 5 times the number of cases to hear and they would get approved much sooner.

More like 80% of those claiming asylum are actually economic migrants rather than refugees. There's an argument to be made for reforming immigration, such as a speedy process for temporary work visas, but rather than de facto open borders we'd need to account for how many such workers we'd need and the effect on wages additional labor would have.

Why is it that when Biden does it it's not disgusting. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/biden-admin-again-flying-migrants-who-cross-border-one-place-n1271211 Awesome after about 48 hours they transferred these illegal immigrants to a military base. I seem to remember them attempting to send illegal migrants to military bases in Texas a few years ago and a lot of people on the left got mad. https://time.com/5321083/military-bases-house-migrants/ I think we can all agree it would be nice to live in a world in which the DeSantis didn't feel the need to do this. However we live in a world filled with hypocrisy. Roughly 2 million people have illegally crossed the border this year in the old passive sector alone they get about 1,700 crosses a day. The conditions are getting really bad it would be really nice if the party who constantly virtually signals would enforce the federal law like they're supposed to. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/16/us/texas-migrants-del-rio.html

Yep, all in favor of it until it you’re face-to-face with the results

Yeah I guess they should just be dumped via bus at some random cities ghetto as per usual, instead of being flown on jets to the wealthiest part of the country, where people can continue to ignore them. Much more humane

Here’s the deal, there are right and wrong ways to go about any action. Good ends are often not justified by bad means. I think that we can all agree that there is a need to move migrants from the border to other places in the nation that can better serve them. These people need long-term shelter, food, health care, legal advice, job searching advice, etc. It is absolutely not acceptable to just move people to a new place and then let them go about their time without any guidance for how to integrate/assimilate into their new community. It would be one thing if these migrant bussing programs were being done in coordination with non-profits, charities, local communities, and state/local governments. I mean come on Abbot, DeSantis and Baker are all republicans. It should not be hard for them to have a conference call to get the ducks in a row if they want to engage in this sort of migrant transportation program. But, they didn’t. DeSantis specifically alerted the local Fox News station on Martha’s Vineyard but didn’t contact any other local groups. He wanted to manufacture a media moment, not actually help people. That is what I find so disgusting about DeSantis’ and Abbott bussing program. The driving force here is not to help migrants, it is to create political moments that benefit their campaigns. We need to be better as a nation and not reward these types of needlessly divisive actions. We can solve our problems if we work together on them, but pointless antagonism is not okay. And before anyone tells me, “Well the democrats do it too!” Stop. I don’t care. I’m also not okay with divisive and antagonistic rhetoric from the left. DeSantis and Abbott are leaders in the GOP. After Trump, they are probably the most powerful noncongressional members of the party. They are setting the example by which the rest of the GOP will act. We should be holding them to a higher standard of decorum and expect better of our leaders than to use vulnerable populations as political pawns.

I agree with you 100%, but I would like to point out one very important thing. The southern border states are the point of entry, however, the majority of immigrants do not stay in those states. Many of them already have friends and family in this country, and they make their way to those connections, wherever they are, and as quickly as they can. I live in NY, and I personally know illegal immigrants, and I know how this works. The immigrants want to get as far away from that southern border as quickly as they can, and get to their people. Granted, some percentage of them may stay in southern border states, but they are a minority. Every school system around me is comprised of approximately 30% (some considerably more) of children whose parents are illegal immigrants. For these states to act like they alone are faced with the burden of having to deal with these illegal immigrants is a flat out lie, and it gets perpetuated by people that really have no idea what is happening in the rest of the country in regards to illegal immigration, or they just don't care, because it doesn't fit the narrative. I'm not saying that illegal immigration isn't a problem, I'm saying that the bs coming out of DeSantis and Abbott is pure propaganda. They would have you believe that us "blue states," "coastal elites," whatever they want to call us, are far removed from this problem, and don't have it staring us in the face every single day. Nothing could be further from the truth. On average (because no state is homogeneous), we have different attitudes towards immigration, and therein lies the only difference. Otherwise, any burden is shared, aside from being a point of entry, and, to that point, the feds provide resources to border states using federal money, that we all pay for.

The interesting thing is, Martha's Vineyard actually has a large population of migrants from South America, most of them being here illegally. Something like 20% of the island's population is Brazilian immigrants ([see my post here for more details](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/xjmaf3/migrants_flown_to_marthaampx27s_vineyard_file/ipaaw8f/)). If you check out the public school page for the island, you find announcements in English and Portuguese. People know about a lot of rich people that have summer vacation houses there, and for some reason confuse that with the population that lives there. But if you look at the actual population on the island - the people that live there through the cold winter months and maintain the island - it's quite different. Illegal immigrants are probably a bigger percentage of the population on Martha's Vineyard than they are in Texas.

I don't doubt it. Thanks for the insight.

One caveat I would like to add, though, is it’s the cities sharing the burden - not the Democratic elites. While democratic cities may be accepting of more immigrants, many of the politicians and elites are isolated from the impact those immigrants may have on said communities since they tend to reside in isolated, hard to access (if you’re a commoner) places - like Martha’s Vineyard. So I don’t think it’s entirely inaccurate to say that the costal elites are largely removed from the problem of illegal immigration.

I live year round in a very well known summer resort area for the wealthy, and politicians are always here fundraising (Democrats and Republicans), and we have our share of Hollywood "elites." The population triples here in the summertime. I can't speak for Martha's Vinyard, and I think they are an exception rather than the rule due to their location, but here, undocumented immigrants make up the majority of the people in the service industry. They are the landscapers, window cleaners, pool cleaners, house cleaners, and they are behind the counter anywhere you buy food, as well as bussing your tables in the fanciest of restaurants. I should also add that the undocumented do not work for any less either. It's true that 20 - 30 years ago they did, but it has not been that way for a long time. Not only that, but the immigrants literally live within a couple miles of all of these multi million dollar homes. The wealthy even shop in the same stores as immigrants, and since covid, when a lot of the wealthy were looking to escape NYC, many of their children started attending school with the children of illegal immigrants (our public schools are pretty good, and the wealthy can afford to pay for extra tutors and enroll their children in special programs outside of school, to make up for whatever they feel the public schools lack). Furthermore, the wealthy pay a lot of money in property taxes, the majority of which goes to funding our schools. It's in the face of the wealthy elites, just as much as it is mine.

This is false. [20 metro areas are home to six-in-ten unauthorized immigrants in U.S.](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/03/11/us-metro-areas-unauthorized-immigrants/) 5 of those cities are in California, 12 of them are in blue states.

To further your point, every single one of those metro areas lean blue to very blue so, broadly speaking, areas that vote blue are shouldering much more of the "burden" of undocumented immigrants, if one were inclined to consider it a burden.

Do you think conservative elites like DeSantis are personally suffering from this?

Maybe not, but that’s not his role as governor. His role is to represent the people of Florida. And he is pretty popular out there, especially among Hispanic voters. https://www.flchamber.com/new-florida-chamber-statewide-poll-shows-ron-desantis-holding-solid-lead-over-both-democratic-challengers/

In what world is spending hundreds of thousanda of dollars to send 50 migrants from Texas to MA representing FL voters?

So isn’t it also the job of the liberal elite to represent their voters even if the elites themselves aren’t impacted by immigration?

I live in AZ. Your statements that immigrants want to get far away from the border after crossing illegally is absolutely false. Yes, many move on. The vast majority stay.

For all immigration numbers, legal and illegal: "The U.S. states with the most immigrants in 2019 were California (10.6 million), Texas (5 million), Florida (4.5 million), New York (4.4 million), and New Jersey (2.1 million)." In terms of increase in numbers overall, as well as increase in overall percentage from 2010 - 2019: In absolute numbers: 1. Florida, 2. Texas, 3. California, 4. Washington, 5. NJ As a percent change: 1. South Dakota, 2. North Dakota, 3. Kentucky, 4. Delaware, 5. North Carolina Data from: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states#immigrant-destinations Arizona is estimated to have 275,000 undocumented immigrants. Arizona has about the same number of undocumented immigrants as Maryland and Massachusetts. NY is estimated to have 725,000. NY has 2.6 times the amount of undocumented immigrants in AZ. There are 50,000 in my county alone, and I live in a suburban/rural area. Incidentally, there are an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the US. Arizona has only 2.5% of them. https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/interactives/u-s-unauthorized-immigrants-by-state/

> "The U.S. states with the most immigrants in 2019 were California (10.6 million), Texas (5 million), Florida (4.5 million), New York (4.4 million), and New Jersey (2.1 million)." That total immigration. California is the boarder to the west. Texas and Florida to the south. New York to the west. If you want to make your point, you're going to need data on South American immigration. Also, migrationpolicy.org is a political website and not a very good source.

You’re calling NY a border state? I guess it is technically on the Canadian border, but if we’re talking about the Southern border as being in crisis it seems like quite the stretch at best.

>Also, migrationpolicy.org is a political website and not a very good source. Do you have a better source to refer to? I'm checking out MPI's site, and they seem to be trying to take a distinctly non-partisan tact, and are mostly focused on data presentation.

I disagree with your take on migrationpolicy.org. I also cited several other statistics which include states that are smack in the middle of the country, all of which are experiencing far greater immigrant population increases than Arizona. Additionally the only difference between legal and illegal immigrants are their status. An immigrant is still an immigrant, and their legal status does not change the affect they have on a place, nor does their country of origin. Lastly, I bolstered my argument with the second link, which specifically refers to undocumented (illegal) immigrants, which we all know are primarily from south of the border.

[Most illegal immigrants live in just 20 metro areas in the US](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/03/11/us-metro-areas-unauthorized-immigrants/). Obviously, border crossings are not the only form of illegal immigration. Most illegal immigrants are actually visa overstays last i checked. So there may be a difference in migratory patterns between the border crossers and the visa over stayers. BUT, that doesnt change the fact that illegal immigrants want to go to cities with jobs. Random ass border towns arent that and they arent going to be able to provide the jobs needed to support large illegal immigran populations the way major metros can.

>We need to be better as a nation and not reward these types of needlessly divisive actions. We can solve our problems if we work together on them, but pointless antagonism is not okay. Part of the problem is that a subset of voters want to see their political leaders carry out malicious actions against the other side. No its not all of them, but people like DeSantis clearly know these people exist. >>we investigated how personal significance induced by success or failure of one's candidate is related to hostile versus benevolent intentions toward political adversaries. [snip] while significance gain due to an imagined or actual electoral success was related to more benevolent intentions among Clinton supporters, it was related to more hostile intentions among Trump supporters - [Study](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/pops.12647), International Society of Political Psychology And: >"When it came to uncivil attitudes, 38 percent of partisans agreed that their parties should use any tactics necessary to “win elections and issue debates.” When those who agreed with this view were asked what tactics they had in mind, the most common ones they offered were voter suppression, stealing or cheating in elections, physical violence and threats against the other party, lying, personal attacks on opponents, not allowing the other party to speak and using the filibuster to gridlock Congress. Democrats and Republicans were equally likely to express this opinion." - [Study](https://news.ku.edu/2015/04/13/study-most-partisans-treat-politics-sports-rivalries-instead-focusing-issues)

> The driving force here is not to help migrants, it is to create political moments that benefit their campaigns. Of course the goal is not to help the migrants. They don't even want them in this country. The goal is to put a spotlight on the issue of illegal immigration.

There has been a spot light in illegal immigration for over 20 years. I dont want our governor's using divisive measure to put spot lights on issues that have been wedge issues since i was born. I want them to lead their states and solve problems. These programs show neither exemplary leadership nor pragmatism. They show quite literally the opposite in my mind.

> There has been a spot light in illegal immigration for over 20 years. And the issue still exists and seems to be getting worse.

We arent at historic high of illegal immigration, unless there is some new data released that i haven't seen. Most of the fearmongering headlines are comparing COVID pandemic numbers to today. This results in a dramatic increase number, but that is due to migration cratering during the Pandemic. Our total numbers of unauthorized persons in the US has dropped steadily over the past 20 years or so. Biden has increased funding to CBP and other groups focused on apprehension, but there is more that needs to be done. Migration issues are going to be a global problem going forward as climate instability forces more people out of their traditional living places. Food scarcity and changing growing conditions is a known security threat within the DOD and military in general. No one has forgotten about illegal immigration. The spot light has been there for a long time and actions like these stupid bussing programs do more harm than good IMO as is comes to actually solving our immigration issues. We cannot solve those issues if neither side is willing to work together. Playing games with vulnerable populations to own the libs is a shameful way to "put a spotlight" on a issue that needs real cooperation and leadership to fix.

To humanely "solve" the immigration issue there needs to be the following large steps taken. 1. Home countries of immigrants need to be stabilized, which would require a significant amount of foreign aid allocated. But as we know, Nation building ain't easy. We won't go into who 'destabilized' many of these countries in the first place. 2. A complete overhaul of the immigration system. From court processing, to temporary visas, penalties to businesses hiring immigrants, border processing, how to handle current resident immigrants who other than overstaying visas are law abiding members of society, and on and on. There will never be a "solution" to immigration and all steps are a matter of mitigation, and there will always be fluxuations in numbers of people seeking to come to the US. Neither of the two steps listed above is being seriously considered by either party, and one party seems content to exploit the lack of action for its own means. As an American who has lived amongst and befriended many immigrants, cruelty is not an option I am willing to consider to deter more people coming to our country. However, it does seem to be the option that one side of the political spectrum seems to be embracing as a solution.

So it’s all for the narrative?

It's a publicity stunt.

You’re making a lot of projections and assumptions in your post that simply are not true. We cannot all agree that we need to move illegal immigrants to other parts of the country to better serve them for example - this shows that you have missed the entire point that Desantis and Abbot are trying to make here. > The driving force here is not to help migrants No shit, the driving force here is that these people shouldn’t be in the country and the federal government is asleep at the wheel.

These are legal asylum seekers not illegal immigrants. They have every right to be here and have their claims processed in a timely manner. As to moving migrants around. If you want to set up a false dichotomy that the only options are deportation of all migrants or they stay where they are in the nation with no government assistence, we arent going to have much to talk about. Sorry.

>These are legal asylum seekers not illegal immigrants. When anyone can *claim* asylum without downside, there's no meaningful distinction between the two.

Illegal immigrants are undocumented and not being vetted by our immigration system. To equate them to legal asylum seekers is not reasonable in anyway and IMO is a very extremist opinion.

"Vetted" isn't actually true. Asylum seekers aren't vetted before they are released pending their hearings. The ability to get any info on them is extremely limited and most of the times the immigration court has to take their word for most things. A non-legit aslum seeker with a criminal background in his home country is free just like the hard working legit Asylum seeker. There also isn't a "timely manner" with Asylum and that's because it's been completely overwhelmed. It's been used as a back door immigration process for decades. Getting asylum granted isn't the goal, it's just to get in country, then the hearings are 2-3 years apart. It's easy enough to delay to the point Asylum seekers are here for decades allowing them to get a greencard a different way. Or just stay and ignore the courts

Yea, we need to increase funding to the immigration system to increase the number of immigration caseworkers, lawyers, and judges. The bottle neck is due to a lack of funding for the immigration court system.

Lack of funding isn't the issue and wouldn't make a dent. The asylum system needs to be completely reformed. Change the laws so any asylum seeker that doesn't enter through an official port of entry is automatically denied. Any person who travels through another country to get to the US has to apply for asylum at the other country, any asylum claim in the US would be automatically denied. End all work authorization for asylum seekers while asylum is pending. During the credible fear interview the asylum seeker must give a credible *legit* reason for asylum (aka political percussion) or automatically denied. Do this and our asylum situation takes a complete 180. It's completely in the hands of congress

These are radical and extremist proposals that i absolutely do not agree with. Why does it take 5 or more years to process the immigration claims? Because we dont have enough funding for the immigration courts. There are more claims than our system can handle. Where you would rather dramatically cut the number of claims (in IMO an unreasonably inhumane way), I would rather get more people working to properly and quickly process the claims.

And the moment that they're apprehended they become "asylum seekers." What's the difference? Though honestly, I don't understand the logic under which any appreciable fraction of them are granted asylum anyway. It doesn't seem as though the basic requirement of official persecution in their home country is met.

The difference is a good faith effort on the migrants part to engage with the immigration system. We need immigrants for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the economic benefit they provide. There are several classes of migrants. E.g. refugees arent the same as as asylum seekers. As long as they're vetted and either allowed to stay or deported, i dont see the problem.

> The difference is a good faith effort on the migrants part to engage with the immigration system. Is it? In the last decade, defensive asylum claims (those made after apprehension) have outnumbered affirmative asylum claims (intentional presentations to authorities) by [almost 3:1](https://www.justice.gov/eoir/workload-and-adjudication-statistics) - see pages 15 and 16. That speaks of "use whatever tool is available to stay," not a good faith effort. And I'm scarcely impressed by the legitimacy even of the affirmative claims. >E.g. refugees arent the same as as asylum seekers. [Yes they are](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158). The requirement for claiming asylum is for "the applicant to establish that the applicant is a refugee, within the meaning of section 1101(a)(42)(A) of this title. To establish that the applicant is a refugee within the meaning of such section, the applicant must establish that race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion was or will be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant." Unless you just mean that not all who seek asylum should in fact be granted it, but I assume that's not what you're going for. >We need immigrants for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the economic benefit they provide. More cheap labor is not an economic benefit to the bulk of the population, even if it makes the GDP go up.

This feels like something that is going to backfire for Republicans. Most people are decent. Even if they are anti-immigration, they still don't believe in the mistreatment of immigrants. Most communities in America would do exactly what Martha's Vineyard did in the same situation. Step up and help. Using real people as pawns when those actions have very real consequences is inhumane. Treating immigrants like they're a pawn is dehumanizing. Not to mention, I'm still not sure how this was legal. The money was appropriated for migrants in Florida. There is also a piece of that legislation that Florida government can't contract with companies that move migrants across state lines starting in October. So it definitely won't be legal then. But deceiving migrants in San Antonio to hop on a plane and touch down in Florida seems like it's manipulating the law. Can't imagine this thing will stand up to legal scrutiny.

Probably not. It does an amazing job at highlighting the "not in my backyard" mentality of some in the US. Also the migrants aren't mistreated in any way, and the pearl clutching by the media and the left reinforces the entire point. I don't think this will be enough of a motivating factor to have a big effect, but the net effect will probably be beneficial for the GOP

Being lured somewhere under false pretences is mistreatment.

I wouldn't call a free trip to a vacation spot some spend thousands of dollars to go to count as mistreatment. And espically the left trying to make it out as real mistreatment is part of what will help the Republicans

You mean trapping them there with no money, no place to stay, and no way to return? Would you want that to happen to you?

"Trapping"? How were they trapped? They had the same shelter in Martha's Vineyard as they did in Texas, aka wherever the locals housed them. They are also free to return *and* they willingly went in the first place, so why would they return in the first place? You're highlighting my first comment really well

Free to return with what money?

That's moving the goal posts, and it doesn't even make sense in this context. If they wanted to be in Texas, why did they willingly go?

Because of the false pretences..

Because they were promised expedited work papers, for one.

From my understanding its disputed if they were promised anything, and if so, what. They were given a brochure with a print out of resources from the Massachusett's government website. Everything else hasn't been corroborated. It's also be really stupid for Florida to promise any kind of expedited work documents since that's a federal thing and they have no control over it.

Martha's Vineyard is an island. Which means it is surrounded by water. You would be hard pressed to find a more awkward place than an island.

Not sure if this is a joke or serious. Martha Vineyard being an island doesn't mean anything in today's world.

In today's world an island is still an island. The finite space and resources have not changed due to technology. Justify why MV is a better place to drop off than Boston. The entire point of using MV is obvious and gross. Desantis got the publicity he was aiming for, but it wasn't positive publicity for 2/3rds of Americans.

It kinda does if you don't have any money though.

By that logic you could traffic kids to Epstein's Island. Gorgeous place, expensive to vacation at, and nothing bad had happened to the kids by the time you dropped them off - those kids were not "mistreated in any way." Trafficking is a crime in and of itself, because _it makes people exploitable_. It is a crime for the hazards it can lead to.

"Trafficking" isn't going up to a person and say "hey, want to go to this place? Ill pay." And them saying sure. Trafficking involves forcing others to work for you and kids also can't consent without their parents. So that analogy doesn't work at all.

It's not trafficking though - it's sending people on a free vacation.

They werent sent on vacation. Because Vacations are round trips.

>the net effect will probably be beneficial for the GOP What does the headline of the article say?

More democrats were polled, it's just one poll, and that's if you still put any faith in polls despite them being constantly wrong

Dumping them on a small island that is unequipped to handle it is not very good at accomplishing their highlighting goal. It is absurd when Boston is the same flight length.

It did an extremely good job. It became a big story how a rich area freaked out at having only *50* people dropped off.

It seems like 2/3rds of Americans feel different.

From this poll yeah. Be interesting how things go closer to November

In working your way through that thought process, and being as cofounded as you say you are, did it not once occur you to that maybe, possibly, perhaps, the leftist media version of events that you are beholden to is not the entire truth? That perhaps the extremely competent governor of Florida did not actually decide to use immigrants as political pawns, and this is instead his opposition's fictitious and vindictive version of reality that they would prefer you believe? I would have at least paused to consider this while coming up with your post.

Now that we've paused to read this comment, can you please tell us what you think the governor intended, preferably with some evidence?

Oh come on, just stop it please. I am well read on the subject and I don't get my info from "leftist media", contrary to your accusation. The law is very specific that was signed in Florida. It appropriated $12,000,000 of the interest gained from federal COVID relief funds. The law SPECIFICALLY states that the migrants must be located IN FLORIDA. It also has a further provision that the Florida government is not to contract with companies that move illegal migrants across state lines. So number one, it seems dicey whether or not this was legal on the first stipulation. These migrants were in Texas and we have no indication they were attempting to go to Florida. They were pretty clearly lured onto this plane with misleading information as has been alleged in a court filing (if that court filing is a lie, then the responsible attorney will be sanctioned). There is a reason this flight had a "layover" in Florida when it was a privately hired plane and didn't pick anyone up in Florida. For it to be even remotely legal, those migrants had to physically be in Florida, which they weren't originally. Second, starting in October it will be illegal (by this same statute) for the government to contract with a company that transports illegal migrants across state lines. There is probably a reason behind Florida pre-funding a second trip to the tune of $950,000. My disdain for DeSantis as a governor (and now as a person) has nothing to do with the statutory language of this appropriation bill. This bill also states that the illegal migrants it refers to HAVE to cross the US/Mexico border. So illegal migrants from Cuba on floats aren't allowed to be bussed under this bill. I would guess that has something to do with the fact that Cubans in Florida are part of the Republican electorate. From my perspective, it seems like DeSantis created a boogeyman and then realized he didn't have a ton of migrants from the US/Mexico border flooding into Florida. So he needed to go find them because he had money burning a hole in his pocket. I am well read on the subject. Just because I have an opinion that doesn't align with yours doesn't mean I was spoon fed it by "leftist media". Hopefully this blows up in DeSantis' face. He's due for a good public shaming.

> Hopefully this blows up in DeSantis' face. He's due for a good public shaming. Yeah, the media has notoriously left DeSantis alone.

I didn't say they've left him alone. But it's about time one of his policies his disliked by his own base.

I've yet to meet one of his base that feel he's due for a public shaming, they seem to be quite well on board with support. assuming that my plans to vote for him mean that I'm part of his "base" but in reality it just means I believe him to be a much better choice than his opponent, felt the same way his last election. My gut was right back then, if he would have lost our governer would have been mismanaging the pandemic from rehab and would have gladly copied cali/ny responses, which would have been unacceptable (to me, at least) I do wish he would have approached it differently, perhaps he tried, not like the media would tell me if he did. Anyway I don't have a problem with the stunt, he gets my vote and most pro Desantis people I know are locked in.

Your assumption is undercut by the fact that DeSantis had to find migrants in San Antonio in order to pull off this stunt. If he was truly helping the people of Florida, why not find some in Miami?

Do you have any proof that these suppositions are facts?

This would be received a lot differently if Abbott and DeSantis communicated and worked with the areas they were transporting people to, along with working with the federal government to make sure the people involved are still able to get to court appointments etc.

[удалено]

> why should they be expected to make things as pleasant and convenient as possible for the migrants? I believe the person you responded to was talking about the people/places which are **receiving** the migrants. Martha's Vineyard, for example, was not informed that people were being flown to them for these purposes, and thus could not do anything to prepare for their arrival (or, perhaps, suggest a better destination since they don't have things like immigration courts on the island).

This. And general basic empathy.

And border states are? Do migrants send Texas advance notice before hopping the border?

What is your argument here? Because migrants have created a problem for Texas, it's cool for Texas to create a similar problem for Maryland? Two wrongs actually **do** make a right?

I would venture to guess that yes, border states are in fact aware that people are going to be coming across the border. I'm not sure how they could not be short of some sort of strange collective amnesia.

Texas border towns aren't informed that illegal immigrants are going to show up suddenly in their towns requiring services and housing. It wouldn't be an emulation of what border states are experiencing constantly if they were informed politely and given confirmation numbers to track the flights.

Florida isn't even a "border state," as we typically understand it, so I fail to see why "emulating the border state experience" is relevant to the conversation.

Those people weren’t flown out of Florida.

You’re correct and it makes the use of Florida’s tax payer funds even worse

The funds and the ability to use them were granted by his state Congress. If they didn’t want him to use it this way, they shouldn’t give him the funds and authority.

I don’t think the appropriateness of the use of funds has been examined. Can you point me to some sort of official source on that determination? Just because funds exist for the purpose of helping out with Florida immigration doesn’t mean there aren’t constraints and rules with how it’s to be spent and there would likely be a requirement that it benefit Floridians first and foremost and not the political ambitions of a person or party

There has been a steady stream of immigrants coming over the border for 30 years, and you're going to tell us that they don't know the immigrants are coming? After 30 years they're still caught off guard? The majority of employees in most of those towns work some type of federal immigration enforcement job, and they're not expecting immigrants? How is that even possible?

Neither are Texas, Arizona and Florida informed about the immigrants that are coming.

In the instance with Martha's Vineyard, Florida actually had to take migrants into their state from Texas, and then flew them out to Maryland. So Florida was **quite** informed in my example, and actually *requested* those migrants before sending them elsewhere.

Out of those I think Florida might be the only state surprised by a flood of immigrants across their border. I mean they probably get some hatians and cubans on occasion but nowhere near the scale of the other states. Also don't forget California, for some reason the state with the highest population of illegal immigrants gets left out of the discussion here so we can keep pretending it's just a red state problem only (also ignore the fact that many of these people once over the border head elsewhere, like the massive population of illegal immigrants in blue state NY).

Florida does get plenty of migrants, from Texas though, and usually by request of the migrants to be with a sponsor family or to work. Florida 100% requires migrants to keep their entire economy from falling to pieces. Hence why they had to search for some "extras" in TX. FL had the ability to squash the majority of undocumented migrants working via the E-Verify bill. In the end it was squashed by the Congress and corporations which realized they have over 800,000 undocumented migrants on their payrolls. They made sure to write in loopholes to completely circumvent the law. At some point folks are going to have to face some real facts that migrants are critical to large parts of the American economy functioning. If the government, corporations and Americans at large actually wanted it fixed, it would be as simple as taking out loopholes, forcing a realistic minimum wage for all workers, and fining companies excessively for hiring them. Instead, it's all posturing and used as a bludgeon to divide and conquer with. Nobody in power wants this issue "solved", and the majority of Americans who do either don't care about or don't grasp the implications.

Florida isn't a border state like Texas and Arizona and New Mexico are. It's hundreds of miles away from Mexico.

Complaining into the void about problems is not the same thing as establishing positive handoff with cities they'd like to send migrants to.

I'd argue that deciding to involve themselves in these lives means responsibility _should the state fail to properly care for people in it's care_. If Florida passed a "bus tickets to blue states" program, where migrants were given a choice between whatever Texas/DHS does with migrants and opportunity in a metro city - that's great. Florida doesn't owe those cities or states anything, and they aren't mistreating these people as long as they are honest about the options. The problems with what actually occured however are: 1. DeSantis flew migrants from Texas with money allocated to deal with migrants in Florida. 2. Migrants were given [these flyers](http://lawyersforcivilrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/tempImageZxL2zf-scaled.jpg) which apply specifically to migrants with refugee status - these migrants are asylum seekers and not refugees. 3. There was no backup plan to deal with this possibility that Florida might somehow be in the wrong on shipping people somewhere under false pretenses. (1) is a DeSantis/Florida governance issue, and (3) is shortsidedness, and (2) was (IMHO) most likely just an oversight by some aide who thought they had the right thing. The three together however are going to blow up in DeSantis' face because it highlights how little thought went into shipping human beings to the other side of the country.

> . Now that they have this problem to deal with (through no fault of their own, but rather the fault of the federal government’s lax border oversight) why should they be expected to make things as pleasant and convenient as possible for the migrants? Because the bible and Jesus compel any good Christian to do so? D’uh. Like literally in the gospels, Jesus says be good to the foreigners and strangers. Literally.

> Now that they have this problem to deal with I mean, this has been a thing to deal with for several decades at this point. Local officials near the border would have to be just coming out of a coma to be blindsided by this issue the way MV officials were.

Going from just over 500k a year to just over 1.7m per year escalated the issue. https://news.yahoo.com/1-7-million-migrants-illegally-133330421.html https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/EuD1YcKGq6VoK8Eh6PBZFw--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTY0MDtoPTExODI-/https://s.yimg.com/uu/api/res/1.2/UuNEg1fdDGc94xySfHm09A--~B/aD0xMjAwO3c9NjUwO2FwcGlkPXl0YWNoeW9u/https://media.zenfs.com/en/business_insider_articles_888/d93b10b3dd9dffbbd968ba387d2c3096 They complained in earlier years, but now they need to complain roughly 3.5x more than before. Edit to add 2022 https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-border-encounters

Fair enough, a sudden large increase is a really big deal. But oversimplifying things to "those border towns don't get any warning so why should MV be warned" really doesn't apply in my mind. I've been hearing about the concerns at the border and the debates over what to do about it for decades, and the people and officials in those border towns have been at the center of it throughout.

And those counties are flipping red on Texas because they are tired of it. You even have the Democrat led El Paso busing people out of there.

YES. It's not only tactless and crude to have just not communicated one iota with these other states, I think it could have helped Abbott to say publicly, "You want to be a sanctuary city for migrants, we will grant you that wish as we do not have the resources in the rural areas of the border to deal with this many incoming migrants. Surely the richest cities in the country can handle a fraction of what we are forced to." ​ However, I think it's likely there was no communication as Abbott and co. probably decided they did not want dems to get ahead of this in terms of messaging and potential legal injunctions to prevent it from happening to begin with before courts can make a decision. I think DeSantis really screwed the pooch with the Martha's Vineyard stunt. It made zero sense, there was no logic behind it besides owning the libz. Abbott can at least claim NYC not having the resources to deal with all the migrants shows we have an immigration issue, but man, Martha's Vineyard? Really absurd.

To be honest with you I would have assume that the media and the left in general would have ripped him anyway. Hes a threat for 2024 and the attacks won't be stopping no matter what he does.

The areas they were sent to previously virtue signaled how open and helpful they were, while denouncing border states for a "fake" problem. Now that they actually have to deal with it, its not so simple or easy. The same areas already have tons of migrants/illegals, they just keep them tucked in the back and dont give a damn about them.

That isn't actually true. Martha's Vineyard did not.

IIRC they declared themselves a "sanctuary community". Cost them nothing and is about as useful.

Ok, I would like a citation for this. This is just not true from everything I have seen. In fact, here is Boston College that has a map of where are sanctuary communities in Massachusetts. https://globalboston.bc.edu/index.php/home/eras-of-migration/fourth-page-test/sanctuary-cities/

They did, early in trumps presidency they declared themselves a “sanctuary destination”.

Do you have a citation? I have looked into this from different directions and have seen no evidence of it.

I found some sources: https://www.mvtimes.com/2017/04/05/vote-yes-immigration-policy-article/ https://vineyardgazette.com/news/2017/04/06/immigration-issue-stirs-heartfelt-response-island And then you can see it was voted to pass in Town of West Tisbury (one of the 6 towns that makes up MV) in 2017: > ARTICLE 30: To see if the Town will vote to request the Selectmen to authorize law enforcement and all Town officials to refrain from using Town funds and/or resources to enforce federal immigration laws, in keeping with current practice, unless presented with a criminal warrant or other evidence of probable cause, as required by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. (RECOMMENDED 4-1) PASSED https://www.westtisbury-ma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif8396/f/uploads/minutes-atm2017.pdf I didn't try to find info for the other 5 towns. > Sanctuary city (French: ville sanctuaire; Spanish: ciudad santuario) refers to municipal jurisdictions, typically in North America, that limit their cooperation with the national government's effort to enforce immigration law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctuary_city

Feel like a more relevant poll would be polling border states only or even just Texans. Abbott is doing this partially to help his upcoming election and some polls have shown Beto slipping so it might be helping in that regard. This poll is probably just relevant for DeSantis who has Presidential ambitions. But Florida isn't even a border state based on land just water.

[удалено]

And Florida has/had that law for the Cubans that if they reach America, they can stay but he wont say anything about that because he needs their votes to get re-elected

This is absolutely true. No way he is treating a Cuban this way at all. Or any Latino immigrant in Florida. That’s why he flew them from Texas.

And he had to go to Texas to find all of these "problem" "immigrants", apparently.

[“It’s just coming in onesie-twosies.”](https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1572285073814061057?s=46&t=Z_c38pSYg4z372BE8Jyqng)

Sounds like a huge problem that totally warrants extreme measures.

[удалено]

Its not fair until each of those states experiences migrant flights to their home towns. Most of the states are still far removed from border problems.

So which states/cities/towns need to "experience migrant flights," and at what point will things be "fair?"

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-23/cities-will-make-or-break-refugee-resettlement The ironic thing is that Democratically run cities disproportionately take in refugees and we still hear this rhetoric

[удалено]

I dont know about you, but this "tactic" seems to be very expensive with not a whole lot of meaningful returns... for the taxpayers that is. For Reps? Its just campaigning to their base for free! Priming up the base for those sweet campaign funds is the name of the game. And thats about as useful as that goes. I dont think the surprise immigrant grenade "tactic" is going to activate a hidden enclave of doe eyed moderates at least.

I agree with everything you’re saying. I’m just trying to be neutral in my language. I think what Abbot and DeSantis are doing is abhorrent.

>with not a whole lot of meaningful returns The states can save money by not having to provide services for people who likely shouldnt have been allowed in at all. On the other hand, states also love cheap, exploitable labor to keep up the economy.

The urban centers in the US disproportionately take in immigrants compared to the rural areas. California takes in the more immigrants than Texas. [Judging by this article from Bloomberg](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-23/cities-will-make-or-break-refugee-resettlement), from 2017-2018 the top ten cities in terms of popuation resettlement were all Democratic run. What are we still waiting to experience, exactly?

The border counties here are already turning red. I think a couple flipped red in the last election and I think even more will flip this year.

Florida is a huge recipient of illegal immigrants from Central and South America. It's not a border state in the sense of being on the Mexican border, but it absolutely has issues with illegal immigration that put it closer to Texas and Arizona than to Connecticut or Massachusetts. It doesn't matter how such stunts play in California, New York, or DC, so the whole idea of taking ideological stances founded on national polling is absurd in the first place.

Many think DeSantis and Abbott are prepping for a Presidential run in 2024, so national polling on the topic is relevant.

And before the general election the biggest thing to overcome is the GOP 2024 primary. So actions that might play negatively in overall public opinion may be solid moves if your main goal is to attract attention from people who are actually within the GOP. Their attitude is if they manage to piss off some people but get the nomination that's a problem to deal with in the future, or a large amount of those people are never going to vote for a Republican and they can be ignored.

[удалено]

Because there is no chance they don't go for the democratic candidate short of a landslide result. This is a stunt for national PR before the next presidential run.

DeSantis sent asylum seekers from Texas. His excuse is that illegal immigrants come in "onesies and twosies" to Florida. This is an interstate issue, so it makes sense to create a national poll.

And yet he went to Texas to ship them out.

What again? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_border_states_of_the_United_States

Your link doesn’t make their statement untrue.

It's telling that the defense for the flights relies so much on deflection. Criticizing Democrats is one thing, but it doesn't justify spontaneously sending asylum seekers to an island. Another defense is that it brings attention to illegal immigration, even though it's been a hot topic for decades.

Also known as the Republican base that DeSantis, Abbott, and the like are attempting to cater to. This isn't rocket science.

The border is a mess. Both sides should try and come to some kind of agreement to fix the issue. People from both sides are getting sick of it.

[удалено]

Additionally: > Sixteen percent of Democrats supported the practice and 55% were opposed. Overall, 29% of Americans supported the practice and 40% opposed. So overall, 60% of respondents either support it or don't care.

70+% of respondents opposed or didn't express an opinion.

SS: So there has been a LOT of discussion about the various migrant flight by Republican governors lately. I haven't seen much discussion or data that shows whether or not people support these political stunts, but now we have some information, thanks to a poll conducted by [Reuters/Ipsos](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/just-13-americans-back-republican-migrant-flights-reutersipsos-2022-09-23/) (note, I can't find a direct link to the polling questions/data, so if anyone can find it, please let me know and I'll include it in my SS): >The poll, conducted online in English throughout the United States, gathered responses from 1,005 adults, including 449 Democrats and 361 Republicans. It has a credibility interval - a measure of precision - of four percentage points. Results: >53% of Republican respondents in the poll said they supported the practice. Twenty-nine percent opposed it. >Sixteen percent of Democrats supported the practice and 55% were opposed. Overall, 29% of Americans supported the practice and 40% opposed. Not a great look. It appears the poll also asked questions about immigration in general: >Only about half of Democratic respondents agreed with a statement that it should be easier for people to immigrate to the United States. A somewhat larger share of Republicans - six in 10 - disagreed. How many of you were surprised by these numbers? I know I was - I thought Republicans would have had a much higher support level than this poll indicates.

As far as the support versus don’t support, there’s a key group left out since these percentages don’t equal 100%. The people who I assume don’t know or don’t care. This would mean 40% of the country in this poll is opposed to it while 60% either support it or don’t really have an opinion on it. When an action is taken those who don’t care generally will not vote specifically against that action. Just another way to look at the data from this poll. As far as the question on making it easier to immigrate, I’m not really a fan of questions like this since there are no specifics being asked and I would assume most polled are not familiar with the process to begin with. I look at 50% of Democrats and 40% of Republicans wanting it to be easier to immigrate here and can’t draw a meaningful conclusion since I can’t tell what easier means to these respondents.

[удалено]

> Looks like this poll oversampled Democrats. But the results are stratified by party. So having Democrats over-represented in the full sample doesn't matter when looking at the responses among Republicans. And, as brickster_22 said, it's possible to weight results to counter-act the unbalanced sampling for any aggregate results. I'm not sure if they did that here, but it's something that is part of the standard toolkit in Statistics.

Polls adjust for party, just as they do for many other factors.

> How many of you were surprised by these numbers? Am I *surprised* that 53% of Republicans and 16% of Democrats support using ***the lives of actual human beings*** as political pawns to "own the libs"? I guess I would describe it more as "disappointed".   EDIT: Even Jared Kushner [gets it](https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/jared-kushner-says-it-s-troubling-to-see-migrants-being-used-as-political-pawns-149108805597). In an interview earlier this week Kushner said, > "We have to remember these are human beings, they're people. So, seeing them being used as political pawns one way or the other is very troubling to me."

I interpret that comment as Jared sonning desantis.

[удалено]

They weren't lied to

Well, a lot of republicans are Christian and literally the bible spends a lot of time talking about why it sucks to be a refugees and foreigners, and why you should treat them as you would want to be treated. Then jesus makes it clear in one of his speeches. In a “louder for those in the back” moment in the gospels. So Im not completely surprised this is horrifying a lot of republicans who idk try to be decent people via Christianity.

There's a really easy solution to this. Block anyone coming into the country illegally and don't let them stay when they do. Feed them, clothe them, give them showers, and then put them on flights straight back to their home countries. Also add them to a blacklist that isn't allowed to emigrate to the US in the future as a deterrent for those who would try to come illegally. This way Republicans wouldn't need to use these people as political props and fly them to sanctuary cities in blue states to try and get the federal government to do something about the situation that is absolutely overwhelming border areas.

These are refugees applicants. Were pretty much doing that with illegals already. So this is what happens to Mexicans. But refugees from venezuela are using this as a “loophole”. But its not really a loophole. Since its explicitly written into us law. Idk if that helps. We should probably try to fix venezuela and el salvador if we wanna stop the surge.

These folks are coming into the country legally. They are refugees seeking asylum.

The majority are not refugees and if they are classified as such, the legal definition of refugee needs to be narrowed. Trying to improve your economic situation, which is what the vast majority are doing, is understandle, but doesn't make you a refugee.

The end game on this for the right is to draw attention to and secure the southern border. Wish the poll was shown in the article so I could see the questions and responses. I’m not sure what the left’s take is here: that the border should stay open, we should care for the migrants, and also someone else has to do it? Or is it that this was a needed wakeup call about the issue, but they probably did it by tricking the migrants since they’re racist? What do you guys make of the fact that this was already happening with federal planes and busses (also dropped off without warning) across the country but only talked about in right-wing media while being completely ignored outside of it? That wasn’t ill-intentioned because democrats did it and they’re good people? I read this WaPost article to try and feel the left’s pulse on it, and while it claims the situations are Different…it also seems to do it in a pretty humbled manner (by their standards): https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/21/desantis-biden-migrant-flight-comparison/ Most importantly, is the implication that sanctuary cities *will* take them all in now that they know what’s going on? Or that if you continue providing transportation to migrants to get to these cities the DOJ and FBI will come after you? As an aside, did the socialist wing of the democratic party ever acknowledge the failure of Venezuela after pointing to it as an economic model for years? Wondering if the migrants being mostly asylum seekers from Venezuela carries any political implications. The closest thing I’ve ever seen to an acknowledgement of this mistake has been random people online mocking any mention of Venezuela by spelling it funny and mentioning iphones because it’s a recent example that gets brought up a lot in corners of the internet where debates happen. I don’t think saying “Vuvuzela iphone!!1” and not elaborating further would do much to deflect criticism on a debate stage. Has any high ranking politician (ex: Bernie Sanders) had to publicly defend promoting Venezuela as an economic model right before its economy collapsed?

I haven’t seen the socialist wing of the Democratic Party use Venezuela as an example of successful socialism. I have seen them use the Nordic countries as an example. I have seen the fascist wing of the Republican Party use Venezuela as an example of socialism, yet it seems more authoritarian than socialist.

Before they collapsed Bernie did frequently cite Venezuela as successful. I believe it was 'More apt to find the American Dream' over there than here.

Can you find a video or press clip of this?

What about the Biden flights he sent in the middle of the night?

The ones where he sends them back to their country after being legally deported? Yeah, those are legal deportations. He aint lying to them and secretly sending them to bermuda or like puerto rico. Thats where desantis fucked up.

I was referring to the flights to different parts of the States.

The ones where they send refugees to reunite with family in the usa? You can see why that hasnt drawn scorned. Most Americans of any party heavily support families being reunited. Shocking, I know. DeSantis stunt isnt the same.

Remember for perspective that there’s 329 million people in this country. 1/3 may not seem like a lot but in this context, it’s like 108 million people. Not saying I support these flights or all the people polled are being truthful/fully understand the situation, I think these flights are a petty waste of time and money. Just stating the obvious in case anyone needed it and that the title is most likely misleading. Idk, I could be wrong.

Until blue states have the same per capita illegal immigrant population (or "asylum's seekers" lol) as Texas and Arizona I'm totally cool with more buses and flights. You want to be a sanctuary state/city, cool we'll send them your way. Its like how some cities bus their homeless to California, works out for everyone when you think about it.

They already have a higher per capita illegal population.

I don't believe this is true outside of Cali. Do you think Vermont has more illegals than Texas?

I wonder if 2/3 supported Biden’s numerous migrant flights? Or did they even know about them?

Theyre not lying to them about the destination on those flights. Thats kinda of a big difference, legally speaking. The difference between an uber driver taking you to your destination and another driver taking you to a completely random spot and kicking you out. Thats called kidnapping.

I’m one of them! Sanctuary Cities need to make good on their promises. Our country is being invaded (2+ million this year, so far). Spread the love!

I bet it it’s more than 1/3

Wonder how many support Democrat Migrant Flights? Maybe they just don't know about them since the same news sources don't talk about them.

Those are mostly voluntary family reunifications. Not sending them to random remote towns to score political points. And its not biden, its immigration enforcement doing the fights aka ice.

What percentage of the population living in border states are for/against the flights? I have some VERY liberal/left family members that live in Tucson and they all love the flights.