Hanaguma

Already baked into the 'pie' for a lot of people. In 2016, the revelations about Trump being scummy towards women and being a legendary BS artist were new and surprising. These days, people aren't surprised anymore. Plus Biden is also a known commodity, and polling suggests that people don't like what they see. If it comes down to the two old codgers again, it is going to be closer than many think IMHO. But hopefully both parties will come to their senses and choose other candidates.

Perhaps there is a big enough anti-Trump vote. THe problem for Democrats is that Biden is beginning to alienate the Hispanic and Black communities. Trump is picking up support in both. Or, they will simply stay home. Either is a big problem for Democrats. I mean, you can't have the president calling an African American man "boy" and expect to do well.

Might not be that easy to persuade people that Trump is a danger. All they have to do is look at their lives today and compare their situation to 2018 or2019, and ask themselves, "am I better off today or 5 years ago?". The answer is not good for Biden.

Read the transcript. He never said to "inject bleach", as another poster wrongly asserted. But anyway, it is a bit off topic and a bit irrelevant.

You could say the same for both of them, ironically. Biden would lose to a younger and more vigorous Republican, Trump would lose to a less senile and more sentient Democrat. They need each other.

Except that, IF you read the transcript, he never said "inject bleach". He was just spitballing in the usual Trumpy way, talking out of his ass about things he didn't know much about.

Lots of Americans want Trump as President. They dont want to marry him. The indictments are baked into their thinking and weighed against everything else. Now if the Democrats were smart and put up someone demonstably younger and more charismatic, like Gavin Newsome, then Trump might be in more trouble. But against Biden he stands a good chance. Scumbag vs. senile isnt a great choice but people may just go for the scumbag if those are the only options.

True, especially when it never happened.

No. I am suggesting that government subsidies for those who are not working be cut. There are millions of people who are not working or looking for work, and for no discernable reason. They need to be gently encouraged to rejoin society and discover the joys of shifting for themselves, instead of relying on the goodwill of others.

Really? This link says that only 10% of restaurant workers are undocumented... https://www.foodandwine.com/fwpro/prioritize-undocumented-restaurant-workers-vaccine-coronavirus Pew Research says that 13% of construction workers and 21% of landscapers are illegal immigrants... https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2016/11/03/industries-of-unauthorized-immigrant-workers/ So, that means that 90% of restaurant workers, 87% of construction workers, and 80% of landscapers are either American citizens or legal residents.

From my previous link; https://www.epi.org/blog/how-much-would-it-cost-consumers-to-give-farmworkers-a-significant-raise-a-40-increase-in-pay-would-cost-just-25-per-household/ It says that a 40% increase in pay would cost 25 bucks per household. Therefore to double pay would cost 60 bucks, which means 5 dollars a month. Follow? The same place that says labor costs for all fresh fruit/veg amounts to about 10% of the retail cost to consumers. So doubling the pay for all workers would increase the cost by 10%, or the above $60 per year per family.

You think five bucks a month for a family is "significantly more expensive"? Biden has already spent a thousand dollars per family in America on the war in Ukraine. Which do you think is more important?

Yes, like I said, there is a difference between legal visa holders/immgrants and illegal workers. It is a very important distinction. The latter are much more vulnerable to exploitation and can easily fall through the cracks. But I was not wrong in my statement, as you asserted. Something like a third of ag workers are illegal immigrants.

Thank you for proving my point. I said, "less than a third of farm workers are illegal immigrants". Your link said 27% of all ag workers are undocumented. So I was erring in the wrong direction by overestimating. Sorry about that...

You are close to correct. According to this study, about 10% of the cost of agricultural products is labor. So, a $3 head of lettuce includes 30 cents of labour. https://www.epi.org/blog/how-much-would-it-cost-consumers-to-give-farmworkers-a-significant-raise-a-40-increase-in-pay-would-cost-just-25-per-household/ So, we could even double the pay for ag workers and still only increase the price of fresh foods by 10%. Doubling the pay would be a great incentive to get people working, even in tough jobs like these. And, for the average family, that would cost about an extra $60 per year on their grocery bill, or $5 a month. And for that extra money, they could be assured that their food was harvested by legal workers who were fully protected by labour laws and not exploited. A small price to pay for such a noble goal.

True, but you have to distinguish between legal residents and illegal immigrants. Nothing wrong with expanding visa programmes to get more workers IMHO, as long as it is regulated and the workers are vetted. But letting thousands of people pour over the border every day is not a solution to America's labour market woes. Think about poor New York City, where it costs upwards of $300 per night to feed and house illegal immigrants in hotels across the city. That adds up to 8-9000 bucks per month per family that are in the system. I am sure that regular Americans who are down on their luck would LOVE to be treated that way.

True, not just salary. But there are millions of able bodied Americans who are choosing not to work for reasons other than health or education. They are just taking time off, getting governemnt benefits, living off parents/partners, etc. It has become all too easy.

The idea of illegal immigrants doing the "stoop labour", as another poster put it, is a myth. They make up less than a third of agricultural workers in the US, and far less in other kinds of labour. There are millions of Americans who are choosing to sit on the sidelines and collect a cheque from Uncle Sugar. They need to be given incentive to get back into the workforce.

Agreed. Good idea, see you over there.

Ah, here we go, the old shibboleth about "jobs that Americans don't want". Do you realize how insulting that is to both Americans and immigrants? Americans are lazy, and immigrants are only good for cleaning toilets. True there is a shortage of skilled trades, but that can be rectified without hiring unqualified and unvetted foreign labour. If paying living wages puts some businesses out of business, then so be it. That is the reality of the economy. Better than the public subsidizing illegal immigrants to do the jobs, just to keep the business owners collective heads above water. Please tell me about these jobs that Americans won't do. Millions of Americans work on farms, in restaurant kitchens, on construction sites, etc. There is NO job that is majority illegal immigrant, and very few that are even half immigrant (both legal and illegal). The problem is providing incentive for the millions of Americans who have left the labour market, and importing an illegal underclass who are vulnerable to exploitation is not the solution.

Haven't seen too much reform from the Boy King. He won two elections while coming in 2nd in the popular vote, so not much incentive to change anything.

Yes, that's right. Their votes don't count towards the Presidency directly. And everyone, including the candidates, knows that going in. It creates a situation where a candidate needs to gain support in the entire country, not just concentrate on population centres.

Of course he has a chance.... IF he is the GOP nominee and if he, as you say, wins the Electoral College. That is the constitutional republic in action. Ditto if Biden wins again (if he is the Democratic nominee). Hyperventilating not necessary.

What possible danger? The precedent is set with the previous election. He can huff and puff but in the end nothing will happen. Have a little more faith in your fellow citizens and the system that the Founding Fathers left you.

Sorry, but no. Time to move on. The peaceful transition of power after the last election is the only evidence needed that hysteria over "the threat" is overblown.