Not true. Also you can go to places like 19:00 in to see an example of the opposite of what you're saying. And I see you and @FranchiseBlade complaining it's not real journalism, so where are the "real" journalists that should be talking about both sides of this issue in these small towns?? They are no where to be found (national ones at least).
You can complain about which stories they choose to do or not do. But nobody should mistake the video for journalism of any kind.
What does that video have to do with what I posted? It’s not JD VAnce making that video. also there have been “real journalists” have reported on the problems of settling a large number of immigrants in small Towns. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/14/us/haitian-migrants-springfield-ohio.html Why Thousands of Haitians Have Settled in Springfield, Ohio Businesses needed workers, and Haitians, many already authorized to work, heard living costs were low. But the newcomers have strained resources, and that has fueled tension.
Of course only AFTER the debate once Trump brought the spotlight on it (and in which dem posters here were adamant that Trump bringing it up wouldnt cast a spotlight on it). But also, I don't see how this article is two sided but the video isn't. The "other side" is only very briefly mentioned in the article. The labor shortage talk in it is no different than the labor talk in the video at 19:00. And it is very very brief. Going into a hotel speaking with workers candidly is more impactful than a fluff piece article.
Right a “fluff piece” article. You keep In asking people to take what you post seriously yet you betray your own bias by dismissing what is a pretty long piece with interviews of locals a puff piece Also regard to bias. I noted the man being interviewed in the video at 19:00 is wearing a “Trumpamania shirt”
It didn't include interviews with opposing viewpoints. there were no direct quotes or insights from local residents who might be concerned about the strain on resources or the rapid changes in the city. It focused mostly on the economic benefits and immigrants' contributions, but it didn’t dive into the social and economic tensions many Springfield residents are clearly feeling. Where are the interviews from local workers struggling with job competition, or those dealing with overcrowded schools and services? I was waiting for the Trumpamania comment. What did the guy actually say that wasn't accurate about immigrants? That they're hardworking? Your comment about me supposedly wanting my posts to be taken seriously is a massive defense mechanism on your part rn
The spotlight was on Trump's crazy lies about Haitian immigrants eating pets. The spill over light was how unsatisfactory a candidate that says such crazy, divisive, and hateful lies, isn't a good candidate. Tiny dim light leftover from that was about immigrants. Of that tiny dim light, 68% of it highlighted the positive benefits of immigrants and how much discrimination and unfair animosity they face.
Right that’s why you called a piece that in the very headline says that immigrants are causing tension for not providing both sides. A puff piece. The piece was an overview piece but states in the very heading that it’s not all perfect. As for the guy wearing a “Trumpamania” shirt. Yes I can believe they he believes what he’s saying. It does call into question though the objectivity of the video just the same as if someone posted a video Of someone wearing a “Go Kamala” shirt.
You focus on Trump’s comment rather than addressing the lack of balance in the article. The piece clearly didn't include opposing viewpoints, and you haven't refuted that. Emotion doesn't replace facts. Headline is different than the content underneath. Where's the opposing quotes? There are none. It was a fluff piece to put a positive light in Haitian immigrant due after the controversy went national. And again, there were more people interviewed than just that guy and there are several videos with several interviews from people.
What is more damaging about this is that the idea that it is actually somehow good to be spreading lies and and fantastical stories by a candidate if it spotlights an actual problem. As noted in the NyT piece it is acknowledged that there are difficulties with settling a large number of people. If Trump and Vance had started with that Springfield, Ohio has had a large influx of new immigrants that are straining city resources few would’ve considered that controversial and would’ve shed light on the issue. By pushing this bizarre claim that was completely unfounded that Haitians are stealing and eating pets it caused much more problems. The Republican mayor and governor of Ohio have said these claims are dangerous. The damage done by the totally false claim far outweighs any benefit of the spotlight on the problem of settling in large numbers of immigrants.
What article? Are you talking about the guy's interviews from the video? I was talking about what the nation is talking about. A whole industry of memes were created by Trump's hateful and decisive lies. His crap debate comment spurred so many comedy bits that are still going on, that many Harris supporters are even tired of them. That is taking the lions share of attention. Not anything else on the issue. You are correct. "Emotion doesn't replace facts" Had Trump replaced his emotional bizarre, emotional, and crazy lies with facts, maybe it would be different.
It said right in the body of the article “Springfield has struggled to handle soaring demand placed on health care, housing, schools and roads.”
So you think this one line the journalists added, which is an obvious point people should know when you have a huge influx of people descend onto a small city, is somehow an example of the article being two sided? Again, where are the quotes and interviews from residents with opposing viewpoints? There are none.
Dude what are you talking about? Vance FIRST brought up the strain on city resources at the National Conservatism Conference in July BEFORE the Sept debate where Trump brought up eating pets. Come on...
Residents being interviewed weren't in the article from either side. This article had quotes from politicians, and also referenced Fox and friends. Neither Immigrants nor long term residents were quoted
Republican really don't want a free market where people who want to work go to places where there is work available. That's called an efficient market. Hypocrites.
That is consistent with what witnesses were telling reporters right after this all happened. I know that part of the issue also, was supposedly that there wasn't direct communication between the Secret Service and local police that were responsible for part of the security. If you go back and look at the Secret Service historically - it really isn't that impressive. There have been a number of failures. Ford would have been dead if his shooter had wanted to kill him. She actually was on the White House grounds with a gun and shot him but had taken the magazine out. They did not prevent Oswald - they did not stop Roosevelt from being shot either... Reagan could have easily died as well. The training for the Secret Service is considered mediocre - I have concluded that they largely rely on the fact people will not attempt to shoot the President, rather than be great at preventing it from happening. If you look at the attempts that they foiled, they were idiots - like the Neo-Nazi that tried to kill Biden.
We need to have an honest discussion over immigration in the USA. It is a topic that is always divisive, but it is also an issue that hasn't been addressed - and when there has been something close to an agreement, it gets shot down. Having said that - bringing up a group of people (Haitians) that you have said in the past you don't want in the country - eating cats and dogs - is not how an adult or leader brings up the issue of immigration. Trump and Vance and the MAGA politicians should not be let off the hook for that - the incendiary language is not acceptable - nor is the BS cop out of "well he prayed on it" nonsense being pushed. You cannot use openly hostile and loaded racist statements to galvanize your base - and then take a step back and basically say "relax - it got people talking" - that is gas lighting and the leaders of the country shouldn't do that. An adult would keep asking Harris why the current President said he couldn't do anything about the border Constitutionally - yet when it politically started hurting his party, he suddenly was able to step in and turn the immigration flow down from an 8 of 10, to a 2 of 10 ........ but the current GOP leadership isn't adult enough to do that - it is better to just talk about black immigrants eating cats and dogs, and label brown immigrants as rapists and monsters.
It's worth pointing out who keeps shooting it down: the far right of the Republican party. Marco Rubio tried to craft a bipartisan solution during the Obama years and was shot down. James Lankford tried to do it now and was shot down. Those two are not "RINOs" but the right flank still defeated them. I would argue it is because the far right does not actually want to solve the problem. It's a very effective electoral cudgel that has so far yielded massive tax cuts for the wealthy and three Supreme Court justices, but no real "solve" on immigration. That's because the far-right demands expensive and punitive solutions like walls and deportation camps and many industries doesn't actually want to lose their cheap, powerless labor backbones. It's not just that they're not adult enough to ask, they've nominated somebody who has suggested "terminating" the Constitution.
edited for clarity. it' pretty simple: stop pretending the problem doesn't exist secure the border give precedence to highly educated/highly skilled applicants create a process to probably vet actual political applicants don't harsh to badly on the folks who are already here profit.
