I'm often asked about "Wet Foot Dry Foot," and in discussing it, I find misconceptions, so here's a quick recap:
WFDF was a policy of the Clinton Administration in the 1990s to address the Cuban rafter crisis of 1994. It was supposed to be temporary but lasted until 2017.
Here's how it worked: If a Cuban stepped foot on US soil, regardless of how they entered, they could stay.
Pres. Obama ended this policy in his final days in office in 2017; Pres. Trump did not reinstate it.
Cuban Americans are divided on it. This is from FIU's 2020 poll:
The law provided relief to many Cubans fleeing Castro, but it had unintended consequences. It incentivized human trafficking, thousands died at sea, and it inadvertently relieved internal pressure on the Cuban regime. How? Bc those most likely to flee are most likely to dissent.
Cubans still have extraordinary immigration privileges.
The Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 affords Cubans the right to apply for permanent residence in the U.S. after a year and a day of entering through a legal port of entry. To my knowledge, no group in the world has this.
The Cuban dictatorship wants a mass exodus. They raised the possibility of one yesterday. It's a weapon against the US and a tool to ease pressure on them. Let's not fall for their ploy.
Our focus should be on ending the cause of mass Cuban migration: The Castro regime.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
.@krystalball and @esaagar seemed genuinely surprised that there are many Cuban Americans who would be willing to risk their lives to free their homeland if it came to that. They may want to try Googling: "Brigade 2506."
The use of force should always be a last resort, but if we're speaking in hypotheticals, of course many would support such an effort if needed.
It's easy to be dismissive of this when you've never lost your country to communism or when you haven't had family members executed.
That said, there's a lot that should be done short of boots on the ground, but it seems like @krystalball, @esaagar and @ggreenwald (who's a mouthpiece for LatAm leftists like Lula, Morales, etc.) know little about U.S. policy toward Cuba. So, let me walk you through it:
It’s worth noting that a lot of Cuban Americans were smeared as “racists” and “conspiracy theorists” by members of the media for correctly noting last year that BLM the org is a Marxist group. They will never receive an apology.
The idea that the Cuban regime is going to voluntarily transfer power is a fantasy. Regime topplings in Cuba have happened in the following ways:
1) Outside forces (1898, US help) 2) Military / Coup (1933 & 52, Machado & Batista) 3) Mass Uprising (1933 & 1959, Machado & Castro)
2021 Cuba is very different than 1959 & 1933 Cuba.
The biggest diff is that the Cuban people are unarmed. In 1933, the student groups that led uprisings resulting in Machado's ousting by the military had guns.
Castro had both guns and international $$$ (thx to the NYTimes).
There is strong support on the island now for toppling the Castro regime. Cubans are tired of living in misery and the only thing they thought (bc of propaganda) they had going for them (health care) has collapsed.
But an unarmed popular uprising faces serious hurdles.
The images that are coming out of Cuba are, in fact, being amplified by Cuban Americans — but they're coming from Cubans who live on the island. None of us do this for money.
Also, at this point, disillusionment with the regime is widespread.
It's difficult to gauge public opinion on the island. Polling is strictly banned. It's been done clandestinely before, and even in 2015 (when econ was better), Raul Castro was divisive and a plurality of Cubans had a negative view of Fidel Castro.
That's only gotten worse.
There are good people on both sides of the Cuba policy debate in South Florida.
The notion that exiles' interests in Cuba are driven by $ is just silly. If anything, the economic interests that support normalization far exceed the traditional Cuban exile community's.
Huh? Latinos are not “under represented” in country music.
The genre just isn’t native to our cultures. Latin Americans have their own types of “country” music. Cubans have punto guajiro, for instance. Colombians have vallenato and Mexicans have rancheras.
This is one of the most absurd entries into the "equity" cannon that I've read.
Hispanics don't top the country music charts for reasons that are similar to why Blacks and Whites don't generally listen to mariachi and cumbia: different cultural preferences — and that's fine!
I didn't get into country music until I lived in rural Virginia for 6 months.
Why? Because, like most Hispanic Americans, I grew up in a big city (Miami) where country music really isn't that popular and my parents didn't listen to it either.
Under current FL law, you can't hand voters *anything* within 100 ft. of a polling station. But you can give them brochures, water, and paella (this is a thing in Miami) outside of that.
These laws exist to protect voters from harassment while they're waiting in line to vote.
This is a picture of a popular Miami voting site. In practical terms, it means that campaign workers can't go beyond the cross-walk. But they can hand you water and snacks before that.
This is a Miami voting site where I've volunteered.
Florida law doesn't allow campaign workers to go beyond that white car and chase voters into the station.
That's not an issue because you can hand them water on the way in from the parking lot. This is a fake controversy.