This how every single argument for mass immigration goes.
Step 1: "Oh, you have concerns about [X group] coming into your country? Well, here's one person from that group who's good. What do you think of that, huh? Do you hate this person, too??"
[when presented with evidence that said person isn't representative of said group writ large]
Step 2: Actually, all those bad things you just mentioned are America's fault. And anyways, it's good for them to come here. I don't have to explain why. It just is.
[no, I think that would probably be bad for us]
Step 3: Honestly, who even is "us"? Who is "we"? Does America even exist? Do you know what America is? Because other people think America's something else. So how can you be so sure that America is anything at all?
Step 3.5: Actually, America is a real thing. But that real thing is just values—values that just so happen to require us to accept unlimited amounts of people from every single place in the world. And if you disagree, you actually hate America.
Step 4: Statue of Liberty quote. Obligatory.
Pro-tip: At this point, you start really layering the moral condescension on thick. You can't believe that anybody would be so stupid as to not want infinite Haitians. It's insulting. It's outrageous. Frankly, it's un-American. Does your interlocutor know anything about America?
Step 5: Google "quotes about why immigration is awesome."
Try to find one from somebody that you think the guy you're arguing with might like and/or respect. Boom. Owned.
Step 6: Alright, you know what? None of that worked. Change of plans. Pivot to just googling pictures of the guy you're arguing with and posting them in his mentions.
Step 7: Double down. Then bizarrely claim at the end that you're not saying the thing that everyone knows you're obviously saying. (At this point you're not even talking about immigration anymore, which is good, because you know you lost that argument).
Anyways, none of this is actually an abstract thought experiment—as much as the other side wants it to be. Real people. Real consequences.
@America_2100 is going to Charleroi, PA next week to report on what’s happening on the ground. Follow our account to keep up with the story.
These are Trump's best approval numbers ever. But look at the generational breakdown.
Boomers are 50/50. Millennials are +4.
Gen Z is +10.
I'll keep saying it: Zoomers are going to be the most right-wing generation in recent memory.
In some ways, this is the U.S. catching up with something that's happening across the West. One of the fascinating things about right-wing nationalism in Europe is that it's often more popular with young voters. It wasn't 60-something pensioners who were singing "Auslander Raus."
It's true. Gen X was a remarkably healthy, patriotic generation, wedged between two highly dysfunctional ones. In 1984, Reagan overperformed with 18-24 year olds—the first batch of Gen X voters.
The last time the GOP carried that age demo was 1988.
It's not even particularly clandestine or secretive—a lot of these groups are openly boasting about it.
The USCCB, for example, regularly touts their efforts on their website:
Same thing with HIAS—one of the groups whose funding skyrocketed under Biden. (And is actively involved in transporting migrants up from South America into the U.S.)
These guys are in DC, actively advocating for expanding asylum, more refugees, etc:
This is arguably the single most important aspect of Trump's funding freeze.
The immigration crisis isn't an accident. It's a well-oiled system, facilitated by powerful NGOs—and funded by your tax dollars.
By defunding the NGOs, Trump is crippling the entire system. 🧵
Here's what just happened: Last week, President Trump signed an executive order suspending refugee admissions into the U.S.
Then, the State Department went a step further—they issued a "stop-work" order to their NGO "partners," suspending all funding for refugee resettlement.
The NGOs were beside themselves. And for good reason—very few of these groups are self-sufficient. Most of them are sustained by the federal tax-dollar gravy train. The immigration crisis is being financed by your government—with your money.
For years, we were told that "the internet isn't real life." But in this election, it was. Online influencers, issues and ideas played a major role in the 2024 election—especially on the right.
Today's right is more "online" than the left—and that's part of why it's winning. 🧵
Conservative politics used to take place on the airwaves of Fox and talk radio, in established journals and magazines, think tanks and direct-mail campaigns, etc. Now almost all of that is downstream of the internet. In 2024, the right-wing "lifeworld" is shaped online.
It's a trickle-down information economy: Not every Republican voter is active on here. But the people that *they* get their news from are. The talk-show pundits, Fox News scriptwriters, journalists, etc are almost all "very online." This is where the influencers are influenced.
In his farewell speech, Joe Biden raged against the "tech-industrial complex."
That "complex" is real. But it's extremely left-wing.
There's a revolving door between Big Tech and the Democratic Party.
They're not just allies—they're often literally run by the same people. 🧵
There are a number of high-profile renegade tech titans (i.e., Elon Musk) who are "on the right." Obviously, that's who Biden was talking about in his speech.
But they're exceptions to the rule. Writ large, the tech industry is an extension of the institutional Left.
In the 2020 campaign, for example, employees of Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple and Facebook were "the five largest sources of money for Mr. Biden’s campaign and joint fundraising committees among those identifying corporate employers," according to the Wall Street Journal: