Official 2020 Democratic Primary Debate Thread

[bzb]

no, we won’t

i've heard this same sentiment from a number of deltas i personally know. part of me thinks it's because she's an aka, which would be petty, but most deltas are very smart and about their business so i'm hoping that isn't it...

her prosecutorial background, her white husband, and her racial background might also dilute her likeability/authenticity with the black community.

i'm not on any bandwagon at the moment, but interesting to see black women being very cautious about kamala and i'm curious as to why...

 

[Worthless Loser]

you should have never left the kamala train.

i would not be surprised if she snatched half of biden's black voters last night.

all the soros - the akas, the deltas, the zetas, the SGRs are going to flock to her hard. skeeeeeeee weeeeeeee

Nah. Once her record gets brought up and they see her with her white husband its over.

Biden will be ok. Its basically going go be a handicap match between him and the progressives. Biden will win but come out a little damaged.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

you should have never left the kamala train.

i would not be surprised if she snatched half of biden's black voters last night.

all the soros - the akas, the deltas, the zetas, the SGRs are going to flock to her hard. skeeeeeeee weeeeeeee

Hey I always said and you can find proof on this forum in the last 2 months.
1. Warren
2. Harris

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

i've heard this same sentiment from a number of deltas i personally know. part of me thinks it's because she's an aka, which would be petty, but most deltas are very smart and about their business so i'm hoping that isn't it...

her prosecutorial background, her white husband, and her racial background might also dilute her likeability/authenticity with the black community.

i'm not on any bandwagon at the moment, but interesting to see black women being very cautious about kamala and i'm curious as to why...

Lowkey. More deltas I know have their shyt together than the AKAs. shyts spooky.

 

[OfTheCross]

Bernie looked mad tired. Homie stays running out of energy around 10 PM lol.

As a responsible president should. nikka be up at 4 or 5 AM like all geriatrics

 

[FAH1223]

i've heard this same sentiment from a number of deltas i personally know. part of me thinks it's because she's an aka, which would be petty, but most deltas are very smart and about their business so i'm hoping that isn't it...

her prosecutorial background, her white husband, and her racial background might also dilute her likeability/authenticity with the black community.

i'm not on any bandwagon at the moment, but interesting to see black women being very cautious about kamala and i'm curious as to why...

I talked to Congressman Andre Carson at a party a couple months ago and he was asking who the young people going for. And then he asked about Kamala. Told him what I thought of her and then he unprompted is like “you know people don’t really be seeing her as black, she’s got that problem”

I was like you said it bruh

 

[the next guy]

Nothing weird they follow Russian bots and bots follow them and give him his marching orders

That has nothing to with Russia. That's clearly an american disaster.

 

[mastermind]

In fact @Atlrocafella was definitely team Hillary in 2008 until it wasn’t mathematically possible. Breh damn near was a PUMA.

 

[John Reena]

I think Kamala stole a chunk of Deep South Black Democrats last night.

Nah, she a prosecutor who jailed scores of black ppl and married to a white dude.

She been hiding him her whole campaign.

 

[John Reena]

Biden will be okay. The only ppl saying it was bad for him is Progressives, who live in a echo chamber. Much like MAGA’s lol

 

[FukkaPaidEmail]

I would think Harris or Biden would be the ones trending in Twitter after yesterday’s debate .......
But it’s only Yang

 

[storyteller]

I see some heads advancing a right friendly line on decriminalizing the border (including some heads that will cry about certain candidates hurting the Dems' chances with their rhetoric) this is a nice little run down that gives yall a brief but valuable context toward why making illegal border crossing a civil offense shouldn't cause such "sky is falling" reactions.

AP Explains: The law criminalizing improper border crossings | WTOP

A federal law that President Donald Trump used in justifying the separation of migrant parents and children at the border last year is creating waves on the 2020 campaign trail, with some Democrats vowing to do away with it completely.

During the first televised presidential debate, Democratic candidate Julian Castro promised to “terminate” the law that criminalizes unauthorized border crossings and challenged others to do the same. Several candidates on the stage of the first debate night said they agreed. By Thursday, all but one Democratic candidate onstage said they would make illegal border crossings a civil, not, criminal offense.

The debates gave prominence to a law that’s been part of border enforcement for decades, but rarely has received this level of national attention.

Here’s a closer look at the law:

WHAT IS THE LAW?

The law is called illegal entry, and it makes unauthorized border crossings a crime. The law specifically bars entry into the U.S. at places other than through ports of entry, like an airport or bridge on the U.S.-Mexican border. A violation of the law, also known as Section 1325, is a misdemeanor with a penalty of six months in prison, though most are sentenced to time served. A second offense, or illegal re-entry, is a felony.

Critics say the U.S. government doesn’t have the resources to prosecute every case and the focus should be on more dangerous criminals.

Advocates say prosecuting the cases deters illegal immigration, though data on the topic is limited.

HOW HAS IT BEEN USED?

For decades the government didn’t actively pursue criminal cases under Section 1325, which has been on the books since 1929. Those caught were deported by immigration enforcement.


It wasn’t until a 2005 program started by President George W. Bush, vowing to curb illegal immigration, that the number of criminal prosecutions soared.

With “Operation Streamline,” large groups of people were tried all at once and slapped with misdemeanors. There were just under 40,000 criminal prosecutions for immigration that year, and up to 90,000 under former President Barack Obama in 2013, according to a research organization at Syracuse University.

WHAT’S HAPPENING NOW?

The law generated international headlines last year when Trump rolled out his “zero tolerance policy,” vowing to prosecute first time offenders with six months in prison. Immigrant parents arriving at the border with their children were hauled into court and prosecuted for illegal entry, and children were separated from them.

Thousands of children were separated from their parents before Trump backtracked and signed an executive order stopping the separations amid widespread outrage over the practice. Shortly after, a judge also ruled that families could only be split in limited circumstances.

Under Trump, the total number of immigration-related criminal prosecutions reached around 100,000 in 2018, which includes Section 1325 cases.

Repealing the law would require Congress to act.


HAS THE LAW GENERATED CONTROVERSY PREVIOUSLY?

One year ago, defense lawyers lashed out at how the Justice Department was prosecuting illegal entry in federal courtrooms as Operation Streamline expanded to San Diego. California was a longtime holdout against the mass illegal entry prosecutions in federal court that were the norm in other border states since the Bush administration. That changed with “zero tolerance,” and the prosecutions were brought to San Diego.

There were no illegal entry cases in February 2018 in the Southern District of California, but more than 800 by June as family separation reached its peak.

Critics say the mass hearings violate the due process of immigrants. Reuben Camper Cahn, executive director of Federal Defenders of San Diego Inc., invoked the “separate but equal” doctrine last year in arguing that immigrants in the Operation Streamline proceedings were being treated differently from the citizen population in courts.

This "deterrent" is fairly new and since Trump has implemented his zero tolerance nonsense, illegal crossings have actually increased a lot. So it's not working now, has no precedent of efficacy and repealing that section would be closer to norms prior to the abuses of the law not some radical new shift in policy. Relax.

 

[Atlrocafella]

In fact @Atlrocafella was definitely team Hillary in 2008 until it wasn’t mathematically possible. Breh damn near was a PUMA.

The majority of dems were team Hillary until it was mathematically impossible for her to win, so what’s the problem?


It’s interesting that you call me a Trump supporter, while at the same time saying I was Team Hillary? Is it oochie Wally or is it One Mic?

 

[John Reena]

Nah. Once her record gets brought up and they see her with her white husband its over.

Biden will be ok. Its basically going go be a handicap match between him and the progressives. Biden will win but come out a little damaged.

Rare pic of Kamala and her white husband.

 

[AZBeauty]

Her Truency policy fukked a lot of homeless parents up... Parents living in shelters with their kids and being that the kids had no stability they missed a lot of school she threatened the parents with arrest.. Broad is grimy

I've seen reports that says it wasn't enforced, statements that 1000's of parents were effected and statement that said very few. I need to get to the bottom of this because I have a feeling people are just repeating what they see.

FACT CHECK: Kamala Harris Says She Never Jailed Anybody For Truancy

During a Feb. 11 appearance on the radio show “The Breakfast Club,” Sen. Kamala Harris denied that she ever jailed anybody under an anti-truancy program she initiated as district attorney of San Francisco.

“We never locked anybody up,” the California Democrat said.


Verdict: True

No parents were incarcerated for child truancy in San Francisco during Harris’ tenure as district attorney. She did, however, strongly support the passage of a statewide truancy law that prosecutors in California have used to charge parents. At least one mother has been sent to prison under the law.

Fact Check:
Recently, a 2010 video of Harris resurfaced, where she discussed her decision as district attorney of San Francisco to prosecute the parents of children who were chronically absent from the classroom. “I believe a child going without an education is tantamount to a crime, so I decided I was going to start prosecuting parents for truancy,” Harris said in the video.

In 2007, Harris began using prosecution and the threat of prosecution as a tool to combat extreme cases of truancy.

But no parent has ever been sentenced to prison in San Francisco for child truancy, Katy Miller, chief of programs and initiatives in the San Francisco district attorney’s office and former assistant district attorney under Harris, told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an email. In late 2010, Harris said that 25 cases had been prosecuted.

Parents in California could be forced to pay a fine or even be sent to jail for truant children, but the San Francisco district attorney’s office does not charge parents with an offense that carries jail time.

Harris zeroed in on truancy, particularly in elementary schools, as an issue after drawing a connection to crime in the city. “To be smart on crime and invest wisely in California’s economic future, we must eliminate elementary school truancy,” Harris said in a 2016 press release.

“Chronically absent children are far more likely to drop out of school and enter into the criminal justice system,” she continued. “This is a solvable problem: with better data, monitoring, and communication with parents, we can continue to make significant strides toward ensuring students are in school and on track to meet their full potential.”

The one parent who was jailed:

California mom jailed for kids’ truancy - her children missed 116 days of school.
The story mentions another parent but no other details were available.

Another thing I found while googling this: A single county in Pennsylvania jailed more than 1,600 parents between 2000 and 2015 for their failure to pay truancy-related fines.

LATimes story: “Harris issued citations to parents whose children missed more than 50 days of school, but none of them were put in jail,” the Los Angeles Times wrote in an April 17 story.