In this case, I suppose they are looking to their elected officials for help. As I've stated before the problem is that the help they're hoping the politicians will give them is unfortunately outdated. Giving them false hope that the way of life they've grown accustomed to has even a shred of a chance at returning en masse to get votes is unjust as well. Bear in mind I never said there wasn't a solution, I simply said I didn't have one. I do think jobs in services would be a great idea or even trying to teach these people more modern skills such as coding or robotics. The problem is would they want these jobs and would the rest of the country be willing to tolerate the change in tax laws to help them? I wouldn't mind as in the end we all benefit, but not everyone else will see it that way.
I'm aware people aren't born labeled one political affiliation or the other. They're taken on through life experiences, education, and emotion. Please don't take this the wrong way, but I'm not sure what the purpose was in stating that. You'll also have to define what you mean by "substantial victory." Hillary won the popular vote without the need of the people we're discussing, did she not? It's the electoral college that got her. In an election year where she was painted as public enemy number one coupled with low turnout the people still wanted her. Now if we're talking anything other than the presidential election then perhaps I would be able to agree with you a bit more.
There are very few people I wish to just wither away and die, and these people who just want to live aren't in that category. It's understandable they're angry their jobs aren't there, but once again, immigrants or not a lot of the jobs they want are archaic. They wouldn't be around much longer anyhow. Also while we look for someone to blame as humans it's not quite right to hate a whole group of people due to some of them taking a job you wanted. If this wall situation shows you anything it's that the democrats do in fact support border security. They just don't want that obnoxious, overly expensive wall there to do it. If we're talking about me personally, I'm not bothered by immigrants coming over here illegal or otherwise. Most of them just want to survive like to aforementioned people. Who are you to weigh lives and say they have to die when they generally just want to work and feed their families as well? Also if we're going to talk about the democrats allowing them to be here, why are we not talking about the people hiring them to do the work? In my experience it's largely moderates and republicans who employ illegal immigrants. If you don't mind me asking, have you ever worked in an industry with immigrants? Seen their employers? Seen how many of them make up the backbone of certain lines of work? If so please tell me what career path you have. I worked in the horse industry, and I saw this. Some people have visas, some don't. Guess which political affiliation was in charge in that line of work? It wasn't democrats I assure you. Centrists and right wingers are perfectly fine blaming immigrants for their problems except when they can hire them and make them work more than fourteen hour days for seven days a week.
Your mention of robotics is a valid one, and something I think about considering my current profession. I work retail. It's no secret that it's dying, and that traditional stores will likely no longer exist in a few decades. Those that do will likely be mostly automated. This means I am becoming obsolete. I know this, but I'm not going to hate all technology or the people who made it and run out into the woods in or to reject the change I see happening around me. I know shady politicians aren't helping the people who we're talking about, but they're once again hoping against reality. Like them, I will have to adapt and find another way to make money. It's unfortunate, but nothing stays the same, and we have to keep moving forward. I'm already well prepared for programs like social security and welfare to not exist in the future. I've come to terms with how life is probably going to be.
Is civil unrest the future? I certainly hope not, but it's a possibility. I think it can be avoided if we start planning ahead now and stop filling people with false promises of glory days returning. Ironically change is the only constant in life. What are the specifics? I don't know, but we can't stay stagnant.
You're misunderstanding some of my words. I've said already no one is to be trusted in politics, and I'm not hailing the leftist politicians as saints. They're far from it. I even said democrats were friendly with Wall Street, of course Obama wasn't going to jail his buddies. I simply stated that they're more aware of differences of life of social classes than republicans are, and it's true.
I didn't say "you" I said the politicians have to find a solution, and fast. As for convincing the people to let go and become internationally competitive - farm and other subsidies which leads to over-production have to be stopped, dollar has to be devalued (which means consumption would plummet to pre-war years), tax for middle-classes and above has to rise by quite a few percentages - and during training these left-behinds would need the welfare system, which would need a generous injection of money. No easy solution, right?
HC winning popular vote means jackshit. She lost the EC which is what mattered. Even then, I know many progressive friends who held their nose to vote for her because the alternative was Trump. She isn't wanted. Gods, Dems chose Obama, a newcomer, over her! Also many countries have systems where population-to-seats are not exactly proportionally correlated. My country has a state which has population larger than Europe, but another state which has population near to SKorea has about 1/5th the seats of the former. You must win the first state to gain PM-ship, but it is created so that small states also hold significance for the ruling coalition.
Substantial means control over both houses - something Obama started with. That is when you can push through necessary reform, rather than sink in quagmire of partisanship and filibusters.
If Dems did support border security, there wouldn't be 'sanctuary cities', or plans for all immigrants (illegal or not) to be able to partake governmental healthcare. Even DACA could have had much clearer guidelines, with a one-time exemption limit. Dems are creating vacuous laws with smokescreen proclamations.
Immigrants need to be legal entrants - it is sad that US doesn't process fast and tbh doesn't have personnel to process fast either. And if there is no to 'refugee' status, and right to say no to immigrants who cannot assimilate or are criminal. As for working i.e. economic migrants, they must be taken only via work-permits applied for by employers. A system, which would mean the end to willy-nilly abuse and slavery of illegal labour.
In any country with a welfare structure in place - which requires citizens to pay into, the existence of illegals matter - if they take help and don't pay in taxes they defraud the system; if they are scared and go take help from the black-market and pay in peripherals they aid the parallel, unregulated economy. With influx of illegal, non-documented persons, social markers like policing (crimes go unfound), schooling (many migrant children don't or can't get full education), accomodation (rents rise, communities drift) all suffer.
You are wrong if you think only non-Dems take on illegals - all restaurants, schools, warehouses, construction companies aren't run only by Repubs. Like you, who cares for people's right to work, many Dems too take on illegals for both altruistic and personal gain/convenience.
I don't want to disclose my line of work, but I am of refugee stock and volunteer with related organisation.
You are a person, and I must tell, you that are not and must not ever think of yourself as a thing, as obsolete. It is the job of politicians, academics, thinktanks, govt. officials to find out a way in which your set of skills may be updated so you too can live a life of dignity.
As for ss and welfare, yes they'll probably get downsized but there must be some safety-net left for the most wretched and needy of the citizens. Saving that is what politicians should look at.