Oh they were all talking about securing borders, halting illegal immigration, etc. Hell, some of them even separated immigrant children from their families at the border and caged them. At some point in time that all became the Nazi™ thing to do, prior offenders were all retroactively absolved of their sins, and asking about how that made any sense was "whataboutism".

Remember when Trump first announced "his" covid vaccine and everyone on the left was suddenly skeptical of vaccines?

I don't remember that.

> So, let's just say there is a vaccine that is approved and even distributed before the election. Would you get it?

> I will say that I would not trust Donald Trump. And it would have to be a credible source of information that talks about the efficacy and the reliability of whatever he's talking about.

This is the exact same tactic used by anti vaxxers on the right. s/Donald Trump/Fauci/. Talk about undermining public trust in institutions - this is the (now) vice president publicly saying that it would have been possible and probable for a vaccine which wasn't safe or effective to be released to the public.

https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/sotu/date/2020-09-06/segmen...

There were a few weeks early on when the vice, slate, the Atlantic etc. were minimizing the virus, and the right was taking the other side. Then it switched overnight with no acknowledgement. Vice even pulled some articles. Then later Fox news suddenly claimed they had always been pro vaccine. I read it was something to do with consistency with Rupert Murdoch's news properties in the UK. There are a few countries where it stayed the other way around, Israel I think?

So if (and I do mean "if") you're calling recent Republiccan statements and policy as simply being against "illegal immigration", that's a level of revisionism right up there with the Civil War being about "states rights". For example:

- "Tucker Pushes Racist ‘Great Replacement’ Theory Yet Again, ADL Renews Call for Fox to Fire Him" [1]

- "Trump referred to Haiti and African nations as 'shithole' countries" [2]. He then went on to say we should have more immigration from Norway, which is probably the whitest country on Earth. Coincidence?

- "Mollie Tibbetts' killing fuels Republican immigration attacks ahead of midterms" [3]

- "President Trump Pardons Former Sheriff Joe Arpaio" [4]

- "The parents of 545 children separated at the border still haven’t been found" [5]

- "Here’s what you need to know about Title 42, the pandemic-era policy that quickly sends migrants to Mexico" [6] (a policy that should've ended on the first day of Biden's presidency but--fun fact--Biden has excluded more asylum seekers under Title 42 than Trump did)

If Republicans actually cared about these people they'd end policies that destabilize countries and create refugee crises like the completely unwarranted sanctions against Venezuela and Cuba.

For the record, when it comes to foreign policy, the Democrats and Republicans are exactly the same.

[1]: https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-pushes-racist-g...

[2]: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-referred-...

[3]: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/08/25/politics/mollie-tibbetts-...

[4]: https://www.npr.org/2017/08/25/545282459/president-trump-par...

[5]: https://www.texastribune.org/2020/10/21/donald-trump-immigra...

[6]: https://www.texastribune.org/2022/04/29/immigration-title-42...

And yes, the fact that so many want to leave their very poor, often dangerous or dirty, countries validates that they are indeed shitholes. They will tell you as much, if not in words, by their actions. It doesn't mean that that person is bad or that you hate them (or their culture, ethnicity, etc.) if you frankly describe the unfortunate situation of their country with that word.