> What I mean is that it's not a legitimate argument in the context of good-faith discussion getting to the truths of matters, which is the ethos of this site.

it's only not a legitimate argument if you are in a specific bubble. How do I know? Because I talk to people outside of it. Talk to some right-wing conservatives and you'll find out I promise you.

> Yes, there are many people repeating these arguments, despite them being trivially debunked.

No, they are not trivially debunked. Actually "no hearings" argumetn is trivially debunked by right wingers: "hearings take too long and we have too many immigrants committing crimes". However it's still a good argument to know. And killing this conversation makes sure people don't know it.

> confirming their preconceived biases feels good

Do you have enough introspection power to ask if you are doing that yourself right here?

> when the bulk of political discourse revolves around flamebait

This is not flamebait for the reasons I explained

Just because people don't understand how the legal system works, even though it has been explained to them, doesn't mean we should listen to their intentionally ignorant arguments.

They won't understand until somebody they know falls to the machine, then they'll say "oh I thought it would only happen to people I don't like."

You need to stop sitting on the fence and thinking that the fascists' arguments are being made in good faith.

I'd say what's driving the grassroots is closer to pure anger, demanding solutions of "someone do something" for how they've been disenfranchised, for which this specter of "illegal immigrants" are being used as a scapegoat. You're not going to convince them of anything by pointing out that this strawman they just want to beat is entitled to Constitutional rights and due process. It's simply hindbrain tribal crap being stirred up by con man Trump and the fascist media bubble.

> Do you have enough introspection power to ask if you are doing that yourself right here?

I'm a libertarian who was both-sidesing up through Covid even. I had still thought there was a good chance Trump would come around to actually leading through June of 2020. Nope!

I still do occasionally ponder thoughts like - lets say I forget about the great amount of human suffering currently being created, and try on going with the flow and loving big brother - do I see any good economic outcomes from these policies here? And my answer still comes around to settling on no - they are continuing to destroy the core fabric of our country based around individual liberty and self determination, in favor of a strong man dictatorship. Trumpism is sold as some radical reset required to restore freedom, but it's merely the continued destruction of it.

>> when the bulk of political discourse revolves around flamebait

>This is not flamebait for the reasons I explained

You have not explained how it is not flamebait. Being popular does not mean something is not flamebait. If you respond to these right-wing "conservative" (aka fascist, actual conservatives were called RINOs and kicked out of the Party), you get back a flood of more half-baked arguments and you're off to the races, right? That's a flamewar, even if you keep your tempers. The only ways that conversation is going to end is to agree to disagree, the topic gets changed, or in anger and frustration.

(fwiw I'd say this dynamic of radical flamebait as common discourse applies to parts of the Democratic party as well)