[NewUser76312]

Meta comment: it seems like you can only voice a particular direction on the politic topic of immigration enforcement on this thread without getting downvoted. The opinion is obvious because everyone automatically jumps to malice as opposed to incompetence as the prevailing theory for the article's claim.

I had a condescending response from a HN mod the other day telling me that HN isn't all that left wing, just a 'slight skew'. Well OK buddy, exhibit A, read through the diversity of opinions that aren't flagged in this thread. I'd go as far to say that HN is basically like Reddit, except more of you happen to have computer science degrees.

And that's fine, it is what it is, but let's not pretend this website doesn't have a heavy bias in a particular direction.

[ImPostingOnHN]

immigration enforcement has existed for as long as HN has existed, yet there was never this much attention paid to it. Even under the same president during the previous term.

So simply supporting or opposing "immigration enforcement" must not be it. Something must be different about this situation. I encourage you to dig deeper, or actually ask those who disagree with you, what that difference might be. And beware of falling victim to the easy dismissal of 'more people are less rational and/or less informed than before', a variant of 'this person who doesn't agree with me must be less rational and/or less informed than me'.

[NewUser76312]

Here's what's actually different:

- This admin is deporting less than Obama was during his first year in office despite promises to the contrary,

- There is now organized harassment and resistance stopping federal agents from removing illegals that are also criminals from our country.

Ironically, you need to take your own advice.

One side is crazier, and it's not mine.

[Almad]

From what I know, politologists are analyzing the situation in US from a perspective of "mid intensity civil war".

So what you're writing is aligned with tactics you'd expect...?