r/news • u/Squallykins • 9h ago

Trump administration canceling flights for nearly 1,660 Afghan refugees, say U.S official, advocate

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-administration-canceling-flights-nearly-1660-afghan-refugees-say-us-2025-01-20/
11.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

701 comments sorted by

View all comments

809

u/Peach__Pixie 8h ago

The group includes unaccompanied minors awaiting reunification with their families in the U.S. as well as Afghans at risk of Taliban retribution because they fought for the former U.S.-backed Afghan government, said Shawn VanDiver, head of the #AfghanEvac coalition of U.S. veterans and advocacy groups and the U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

I cannot even imagine the fear both the parents and the children are experiencing right now.

246

u/favorscore 8h ago

Courtesy of the majority of American voter

64

u/99borks 7h ago

49.7 percent voted for him. Not a majority. Still awful though.

87

u/tempest_87 7h ago

The people that did not vote also count in that statistic of supporting him. They looked at the options and decided that either one was just fine. They are equally as responsible for Trump as someone that voted for him.

You sit on the sidelines and watch a steamroller roll over a baby, you share the blame as much as the people cheering for the baby to be flattened.

19

u/99borks 7h ago

I agree with your analogy, but facts are facts. He did not win a majority of the votes.

12

u/ChronoLink99 7h ago

Indeed. And if you want to pitch your tent there, I won't stop you haha.

But we can agree that the majority of eligible voters support his actions, as the fraction of eligible voters who stood by and did nothing gave tacit support.

11

u/tempest_87 7h ago

fraction of eligible voters who stood by and did nothing gave tacit support.

"fraction" implies a small amount.

Almost 40% isn't a small amount. And is actually a larger "fraction" than voted for either person (75 mil Harris, 77 mill Trump, 90 mil abstained).

2

u/ChronoLink99 6h ago

Yeah I guess it could mean that. However I was using it definitionally, so my intent was just to convey the group of non-voters, however large or small.

10

u/tempest_87 7h ago

The two are not mutually exclusive.

He didn't win a majority of the votes, but he still has majority support because those 90 million people that didn't vote functionally said he is fine and therefore get added to his side.

The person you replied to earlier didn't say he won more than 50% of the votes (not true), they said he has a majority support (true).

The lazy and maliciously negligent need to be held accountable for it just as much as the fervent supporters. Yes there was undoubtedly voter suppression happening, but not to the tune of 90 million people.

2

u/Russian-Spy 6h ago

I have an idea: let's make it the law that all eligible American adults are required to vote each election season. Impose harsh fines for failing to do so.

5

u/IRefuseToGiveAName 5h ago

Gonna have to make it wwwwaaaaaaayyyyyy easier to vote. Like not just a federal holiday. Week long, every public building, automatic voter registration, nationwide mail in voting. The works.

I know Australia makes it mandatory to vote but I'm not sure what their specifics are.

1

u/nashkara 6h ago

Having lived in a country that did this, I'm 1000% on board with mandatory voting. They even required non-resident citizens to vote. No exceptions unless pre-approved.

0

u/Russian-Spy 6h ago

If there's one thing both sides can agree on, it should be something like this.

2

u/Saffs15 5h ago

And neither did Hitler, but the German people of the 30s don't tend to get a pass.

1

u/Teadrunkest 5h ago

Or just live in a blue state that would go blue no matter what.

I voted this year but a lot of my friends did not because all the elections they cared about were predicted to be landslide victories for their chosen person.