Welp, now that Biden's almost out the door and Kamala dropped that huge L, I guess it's okay for The New York Times to admit stuff like this:
Hey, NYT…
And welcome to the party!
We on the Right have been talking about this for … well, about four years now.
But I'm still glad you're here. Let's see what you got for us.
The immigration surge of the past few years has been the largest in U.S. history, surpassing the great immigration boom of the late 1800s and early 1900s, according to a New York Times analysis of government data.
Annual net migration — the number of people coming to the country minus the number leaving — averaged 2.4 million people from 2021 to 2023, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Total net migration during the Biden administration is likely to exceed eight million people.
Boy, this would've been a great article to publish, say, in October, over the summer - basically anytime before the election. But you guys really thought you stood a chance against MAGA.
Even percentage-of-population-wise, this was a historic immigration surge. Our modern surge was mostly illegal immigration, too, which is a whole other bag of worms I'm not even going to get into. But let's just look at our current situation compared to the legal, justified immigration of the past, provided, of course, by this post-2024 election New York Times article.
Historic on another level!
And look at this statistic:
The combined increases of legal and illegal immigration have caused the share of the U.S. population born in another country to reach a new high, 15.2 percent in 2023, up from 13.6 percent in 2020. The previous high was 14.8 percent, in 1890.
I think this next number (5 million) is a little low, but it's great to see The New York Times report stuff like this:
Of the roughly eight million net new migrants who entered the U.S. during the Biden presidency, about five million did so without legal authorization, according to Goldman Sachs.
Ope, and here's another thing conservatives have been saying for - I don't know - about four years:
Several factors caused the surge, starting with President Biden's welcoming immigration policy during his first three years in office. Offended by Donald J. Trump's harsh policies — including the separation of families at the border — Mr. Biden and other Democrats promised a different approach. 'We're a nation that says, "If you want to flee, and you're fleeing oppression, you should come,"' Mr. Biden said during his 2020 presidential campaign.
After taking office, his administration loosened the rules on asylum and other immigration policies, making it easier for people to enter the United States. Some have received temporary legal status while their cases went through backlogged immigration courts. Others have remained without legal permission.
And they even admit, "After Mr. Biden tightened enforcement in June, the number of people crossing the border plummeted."
They really thought that halting the illegal immigration surge for a few months would win them the election!!
The article also mentions the strain illegal immigration has put on our big cities, its pressure on social services, and the increase of job competition.
Like, is The New York Times conservative now, or are they just telling the truth for once?
For instance, here's yet another thing the Right has been noting this whole time:
The Congressional Budget Office has concluded that wage growth for Americans who did not attend college will be lower than it otherwise would have been for the next few years because of the recent surge.
Bro, New York Times, where you been the last four years?
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
