Trump and his admin angry that the Border Patrol union endorsed 3 Democrats - Polidicks

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/26/border-patrol-union-senate-democrats-894886 Trump White House and administration officials are furious that the union representing a key Trump constituency — Border Patrol agents — endorsed three Senate Democrats. It's an “egregious” action on “the existential issue of this election,” one White House official told POLITICO. The focus of administration ire is Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council, which represents 14,000 border agents and support personnel. In allowing his union to endorse Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), Judd behaved in a manner that was "self-serving," a Trump administration official said, "rather than putting the Border Patrol first." Judd appeared in TV ads for McCaskill and Tester. In the McCaskill ad, Judd said: “Those ads against McCaskill on immigration just aren’t true. She was one of only four Democrats to vote to end sanctuary cities.” Judd also praised McCaskill's record on border security. NBPC was among a handful of labor unions that endorsed candidate Donald Trump in 2016. Since then, Judd and his union have thrown in their lot with the administration's immigration hardliners — for instance, by suggesting that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen is too soft on immigration, a criticism previously voiced by Trump and by National Security Adviser John Bolton. Asked Thursday on Fox Business whether Nielsen failed to do her job, Judd said, "She's not holding these people pending their deportation proceedings, so I would say yes." The administration official objected to this criticism, saying DHS is bound by laws that limit the actions it may take. Judd “simply doesn’t understand immigration laws,” the administration official said. “Allegedly supporting the president but then attacking his top lieutenants on immigration just falls flat with everyone.” NBPC has endorsed more Republicans during this cycle than Democrats, including Senate Republican candidates Martha McSally in Arizona and Sen. Ted Cruz in Texas, along with Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey. But NBPC's decision to endorse McCaskill, Tester and Heitcamp "opens up a pretty serious rift," the White House official said. In response, Judd told POLITICO that his union, which is a member of the AFL-CIO, is not a partisan organization. “We’ve endorsed Republicans," Judd said, "We’ve endorsed Democrats. We always have. We endorse those who we feel are strong on border security, period. ... If they’re mad at us because they want us to be a partisan organization, that’s up to them.” Judd told POLITICO that he was notified Thursday night that Trump was upset at him because NBPC endorsed some Democrats. “I won’t tell you by whom," he said. "That was the very first I ever heard of it." The warning came, ironically, less than 24 hours after Trump tweeted: “Brandon Judd of the National Border Patrol Council is right when he says on @foxandfriends that the Democrat inspired laws make it tough for us to stop people at the Border. MUST BE CHANDED [sic], but I am bringing out the military for this National Emergency. They will be stopped!”

Correct me if i'm wrong, as I've read the article while being incredibly tired, but isn't this literally just shaming for not endorsing republicans? Essentially saying the "Existential issue of this election is that you didn't support ME"? There's no way i'm correctly interpreting it, that would be absolutely baffling.

Trump has visited Montana so much to try and unseat Tester, he really hates his guts after Tester fucked over his Veterans Affairs nominee. Casted my ballot for him a few days ago, pretty confident he'll win.

But the White House official said, “We are in this epic struggle over the next few weeks for control of the Senate, in which the president has framed the issue quite correctly as a Republican Senate that’s with the president on border security or a Democrat Senate that’s not. So campaigning for any Senate Democrat, particularly in races where the president is spending time campaigning against that incumbent, is going directly against the president on border security.” You cannot go against the Party

Jesus christ, I was interpreting it correctly. That's incredibly contradictory to how America should operate. It's a democracy, not a damn dictatorship.

I know someone who used to me moderate who went right in the past few years who has this logic. "If I vote R for my president, I must vote R for everyone below them." It truly baffles me.

It's almost like electing a spoiled-rich egotist manchild who's never had anyone tell him "no" to the highest office in the land results in a President with zero interest in the public good, only his own selfish ends. Trump has decided that ("illegal") immigration is the single issue that gets Republicans energetic about voting, and he's determined to keep it in the headlines because it'll make Republicans get out and vote. The Republican strategy in this midterm election is fearmongering about immigrants, 100% of the way, and anyone involved in immigration who doesn't support the Republican party line damages the structural integrity of the big lie the Republicans have circled their wagons around. Tell him that George Washington would bitchslap his teeth right out of him for blind loyalty to a would-be monarchical faction. He didn't rebel against the British so politicians could band together and form parties and then turn them into personality-worship cults.

I got a mailer yesterday from the Republican party talking about how the Democratic nominee for senator said "no" to Trump and that is why we shouldn't vote for him. Nothing about policy, nothing about the Republican candidate, just literally a card saying "He said no to Trump" then listing the nominees he voted against.