I don't find your explanation for the Dems low approval rating very convincing.
After 4 years of Joe Biden, the American people voted in the most disruptive, change agent in US political history, the polar opposite of Joe Biden.
So fairly obviously people are not happy with the Dems.
Fentanyl is obviously related to the Democrat open border policy. Gangs establishing territory in the US is obviously related to the Democrat open border policy.
You can tie yourself in knots with whatever tortuous logic you choose to justify the unjustifiable but most people (like me) are on the side of commonsense. Close the borders and manage immigration in an orderly, controlled way.
With regard to deporting the family of illegal immigrants, the people responsible for this situation is the Democrats who opened the borders and the family that chose to break the law by immigrating illegally.
Re: the "purely numbers thing". You haven't understood the point I was making. With any govt action at scale (Dems or Republican) there will always be winners and losers.
Depending on your bias (and we can obviously see your bias) you'll focus on whatever outlier situation you find to justify your political framing.
And there are so many "very dark paths" aren't there?
Some people might consider weaponising the justice system in an attempt to take out a political opponent a very dark path".
Or others might consider constructing a fake dossier alleging political collusion with Russia, and then using that fake dossier to weaponise the FBI against a political opponent, a "very dark path".
Others might consider opening the borders to illegal migration at scale to sway the voter demographics in your favour (a complete corruption of democracy), a "very dark path".
Not to mention the sex trafficking at scale, the importation of fentanyl at scale as a result of the open border policy could also be a "very dark path".
Others might consider hiding the diminished mental state of a president (in collusion with the media) and gaslighting the public on this issue, so that a cabal of unelected bureacrats can run the country from behind closed doors, a "very dark path".
Others might consider placing enormous pressure on social media companies to censor public discourse thereby bypassing the first amendment a "very dark path".
So please spare me your highly, highly selective, performative faux "concern". I simply can't take you seriously.