SURVEY: Build the Wall -- Yes or No?

[wayned]

44 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

it was never a 2000 miles, as there were already existing barriers, so please get the facts straight. as far as the cost increase you are trying to say is not warranted, do you think land acquisition prices and construction cost might have risen in 17 years, or for that matter, you don't think the style and type of barrier is not the same as the bare minimum installed before? that would require common sense and logic though.

 

 these are the proposed outlines of the border security, so should the dems propose a compromise? Where is it? what are they proposing? give details if they are serious, where is it? so just say no and nothing changes. The leftist base will never forgive the dems if anything is compromised or approved.

 

as far as the vacuously obtuse silver spoon comment, how does a woman in politics since 1962 and has never done anything else amass a net worth

of 20 million dollars? I'm sure it was all sheer wise investing and savings it no advantages being exploited.

 

 

 

That's total BS, it was always a "beautiful 30' high concrete wall from sea to shining sea and Mexico was going to pay for it".  There was never any mention about not replacing the existing fences which are nowhere near 30' high.  It was also going to have "a big beautiful gate" and would have a beautiful "Trump Wall"  sign on it!

 

As far as Pelosi's counter proposal she has already given a list of what she would supply funds for and is in the process of updating her proposal and bill, most likely tomorrow.  I'm not going back and researching what she has proposed.

 

As far as the "silver spoon" comment it was directed at the thousands of TSA workers that are mostly non college educated people that are trying to support a family on $30K per year. They live from paycheck to paycheck and cannot continue to work if they are not being paid. Their vehicles won't run without fuel and I doubt that the gas station will accept IOU's and they can't apply for unemployment as they are technically still working even if they are not being paid.  They can't go ask daddy to make them a small loan of $1,000,000. I never said anything about  Pelosi and have no idea about her personal history.

[mcambl61]

21 minutes ago, wayned said:

That's total BS, it was always a "beautiful 30' high concrete wall from sea to shining sea and Mexico was going to pay for it".  There was never any mention about not replacing the existing fences which are nowhere near 30' high.  It was also going to have "a big beautiful gate" and would have a beautiful "Trump Wall"  sign on it!

 

As far as Pelosi's counter proposal she has already given a list of what she would supply funds for and is in the process of updating her proposal and bill, most likely tomorrow.  I'm not going back and researching what she has proposed.

 

As far as the "silver spoon" comment it was directed at the thousands of TSA workers that are mostly non college educated people that are trying to support a family on $30K per year. They live from paycheck to paycheck and cannot continue to work if they are not being paid. Their vehicles won't run without fuel and I doubt that the gas station will accept IOU's and they can't apply for unemployment as they are technically still working even if they are not being paid.  They can't go ask daddy to make them a small loan of $1,000,000. I never said anything about  Pelosi and have no idea about her personal history.

yes, I am sure you won't be going back to to researching what she has proposed.

 

if you were referring to the TSA workers then say so. If congress was really concerned about it, they would not be taking days off or travelling while not negotiating.

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, mcambl61 said:

yes, I am sure you won't be going back to to researching what she has proposed.

 

if you were referring to the TSA workers then say so. If congress was really concerned about it, they would not be taking days off or travelling while not negotiating.

And if you were not concerned about TSA workers, you'd be supporting Trump. Oh wait...

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎1‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 1:03 AM, Slip said:

Should be fun trying to land those choppers on the mountain.  

???????????????

You are surely aware that Afghanistan is mountainous and US helicopters regularly land troops on them. Also, if you are correct there would be no helicopters used in rescues on mountains, and in fact there are.

 

[Spidey]

Build that wall? Nancy and Chuck say "NO". Donald says, "OK, some other time then".

 

He's not a happy bunny. Loser! 555

Edited January 26, 2019 by Spidey

[wayned]

Trumps idle!

[Chomper Higgot]

We need another poll:

 

 

*Has it sunk in yet, you’re not getting your wall?

[metisdead]

Another troll post has been removed. 

[wayned]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

We need another poll:

 

 

*Has it sunk in yet, you’re not getting your wall?

He now doesn't want a wail, but a steel slatted fence.  In the end it will become a beaded curtain.

 

They are forming a committee, bipartisan, to negotiate a deal over the next 3 weeks.  The first thing that they should do is get reps of the border patrol, not management or  the Secretary of HS and ask exactly what they need.  If it's an additional 230 miles of slatted fence then they should get estimates of what that would cost and how long it would take to build.  They should then put together a proposal for additional barriers and repair of existing barriers, not a wall, and the addition of technologically that can be accomplished  from now until September, the next budget cycle and outline it in detail,.  I doubt that the total package will be anything near 5.7 billion.  They should also add permanent protection for DACA and TPS and any other immigration reforms.  No matter what they do Trump won't sign it, President Coulter has already called him a wimp!  It's just an exercise in futility!

[goferman]

What's the real reason Trump is so hell-bent on his wall?

https://escondidograpevine.com/2019/01/11/wall-stinking-ridiculous-wall-fun-facts-sheet/

[wayned]

There is only one reason for the border wall! It was a Trump campaign promise and the conservative media are pounding him to fulfill the promise or they will campaign against him in 2020. 

[Opl]

Mexico failed to fulfill Trump Campaign promise but Trump followers would'nt mind Russia to pay for the wall to "Keep America Great" 

[Becker]

1 hour ago, Opl said:

Mexico failed to fulfill Trump Campaign promise but Trump followers would'nt mind Russia to pay for the wall to "Keep America Great" 

Well, they did get him elected so it's only fair that Putin helps the stooge and pays for the wall as well.

[Hanaguma]

4 hours ago, wayned said:

There is only one reason for the border wall! It was a Trump campaign promise and the conservative media are pounding him to fulfill the promise or they will campaign against him in 2020. 

The fact that a wall actually works in certain conditions of course has no bearing on the discussion, does it?  The "conservative media", whatever that is, will not campaign against Trump. They have no choice but to support him come hell or high water. You think they'll suddenly jump to Sen. Harris or Joe Biden?

[Jingthing]

8 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

The fact that a wall actually works in certain conditions of course has no bearing on the discussion, does it?  The "conservative media", whatever that is, will not campaign against Trump. They have no choice but to support him come hell or high water. You think they'll suddenly jump to Sen. Harris or Joe Biden?

The chances are increasing that "trump" may face a primary challenge from a more historically normal republican. As I've said many times if arguments were made for new sections of barriers from the beginning based on rational policy arguments rather than the big ego of a race baiting demagogue, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Please don't be naïve. The way "trump" framed it, it became impossible to see the "trump" wall as a regular policy issue. For as long as that lying con man remains in office, I doubt it ever can be. Cheerio. 

Edited January 27, 2019 by Jingthing

[riclag]

"In general, as fencing increased along the border, apprehensions in construction areas dropped. But people didn’t stop trying to enter the country illegally. They shifted to less-fortified and more remote areas of the border".

These remote areas need to be patrolled,while enforcing existing barriers! 

https://escondidograpevine.com/2019/01/11/wall-stinking-ridiculous-wall-fun-facts-sheet/

[riclag]

 President Bill Clinton ramped up fencing construction in San Diego and launched Operation Gatekeeper to make it harder for people to cross illegally into the U.S.

The result was the flow of illegal immigration shifted east toward Arizona.

https://escondidograpevine.com/2019/01/11/wall-stinking-ridiculous-wall-fun-facts-sheet/

When barriers were modified and reinforced illegals went to weaker areas!

 

 

 

[348GTS]

Skimming the comments here, it is so easy to see who is getting their "information" from the legacy mainstream media (aka the Democrat Party). All you're doing (apart from being part of the problem) is repeating disingenuous and in some cases outright false Democrat talking points. It would be laughable if it was a laughing matter. The wall should've been built 30 years ago and everyone who is now suddenly "against" it was all for it not that long ago, including the demented Pelosi and her idiot lapdog Schumer, not to mention Obama, both Clintons, etc. But I am sure CNN et al conveniently don't mention that or play those clips do they? If they are so convinced that the wall wouldn't work, then why don't the sycophantic colluding media ask them why they kept asking for it until Trump took office ? Why not just approve the 1/10th of 1% of the budget for this purpose this one time and then monitor what happens? What are they afraid of ? I think we all know the answer to that. In every place that sections of "wall" have been built, illegal crossings have dropped 95% in those sectors, so anyone who says that they don't work is just lying. Why does nobody mention the fact that the US spends approx 200 billion per year on handouts to illegal immigrants? Why is it that the Dems/MSM think they know better than the border patrols who do this day in and day out and in some cases risk their lives ? They have all gone on record several times saying they need a wall desperately in order to do their job properly, and when they went to one of the meetings to present the figures showing how many illegals, criminals, and drugs had been apprehended, Pelosi and her ilk refused to listen and cut them off. They don't want to accept the facts because it contradicts their political narrative and they would rather lie than admit they want a borderless country in order to replace the voters with Undocumented Democrats. They seem to care more about the rights of illegals than they do about their own citizens. Anyone who doesn't get this is either uninformed, ignorant, or complicit.

[riclag]

48 minutes ago, 348GTS said:

Skimming the comments here, it is so easy to see who is getting their "information" from the legacy mainstream media (aka the Democrat Party). All you're doing (apart from being part of the problem) is repeating disingenuous and in some cases outright false Democrat talking points. It would be laughable if it was a laughing matter. The wall should've been built 30 years ago and everyone who is now suddenly "against" it was all for it not that long ago, including the demented Pelosi and her idiot lapdog Schumer, not to mention Obama, both Clintons, etc. But I am sure CNN et al conveniently don't mention that or play those clips do they? If they are so convinced that the wall wouldn't work, then why don't the sycophantic colluding media ask them why they kept asking for it until Trump took office ? Why not just approve the 1/10th of 1% of the budget for this purpose this one time and then monitor what happens? What are they afraid of ? I think we all know the answer to that. In every place that sections of "wall" have been built, illegal crossings have dropped 95% in those sectors, so anyone who says that they don't work is just lying. Why does nobody mention the fact that the US spends approx 200 billion per year on handouts to illegal immigrants? Why is it that the Dems/MSM think they know better than the border patrols who do this day in and day out and in some cases risk their lives ? They have all gone on record several times saying they need a wall desperately in order to do their job properly, and when they went to one of the meetings to present the figures showing how many illegals, criminals, and drugs had been apprehended, Pelosi and her ilk refused to listen and cut them off. They don't want to accept the facts because it contradicts their political narrative and they would rather lie than admit they want a borderless country in order to replace the voters with Undocumented Democrats. They seem to care more about the rights of illegals than they do about their own citizens. Anyone who doesn't get this is either uninformed, ignorant, or complicit.

One thing for sure, even  if all the law makers got together to fix the existing loopholes in the laws that encourage migrants to enter  illegally at the SB ,my country would still need fortifications at the SB! I 

Edited January 27, 2019 by riclag

[Hanaguma]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

The chances are increasing that "trump" may face a primary challenge from a more historically normal republican. As I've said many times if arguments were made for new sections of barriers from the beginning based on rational policy arguments rather than the big ego of a race baiting demagogue, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Please don't be naïve. The way "trump" framed it, it became impossible to see the "trump" wall as a regular policy issue. For as long as that lying con man remains in office, I doubt it ever can be. Cheerio. 

But you see, those arguments WERE made, and ignored. Especially by people who are so blinded by their irrational and immature hatred of the President that they can't even say his name without resorting to juvenile insults. 

[goferman]

19 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

But you see, those arguments WERE made, and ignored. Especially by people who are so blinded by their irrational and immature hatred of the President that they can't even say his name without resorting to juvenile insults. 

And who won the Republican nomination based on juvenile insults? Who later became president based on more juvenile insults? And which president in history has cast the most juvenile insults? Your questionable support for this president is irrational and immature and demonstrates hatred for opposing viewpoints. Yes, the kettle is black.

[Hanaguma]

2 minutes ago, goferman said:

And who won the Republican nomination based on juvenile insults? Who later became president based on more juvenile insults? And which president in history has cast the most juvenile insults? Your questionable support for this president is irrational and immature and demonstrates hatred for opposing viewpoints. Yes, the kettle is black.

If you think Trump's victory was all about his colourful vocabulary, you need to do a bit more research. Plus if you want some really good insults, you should study a bit more about previous elections. Adams famously referred to Jefferson as, “a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mullatto father.”

 

Besides, that shallow reasoning of pointing your finger and shouting, "he did it first, so I can do it too" isn't accepted in children, so it really has no place in what is supposed to be a conversation between adults.

[bristolboy]

48 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

But you see, those arguments WERE made, and ignored. Especially by people who are so blinded by their irrational and immature hatred of the President that they can't even say his name without resorting to juvenile insults. 

You mean like "Pocahantas" and "Slimeball James Comey"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump

[goferman]

6 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

his colourful vocabulary

See? There you go again. More questionable support. His vocabulary is not up to standard for a very stable genius or even an ordinary responsible adult. Look at the long list of the insults he's cast upon notable people in the US and around the World. No other president in history deserves this notorious distinction, not even Adams. Now read this before casting your opinion on us again please:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump

[riclag]

50 years of poor immigration control at the southern border have surely made a mess of things ! The Southern Border protection was one of  the top three reasons why he was elected POTUS !

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

One thing for sure, even  if all the law makers got together to fix the existing loopholes in the laws that encourage migrants to enter  illegally at the SB ,my country would still need fortifications at the SB! I 

Really? If it were made a federal crime with mandatory jail sentences for hiring illegal immigrants, you think there would be much of a problem anymore?

[Jingthing]

But you see, those arguments WERE made, and ignored. Especially by people who are so blinded by their irrational and immature hatred of the President that they can't even say his name without resorting to juvenile insults. 

You really don't get it. He poisoned the well to the point where whenever he play acted normal nobody really believed him.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Jingthing]

If you think Trump's victory was all about his colourful vocabulary, you need to do a bit more research. Plus if you want some really good insults, you should study a bit more about previous elections. Adams famously referred to Jefferson as, “a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mullatto father.”
 
Besides, that shallow reasoning of pointing your finger and shouting, "he did it first, so I can do it too" isn't accepted in children, so it really has no place in what is supposed to be a conversation between adults.

He won because of racism with help from his amigo in Moscow.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Hanaguma]

6 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You mean like "Pocahantas" and "Slimeball James Comey"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump

Please see above reply re: "shallow reasoning". I wouldn't accept it from my son when he was 6 years old, so why should an adult try the same?

[Hanaguma]

9 minutes ago, goferman said:

See? There you go again. More questionable support. His vocabulary is not up to standard for a very stable genius or even an ordinary responsible adult. Look at the long list of the insults he's cast upon notable people in the US and around the World. No other president in history deserves this notorious distinction, not even Adams. Now read this before casting your opinion on us again please:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump

I agree completely. I wish he'd grow up and use better language too. But it's not gonna happen anytime soon. And it doesn't mean I should do the same thing, or give me license to do the same thing. 

 

Besides, most of the invective hurled Trump's way is a soporific combination of repetitive and boring. If people were at least original, it might be amusing...