Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Horn6721, Jul 28, 2016.
at the DNC?
And explain why a wall to protect our southern border is bad?
If you jump the Dem fence in in Philly , you get arrested.
If you jump the international border fence between the US and Mexico, you get invited to speak at the convention!
What these wall-bashers don't seem to get is WE ALREADY HAVE A WALL. It's just not complete. They currently call it a "fence" but whatever.
It is a serious question for Dems.
I hope someone will answer.
I admit the thought of someone throwing a coffin over a wall is hilarious
Still why was it a good idea for the Dems but not for Americans ?
I suppose your question is aimed at the speakers who mentioned the wall in either jest, contempt, funny metaphors, etc.
I don't necessarily thinks anyone (well, anyone in the mainstream) thinks that a border wall to protect our country is a bad thing. As Phil stated, we pretty much have a fence in the populated areas already, and I see a wall as an expensive upgrade of the fence.
The two-pronged opposition to Trump's wall seem to be:
2. Policy objectives
As for #1, it's going to cost twice as much as Trump's highest estimate, and his way of paying for it is more complicated than the bill of goods that's currently being sold. It's basically "the wall will cost billions and we'll just stop the billions that are being sent by illegal immigrants back to Mexico in order to pay for it," but that's not exactly a zero-sum math problem. There's no way to gauge how much wouldn't be sent once Trump put this policy in place, or what exactly Mexico would do to counter losing 3 percent of their GDP in order to "help" us build the wall. And all this is notwithstanding that people still might find ways to send money to Mexico without heading to the nearest Moneygram location. I think Trump believes he's flipping the script in trade negotiations, but I don't see the end game in which other countries all of a sudden accede to his will. We all saw how Nieto and Fox responded to Trump's claims. Will they rush to the bargaining table once Trump is elected? My guess is no.
Also for #1, there are about 350 million LEGAL border crossings each year, and those become much more difficult and costly for people who do things the right way.
As for #2, it's pretty clear that the policy reasons he wants to build the wall (drugs, rapists, criminals) aren't going to be affected by said wall. Vice was even interviewing some of the militia guys near the Arizona border (who were obviously all in favor of the wall) and one of them gave the unprompted response that it would be a lot tougher to get through the border... unless they had a long rope or something. Yeah. Unless they had a long rope. Which I hear is tough to come by in Mexico. Drugs are never going to stop flowing from the south because of the failed war against them and demand in the US. Gangs aren't going to stop competing to sell the drugs. Border patrol is at its highest amount ever and they understand the difficulties in policing the areas even with increased budgets and technology. So I just don't see the wall as a huge obstacle to curtailing the very things Trump says it's going to stop. Just a $25 billion project that will affect other bargaining chips in Congress when the next budget comes due... like entitlements, defense, etc.
That was a well thought response
My question was on a simpler level.
Why would Dems think it is fine to erect a wall to keep out people who are not "authorized" from getting into their convention
But cry how horrible it would be to keep out people who are not authorized to enter our country.
Sorry, I guess I was just answering the 2nd question.
For the convention, it's the same bait that Republicans throw out there whenever a liberal wants more gun control but also armed bodyguards. "You can't have it both ways." Except it's not really both ways as it's two very different topics.
Perhaps you can explain the difference vis a vis a wall at the DNC
But be against a wall on our southern border .
Really? Elaborate more please. Because guns in the hands of the good guns such as security or good citizens protect themselves and others from the bad guys. A wall protects the government or democrats at the convention just as a wall would on the border of our citizens.
As far as cost? You can't put a price tag on our safety. Maybe if we weren't blowing money on Solyndra and global warming or Obama Care which ended up being a lot more cost with less care, then the cost wouldn't be a big deal to you.
It's very simple. A wall around the DNC convention is not keeping prospective Dem voters out of the country.
Thank God for Fox News and other conservative media. How else would millions of sheeple be able to conflate temporary structures for a convention needing a high levels of security in an age of heightened terrorism with a 1,989 mile long wall for a border crossed millions of times each day for legal purposes?
Since I think spending hundreds of billions building a wall between Mexico and the US is a stupid waste of resources that could be more effectively spent on other means of security, do you think 6721 that I'm a hypocrite because I built a wall between my bedroom and my bathroom?
What Phil said. There's a difference between a national border with complex foreign policy implications and a security perimeter at a sports/celebrity event. A localized security perimeter is easier to maintain and has pretty much one purpose.
Like I said earlier, there are a million legal crossings each day between the US and Mexico, but the screenings at checkpoints are far between. A wall in the middle of nowhere to combat drugs and gangs isn't going to achieve its objective.
I already stated that a border wall won't achieve its objectives, particularly the drug/gang stuff. The assumption that the wall will protect us is basically what we have in the status quo, so proposing a change in border policy that would potentially not achieve anything seems like a waste.
Your perception of "not putting a price tag on safety" is fallacious. That bad guys will inevitably be kept out now that there's a better barrier. I'd love to revisit the numbers in like 15 years about the drop of border-related drugs or crime from illegal immigrants, but I don't think it's going to make the dent that you think it will.
I didn't bring up Solyndra or Obamacare, but as long as we're cutting things to pay for the wall, I'm sure there's more than a few pet projects from the other side of the aisle too.
So it doesn't have to be a solid wall. It can be a mixture of many types of ways to keep people out except through actual entries where we know who is coming into our country.
Many if not most Dems are not in favor of stopping people from streaming over.
Once here we are on the hook for them .
So if not a solid wall how many agree we need some mixture of prevention, we can't keep letting people who come in illegally stay here and live off us.
Most of the people already here illegally came legally and overstayed their visa. People are not streaming over in fact more people are now leaving than coming. Your proposed wall would cover less than 1/10 of the nations border, what about the Ocean or the border to the north?
Do you really want to keep people out? Punish the companies that hire them, punish the home builders, the farm owners, construction companies, restaurants, hotel chains. No work, no pay, no illegals. Pretty dam simple but go ahead and believe a wall will help, you have already made it clear your a stupid FU..
The E-Verify system needs to be immediate. It is another failed government system. The problem with punishing companies is you are putting them in a Lose-Lose situation. If they deny employment to someone who has and ID card and SS card they could be sued and they will be by the Mexican Barrios Lawyers. They prey on companies that might be discriminating because a license or SS card looks fake.
I will give you and example, guy or gal, jumps the border, they are put up in an apartment given false papers, ID and SS card and told to go apply for a job at this location. They go there get the job and turn in their paperwork. It takes about 6 months for the Federal government to come back and say that person has been dead for 20 years. They fire the guy and the guy shows up the next day with different papers. The problem for the company if they dispute or say the paperwork is false, the Barrios will sick their lawyers on them and cost the company mucho dineros........
It is not as simple as just punishing the company that hires the illegal.
Prevent them from coming here and send them back when caught, if they get caught a third time, a year in jail happens.
What no wall in your response? You must agree that its a stupid idea, thanks. Your example seems somewhat reasonable but if that system sucks and E-verify has failed what makes any sane person think 1/10 of a wall will do anything to improve the situation, its mind boggling.
Come on guys, this is your wall post try to defend your wall argument. I be sitting her laughing.
' People are not streaming over in fact more people are now leaving than coming"
Where do you get this from?
Have you ever heard of google? I heard it is pretty good but you know what they say about statistics. Since you brought it up, can you show us the actual "stream" of people flowing over here?
YOU brought up numbers. You stated a fact. So where did you get that fact?
Nugz = Troll.
no doubt but I really wanted to see if he/she could come up with any actual site to back up that silly claim.
"Many if not most Dems are not in favor of stopping people from streaming over."
YOU made this statement first so go ahead and back it up. Is it a silly claim? Are you and Phil having a circle jerk, seems fun but glad im not there to join in.
What happened to your WALL arguments, you guys starting to dodge the issue you brought up now? Come on guys tell us how its going to solve all of Americas problems and make us great again.
Bunch of friggin morons. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=are+more+immigrants+leaving+then+coming
There is even a nice fox news link for you guys.
this is from HHS
The number of illegal immigrant families jumping the border this fiscal year has already topped all of 2015, according to Homeland Security Department statistics released Friday that show the administration’s border problems continue to grow.
that was families, here is unaccompanied children
Unaccompanied children crossing southern border up 78% in 2016
This is 2016
Per the Posting Guidelines:
Personal attacks, name-calling and aggressive messages are not acceptable.
You missed one... " Nugz = Troll."
If someone climbs the fence at the Democratic Convention, they get arrested. If an illegal climbs the fence at the border, they get a speaking spot at the democratic convention.
The Vatican, of course, is surrounded by a big-*** wall