Hint to Democrats: Let Trump build his wall

I'd like to give advice to congressional Democrats: Let Trump build his dam* wall.

You have to pick your fights. This is a fight that is really unimportant, but may have huge upsides for Dems, if they don't fight it.

1) Trump can't use the topic anymore to demonize Dems and divide the country.
2) He may be forced to cooperate with Dems on some more important issue.
3) The wall will likely cost 2-3 times as much as the projected $30 billion. Dems can paint him as a big spender.
4) The wall will likely do little to curb illegal immigration. What better way to say: We told you so.
5) Dems can keep asking Trump why Mexico is not paying for his wall.

In essence, there is huge political risk in building the wall for Trump. Why would Dems take the blame for him not taking the risk? Let him do it and pay the political price.

 

I can see where you're advice is actually rather sound politically

Some will argue $30 billion or more to score political points is a costly way to do it, but hey, the left is spending far more than that to build a train to nowhere in California, so in the grand picture, it's not that much.

 

If it is irresponsible spending, granting Trump his wall is just more silly antics. Setting up a trap is childish at tax payers expense. Someone has to be the adult in the room.

 

I agree with most of your post. Personally I've never had this problem because I have a thousand kilometer moat surrounding my nation. Kind of a natural wall.

I always thought there must be a better way in the modern age than a wall. Maybe live satellite imagery of the entire border? Maybe one drone per 100m along the border.

I agree in principle that something has to change.

 

Dude he is asking for five billion out of what will be very nearly 4 trillion in spending. Complaining about that is like ignoring a broken arm in favor of complaining that your little toe itches.

 

Dude - read my post again. I'm against concession when it is all about gamesmanship.

 

Please see my brilliant proposal: http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/border-security-proposal.546635/

Trump's non-existent wall is far more valuable to him as a partisan issue to wee wee up his cult than it would be as an exorbitant approach to curtailing the reduced level of illegal border crossings. Most undocumented aliens already achieve that status by overstaying visas, and the inconvenience of a "big, beautiful wall!" would only increase those opting for that method.

Democrats would do better to serve the interests of the nation, the American taxpayer, and especially Texans who fear having their private land seized by Trump bureaucrats under eminent domain.

 

Doesnt seem like much of a serious proposal if I'm being honest, or are you sincere?

 

Uhm Nancy......is not listening.


Nancy Pelosi Says No Funding for 'Immoral' Border Wall.....


"Would you be willing to support some degree of wall funding if you got a permanent, bona fide solution on DACA?" a reporter asked House Minority Leader -- soon to be House Speaker -- Nancy Pelosi on Thursday. "

No," the California Democrat replied. "Because they're two different subjects."


She called President Trump's long-promised border wall "immoral, ineffective, expensive.


Funding for the Homeland Security Department expires tomorrow, but Pelosi noted that it will be extended for two weeks.

And within those two weeks, she said she expects Congress to pass all the remaining appropriations bills except for the one funding the Homeland Security Department......snip~


https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...-two-different

 

The "gassy don" motif is merely a sales ploy, but a phalanx of balloon-mounted surveillance cameras with night-vision would facilitate comprehensive monitoring at a small fraction of the cost of the proposed 3,100 km concrete and steel barricade that, despite repeated assurances, Mexico will not pay for.

Again, Trump's fake, fantasy wall is of far greater partisan, political value that an actual one.

 

Seems reasonable to me. I'd need to see the specifics but I'm encouraged.

 

Doesn't change a thing. Ninety percent of this budget is going to be gamesmanship. It is almost certainly going to be designed to provoke a Trump veto.

 

Build the wall. It will be a statement that American Culture is going to remain and that is what made it great!. Your motives may be wrong, but the idea is great! Of course it will make a dent in the future of your voting base, but America will eventually come back to that American Dream!

 

I agree that there must be better ways to protect the border than a wall. The problem with the wall is that it was really not a serious proposal, but rather Trump's gut instinct that he carelessly used in early campaign speeches. After he got elected, he couldn't say "guys, the wall was just a joke", he now has to build a wall to save face. And we have to pay for it.

If you really want a tight border you have to go with the former East German concept: A watch tower every 300 feet with shoot to kill orders. I am not sure people have the stomach for such an approach. I sure don't.

 

Compared to our budget, $30 billion is nothing. Of course, the NIH roughly has similar budget, you bet that I'd rather spend the $30 billion on medical research than the dam* wall.

However, since this is relatively unimportant, you can deal with it like a parent trying to teach a teenager that their behavior is wrong. You can argue with them all to no avail, or let them live out one of their less-damaging impulses and get burned. Then, they'll see that the parent was right in the first place. Since Trump is of that mindset, this approach might work. Of course, we can't have him act on his impulses on more critical matters.

 

I have developed a policy. If someone will not listen to reason I check and ask " will it harm anyone?" If the answer is no then let them **** up big time

Future generations will be calling it "Trumps Folly" only I think alliteration may take over and become "Trumps Total ****up"

 

Fair point.

However, the challenge is that the parent in your example, when applied to matters at hand, is a biased and manipulative propaganda operation with a singular objective. Rather than waiting for a lesson to be learned, they will just move on to the next issue, and ignore whatever resulted from the previous one. Especially true when it turns out "the kid" was right.

 

Don's manipulative propaganda operation with a singular objective is to make himself look better by scoring a win. It has nothing to do with border security.
Why the Wall Won't Work | Cato Institute

https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-wall-wont-workWhy the Wall Won't Work ... While he said after the election that a fence may be appropriate in “some areas,” he added that a wall would be better, and he has ...

TX Smugglers: Wall Won't Stop Immigrants, Drugs | Pulitzer Center

https://pulitzercenter.org/.../texas-smugglers-say-trumps-border-wall-wouldnt-stop-im...Jan 26, 2018 - Two former smugglers explain how they'd work around it. ... Texas Smugglers SayTrump's Border Wall Wouldn't Stop Immigrants, Drugs .... to the border also began to exert more control over human smuggling, experts say.

Trump's border wall won't work, say hundreds of architects

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2018/02/02/...wall.../1079739001/Feb 2, 2018 - A border wall with Mexico is costly and would cause irreparable damage, say architects who work in Arizona and other border states.

5 Problems 'the Wall' Won't Solve - POLITICO Magazine

https://www.politico.com/.../story/.../trump-wall-mexico-problems-immigration-21483...
Feb 28, 2017 - Trump seems to think that a wall can stop the flow of drugs and guns across ... and author most recently of Why Walls Won't Work: Repairing the ...

Mexico Border Wall Won't Stop Immigrants From Crossing: Why? | Time

time.com › U.S. › Immigration
May 16, 2017 - But experts say that a wall, like the fences that are in place now, won't deter immigrants who are already risking their lives to cross the border.

What Border Agents Say They Want (It's Not a Wall) - The New York ...

https://www.nytimes.com/.../border-patrol-wall-immigration-trump-senate-democrats.ht...
Mar 22, 2018 - WASHINGTON — President Trump has called for a wall along the border with Mexico to stop ... Customs and Border Protection officials said Border Patrol agents were asked to identify ... Here Are Some He Won't See. .... Contact Us · Work with us · Advertise · Your Ad Choices · Privacy · Terms of Service ...

 

Geeze, got to hand it to your team to have data and links available on short notice.

Not sure how that changes anything.

 

It was just a Google search result so don't let your penchant for conspiracy theories get the best of you. The point being......the wall is unpopular, a waste of resources, expected by experts to be ineffective, and not a priority for the professionals guarding the border.

 

I don't see why shoot to kill is necessary, why not just lob a bunch of tear gas at them? It's hard to climb a fence when you're engulfed in tear gas.

 

Well, considering how porous the current border infrastructure is, how many millions of illegal aliens have been allowed to cross the border and harm American workers and cities, I'm not too moved by the words of people who have allowed that to happen.

The Train to Nowhere in California is unpopular, a waste of time and money, but it hasn't been the focus of never ending stories, so nothing has been done to stop it from being built.

Not necessarily the same thing, but popularity can be manipulated, and it's a pretty good example.

 

I started a thread with an "all eggs in one basket" strategy. Meaning throw everything the United States can muster in sealing the border. Close overseas military bases and divert the funds, hardware and troops to protecting the southern border. Divert funds from various government expenses towards building the wall. Raise taxes to pay for the wall.

Make the wall not only thick and tall, but also add crocodile infested moats, a minefield no man's land, sniper turrets and drones and finally the have the US military patrolling the border all day every day.

There will still be a small handful of people who make it through this gauntlet of death, but at least you Americans did everything possible to keep the "enemy" out. When all is said and done THEN we can talk about amnesty and Mexico paying for the wall.

What say the people of the forum to an "all eggs in one basket" strategy?

 

That would be way to smart.
The DP will probably stick with tax hikes, gun control, sanctuary cities and $7/gal gas - things that work in France.

 

The East German analogy is ridiculously bombastic. East Germans were prison keepers preventing their own people from escaping. The primary evil in what they did was in imprisoning their own people with the threat of death, NOT the fact that they had a border where they were preventing crossings.

I feel like the left keeps telling themself that a wall does not work so often that they have created an echo chamber that has convinced themselves that a wall does not work. I realize that it also requires border enforcement as well, but how are you rationalizing that a wall isnt an enormous benefit for those that are guarding the border? In a simplified form, if I were wanting to contain 100 prisoners and prevent them from escaping, I could erect an imaginary perimeter with 50 guards stationed every 20 feet working 24/7, and probably deter and prevent people from escaping. Conversely, I could erect a wall, and probably have 4 guards to accomplish the same thing. Undoubtedly, the wall would be the more expensive option initially, but with time, having the wall would be less expensive due to needing less guards.

With this dynamic in mind, what are you proposing as a better solution to reduce illegal border crossings than a physical wall?