Trump appears to back down from demanding wall funding from congress

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: narrator

A shame you are bowing out

You were so serious in arguing in good faith, even outright dismissing a Yale study because Fox News linked it

I didn’t say you said those things

I asked questions, and implied your solution would be in effective

Why imply things? Why not just wait to hear my answers to the questions? Implying is poor form in a debate. Your implications are incredibly faulty. If you truly think that any of what you said would be my actual answer to the problems, you aren't thinking very hard.

We disagree. We're never going to agree on this topic. That isn't a reason to put words in my mouth by assuming you know what I'm going to say and putting implied answers after each of your questions before I have a chance to state my actual opinion. You know what assuming does.

Also, I was saying it figures that FOX posted it because the study is flawed. I wasn't discounting it simply because FOX posted it, I'm discounting it because it's wrong. There are dozens of studies that show a much lower number than that one, why are you deciding to only focus on that one and ignore the others? Because it defends your narrative? Discuss the dozens of others that show the Yale study is off by about 11 million.

This stopped being a good debate, and started to feel like you were just trying to get a "liberal" to slip up because of your faulty implications, several posts ago. That's why I'm out of this one. Again,

Every time i hear something about that wall you guys wanna build it makes me think of this song.

Why do we build the wall, my children, my children?
Why do we build the wall?

Why do we build the wall?
We build the wall to keep us free
That’s why we build the wall
We build the wall to keep us free

How does the wall keep us free, my children, my children?
How does the wall keep us free?

How does the wall keep us free?
The wall keeps out the enemy
And we build the wall to keep us free
That’s why we build the wall
We build the wall to keep us free

Who do we call the enemy, my children, my children?
Who do we call the enemy?

Who do we call the enemy?
The enemy is poverty
And the wall keeps out the enemy
And we build the wall to keep us free
That’s why we build the wall
We build the wall to keep us free

a reply to: narrator

You accused me of having a fear mongering narrative because I don’t want caravan people getting raped

Why did you not ask me my thoughts instead of implying

Furthermore I said I implied your solution wouldn’t work. You want me to ask you instead of having an opinion on your solution? What kind of conversation would that be?

Why did you imply the wall wouldn’t be effective instead of asking me?

The study I cited is not flawed, and relies on more comprehensive factors than just the census which you study relies on

You are trying to make it seem like you weren’t dismissing it because it was linked by Fox, which I am highly skeptical of

I onluuimplied that having easier immigration wouldn’t solve all problems

I then asked questions

I said how many. I assumed you would not mean unlimited, in other words I assumed you wouldn’t take the most ridiculous position

I then said when we reached the number you find acceptable, we would still have illegals wanting to get in, and be right back where we started

You seem so fragile that you can accuse me of fear mongering, dismiss studies because of who linked them, but must be carefully asked polite questions in return with no contention whatsoever

Yes perhaps it is best to end this, I certainly don’t want to hurt your feelings

a reply to: Grambler

I don't see this as a loss for the American people, though, and that's what matters.

I agree that a more robust wall in strategic locations will help reduce illegal entry, but not by much--what will happen is that more tunnels (and we know that they can build tunnels) will start popping up to get around the walls.

We need better border security, but I don't believe a massive wall will do much for that. We need more bodies and better technology to assist those bodies.

And better laws and procedures to create a bigger deterrent.

Again, none of that is true.

Once more, just to point out your errors:

1. I said that what you said sounded like fear mongering. I did not imply that you purposely meant to elicit a fear response by posting that. Accusation vs. implication. Different things. I did not put words in your mouth. You repeatedly put words in mine.
2. As I already said, I did not dismiss the study because of who posted it, I dismissed it because it is such a far outlier from every other study (both liberal and conservative) on the subject. Any scientist worth their salt tosses out major outliers when performing a study. If it isn't replicated, toss it. You're doing the opposite of that, and only focusing on the outlier. If other studies come along to back this study up, I'll happily reverse what I'm saying. But for now, it's the only study with that outcome, flying in the face of many other studies that all have pretty much the same (much lower) outcome, so the Yale study doesn't really hold water at this point in time.
3. I don't care if your questions are nice or not, my complaint was that you're trying to answer for me before I get a chance to. That isn't how a debate works. You're allowed to show contention over my actual answers, but not the answers you made up for me. You're just arguing with yourself at that point.

Feelings? You're a random stranger on a fringe internet forum. You don't come anywhere close to registering feelings in me.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I think the wall would be helpful

But it’s more than that

The caving on this is symbolic

It shows that the issue will be dealt with as it has for decades; ie nothing at all

The ruling class loves illegal immigration

They will make empty platitudes about how they have great plans to solve it

And then nothing will be done

a reply to: Grambler

Today I'm really disappointed in Trump and his administration.

He caved on bump-stocks, he caved on wall funding.


I mean, what the hell!

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

Today I'm really disappointed in Trump and his administration.

He caved on bump-stocks, he caved on wall funding.


I mean, what the hell!

Instead of The Donald, we should call him Donald "The Cave" Trump.

I notice you're disappointed he caved on bump stocks, it's been said that nobody on the right cares about them, doesnt that include you DB?

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

Today I'm really disappointed in Trump and his administration.

He caved on bump-stocks, he caved on wall funding.


I mean, what the hell!

Instead of The Donald, we should call him Donald "The Cave" Trump.

I notice you're disappointed he caved on bump stocks, it's been said that nobody on the right cares about them, doesnt that include you DB?

I have issue with it because it is a ban, a "feel good" movement. It won't fix anything, it won't solve anything, but it will embolden the left to pursue banning more.

a reply to: Grambler

I'm not so certain--Trump seems to always have a trick up his sleeve, so I'm going to let time play out. Of course, with this being the last chance to get a Republican-controlled budget put forth, I understand where the pessimism originates from.

Like DBCowbody notes, though, caving on this and the bumpstocks and who knows what else is a poor image to present at a time of transition (unless it's a message that he's capable of compromise).

Who knows what Pelosi and Schumer said to him when they got out of views of the cameras to get this to happen, but I never assume that Trump has given up completely. He's seen too many promises through to fruition to not get my benefit of the doubt.

a reply to: narrator

So you didn’t make an accusation of me, you made an implication?

Hence you implied, the very thing you criticized me for doing by implying I am a fear monger

I’m done talking about the study

I feel it gives good reasons as to why it uses a better method than just the census which almost all of the other studies use

Even if your study is accurate, illegal immigration is still a huge problem

You brought up not liking the study and Fox, not me. And you didn’t make one other objection to the study at that time. So don’t act like a reasonable person wouldn’t come to the conclusion you had a problem with it because of Fox

What question are you upset I didn’t let you answer? How many legal immigrants you would allow?

So your criticism is that I assumed you would chose a reasonable number, I retired and should have instead allowed you to give your own number?

The debate is clear

You don’t think a border wall will work, and don’t think illegal immigration is as big of a problem as I do

We disagree on the problem

In the solution, you said there were cheaper solutions and listed in, making legal immigration easier

I think that won’t work

Other than that, we disagree on studies that show how many illegals there are or how many crimes they have committed, both of which I am sure we would both admit we have no real way of knowing, but are far less consequential than the above disagreements

That’s it

I was having a fun time with the discussion

You seem to criticize my tone or implications, while engaging in some of the very things you criticized me of doing

I had no problem with your tone, and felt you were merely making an impassioned and perhaps slightly hyperbolic case for your position

If you are upset I apologize and wish you the best

originally posted by: SlapMonkey He's seen too many promises through to fruition to not get my benefit of the doubt.

You're only as good as your word.

And right now, it's not good. He may have delivered in the past, but he's sure giving the impression of screwing the pooch now.

It reminds me of something Bernadette said on TBBT. Her company once 'created a disorder and introduced a medication to cure it all in one day". lol.

Trump created 'an immigration crisis" where there wasn't one. He wants to use a machine gun to fix it, when a sling-shot would do. People see through it. Or, MOST people see through it.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Well that sucks.
I was hoping he would stick to his guns on this one.

Does it matter how it gets done? Take it out of the building of a few fighter jets.

originally posted by: angeldoll
It reminds me of something Bernadette said on TBBT. Her company once 'created a disorder and introduced a medication to cure it all in one day". lol.

Trump created 'an immigration crisis" where there wasn't one. He wants to use a machine gun to fix it, when a sling-shot would do. People see through it. Or, MOST people see through it.

I hope you are privledged enough to not have to have your wages depressed by cheap illegal labor

How great it must be to be willing to say problems don’t exist when they don’t personally affect you!

I think people who are against the wall should protest it by showing us that we dont need a wall to secure our borders, they should all remove their front door from their home, garage doors, even their fences .
I dont know how people can think that we dont need a good border for our country.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

Today I'm really disappointed in Trump and his administration.

He caved on bump-stocks, he caved on wall funding.


I mean, what the hell!

Instead of The Donald, we should call him Donald "The Cave" Trump.

I notice you're disappointed he caved on bump stocks, it's been said that nobody on the right cares about them, doesnt that include you DB?

I have issue with it because it is a ban, a "feel good" movement. It won't fix anything, it won't solve anything, but it will embolden the left to pursue banning more.

I'd say this is just a political move by the Trump Admin, it won't achieve anything, I think there's something to the theory that this is an attempt to appease Gun Control advocates and if it is I'd expect them to see right through it.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: SlapMonkey He's seen too many promises through to fruition to not get my benefit of the doubt.

You're only as good as your word.

That is true and Trump proved his word wasn't worth a lot before he went into politics. He promised, in building Trump Aberdeen Golf Resort, he would boost the local economy and to protect the Scottish Landscape, both were lies.

Now I know they're not US political issues but if you're saying a man is only as good as his word then Trumps word is worthless...

originally posted by: DBCowboy

I have issue with it because it is a ban, a "feel good" movement. It won't fix anything, it won't solve anything, but it will embolden the left to pursue banning more.

Wait, what now? The Left are not even in power and by the general feeling on ATS is, they wont be in power for at least another 6 years, in the UK we have only had one left government in over 30 years, the same may happen in the US, how can this be the fault of the Democrats it feels like you are future projecting hate, now thats a skill I have not seen before, even on these forums

I agree with Slapmonkey in that A giant wall will not solve it but better security, even employing more Americans, more jobs win win, spend those billions on something more American

h̶e̶a̶l̶t̶h̶c̶a̶r̶e̶ GUNS!!

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: angeldoll
It reminds me of something Bernadette said on TBBT. Her company once 'created a disorder and introduced a medication to cure it all in one day". lol.

Trump created 'an immigration crisis" where there wasn't one. He wants to use a machine gun to fix it, when a sling-shot would do. People see through it. Or, MOST people see through it.

I hope you are privledged enough to not have to have your wages depressed by cheap illegal labor

How great it must be to be willing to say problems don’t exist when they don’t personally affect you!

Oh for God's sake

Blah, nvm. Sooooo nor my worth my effort. Your contentiousness exceeds your sensibilities.