I just don't get the people who are willing to go to the mattresses over the "wall" issue.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 9:03 am on Jan 9, 2019

Here's why.

1. First of all, President Trump, like it or not, was elected with this as one of his primary issues. Clearly, a very significant portion of voters support the action.

2. It's 5 - 6 billion dollars for cripes sake! That's a drop in the ocean. The government wastes hundreds of billions of dollars on all kinds of items that are highly questionable, if not, useless. Even if there is a small possibility of it making a positive impact, it's worth taking a flier on. Just do it already.

3. There are already walls or barriers all up and down the southern border. Ever been to El Paso? In principle we don't let people just walk freely over the border. Not the Canadian Border. Not the Mexican border. What the Hell is the difference in adding a little more barrier? In addition, we have always had border patrol to control crossings as well. Bottom line is that some additional barrier (whether you think it is effective or not) is something we have always done, will continue to do and both parties have always been more than willing to fund.

4. I completely reject the idea that increasing barriers to prevent uncontrolled crossings is somehow racist. This is just silly and not an intelligent position. Again, we already do this. We have laws on the books to prevent it. If there were a similar problem on the northern border, we would do the same thing. Well, actually we already do. Crossings at the northern border ARE controlled. It's just that additional measures are required in different places to effectively control it.

5. Nobody is proposing that we don't let people in from Mexico, Honduras or wherever. The point is to just make it a controlled and documented process. This is a reasonable position that reasonable people should be able to agree on. I'm sure they do in fact.

6. It is pretty obvious to me that this is all political posturing. The Democrats are being obtuse because they don't want to give Trump a "victory". This is just silly. Fund the damn thing already and move on. Is it really worth all of the hand-wringing and entrenching themselves into immovable positions?

It's just frustrating and I'm tired of hearing about it. It's just plain stupid. Fund it and move on.


Replies to: I just don't get the people who are willing to go to the mattresses over the "wall" issue.


Thread Level: 2

The issue is whether the President should hold the government hostage over it.

Author: conorlarkin (10459 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:56 am on Jan 9, 2019

If he wants a wall, and the American people support, let Congress pass a bill after full debate, etc.

But, to say "Pay for the wall now or I shut down the government indefinitely," is flat out wrong.

The wall is not a moral issue. It is not a national security issue.

It is just a dog whistle to incite his base.


Thread Level: 3

As I tell my children, it takes two people to fight.

Author: iairishcheeks (9933 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 12:39 pm on Jan 9, 2019

The Dems are lowering themselves to Trump's level and aren't going to get anything for it.

Thread Level: 4

So you let your child hide the clicker, and deny TV to household until ....

Author: conorlarkin (10459 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 3:17 pm on Jan 9, 2019

.... you agree to child’s demand to be able to watch TV until 1:00 AM?

Per your thought process, stealing the clicker is irrelevant.

All that matters is negotiating how late your kid can stay up? And that you become the asshole for failing to negotiate?


Thread Level: 5

Of course not, my children are well behaved.

Author: iairishcheeks (9933 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 3:39 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 6

Unlike Trump .... who happens to be a US President. Hence, my point.

Author: conorlarkin (10459 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 3:56 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 7

"But he started it!"

Author: iairishcheeks (9933 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 4:44 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 4

How so? There had already been a bipartisan solution to keep the govt

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 12:45 pm on Jan 9, 2019

running without this funding that Orange had agreed to. Orange reneged when he got yelled at by the right wing media.

There had also previously been a bipartisan deal for $25 mill of wall funding in exchange for DACA. Orange reneged on that as well.

Orange is going to lose this which is why the smart R money like Mitch won’t touch it with a ten foot pole.


Thread Level: 5

It's pretty simple.

Author: iairishcheeks (9933 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:23 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Your mistake (and theirs) is in viewing this through a traditional political lens.

Trump will claim victory no matter what happens.

His supporters don't care about the govt shutdown (many prefer it) and if you take him at his word, he's willing to keep it shutdown as long as it takes.

$5B on a $4T budget is a very small concession to make. Tactical error by the Dems in lowering themselves to Trump's level over a measly $5B. Their only chance is if he caves, which I doubt he will.

Also, no one's vote in 2020 will be changed by this. All this does is prevent the Dems from appearing above the fray, as the adults in the room. And at a certain point they may start to lose some of their more pragmatic supporters.


Thread Level: 6

How’s he going to claim victory? They already offered him $25 billion worth of Wall for DACA which

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 5:13 pm on Jan 9, 2019

he reneged on. That’s a good all around solution. They aren’t going to give him anything better than that. And you are foolish to think they wouldn’t pay a heavy price with their own base if they did.

Orange backed himself into a corner. He has already claimed the shutdown. The only way he can “win” is to declare an emergency, take his chances in court and reopen the govt. The D’s have no incentive to do anything.


This message has been edited 2 time(s).

Thread Level: 6

The Dems are in a hissy fit over 10 minutes worth of .gov border spending

Author: CC72 (14004 Posts - Joined: Sep 5, 2010)

Posted at 2:26 pm on Jan 9, 2019

And Trump the deal maker screwed up royally when he took responsibility for the shutdown. A kabuki theater full of morons. Everyone in Washington politics is a shithead.

This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 7

Trump is throwing the hissy fit. The Dems are just refusing to appease the tantrum.

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 7:06 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

Bingo. Give the man a kewpie doll.

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 11:58 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

Surprised you'd blame the uneducated racists at Trump rallies who chant "Build the Wall". Smh.

Author: ND521 (3263 Posts - Joined: May 10, 2016)

Posted at 11:40 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 3

Tear down the border wall at San Diego and invite everyone to cross in

Author: CC72 (14004 Posts - Joined: Sep 5, 2010)

Posted at 2:28 pm on Jan 9, 2019

The Cali Governor will take care of them.

Thread Level: 2

Everything is about "identity politics."

Author: Curly1918 (2891 Posts - Joined: Aug 30, 2017)

Posted at 11:19 am on Jan 9, 2019

We are now ultra-sensitive to even the smallest slight to our sense of who we are and who we are not... even to our own detriment. I mean, who actually is most harmed by illegal immigration? Our poorer minorities, because the newbies drive down the cost of low end labor (which is why a lot of Republicans actually wanted as many illegals as possible).

Thread Level: 2

I'll bet you thought that was a great line, didn't you?

Author: jimbasil (33333 Posts - Joined: Nov 15, 2007)

Posted at 11:14 am on Jan 9, 2019

Well it's not.

Everything you typed was just pure defeatist mumbo jumbo.


Thread Level: 3

Very cogent argument.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:24 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 4

Then give me something to work with.

Author: jimbasil (33333 Posts - Joined: Nov 15, 2007)

Posted at 11:40 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

When did Candidate Don say the American taxpayer was going to pay for the wall?

Author: Rooney (4810 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:07 am on Jan 9, 2019

He was not elected to build the wall with American taxpayers' money. Period.

Besides, if he wanted to pivot and have the American taxpayer fund the wall why didn't he ask Paul Ryan for the money? He had two freaking years to ask. Never got around to it I guess. I mean, those 150 rounds of golf the last two years aren't going to play themselves.

donald-trump-golf-990x556-830x466.jpg

Trump: "So if I hold my club like this the lightning won't strike me?"
Melania (off camera): "Yes"


This message has been edited 2 time(s).

Thread Level: 3

I think the vast majority of Trump voters understood it was hyperbole.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:30 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 4

Yeah sure, hyperbole - his base actually thought when voting for him, it's just hyperbole

Author: jimbasil (33333 Posts - Joined: Nov 15, 2007)

Posted at 11:39 am on Jan 9, 2019

as they repeated it over and over again on the way to the vote - FOX TV bellowing it for months and months. Sure - hyperbole.

Trumpbots justifying the nonsense. Always a good argument to back up the inane.


Thread Level: 4

Respectfully, I think you give the vast majority of Trump voters too much credit.

Author: Rooney (4810 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:37 am on Jan 9, 2019

Certainly the ones that attended the rallies.

Thread Level: 5

The base yes. The left underestimates how many votes he could get, not from supporters,

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 11:44 am on Jan 9, 2019

but rather from mainstream conservatives who see the thought of Warren, Kamala, Newsome, or some other libbed out wacko as an even worse choice.

They need to smarten up and nominate a ticket like Biden/Beto. They would crush the Orange slime.

If they nominate a far lefty though, it could be 2016 all over again.


This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 6

I think you are spot on. That has been my point for 2 years now.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:03 pm on Jan 9, 2019

The Dems don't seem to be learning from 2016. They appear to keep moving further Left.

Thread Level: 6

I know I shouldn't say this, because a Biden-Trump election would be fun, but Biden is unelectable.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 11:57 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

https://media.giphy.com/media/yoJC2Dfq64OLKwcwRa/giphy.gif

Thread Level: 7

Bring that shit on. Would love to see the fight over who is the bigger dirtbag.

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 11:59 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 8

Agreed. Would be fun.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 1:49 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 4

Not a valid reason to close down the govt when you can’t back up yer hyperbole!

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 11:33 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 2

Mostly fair points. But look at it from the other side. Orange has been a petulant child over this.

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 10:49 am on Jan 9, 2019

First of all he cares nothing about this wall other than it’s a rallying symbol for his base. He had already agreed to funding the govt without it before going all wobbly after Ann Coulter yelled at him like a bad little schoolboy.

Secondly, he could have had 25 mill for DACA last summer. But the wall apparently wasn’t a crises then.

This is all about his ego and not being able to be seen as backing down. That’s not a valid reason to close down the govt.

My solution is DACA plus set up a bipartisan commission on border security. Whatever they agree to both sides agree to fully fund.

Neither side wants to lose this as a political issue. Orange, because it is the issue plus abortion for his base. D’s because they know that everyone else, including moderates and independents agree with them.


Thread Level: 3

I also think the Dems could play it more in their favor if they agree to fund it.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:39 am on Jan 9, 2019

1. They can leverage it to get some things they want.

2. They can show they are willing to compromise and be the "bigger man".

3. They can throw it in Trump's face in the election. If it doesn't work, they can claim that he held the government hostage for wasteful spending. They can also play up that they are serious about border security. So serious that they were willing to take a flier on it. I can't believe they would lose any of their base.


Thread Level: 4

Here’s my prediction. The shutdown is unsustainable past this month.

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 11:47 am on Jan 9, 2019

Unless something breaks, always a possibility, Orange is going to say he did everything he could including the speech to avoid invoking the emergency, but it hasn’t worked and he’s now doing it. Also let’s the govt reopen, and fights in the court. If he loses, he says he did all he could.

Thread Level: 5

Here is my perfect scenario on that.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 1:57 pm on Jan 9, 2019

At some point, a progressive president is going to declare a state of emergency due to something like climate change. In anticipation of that, Trump should use that power first, and definitely declare illegal immigration and human trafficking to be a state of emergency. There are several likely outcomes:

1) The anti-trumpers freak out, and succeed in stopping Trump, having his declaration halted by the courts or impeachment or whatever. That would be a victory for me, in that the powers of the presidency are clearly limited, and a future progressive president would presumably be similarly limited by the precedent.

2) Trump wins, and POTUS is declared/allowed to use such emergency powers. That is a loss for me (a constitutional process guy), BUT, since a progressive president would win that battle if Trump can win it, then that means that the future progressive president was going to do something like that anyway (it is inevitable), so at least in the meantime Trump does some good with the unfortunately broadly expanding powers of the presidency.

Trump needs to press to expand the presidential powers as much as possible, inch by inch to establish as much anti-POTUS precedent as possible. Everytime the anti-Trumpers shut him down, I will be happy, because the POTUS powers will become more limited. It will be easier to stop Trump than it will be to stop the future progressive/socialist president, and good precedent will be thereby established.

Granted, the Left will likely just argue that Trump is a singular president, which warranted special limits, and their more reasonable socialist president warrants special powers. But, it will at least be a little harder for them to argue that after going all out against Trump.


This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 5

That is a very real possibility. Maybe even likely.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:00 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 5

Not a bad prediction.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 11:59 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

I guess we'll see where it goes. I think it will hurts Dems though.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:33 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

So it's Democrats going to the mattresses over the wall, is it?

Author: Chris94 (21750 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 10:41 am on Jan 9, 2019

It's Democrats that refuse to sign a continuing resolution to keep the government running because there was no funding for the wall, is it?

It's Democrats that gave an address from the Oval Office over this, is it?

It's Democrats who are considering declaring a "national emergency" because we don't have a wall, right?

"Fund it and move on" is not the only option here.


Thread Level: 3

Sorry. I meant in terms of opposing it. I assume everyone expected Trump to do it.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:28 am on Jan 9, 2019

I don't blame him. It was a key issue that he was elected on.

Thread Level: 2

Answers.

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 10:14 am on Jan 9, 2019

1. The November 2018 election was a referendum on the wall. The entire Republican strategy was to engender fear about the southern border, complete with Trump sending troops down to address the invasion force. The Republicans got their asses handed to them. Americans do not trust his approach to this issue. They trust the Dems, including on the issue of whether there should be a wall (or more fencing). Maybe some new fencing will help, but that's for someone credible to decide, not the guy who sent troops to the border to engender fear before an election.

2. That's ludicrous. Why not hire two more border guards and pay them 2.5B? It's a drop in the ocean, right? It will likely help a little bit. Let's take a flier on it!

3. How much more? What will it look like? How will it help? Who will it help?

4. I don't have any reason to disagree with you on this. I'm not really "woke" to the racist argument. That doesn't mean there isn't one. I do know that the wall was sold in a racist matter, but the wall itself doesn't have to be.

5. Sure, but most of the illegals are coming in some other way (visa overstays). We aren't going to get to zero illegal immigration. We can play whack-a-mole all day and never get it done. The question is whether this is an effective and desirable way to reduce it.

6. Why is the solution to waste money on a stupid idea? Why isn't the solution to move on, and work toward something that actually addresses the problem. "The 10 year old is throwing a tantrum because he wants ice cream. Can you just give him ice cream already????"

You last points are the worst. You think the whole issue is silly, so just go ahead and appease the spoiled child?


Thread Level: 3

Lehigh, why do you think the Democrats changed their minds on the wall? Just b/c Trump likes it?

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 2:02 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 4

I don't understand the question.

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 6:55 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Walk me through it.

1. What is Trump proposing?
2. When did the Democrats approve of the same thing Trump is proposing.
3. When did the Democrats stop approving of the same thing Trump is proposing.

Give me that, and maybe I can answer your question.


Thread Level: 5

He is proposing basically the same stuff in the Democratic Party Platform from 2008 quoted earlier.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 6:59 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 6

Evasive and disingenuous. What did the platform propose, and what is Trump proposing?

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 7:03 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 7

Because I referenced my earlier post which laid out the Dem/Trump platform?

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 12:56 am on Jan 10, 2019

By the way, Schumer and Pelosi have voted for wall funds in the past. They just won't do it now.

Thread Level: 3

Do you actually know anything

Author: WoodstockIrish (9728 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:36 pm on Jan 9, 2019

About the engineering concepts behind a new wall? The technology that will be applied. The competitions that have already been had, the modelling that it took?

Cause if you aren't aware of why a wall will work then why are you acting like you know better than the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Homeland Security.

This is such a hilarious discussion because there are bunch of idiots running around spouting off about why it wont work when there is already engineering designs, proof of concept physical models, and detailed engineering estimates prepared.

But you keep spouting off acting like you know everything. It suits you real well.


Thread Level: 4

I've asked a million times for some to explain what he is planning to spend the 5.6 billion on.

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 7:01 pm on Jan 9, 2019

1. No one has an answer, so I will assume that Trump has no actual idea either, and it changes every week or so.
2. I do not see the logic in just giving him money, and hope that he settles on the version that will be the least wasteful.

What barrier, and where it is to be located, and how long it will be. I believe he is talking about adding 100 miles of fence, not a single one of you Trumpsters will confirm that. And if Trump is proposing to add 100 miles of fence to the existing fence, then he should come out and say exactly that. He hasn't.


Thread Level: 5

Um, you're asking people on this board....

Author: Domer From Hell (10757 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 8:37 pm on Jan 9, 2019

and most have no idea what the fuck they're talking about. As far as Woody, he's an engineer. I have a feeling that he knows a weee bit more about this subject than you do.

BTW, the Grateful Dead sucks Oprah's taint.


Thread Level: 6

I doubt "Woodie" has read the plan, analyzed the economics of it.

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 12:50 am on Jan 10, 2019

An engineer background might be able to tell you whether something might fall over.

Since Woodie doesn't even know what the "something" is, where it will be, how many people might not cross because of that "something", and how much those "people" that might not cross would have "cost" us as a nation, I'm thinking his engineering degree isn't going to help.

The problem here isn't the structural engineering analysis of whatever it is people believe is being proposed.


Thread Level: 7

Re: I doubt "Woodie" has read the plan, analyzed the economics of it.

Author: WoodstockIrish (9728 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 12:08 pm on Jan 10, 2019

It's a HELL of a lot more than 100 miles....where the hell did you get that from

Ultimately it will run the entire length of the border; otherwise why the fuck have it? The idea that there are some areas that are a ghost town and no one will cross?

Seriously, you believe this drivel. These people will find the path of least resistance as would anyone with half a brain

Please understand that this wall is being designed as we speak. There are already proof of concept mock ups that have been built and evaluated. There is serious engineering and economic modelling being performed. It likely will be a design-build project and price will be the most important evaluation factor.

Do you really think this $5B pricetag was just grabbed out of thin air?

Comical.


Thread Level: 5

Wall, a couple hundred border agents, and some other stuff. They gave a list of stuff on the radio.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 7:08 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 4

I balee he has an engineering degree. Do you?

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 5:17 pm on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 5

I do. But, even a history degree would be useful here.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 7:03 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Lehigh is acting like walls haven't been used to keep people on one side of the wall for thousands of years.

Woodstock is just pointing out that this new wall will be far more effective than past walls which also worked...while Lehigh pretends that walls have never worked.


Thread Level: 6

I'm pretty sure I am not acting like that. Do you have a link where I act like that?

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:01 am on Jan 10, 2019

Or are you making shit up because you are a dishonest broker?

Thread Level: 6

Did I ask you?

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 8:32 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Woody of all people has no bidness saying he knows nothing on these subjects.

This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 3

Your bias is transparent. This is all about you not liking Trump. "Spoiled child"? That dog won't hu

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 10:25 am on Jan 9, 2019

If a barrier is so ineffective, then why do we already have hundreds of miles of it. Again, it's worth trying and then results can actually be measured. I'll buy that anyone is opposed of the tiny cost once they make any noticeable attempt at ruducing government waste.

The idea that the November election was a referendum on the wall is delusional. The Republicans picked up seats in the Senate.


Thread Level: 4

I didn't think "spoiled child" was even contested by his supporters.

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 10:33 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 5

It's a term of endearment in some circles.

Author: Rooney (4810 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:13 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

39% favor the border wall.

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 10:24 am on Jan 9, 2019
Thread Level: 4

That is a poorly asked question. I wonder how many of them know there already is a wall.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 12:01 pm on Jan 9, 2019

And, would they support taking down the wall along the US/Mexico border? Probably most would say no.

Thread Level: 2

The dems are going to come out on the losing end of this ordeal...

Author: IrishMac (667 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 9:48 am on Jan 9, 2019

First, the repubs haven't moved on their imigration position, if anything they have lightened up on it... I would guess that a majority of the repubs in Congress would now negotiate on DACA as opposed to what they would have agreed to just two years ago. The dems however have gone way left of what they have ever been on immigration. Talk about a party that has been hijacked by extreme positions. Anybody with a lick of common sense can see that the dems are just doing this to prevent a Trump accomplishment that he promised he would do. Like you said, it is 5-6 billion... that is literally just 6-8 hours of gov't spending. And, it wasn't too many years ago that the majority of dems in Congress approved more funding for the exact same thing they are now calling rascist and immoral. I suppose they have just been "enlightened".

Thread Level: 3

Nope, almost 2/3rds of the country agree with them.

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 10:50 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 2

Well said. Good summary of the situation. This is all purely political, and nothing to do w/border.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 9:13 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

The Dems are misguided and believe Trump will lose his base if he doesn't get the wall.

Author: NDavenue (3069 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 10:30 am on Jan 9, 2019

I doubt be would lose one single vote. He has already secured the base by allowing an extended shut down over the issue. This will backfire on the Dems. They haven't learned a damn thing and that is very disappointing to any reasonable voter.

Thread Level: 4

Actually it was Orange who was misguided over that. Went wobbly and wussy when Ann and Rush yelled

Author: Frank L (34588 Posts - Joined: Sep 20, 2007)

Posted at 11:38 am on Jan 9, 2019

at him.

He wouldn’t have lost the knuckledraggers over this at all.

This is all ego and territory marking for Orangeran.


This message has been edited 1 time(s).

Thread Level: 3

So stick to the status quo?

Author: LehighND (5533 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 10:15 am on Jan 9, 2019

No wall, get back to business.

Thread Level: 4

There is a wall, but perhaps the Dems would like to vote on tearing it down? Cause after all you

Author: WoodstockIrish (9728 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:39 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Said it doesnt work

Thread Level: 4

That is the political victory the Dems are looking for. Trump is looking for the opposite.

Author: NedoftheHill (23180 Posts - Joined: Jun 29, 2011)

Posted at 11:54 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)