Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you support a contiguous wall where it is unnecessary?
No, I don't. Even Trump has said of late that we don't need a wall along our entire border because there are natural barriers that would inhibit illegal crossings.
Look, how many Trump voters believed he might accomplish everything he claimed? In fact, who in their right mind believes that any politician will keep their promises? The "Wall" played well at rallies and KKK meetings, but I think most reasonable people never believed it was going anywhere. Trump was elected because people are frustrated with establishment government, they thought an outsider might truly "drain the swamp", alas, the experiment isn't going well. As far as immigration, I am no Trump fan(atic), but he has taken some of the handcuffs off of INS, and letting them do their job. No wall necessary.
It played well at KKK rallies? Sorry, but most Trump supporters aren't members of the KKK and they want the wall where it is appropriate and necessary. How does internal enforcement stop new ones from coming here illegally?
Mexico was going to pay for it. Why did the dems have to approve funding for the wall if Mexico was going to pay for it?
Because we need the funds to get it started. Mexico can and will reimburse us for it later whether they like it or not. Doesn't really matter to me one way or another since a $25 billion wall is much cheaper than the $113 billion a year that illegals cost us.
I know. And you didn't really want a Muslim travel ban, and you didn't really expect him to drain the swamp, either, right?
You're good at this back-pedaling stuff.
As far as I know, there is a travel ban on certain countries.........similar to the one Obama started, not that it was very high on my agenda. And, apparently libs only had a problem with it when republicans issued one......pretty funny. Guess ya'll were asleep at the wheel back then.
Drain the swamp? Get real.....silly campaign slogan that means nothing. I am content that the swamp creatures are now mainly Repbulicans.
Because we need the funds to get it started. Mexico can and will reimburse us for it later whether they like it or not. Doesn't really matter to me one way or another since a $25 billion wall is much cheaper than the $113 billion a year that illegals cost us.
I'm surprised people still peddle this. Even Trump stopped peddling this when he embarrassed himself with Nieto.
Because we need the funds to get it started. Mexico can and will reimburse us for it later whether they like it or not. Doesn't really matter to me one way or another since a $25 billion wall is much cheaper than the $113 billion a year that illegals cost us.
The $113 billion has been debunked as far back as 2013.
Quote:
This so-called fact is based on research from the anti-immigrant hate group FAIR. In 2010, FAIR released a study titled, "The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers," which found "the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion." At the time the study was released, FoxNews.com defended both FAIR and the study.
FAIR has a long history of making anti-immigrant remarks and is connected to white nationalist organizations. The group's founder, John Tanton, is the modern day architect of the anti-immigrant, nativist movement and also has a history of making anti-immigrant and racially charged remarks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.