Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:21 PM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
25,573 posts, read 17,281,298 times
Reputation: 37315

Advertisements

If Democrats held a super majority would they vote to remove all portions of the existing wall?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:26 PM
 
62,945 posts, read 29,134,396 times
Reputation: 18578
Quote:
Originally Posted by neon55 View Post
For once he isn't a Flake hes doing what he said he would do reject all of dumps legislation judges till Mueller is protected good for him.

"Dumps"? Just more childish insults by the left. Where's Neutral Party when you need him/her?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:28 PM
 
62,945 posts, read 29,134,396 times
Reputation: 18578
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
The wall is a maniacal obsession of the cognitive disorder crowd. Sad.
Really? So the Border Patrol and Homeland Security who want the wall are suffering from maniacal obsession of the cognitive disorder?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:29 PM
 
62,945 posts, read 29,134,396 times
Reputation: 18578
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottomobeale View Post
Wont matter after the new congress.

Trump is a crook. No different than the last crook except he adds a big dose of unpolished turd to the title of crook.

"Unpolished turd"? Again, where is Neutral Party when you need him/her?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:36 PM
 
62,945 posts, read 29,134,396 times
Reputation: 18578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
There are plenty of ranchers along the border that don't support a wall, is the government going to use eminent domain to erect the wall on those properties. How about the Rio Grande and Big Bend National Park in Texas and all those other ranchers in NM, do they agree to giving up their property. This is a lot for a resident to give up for a policy that will have minimal impact.

First off, how many times do I have to post the links proving that the good walls have had a very large impact on illegal entry before you stop spouting this nonsense?


Second, the ranchers that don't want a wall on their properties can just deal with the illegal trespassers, criminals, terrorists and the drug cartels all by themselves who will just funnel through their lands then. It would be sweet karma as they would be crying for a wall in no time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:40 PM
 
62,945 posts, read 29,134,396 times
Reputation: 18578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Being against an ineffective wall solution is not the same as open borders.

What ineffective wall solution? Do I need to post those links again while you still remain in denial. Also the Border Patrol and Homeland Security disagree with you. But you know better than them, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:46 PM
 
62,945 posts, read 29,134,396 times
Reputation: 18578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
A wall around the entire border which was Trumps campaign promise is not a rational solution. Yes it is effective in certain areas but selling this as a solution to illegal immigration is not going to work. This was a campaign slogan not a reasonable solution.

Did you just wake up from a coma? Trump no longer has a plan to wall off the entire border and hasn't for at least over a year or more now. The wall approved by congress back in 2006 is for the most porous areas of the border. You know, those areas that you admit would be effective in your above post. So why isn't that a reasonable solution in those areas? I even posted several links proving that the good walls do work in those areas. So what's your problem?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,271 posts, read 26,199,434 times
Reputation: 15640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
First off, how many times do I have to post the links proving that the good walls have had a very large impact on illegal entry before you stop spouting this nonsense?


Second, the ranchers that don't want a wall on their properties can just deal with the illegal trespassers, criminals, terrorists and the drug cartels all by themselves who will just funnel through their lands then. It would be sweet karma as they would be crying for a wall in no time.
Yes it has worked in certain situations but selling an entire wall as critical to our safety? Many dancers don’t want this so what is the solution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:49 PM
 
Location: Canada
6,141 posts, read 3,372,422 times
Reputation: 5790
Quote:
Originally Posted by latimeria View Post
Almost 2/3 of AZ residents polled opposed it.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news...ays/963580001/
Just to follow up with your link with a SNIPPET~~
(QUOTE)
Two-thirds of Arizonans oppose President Donald Trump's plans for a border wall, according to a poll that appears to indicate friendlier attitudes toward immigrants than in the recent past.

The survey released this week found a majority of Arizonans prefer policies that facilitate commerce and improve the quality of life along the border instead of enforcement-heavy policies. The poll found 61 percent oppose laws favoring the deportation of immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally, another signature Trump proposal.

"The big takeaway is that Arizona seems to be moving away from the national conversation on the border wall. And that's very interesting as a border state," said Erik Lee, executive director of the North American Research Partnership.
[/quote]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 08:54 PM
 
62,945 posts, read 29,134,396 times
Reputation: 18578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Yes it has worked in certain situations but selling an entire wall as critical to our safety? Many dancers don’t want this so what is the solution.

The "entire" wall is only for 700 miles and those are all the certain situations where's it's needed. Yes, any "porous" area of our border puts our safety as risk. Try again, it's fun to watch you so desperately trying to pretend we don't need the 700 mile long wall. Did you pass your objection on to congress in 2006? If so, why not?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top