LOL wow, the mental gymnastics. Well anyway, this is a pointless conversation given that the border barrier will be built one way or the other. I honestly don't want you to tie yourself up in knots anymore than you already have trying to defend the many different positions the Democrats have taken on the issue of border barriers. Somehow you are ignoring Pelosi calling building walls "immoral" while at the same time defending the walls Democrats supported building in the past, while being against building the new walls that Border Patrol are asking for. Damn man, you are a REALLY good Democrat.
Again... Either you don't understand that Pelosi is referencing Trump's border-long wall, or you are being dishonest.
So, now border barriers are only "immoral" if they finish the job? Sorry man, there's no way you can make sense of that BS. Walling off Southern California is perfectly fine, but walls in southern Arizona or Texas? IMMORAL!!!
No, they're not. But if you do believe that is what's happening, why do you ignore that Canada was part of the deal, too. Why is Canada responsible for paying for a wall on our southern border?
Do you understand how complex trade deals are? You do understand that 95% of NAFTA is intact right and just reworded into a new name? You do know that advocates of NAFTA when it originally was signed were also promising added economic output in the United States? A political promise of added revenue from a revised NAFTA from Trump means jack ****. It's all political rhetoric especially coming from a man who to this day believes that tariff revenue comes from China instead of his own constituents. Sorry, but going on Trump's word that the new deal will add more economic output and fund the wall is asinine.
No, they are not. This fallacy has been fact checked extensively, and even trump's revised version of the lie is still just that...
You believe this argument? Now, it's possible with my partisan blinders, that I don't give this argument a fair shake. I pretty much said 'no one is going to believe that!' the moment I heard it. But apparently somebody does. Can you explain to me how this works that Mexico is de facto paying for the wall via USMCA? I agree. Mexico paying for the wall was a bit of campaigning bravado like keeping your doctor. He was widely disbelieved on that point anyway and people said stuff like 'take him seriously, not literally.' The point of the criticism though is to respond to the idea that Trump has a "mandate" from winning the election featuring this promise, and because he has this mandate, all the other politicians should just bend over and let him do it. For his base, I think he has that mandate. They don't care about Mexico paying any more than I cared (or believed) about keeping my doctor. But his base is distinctly in the minority then and now. Where Obamacare bounced around 50% approval ratings, Trumpwall is bouncing around 40%. Obama obviously didn't have enough mandate to make Obamacare stick, so what does that say about Trump's even less popular project? Speaking of which, when we see a Democratic president in 2 or 6 years, are we just going to take down the wall just like Republicans have been trying to hamstring Obamacare? The Republicans' logic is probably that once it is built, no one will go through the trouble of taking it down. But: (1) It might not all be built by then, so Democrats might stop construction. (2) Walls come with maintenance costs so we may later decide some parts of the wall that yield no security benefit are better off gone. (3) The wall will have negative environmental impacts, upset migratory patterns, etc, and as those externalities are realized, liberals in government may be moved to be proactive in removing parts of the wall. So, will we end up spending billions to put up this wall only to set ourselves up to spend billions more maintaining it, and then billions again for taking it down?
And you sound like you’ve been conned by Donald Freaking Trump. Mexico is not paying for the wall through the trade deal, which hasn’t even passed Congress by the way. Anyone that believes that is too blind or embarrassed to see that they’re being conned by a compulsive liar. And he made that promise hundreds of times, not just once in the heat of a rally between “lock her up” chants.
One of the reasons he was elected was because of the wall. How dare he for trying to follow through on his promise?
So what you are saying is that you agree that walls anywhere but southern California are immoral? I don't see how you can even try to defend that claim
Yup, this thread has gone just about as expected. I found it most entertaining when a few of our Trump-supporting friends preemptively tried to call the other side triggered. They like to use that word, but fail to realize that most of the time they call the other side that, it shows how triggered they actually are. You know, kind of like calling the other side triggered before the speech even occurred. Hahaha brilliant!
During his campaign he repeatedly said that Mexico would pay for it. There was a chant and everything. So he already failed on following through with his promise. You can move the goal posts all you want, and partake in all the mental gymnastics to your heart's content, but he has already failed. If he didn't fail on his promise, then he purposely lied to his gullible base, knowing that they would eat it up, just to get elected. I'm not sure which is worse.
The "Mexico will pay for it" wasn't the important part and you know it. Don't worry, those talking points will change pretty soon when the polls show it's a losing argument.
