Don't be surprised if it's not a wall

Cruze

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
1,811
Reaction score
81
Points
48
It looks like the Trumpster is going to give up on his wall and declare victory.


Don't be surprised if it's not a wall

The border wall is one of President Trump's best known campaign promises, and it's the reason we're in a partial government shutdown — but the Associated Press has a good roundup of comments by White House officials and allies that suggest it might end up being less than a complete physical wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

Between the lines: It's not surprising that Trump allies would float ideas to negotiate Trump's promise down to something he just calls a wall. But given how important Trump's promise is to his supporters, nothing will be resolved until Trump himself signs off on something less.

The key comments, per AP:

White House chief of staff John Kelly, to the Los Angeles Times: Trump gave up on “a solid concrete wall early on in the administration.”

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, on Fox News Sunday: “There may be a wall in some places, there may be steel slats, there may be technological enhancements.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, to reporters after having lunch with Trump on Sunday: “The wall has become a metaphor for border security.” He said it could just be “a physical barrier along the border.”

https://www.axios.com/trump-border-wall-might-not-be-complete-wall-962c72a4-f42e-4efd-8a4b-d371c18e3db5.html
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,048
Reaction score
378
Points
83
The Wall exists in the hearts of all those who wear the red hats, if they just believe. And Mexico has paid for it. MAGA.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,196
Reaction score
256
Points
83
The mystery, of course, is why the Trump administration has spent so little of the money already appropriated for border security. If this were truly about border security, even this incompetent and ineffectual administration would be putting it to some use. It is not about border security. It's about something else. It reminds me of the abortion issue. The Republicans had control of the whole shooting match for two years, and did you hear even a whisper of them trying to act on their biggest campaign issue? Of course they didn't. That would kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. They can campaign on that issue forever if they can keep it an issue.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
37,075
Reaction score
244
Points
63
As to unspent money, I believe Trump tweeted that he just signed off on a deal for 1.5 bil. for a stretch of wall.

"The Republicans" is not synonymous to "Trump". The Rs are weak starting with the leadership they had in McConnell and Ryan (especially Ryan). They should have jammed the wall through on 51 votes a long time ago and they would have held the House in the midterms. It's what the people voted for. I don't care if the wall is made of concrete or steel - as long as there is a high physical barrier that covers the mileage not protected by natural barriers. It is a sign of TDS that you yokels think that Trump has somehow changed his tune if the wall becomes steel slats.


For those of you on the left who claim you actually want border security (you don't) what is it that you want done to make the border "secure" that will work?
 

God

Banned
Joined
Apr 1, 2014
Messages
509
Reaction score
0
Points
16
It looks like the Trumpster is going to give up on his wall and declare victory.


Don't be surprised if it's not a wall

The border wall is one of President Trump's best known campaign promises, and it's the reason we're in a partial government shutdown — but the Associated Press has a good roundup of comments by White House officials and allies that suggest it might end up being less than a complete physical wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

Between the lines: It's not surprising that Trump allies would float ideas to negotiate Trump's promise down to something he just calls a wall. But given how important Trump's promise is to his supporters, nothing will be resolved until Trump himself signs off on something less.

The key comments, per AP:

White House chief of staff John Kelly, to the Los Angeles Times: Trump gave up on “a solid concrete wall early on in the administration.”

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway, on Fox News Sunday: “There may be a wall in some places, there may be steel slats, there may be technological enhancements.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, to reporters after having lunch with Trump on Sunday: “The wall has become a metaphor for border security.” He said it could just be “a physical barrier along the border.”

https://www.axios.com/trump-border-wall-might-not-be-complete-wall-962c72a4-f42e-4efd-8a4b-d371c18e3db5.html
You are too simple to get it. In some places it will be a concrete wall and other places it will be slats, depending on which makes America safer. Funny how the Obamas have a 10 foot wall around their home and no one cares!!!! They should have their wall. Walls are so good. We are going to get the biggest wall to make us the safest!!!

MAGA
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,048
Reaction score
378
Points
83
As to unspent money, I believe Trump tweeted that he just signed off on a deal for 1.5 bil. for a stretch of wall.

"The Republicans" is not synonymous to "Trump". The Rs are weak starting with the leadership they had in McConnell and Ryan (especially Ryan). They should have jammed the wall through on 51 votes a long time ago and they would have held the House in the midterms. It's what the people voted for. I don't care if the wall is made of concrete or steel - as long as there is a high physical barrier that covers the mileage not protected by natural barriers. It is a sign of TDS that you yokels think that Trump has somehow changed his tune if the wall becomes steel slats.


For those of you on the left who claim you actually want border security (you don't) what is it that you want done to make the border "secure" that will work?
Actually Trump tweeted that "he awarded" the funds for a new section of wall. It was, of course, a lie. He does not get to "award" anything like a dictator, no matter how much he'd love that, and the $ was for repairs to existing wall, not new wall. But you don't care when he lies.
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
9,352
Reaction score
60
Points
48
And hackin howie ignores the last question. Hackin howie has no solution.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
37,075
Reaction score
244
Points
63
Actually Trump tweeted that "he awarded" the funds for a new section of wall. It was, of course, a lie. He does not get to "award" anything like a dictator, no matter how much he'd love that, and the $ was for repairs to existing wall, not new wall. But you don't care when he lies.
I certainly don't care when you lie- which is almost every post.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
7,622
Reaction score
64
Points
48
As to unspent money, I believe Trump tweeted that he just signed off on a deal for 1.5 bil. for a stretch of wall.

"The Republicans" is not synonymous to "Trump". The Rs are weak starting with the leadership they had in McConnell and Ryan (especially Ryan). They should have jammed the wall through on 51 votes a long time ago and they would have held the House in the midterms. It's what the people voted for. I don't care if the wall is made of concrete or steel - as long as there is a high physical barrier that covers the mileage not protected by natural barriers. It is a sign of TDS that you yokels think that Trump has somehow changed his tune if the wall becomes steel slats.


For those of you on the left who claim you actually want border security (you don't) what is it that you want done to make the border "secure" that will work?
You can't actually believe this. You think Republicans lost dozens of suburban seats because voters WANTED the Wall?

https://www.rollcall.com/news/opinion/republicans-traded-election-caravan

(emphasis added)

Compared to 2010, when Republicans put together their current majority coalition, the margins with certain key groups shifted significantly. Examples are:

Independents: +19 in 2010, -12 in 2018 Suburban independents: +25 in 2010, -6 in 2018 Rural (small city) independents: +27 in 2010, -2 in 2018 Women: +1 in 2010, -19 in 2018 Suburbs: +13 in 2010, even in 2018 18-29: -13 in 2010, -35 in 2018
In contrast, the Winning the Issues post-election survey found that among those voters who heard an immigration message from GOP congressional candidates, the top issue heard, 35 percent were more favorable as a result, while 59 percent were less favorable.
https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/416283-republicans-must-learn-from-the-election-mistake-on-immigration

Despite what the comments section at the Daily Caller may suggest, there are not enough anti-immigrant voters to win close elections. According to exit polls, 22 percent of voters listed immigration as the most important issue facing the nation. Nearly twice as many voters listed health care as the top issue, while nearly three times as many listed health care or the economy. According to a national poll this fall, voters say immigration helps the country rather than hurts it by a margin of two to one.

Even as a rallying issue for the core Republican base, it is unlikely that immigration is best. Among the top issue immigration voters, 75 percent were Republicans. Yet an internal Republican National Committee memo found that a mere 12 percent of respondents said illegal immigration was the most important problem facing the country. While the anti-immigrant rhetoric toward the end of the campaign may have driven up Republican turnout in rural areas on election night, these parts of the country are shrinking in favor of growing suburbs. The memo thus recommended mobilizing establishment Republican and independent voters.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
11,327
Reaction score
45
Points
48
As to unspent money, I believe Trump tweeted that he just signed off on a deal for 1.5 bil. for a stretch of wall.

"The Republicans" is not synonymous to "Trump". The Rs are weak starting with the leadership they had in McConnell and Ryan (especially Ryan). They should have jammed the wall through on 51 votes a long time ago and they would have held the House in the midterms. It's what the people voted for. I don't care if the wall is made of concrete or steel - as long as there is a high physical barrier that covers the mileage not protected by natural barriers. It is a sign of TDS that you yokels think that Trump has somehow changed his tune if the wall becomes steel slats.


For those of you on the left who claim you actually want border security (you don't) what is it that you want done to make the border "secure" that will work?
Bga, Trump wouldn’t have gotten the tax reduction plan and nearly the deregulation without McConnell and Ryan, and the only reason that the Federal District court has put the constitutionality of Obamacare in play is b/c the Congress eliminated the mandate. McConnell is solely responsible for allowing Trump to name Gorsuch to the SC. I know it’s not popular here to praise McConnell or Ryan, but you can’t bet that Trump is more effective for having them and their tempered leadership.

The truth is the only things that Trump hasn’t been able to get through are things that aren’t as popular or aren’t as big a priority for the voters, like the Wall. I personally favor the Wall as part of a comprehensive border security plan, but it’s up to Trump to persuade the public that it’s needed.

Lastly and most importantly, “jamming the wall through on 51 votes” by eliminating the filibuster would be a disaster. Democrats will eventually have control of the Senate, House, and Executive Office, and then you’d be sorry that it doesn’t take 60 votes to pass the Senate.

The 60 vote requirement is a rule that, like the structure of the Electoral College, prevents the majority from having tyranny over the minority. Or Lefties might say, the minority over the majority. Abandoning this priniciple would be bad for the governing of our country. If you can’t negotiate a solution, the best answer may be to do nothing rather than using or abusing power to jam an unpopular solution through. If and when it does become popular by a majority of voters, it will pass the Senate along bi-partisan lines.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
11,327
Reaction score
45
Points
48
You can't actually believe this. You think Republicans lost dozens of suburban seats because voters WANTED the Wall?

https://www.rollcall.com/news/opinion/republicans-traded-election-caravan

(emphasis added)





https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/416283-republicans-must-learn-from-the-election-mistake-on-immigration
Didn’t read the articles, but I completely agree with your comment. Being from a metropolitan suburb, I don’t believe that my district or others would have remained Republican if the Congress had pushed all of Trump’s agenda as the Trumper narrative has gone. I don’t even believe Trump believes that.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
37,075
Reaction score
244
Points
63
Bga, Trump wouldn’t have gotten the tax reduction plan and nearly the deregulation without McConnell and Ryan, and the only reason that the Federal District court has put the constitutionality of Obamacare in play is b/c the Congress eliminated the mandate. McConnell is solely responsible for allowing Trump to name Gorsuch to the SC. I know it’s not popular here to praise McConnell or Ryan, but you can’t bet that Trump is more effective for having them and their tempered leadership.

The truth is the only things that Trump hasn’t been able to get through are things that aren’t as popular or aren’t as big a priority for the voters, like the Wall. I personally favor the Wall as part of a comprehensive border security plan, but it’s up to Trump to persuade the public that it’s needed.

Lastly and most importantly, “jamming the wall through on 51 votes” by eliminating the filibuster would be a disaster. Democrats will eventually have control of the Senate, House, and Executive Office, and then you’d be sorry that it doesn’t take 60 votes to pass the Senate.

The 60 vote requirement is a rule that, like the structure of the Electoral College, prevents the majority from having tyranny over the minority. Or Lefties might say, the minority over the majority. Abandoning this priniciple would be bad for the governing of our country. If you can’t negotiate a solution, the best answer may be to do nothing rather than using or abusing power to jam an unpopular solution through. If and when it does become popular by a majority of voters, it will pass the Senate along bi-partisan lines.
McConnell deserves great credit on the judges and not much else. Ryan is a guy who I was a big fan of early in his career and who has been a huge disappointment in recent years. He and McConnell both have been more interested in what the media will say and about damage to the Republican brand than in getting things done for the country. They failed to be leaders, they acted like scared followers. These two have not only failed to legislate but they also failed to support Trump through the attempted soft coup, one of the most criminal events in the history of American politics.

As to the Democrats, if they get control of all three branches they will go nuclear (51 votes) guaranteed. The Rs played by R rules. The Dems won't.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
17,363
Reaction score
86
Points
48
McConnell deserves great credit on the judges and not much else. Ryan is a guy who I was a big fan of early in his career and who has been a huge disappointment in recent years. He and McConnell both have been more interested in what the media will say and about damage to the Republican brand than in getting things done for the country. They failed to be leaders, they acted like scared followers. These two have not only failed to legislate but they also failed to support Trump through the attempted soft coup, one of the most criminal events in the history of American politics.

As to the Democrats, if they get control of all three branches they will go nuclear (51 votes) guaranteed. The Rs played by R rules. The Dems won't.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,048
Reaction score
378
Points
83
They failed to be leaders, they acted like scared followers. These two have not only failed to legislate but they also failed to support Trump through the attempted soft coup, one of the most criminal events in the history of American politics.

As to the Democrats, if they get control of all three branches they will go nuclear (51 votes) guaranteed. The Rs played by R rules. The Dems won't.
Seek Help.
 

God

Banned
Joined
Apr 1, 2014
Messages
509
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Bga, Trump wouldn’t have gotten the tax reduction plan and nearly the deregulation without McConnell and Ryan, and the only reason that the Federal District court has put the constitutionality of Obamacare in play is b/c the Congress eliminated the mandate. McConnell is solely responsible for allowing Trump to name Gorsuch to the SC. I know it’s not popular here to praise McConnell or Ryan, but you can’t bet that Trump is more effective for having them and their tempered leadership.

The truth is the only things that Trump hasn’t been able to get through are things that aren’t as popular or aren’t as big a priority for the voters, like the Wall. I personally favor the Wall as part of a comprehensive border security plan, but it’s up to Trump to persuade the public that it’s needed.

Lastly and most importantly, “jamming the wall through on 51 votes” by eliminating the filibuster would be a disaster. Democrats will eventually have control of the Senate, House, and Executive Office, and then you’d be sorry that it doesn’t take 60 votes to pass the Senate.

The 60 vote requirement is a rule that, like the structure of the Electoral College, prevents the majority from having tyranny over the minority. Or Lefties might say, the minority over the majority. Abandoning this priniciple would be bad for the governing of our country. If you can’t negotiate a solution, the best answer may be to do nothing rather than using or abusing power to jam an unpopular solution through. If and when it does become popular by a majority of voters, it will pass the Senate along bi-partisan lines.
Your continued refusal to drain the swamp is proof that you are Deep State! Ryan is the worst. Awful. He was a part of the soft coup.

MAGA
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
7,622
Reaction score
64
Points
48
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
20,068
Reaction score
54
Points
48
You guys should stop embarrassing yourselves. We're building a wall, a barrier, whatever you want to call it. I'm not interested in semantics. There's no reasonable argument against it and you were all for it before. The only reason any of you are against it now, is because you hate Trump so bad, you just can't allow him to get a "win".
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
11,327
Reaction score
45
Points
48
You guys should stop embarrassing yourselves. We're building a wall, a barrier, whatever you want to call it. I'm not interested in semantics. There's no reasonable argument against it and you were all for it before. The only reason any of you are against it now, is because you hate Trump so bad, you just can't allow him to get a "win".
That is spot on.

And if the Dems don’t compromise with Trump on these permanent structures, I expect that the American public will increasingly been to see the Dems as unreasonable regarding border security. The longer the government shutdown goes on, the more Dems will be blamed for not negotiating. There is no good reason for opposing permanent barriers at certain points of the border.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
20,068
Reaction score
54
Points
48
That is spot on.

And if the Dems don’t compromise with Trump on these permanent structures, I expect that the American public will increasingly been to see the Dems as unreasonable regarding border security. The longer the government shutdown goes on, the more Dems will be blamed for not negotiating. There is no good reason for opposing permanent barriers at certain points of the border.
There is one reason & it's a bad one. They hate Trump, more than they care about the country.
 

LesBolstad

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
84
Points
48
There is one reason & it's a bad one. They hate Trump, more than they care about the country.
Yep. We see the Loony Left at work every day on this site; and there are plenty of folks way further left than our GH friends. Astounding.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
17,363
Reaction score
86
Points
48
That is spot on.

And if the Dems don’t compromise with Trump on these permanent structures, I expect that the American public will increasingly been to see the Dems as unreasonable regarding border security. The longer the government shutdown goes on, the more Dems will be blamed for not negotiating. There is no good reason for opposing permanent barriers at certain points of the border.
No they won't. The government shutdown is on Trump and his stupid wall. It could have been funded if he agreed to the DACA compromise....but he was talked out of it by a white supremacist. Whoops. He said that Mexico would pay for it. WHOOPS! The longer this goes on....the worse and worse it looks for Trump and the republicans.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
7,622
Reaction score
64
Points
48

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
20,068
Reaction score
54
Points
48
No they won't. The government shutdown is on Trump and his stupid wall. It could have been funded if he agreed to the DACA compromise....but he was talked out of it by a white supremacist. Whoops. He said that Mexico would pay for it. WHOOPS! The longer this goes on....the worse and worse it looks for Trump and the republicans.
You couldn't be more wrong. Again. Lol. The funding for the wall passed a House vote WHOOPS! Schumer killed it in the Senate to ensure we couldn't secure our border. Now Pelosi is working a new plan to cut all funding to the Dept of Homeland Security & eliminating all funding for border security from all bills. Let that sink in. The Democrats want to defund the Dept of Homleand Security and end all border security funding. This on the heels of the illegal aliens who killed a cop, after a drunk driving stop. This is the team you've hitched your wagon to, own it.
 

TruthSeeker

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
3,127
Reaction score
36
Points
48
You couldn't be more wrong. Again. Lol. The funding for the wall passed a House vote WHOOPS! Schumer killed it in the Senate to ensure we couldn't secure our border. Now Pelosi is working a new plan to cut all funding to the Dept of Homeland Security & eliminating all funding for border security from all bills. Let that sink in. The Democrats want to defund the Dept of Homleand Security and end all border security funding. This on the heels of the illegal aliens who killed a cop, after a drunk driving stop. This is the team you've hitched your wagon to, own it.
Lots of people want to defund DHS. Diehard and I are included. DHS makes us less safe and is a huge waste of money. However, DHS needs to be wound down slowly and carefully. It would be dangerous to suddenly end it.
 

LesBolstad

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
84
Points
48
Loony Left Dems: We were for the wall before we were against it. The liberal mind truly is a form of mental illness.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
17,363
Reaction score
86
Points
48
You couldn't be more wrong. Again. Lol. The funding for the wall passed a House vote WHOOPS! Schumer killed it in the Senate to ensure we couldn't secure our border. Now Pelosi is working a new plan to cut all funding to the Dept of Homeland Security & eliminating all funding for border security from all bills. Let that sink in. The Democrats want to defund the Dept of Homleand Security and end all border security funding. This on the heels of the illegal aliens who killed a cop, after a drunk driving stop. This is the team you've hitched your wagon to, own it.
So there wasn't a compromise to fund the wall in exchange for DACA measures all ready to go before Trump torpedoed it after a white supremacist republican congressman got in his ear? This is who you defend on a daily basis, own it!

And the rest of your post is mostly garbage as well. Let's see a link for cutting funding to the DHS and ending all border security funding.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
20,068
Reaction score
54
Points
48
Lots of people want to defund DHS. Diehard and I are included. DHS makes us less safe and is a huge waste of money. However, DHS needs to be wound down slowly and carefully. It would be dangerous to suddenly end it.
I don't think we should defund the DHS, I think we should eliminate it altogether. That's got nothing to do with the matter at hand. This isn't abouit some ideological belief the D's hold, this is about trying to hurt America as bad as possible.
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
9,352
Reaction score
60
Points
48
You guys should stop embarrassing yourselves. We're building a wall, a barrier, whatever you want to call it. I'm not interested in semantics. There's no reasonable argument against it and you were all for it before. The only reason any of you are against it now, is because you hate Trump so bad, you just can't allow him to get a "win".
Dead nuts.
 
Top Bottom