*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[TheSpoonald]

Lucky for me that I never said anything of the sort.

Liar.

Can you answer the question without subjectively adding a freight train of your own baggage to it, then tearing down the strawmen you've built out of thin air?

Can you make a post without a metric ton of ad hominem nonsense? You're not even good at it.

It was alright.

You do you man.

I almost never know what you actually mean. Do you, even?

It's crystal clear.

I mean, I get that you're all, "right wing good. left wing bad,"

Uh no. You clearly don't know anything about my political views.

but that's not really an informed position on any issue

Agreed. I'm glad that's not my position.

I don't see any central core or consistency to what your vision of America's future is aside from that caveman agenda to "stick it to the cry-baby libruls."

It's like you're conflating me with the magnified perception of a cliche that you think I am. It's confusing and silly.

My vision for America is one where regular folks, with 100 IQ's, can work, and be engaged in society. Right now people like that are totally dispossessed. They are either unemployed, or about to be. They have drug and alcohol problems. Divorce is the rule. Domestic violence is common. Depression and suicide and rampant. And while people like that used to be able to save money and give their kids a better future, nowadays those people are two paychecks from oblivion. In 2015, America's middle class became a statistical minority. That's not going to work. Society functions a hell of a lot better if 80% of the country is bourgeoisie. We used to have that. Now that class is in the minority. That's what "Make America Great Again" means. It means regular folks get re-engaged and take back power from the ruling class.

It's not a left/right thing for me at all. If you want to understand my political views think of it like this: Everything Bernie Sanders says is correct, except for when he makes suggestions on how to fix things. All of his complaints are spot on. All of his criticisms are apt. All of his policy ideas for solutions are complete buffoonery.

Trump on the other hand is part of the inequality problem that Bernie bitches about. However, his ego is so far beyond restraint that he can't help himself but to push back against it if it makes him famous. I believe he's a patriot. I believe he really wants to do a good job as POTUS. And if he wants to crush the system he enjoyed for decades just to pump himself up....I'm going to let him.

question: do you actually think you have any idea what the rest of us mean?

Definitely. Oskar thrives on racism. He loves it. He sees it everywhere and he makes a little white puddle in his pants anytime he can stick up for the brown guy. Poop is just a contrarian but lacks the talent to do it well. Doesn't matter what's posted, he'll find some illogical way to push back against it. Stuff like "How come the Navy follows Trumps orders but his lawyer doesn't? NYAH!" And you, MMM, you just seem to want to land some haymaker on me. You've been trying for days without success. How much longer is this gonna go on?

Spoon: Manpower, sensors, drones = not permanent, therefore not effective 'cause someone later down the line can remove them.

Right

Me: A wall without manpower, sensors, drones = not stopping anyone

It might stop someone. I'll grant you that it's less effective. But don't pretend like a 30 foot concrete wall is just a speed bump.

/ no more resilient to the cutting of manpower, sensors, drones.

Actually it is more resilient. See if you cut funding for manpower, you have nothing. If you cut funding for wall maintenance, you still have a wall. What's not clear about that?

Spoon: the manpower isn't effective without a wall!

This is also true. Evidence: 25 million illegal immigrants are here right now.

SMH. Just keep moving the goal posts and changing the topic so you can maintain that level of outrage, man.

What goalpost am I moving? What exactly is the goal here? How has my position been inconsistent? Do you think that my policy position was to just build a wall and then leave it alone? Do you really think that I think that stacking some bricks up in the desert is gonna solve immigration all by itself?? This is why I don't understand what you're trying to do. For your arguments to even make a lick of sense, you'd have to assume I have the intelligence of Oskar. Have we not determined that my IQ is nearly two full standard deviations higher? Give me some fucking credit man.

I said a wall without manpower is no more permanent than manpower without wall.
If you're arguing against that, then dafuq, man?

I am arguing against that. As I said above. If you cut funding for manpower, the man goes home. If you cut funding for wall maintenance, the wall still stands. At least for a while. And probably a long time. I'm not sure that "more permanent" is even a logically sound phrase, but assuming it is...then a wall is more permanent than a man. Dafuq you talking about?

Your statement about the permanence of walls is stupid. Just suck it up and admit that you said a stupid thing.

Uh no, because it's not stupid. You understand the difference between a 30 foot mass of concrete, and a sensor with dead batteries right? Assume that the next POTUS declares that he's not funding border patrol anymore. Now you've got a a wall, and a senor with dead batteries sitting out there in the desert. Neither one is consuming any resources. Neither one requires any funding. Yet one still functions, and the other is a useless object.

Do you know what permanence means?

Maybe acknowledge that's a telltale sign of confirmation bias if your supporting facts get disproved

The only supporting fact that I'm assuming is that if the next POTUS cuts funding for wall maintenance, that the wall will not dissolve into dust automatically. Has that fact been disproven? Source?

Once again... I said nothing of the sort.

Hold on, yes you did. I said "America voted for a wall". You said "Hey wait, I thought you said America voted for a populist". Do you see how you're implying that a wall is not consistent with populism?

[MadMojoMonkey]

Liar.

Quote or STFU.
I asked if it's our best option. I never said anything about the gov't spending too much on anything. I never said the wall is more expensive than anything else. I asked if it was. You dodged the question, changed the subject, invented strawmen, jumped to conclusions, etc.

Can you make a post without a metric ton of ad hominem nonsense? You're not even good at it.

Criticizing your inability to stay on topic and effectively communicate is neither ad hominem, nor nonsense.
I'm not using the criticism of your ability to communicate as a means to discredit anything you're trying to say.
Ergo, ad hominem doesn't apply.

Discrediting what you're saying because it asserts a position to me that I do not hold is a totally different thing going on there.

You clearly don't know anything about my political views.

Refresh my memory on the last time you spent more than 1 post giving as much of a heated defense of any left-wing policy as you have to the wall issue, please.
I'm not claiming to know your political views beyond what you've posted here. My memory isn't all that great. I don't recall you taking a strong position on a political issue that was on the left-wing side of things. If you have, and I've forgotten, then please remind me.

My vision for America [...]

That was nice. Thanks.

And you, MMM, you just seem to want to land some haymaker on me.

Not a bit of it. I want to understand why you're so single-mindedly defending the wall that you'll say things which are not supported by any data (reality). Some data which illuminates things on topic has been posted ITT at your request, but none of it seems to have changed even a nuance of your position.
Ergo, you've got an emotional attachment to the idea of the wall that you're willing to defend with or without facts.
That's interesting.

That's what I'm trying to draw your attention to, as it's what I'm stuck trying to figure out. I'm not trying to "haymaker" you. I'm trying to figure out why you're building a house of cards.

This is also true. Evidence: 25 million illegal immigrants are here right now.

Where'd you get that number?
It says 12 million on the DHS site.
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/fi...est-report.pdf
(So now half the problem is already solved for you, right? Because that 25 million number was important to your point? Because you don't just throw out unimportant nonsense to support a position with data that you came to with emotions? Right? You're a logical adult, so this new information will change your position as you incorporate it into what you know, right?)

***
Did you know most immigrants enter legally and overstay their visas?

https://cmsny.org/publications/jmhs-...s-border-wall/
"This report speaks to another reason to question the necessity and value of a 2,000-mile wall: It does not reflect the reality of how the large majority of persons now become undocumented. It finds that two-thirds of those who arrived in 2014 did not illegally cross a border, but were admitted (after screening) on non-immigrant (temporary) visas, and then overstayed their period of admission or otherwise violated the terms of their visas. Moreover, this trend in increasing percentages of visa overstays will likely continue into the foreseeable future."

(I didn't find any more recent data. Let me know if you do.)

Assuming illegal immigration is the crisis you say it is, is a wall the best way to address this, given these data?

Actually it is more resilient. See if you cut funding for manpower, you have nothing. If you cut funding for wall maintenance, you still have a wall. What's not clear about that?

OK, I'll grant you that a swiss cheesed ex-wall with ladders along it is probably easier to bootstrap than no wall.
Still a far, far cry from "permanent," but if that's all you meant, then I'll drop it.

What goalpost am I moving? What exactly is the goal here? How has my position been inconsistent? Do you think [...]?

calm down there, bucko.
The evidence is in your face every day or so. All I asked was, "Is a wall the most effective use of our money to address these issues?" and you've digressed into many tangents and asserted a load of nonsense that I never said. We're a page later and many posts and you still haven't answered the question.
You picked up the goalpost and moved it so many times you forgot where it started.

For the record I don't think any of those things. IDK what you're even on about. I never said any of those things. With how unrestrained I am when speaking with a fellow interlocutor of your caliber, I'd think you know that I'm not holding anything back. If I think something about you, I'm pretty open with saying it.

If I ask you a question, it's because I don't know the answer.

It might stop someone. I'll grant you that it's less effective. But don't pretend like a 30 foot concrete wall is just a speed bump.

Nope. Once the border patrol isn't coming along and confiscating abandoned ladders, well... it's not even a good speed bump.
Oh. I forgot. You live in a world where you can't make a ladder out of sticks. Or launch a grapple up 30 feet. After all, only 1 guy in that test was able to do it. Good thing he's on our side.

Yet one still functions, and the other is a useless object.

The wall doesn't stop a determined bad guy. It makes his job harder. It slows him down so less manpower can apprehend more criminals. If it takes the bad guy 5 minutes to cross, then we need a lot more guards than if it takes them 30 minutes. Even when we have cars and drones and sensors, we still gotta get there in time.

Do you know what permanence means?

Do you know what ladder means?

Hold on, yes you did. I said "America voted for a wall". You said "Hey wait, I thought you said America voted for a populist". Do you see how you're implying that a wall is not consistent with populism?

Hey wait... that's still not me saying a wall isn't a populist idea. It's still me pointing out that people voted for Trump for many reasons, and just because a majority of people voted him over Clinton, that doesn't mean the same majority supports each of his positions and policies.


Communication. It's about what someone said, not what you wish they would have said so you can tell them how wrong they are.

[TheSpoonald]

I'm not claiming to know your political views beyond what you've posted here. My memory isn't all that great. I don't recall you taking a strong position on a political issue that was on the left-wing side of things. If you have, and I've forgotten, then please remind me

What exactly do I have to do to prove to you I'm not a right winger? I'm a registered independent. I intend to vote in the democrat primary and vote for elizabeth warren. In my last post I just told you how spot on Bernie Sanders is. I wholeheartedly support universal healthcare. Personally I think it's a horrible idea, but I acknowledge that America voted for it in 2008. I love democracy, even when my side loses. But that same democracy voted for a wall in 2016. So fuck the cost. Fuck whether it will work or not. America voted for it. Build the fucking thing. And anyone who doesn't like it, should reflect on why their message lost in 2016 and try to do better next time. Either that, or shut the fuck up.

I lean right, heavily right, when it comes to the size and power over government. And it's not that so much that I'm libertarian on those issues. I'm *for* a lot of things the government does. I just think the government sucks at doing it. I can't think of anything the government has done that wasn't wildly inefficient and far less beneficial than promised. They suck at doing it.

Would it be good if some guns were banned? Sure. I can get behind that. But who decides where the line is and who enforces it? The government? No. They are guaranteed to fuck that up. So I'll live with whatever consequences come with allowing 12 year olds to buy bazookas. So I lean right on the 2nd amendment.

I'm heavily left on abortion. Maybe I could be convinced it's murder, but I still wouldn't care. Nobody wants it? Kill it. More air for me. Am I for abortion right up until the moment of birth?? I dont' know? If I'm not, then where's the line and who enforces it? The government? No. They are guaranteed to fuck that up. So I'll live with whatever consequences come with allowing a pregnant woman to tap out right before the epidural.

I hope that clears it up.

I want to understand why you're so single-mindedly defending the wall

See above. Same reason I'll single-mindedly defend an absurd and dangerous policy like universal healthcare.

that you'll say things which are not supported by any data (reality)

Walls work.

. Some data which illuminates things on topic has been posted ITT at your request, but none of it seems to have changed even a nuance of your position.

there's no nuance. Walls work.

Ergo, you've got an emotional attachment to the idea of the wall that you're willing to defend with or without facts.

FACT: Walls work.

I'm not trying to "haymaker" you. I'm trying to figure out why you're building a house of cards.

I'm trying to build a wall.

Where'd you get that number?

You cited "reality" as "data" earlier. I'd like to do the same.

It says 12 million on the DHS site.

Search harder. Related question: If we already know how many there are, why does it matter if we ask citizenship on the census?

Because that 25 million number was important to your point?

Right

Because you don't just throw out unimportant nonsense to support a position with data that you came to with emotions?

Right

Right?

Right

You're a logical adult, so this new information will change your position as you incorporate it into what you know, right?

Your information is old. Here is some new information,
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insigh...ious-estimates
and I hope it will change your position as you incorporate it into what you know
Right?

Did you know most immigrants enter legally and overstay their visas?

Yeah, if you go back to the 70's to calculate the average. I'm totally over this whole argument. There are 60K+ people a month showing up at the border. That's the situation right now, today.

(I didn't find any more recent data. Let me know if you do.)

See above. Current as of today.

Assuming illegal immigration is the crisis you say it is, is a wall the best way to address this, given these data?

You act like this question hasn't already been answered. Google "2016 election". This has already been adjudicated....WALL.

If you're asking my personal, non-political opinion, as to what is the best way to keep unwanted people out of a place? WALL.

"Is a wall the most effective use of our money to address these issues?"

Poop is gonna give me crap for changing what you say here. But you have to understand, from my perspective, this question is *exactly* the same as asking "Should we listen to democracy". The answer is yes. yes we should.

ladders,

I'm really over this ladder argument. Honestly, it's pathetic. First of all, if Trump was able to build the wall he wanted...ladders wouldn't work. You can't perch yourself on top while you lift the ladder over. Two ladders? Maybe. They would have to be really tall. They would have to be really strong. Picture it, would people orderly climb over one at a time? Or would they just all climb up the ladder single file? How many people are on the ladder at once? How strong does this ladder have to be? How much would that ladder weigh? How easily could something like that be carried through the desert?

How likely is it that someone would be able to approach the wall, set up the apparatus to get people climbing over it, herd people over it, and then move into america undetected? Without a wall, all they have to do is walk on through.

The wall doesn't stop a determined bad guy.

And locks are for honest people. So leave your front door open and stop locking your car.

It makes his job harder. It slows him down so less manpower can apprehend more criminals.

These are all good things.

Hey wait... that's still not me saying a wall isn't a populist idea

Holy fuck. Ok. Fine. If you're gonna play this game, I can too. I didn't say you said a wall isn't a populist idea. I said you implied it. And when you implied it, I asked you a question. That's not me putting words in your mouth. You said something. I interpreted it, and then I asked you to confirm my interpretation. What exactly is your problem with that?

It's still me pointing out that people voted for Trump for many reasons, and just because a majority of people voted him over Clinton, that doesn't mean the same majority supports each of his positions and policies.

So? Why does that matter? You elect whole candidates.