*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[Poopadoop]

Intellectually vapid

Projection.

Are you really asking me how the commander in chief stays informed of military affairs? Really?

No I'm asking you what I asked you. What information do you believe Trump had when he came to his decision to intervene? Do you think the guy who doesn't like to read and prefers briefings with lots of pictures had a firm grasp on the complexities of the situation?

[TheSpoonald]

That seems like a really low bar to set for the cost involved.
How else might the money be spent to address the same concerns?
Is a wall our best option?

Honestly, I just have to roll my eyes whenever someone brings up the cost. The Government Accountability Office publishes an annual report showing that fraud, waste, and abuse in the government is enough to pay for many many many walls.

The Green New Deal costs enough to pay for 1000 walls.

It doesn't matter how else the money might be spent. Even if you could make an argument that there are more effective measures of border control....none of them are permanent. That's a unique feature of a wall, and it's kind of a dealbreaker. Voters have been misled on immigration too many times, going back to Reagan. If you pass a bill that puts sensors, patrols, and drones on the border....how am I to know that the next president won't just cut the funding for those things and leave the border unsecure again?

You can't un-build a wall.

And frankly, effectiveness and cost SHOULD NOT MATTER AT ALL. These are bogus, feckless, diversionary arguments. The election of 2016 was largely a referendum on Immigration. The winning candidate had a wall as the top plank in his platform. America voted for a wall. All the counter arguments about costs, necessity, effectiveness, and other measures were aired. The debate already happened. All opinions were heard, and a vote was taken. America voted for a wall. Democracy has spoken. The POTUS has a mandate to build the fucking thing.

Anyone who thinks that they have an argument stronger than that is just a desperate narcissist.

[Poopadoop]

You can even get a ruler, and measure it on the screen. Both sides got nearly an equal number of inches (those are like better versions of centimeters)

You're blatantly just making shit up here lol. They not only gave Gallagher's side first,they gave it at least 2x as much space as the warden's.

I really don't care what you think the "implication to a simple person" would be.

It's important if you're really concerned with how media is being used to influence people. Since you seemed so concerned with imagined ways in which Twitter is warping people's minds, I thought you'd want to address factual evidence of how your favourite news channel does the very same thing you find so outrageous.

I'm sorry you're a simple person. That must be shitty.

I'm sorry you can't provide a better argument, and have to resort to projection. That must be shitty.

[oskar]

This one though is definitely racist
https://twitter.com/kishkushkay/stat...90507714113538

That's a big yikes.
idk what your point is. You seem to be under the impression that I am supposed to defend everything "THE LEFT" writes says or does. CNN is different but no better than Fox. Fox is an extension of the republican party and for the most part state-tv, while CNN is corporate-donor TV. Both are shit.
I do have a NYT subscription. I don't read it for the cartoons and idk what they were thinking printing that one.

[Poopadoop]

Wait, aren't you the one always speaking up for due process? We don't know the facts of his treatment whether it was abusing his rights or not until it goes to court. Right?

So why are you leaping to the conclusion that Gallagher's lawyers are right and the warden is wrong?

More importantly, why is Trump leaping to that same conclusion?

Sorry but I missed your answer to this, bananold. Can you provide it again please?

[TheSpoonald]

This is something you'd have to ask the DEA, and they'll tell you that most drugs come through ports of entry. So you'd stop some drugs, but spending the money on better checks at ports of entry would be vastly superior solutions.

Holy shit, your'e doing it again!! And we've talked about this one before!! You're conflating talking points again.

Most drug confiscations happen at places where the cops are. That is not indicative of anything.

This statement right here:

most drugs come through ports of entry.

Is absolutely FALSE. Stop fucking saying it. It's not true, and you're just making yourself sound dumb.

What do you think is wrong?

You claimed that illegal immigrants commit less murders than native born americans. You can't prove that. There is no data whatsoever to support that conclusion. You're simply taking the original talking point that says ALL immigrants commit less crime than ALL natives, and then you're adding the word "illegal" and "murder" to make an entirely new talking point that doesn't' comport with any facts whatsoever.

And any evidence that does exist on this subject suggests the opposite conclusion.

[TheSpoonald]

That's a big yikes.
idk what your point is.

My point is that it's deranged how you read lines between lines between lines in Trump's tweets just to find evidence of racism when there is plenty to be found right out in the open.

Honestly, if racism is your target, then Trump is not your enemy.

[Poopadoop]

Holy shit, your'e doing it again!! And we've talked about this one before!! You're conflating talking points again.

Most drug confiscations happen at places where the cops are. That is not indicative of anything.

This statement right here:

Is absolutely FALSE. Stop fucking saying it. It's not true, and you're just making yourself sound dumb.

Where are you getting your numbers from? What proof do you have that most drugs are coming over the border at places other than the ports of entry?

You claimed that illegal immigrants commit less murders than native born americans. You can't prove that. There is no data whatsoever to support that conclusion. You're simply taking the original talking point that says ALL immigrants commit less crime than ALL natives, and then you're adding the word "illegal" and "murder" to make an entirely new talking point that doesn't' comport with any facts whatsoever.

And any evidence that does exist on this subject suggests the opposite conclusion.

Can we finally and once and for all agree that a claim by someone on Fox News != 'evidence.'

[oskar]

https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/fi...resolution.pdf
You can't be bothered to type 3 words into google but you decide it's a good idea to call me dumb because your feelings tell you that I'm wrong?

[TheSpoonald]

Where are you getting your numbers from? What proof do you have that most drugs are coming over the border at places other than the ports of entry?

Life expectancy in the United States dropped last year as a result of opioid overdoses. I'm not sure of the exact stat but something like 85%+ of the heroin in the US comes from Mexico.

For me to believe that "most drugs come through ports of entry", it would mean that the gov't knows the sources of ALL drugs, and the routes they take to get to America. And if they knew that....they would intercept the drugs. But they don't intercept the drugs. How do I know? Dead bodies.

So don't tell me that you KNOW that most of the drugs go right under cop's noses. Just fuck off with that.

Can we finally and once and for all agree that a claim by someone on Fox News != 'evidence.

Honestly....just fuck off.

[TheSpoonald]

https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/fi...resolution.pdf
You can't be bothered to type 3 words into google but you decide it's a good idea to call me dumb because your feelings tell you that I'm wrong?

Just tell me where it says "most drugs come through ports of entry" without specifying confiscations.

[oskar]

You claimed that illegal immigrants commit less murders than native born americans. You can't prove that. There is no data whatsoever to support that conclusion. You're simply taking the original talking point that says ALL immigrants commit less crime than ALL natives, and then you're adding the word "illegal" and "murder" to make an entirely new talking point that doesn't' comport with any facts whatsoever.

And any evidence that does exist on this subject suggests the opposite conclusion.

Again, you can just google that. You'll have a really rough time finding data that supports your narrative on that one. Texas department of public safety numbers disagree with you. There are many studies on this, they're all pretty much in line.
https://www.cato.org/publications/im...nt#endnote-003

[oskar]

Just tell me where it says "most drugs come through ports of entry" without specifying confiscations.

ctrl-f

[Poopadoop]

https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/f...16/Table09.pdf
US Citizens are responsible for only 58% of crime. Does that sound proportional to their population??????

According to this,there were only 84 murder convictions in the US in all of 2016.

Something tells me they don't have anything approaching a complete data set here.

[oskar]

It's kinda entertaining, but I don't understand how you can base all your believes purely on what feels correct to you - never bother to look up anything, but go around calling people idiots for citing department of public safety statistics.

[Poopadoop]

Life expectancy in the United States dropped last year as a result of opioid overdoses. I'm not sure of the exact stat but something like 85%+ of the heroin in the US comes from Mexico.

For me to believe that "most drugs come through ports of entry", it would mean that the gov't knows the sources of ALL drugs, and the routes they take to get to America. And if they knew that....they would intercept the drugs. But they don't intercept the drugs. How do I know? Dead bodies.

So don't tell me that you KNOW that most of the drugs go right under cop's noses. Just fuck off with that.

Just out of curiosity, how much of the drug trade do you think comes over an unprotected land border (I mean by land, not by air)?

[Poopadoop]

Wait, aren't you the one always speaking up for due process? We don't know the facts of his treatment whether it was abusing his rights or not until it goes to court. Right?

So why are you leaping to the conclusion that Gallagher's lawyers are right and the warden is wrong?

More importantly, why is Trump leaping to that same conclusion?

Damn, I don't know what's wrong with my internet today. I thought you'd be all over these questions, what with your deep concern for due process and the constitution and all that.

[TheSpoonald]

Hey Oskar....did you know that most drowning rescues occur in places where lifeguards are on duty? Does that mean it's completely safe to swim everywhere else?

[TheSpoonald]

According to this,there were only 84 murder convictions in the US in all of 2016.

Something tells me they don't have anything approaching a complete data set here.

It's federal stats. And the vast majority of crimes are prosecuted at the state level. If you had any shred of reading comprehension you'll see where I clearly stated that available data on this is thin.

[oskar]

If you had read the corresponding section, which is only a couple sentences long, you'd see that the DEA accounts for that. They're not fucking retarded.

How did you find the link you gave on crime statistics? Like what did you google for?

[TheSpoonald]

It's kinda entertaining, but I don't understand how you can base all your believes purely on what feels correct to you - never bother to look up anything, but go around calling people idiots for citing department of public safety statistics.

Uh, you didn't cite public safety statistics, you cited the Cato Institute. Try again.

[TheSpoonald]

Damn, I don't know what's wrong with my internet today. I thought you'd be all over these questions, what with your deep concern for due process and the constitution and all that.

Your questions are absurd. eat shit

[TheSpoonald]

Just out of curiosity, how much of the drug trade do you think comes over an unprotected land border (I mean by land, not by air)?

Fuck you. That's how much.

If you have a point to make, make it.

[Poopadoop]

It's federal stats. And the vast majority of crimes are prosecuted at the state level. If you had any shred of reading comprehension you'll see where I clearly stated that available data on this is thin.

If you were trying to argue in good faith you wouldn't have even put this up.

You may as well look at one courthouse and try to draw conclusions about what is happening everywhere in the country.

[Poopadoop]

Fuck you. That's how much.

If you have a point to make, make it.

The point is obvious - if you think a Wall is going to put a serious dent in the drug trade you must think most drugs come in over the land border, and by land.

And to think that, presumably you must have a reason to think that. That's the next question: If that's what you think, what are you basing that belief on?

[Poopadoop]

Your questions are absurd. eat shit

So you're all for upholding the constitution unless someone's lawyer says it is't being upheld, in which case we should believe him and act accordingly. No need for due process there. Gotcha.

[Poopadoop]

Frankly, bananold, I'm impressed it's taken you this long to start being abusive as a regular form of argument. Well done I'd say. You held it together there for quite a while really.

[oskar]

430 posts and 7 days

[TheSpoonald]

If you were trying to argue in good faith you wouldn't have even put this up.

You may as well look at one courthouse and try to draw conclusions about what is happening everywhere in the country.

If you have more complete stats, please post them.

[Poopadoop]

If you have more complete stats, please post them.

And if I don't should I just post some incomplete and misleading figures instead?

[TheSpoonald]

The point is obvious - if you think a Wall is going to put a serious dent in the drug trade you must think most drugs come in over the land border, and by land.

And to think that, presumably you must have a reason to think that. That's the next question: If that's what you think, what are you basing that belief on?

Make up your mind man. A minute ago you told me that most drugs come through ports of entry. Are ports of entry in the sky??? Are they underwater???

Should we get Aquaman to guard the border??

[TheSpoonald]

And if I don't should I just post some incomplete and misleading figures instead?

If you cite them properly as incomplete stats, as I did, then feel free to do so. Just be honest.

[Poopadoop]

Make up your mind man. A minute ago you told me that most drugs come through ports of entry. Are ports of entry in the sky??? Are they underwater???

I didn't say that, don't conflate my argument with Oskar's.

IIRC one of your arguments for having the Wall is to deter drug smuggling. I'm asking you what makes you think that will happen. See the link there between cause and effect? That's what you're not making a good case for.

[TheSpoonald]

So you're all for upholding the constitution unless someone's lawyer says it is't being upheld, in which case we should believe him and act accordingly. No need for due process there. Gotcha.

What are you talking about?? What due process would there be? The defense filed a motion....a judge could have ruled on it. Instead, Trump pulled rank and said "just fix it".

That's due process. The constitution says that military people take orders from the POTUS.

If he's obstructing justice, impeach him. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

[Poopadoop]

If you cite them properly as incomplete stats, as I did, then feel free to do so. Just be honest.

Better is not to present misleading information at all, than to present it and say 'oh btw this is misleading'. Not a difficult guideline even for a non-scientist to follow.

[Poopadoop]

What are you talking about?? What due process would there be? The defense filed a motion....a judge could have ruled on it. Instead, Trump pulled rank and said "just fix it".

Exactly. Trump judged the case before it went to court.

That's due process. The constitution says that military people take orders from the POTUS.

The constitution also says POTUS shouldn't interfere with the normal course of justice. Did you hear about that whole Mueller Report thing? That's kinda what a big chunk of it was about.

[Poopadoop]

This is also why I was curious about whether the order Trump gave had been followed or not - because he has the habit of giving illegal orders and getting involved where it's not his place to get involved. That's why a lot of people choose not to follow his orders.

[TheSpoonald]

Exactly. Trump judged the case before it went to court.

It's not like it's a subjective judgement. either the guy has a right to attorney-client privilege or he doesn't. Kinda hard to have due-process when your due-process is being violated.

This is such a petty complaint with regards to Trump. Truly. The guy is still in prison you know.

[TheSpoonald]

This is also why I was curious about whether the order Trump gave had been followed or not - because he has the habit of giving illegal orders and getting involved where it's not his place to get involved. That's why a lot of people choose not to follow his orders.

Just fuck off

[Poopadoop]

It's not like it's a subjective judgement. either the guy has a right to attorney-client privilege or he doesn't. Kinda hard to have due-process when your due-process is being violated.

But we don't know whether his due process was being violated or not. We only know his lawyer claimed it was. It was Trump who chose to take his lawyer's side over the warden's.

This is such a petty complaint with regards to Trump. Truly. The guy is still in prison you know.

The original nature of the complaint was that Trump acted out of line to stick up for someone who allegedly killed kids who were POC.

This is a problem because he's not supposed to get personally involved with the justice system. The fact he keeps doing it doesn't mean that eventually it becomes an okay thing to do.

[Poopadoop]

Just fuck off

So, you don't like where this is heading eh? I can see why.

[TheSpoonald]

I didn't say that, don't conflate my argument with Oskar's.

It's really hard when you're both so fantastically dumb.

IIRC one of your arguments for having the Wall is to deter drug smuggling.

Yeah, "one of".

And I really don't care what you think the gov't says about "most drugs at ports of entry" or whatever bullshit line the mainstream media put through the spin cycle before beaming it straight to you brain.

Drugs are killing people. If you're 40 years old in America there is almost ZERO chance that you don't know someone who has died of a drug overdose. Life expectancy actually dropped for the first time in virtually forever.

Now if you're going to tell me that you KNOW where all those drugs are coming from, and how they are getting in here.....then the question is "why aren't they being stopped"?

Now your argument completely fucking fails. Because if you KNOW where the drugs are.....go get them!!! If drugs are getting in undetected, then by definition, you have no fucking idea how they get in here.

[oskar]

The guy is still in prison you know.

Where do you get that from. It seems like absolutely everything you say is pure fantasy. Do you bother looking anything up or do you have cosmic inspirations?

[Poopadoop]

....a judge could have ruled on it. Instead, Trump pulled rank

Do you, a scholar of the constitution, really not see what the problem is with this?

Trump's rank does not put him above a judge. He's in a different branch of the government. Or do you think Trump can overrule judges on cases involving the military now?

[TheSpoonald]

But we don't know whether his due process was being violated or not. We only know his lawyer claimed it was. It was Trump who chose to take his lawyer's side over the warden's

SO FUCKING WHAT???? That is Trump's job!!!!! He's allowed to do that. That's completely within his constitutional powers.

The original nature of the complaint was that Trump acted out of line to stick up for someone who allegedly killed kids who were POC

And why does any of that mean you're not allowed privileged conversations with your defense attorney?

This is a problem because he's not supposed to get personally involved with the justice system.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTT?????!!!!!!

You and Oskar suffer from teh same disease. You both hallucinate new branches of government being sprouted whenever you decide ORANGE MAN BAD

Just so you are clear....TRUMP RUNS THE JUSTICE SYSTEM. The DOJ is part of the executive branch, and Trump is Chief Executive.

The fact he keeps doing it doesn't mean that eventually it becomes an okay thing to do.

You've got it backwards. Just because you and Oskar keep pissing your thongs about it doesn't mean it's wrong

[TheSpoonald]

Where do you get that from.

Facts

Chief Gallagher is now in a barracks environment, similar to a hotel room. In accordance with the Rules for Court Martial

[oskar]

It's really hard when you're both so fantastically dumb.

Coming from the guy who thought Trump would never build a wall that could be climbed with a ladder. Meanwhile Trump built this pile of shit that you wouldn't even bother to bring a ladder for: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz-9UOpnkHk

[Poopadoop]

It's really hard to think straight when I'm seeing red all day long

fyp

Drugs are killing people. If you're 40 years old in America there is almost ZERO chance that you don't know someone who has died of a drug overdose. Life expectancy actually dropped for the first time in virtually forever.

Now if you're going to tell me that you KNOW where all those drugs are coming from, and how they are getting in here.....then the question is "why aren't they being stopped"?

Now your argument completely fucking fails. Because if you KNOW where the drugs are.....go get them!!! If drugs are getting in undetected, then by definition, you have no fucking idea how they get in here.

So you don't know where they're coming in, but you think building a Wall on one possible entry point is worthwhile. Ok, that's not so ridiculous I guess.

I just don't want you to expect the drug epidemic to stop the day after they finish the Wall. Just trying to manage your expectations there bud.

[oskar]

Facts

But he's not in prison. So why do you think he's in prison?

[oskar]

Drugs are killing people. If you're 40 years old in America there is almost ZERO chance that you don't know someone who has died of a drug overdose. Life expectancy actually dropped for the first time in virtually forever.

How's the MAGA going?

[TheSpoonald]

But he's not in prison. So why do you think he's in prison?

Oh jeeezus. Alright, he's confined in a military barracks, isn't allowed to leave, and has every aspect of his life micromanaged by guards.

But it's not prison. Fine, you win.

[Poopadoop]

Just so you are clear....TRUMP RUNS THE JUSTICE SYSTEM. The DOJ is part of the executive branch, and Trump is Chief Executive.

So wait, he can be a dictator then if he wants to?

He can tell a military judge 'this guy did good things a while ago, give him a nicer cell' or tell the head of FBI 'don't prosecute this guy'?

'Cause I'm pretty sure he can't....

[TheSpoonald]

So wait, he can be a dictator then if he wants to?

Fuck off

He can tell a military judge 'this guy did good things a while ago, give him a nicer cell'

No, he can't tell a judge how to rule. But he can say that to a Navy Captain responsible for running a prison-like barracks facility. (I have to say prison-like now because Oskar gets sand in his vagina when I call it prison).

or tell the head of FBI 'don't prosecute this guy'?

Well, he would never say that, because Trump is not a hopeless retard that thinks the FBI is responsible for "prosecution". The AG would be responsible for that, and Trump absolutely can say "don't prosecute this guy".

'Cause I'm pretty sure he can't...

Yeah, he can.

[Poopadoop]

Coming from the guy who thought Trump would never build a wall that could be climbed with a ladder. Meanwhile Trump build this pile of shit that you wouldn't even bother to bring a ladder for: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz-9UOpnkHk

Come on now, it's called 'anti-climb' for a reason -it's replacing that 'pro-climb' wall they had under Obama!

[TheSpoonald]

So you don't know where they're coming in, but you think building a Wall on one possible entry point is worthwhile. Ok, that's not so ridiculous I guess.

No one knows where they are coming in. The only drugs we are sure about are the drugs we find and confiscate. All of the rest of the drugs are more or less a mystery, at least to the public.

What we do know is that the drugs in the latter group kill people, and the drugs in the former group usually don't.

We also know that if we're catching thousands of pounds of drugs at ports of entry, then we're probably doing a good job at detecting them. Which means it's unlikely that drugs are moving through ports undetected.

So the undetected drugs must be coming through some other way. And if it's not ports of entry....then there aren't a lot of options left. It's either over land and a wall would stop it. Or its through underground tunnels, and a wall would stop that too. Or its coming via light aircraft, which would admittedly thwart a wall. However, since the wall is doing everything else, it's possible that we might have more available resources to patrol the skies.

[Poopadoop]

Fuck off


No, he can't tell a judge how to rule. But he can say that to a Navy Captain responsible for running a prison-like barracks facility. (I have to say prison-like now because Oskar gets sand in his vagina when I call it prison).


Well, he would never say that, because Trump is not a hopeless retard that thinks the FBI is responsible for "prosecution". The AG would be responsible for that, and Trump absolutely can say "don't prosecute this guy".


Yeah, he can.

You should talk to Robert Mueller. He seems to have a different idea of how involved the president can be with the justice department. I'm sure he'd benefit from your constitutional wisdom.

[TheSpoonald]

Come on now, it's called 'anti-climb' for a reason -it's replacing that 'pro-climb' wall they had under Obama!

This is the least intellectually vapid thing you've posted this week

[TheSpoonald]

You should talk to Robert Mueller. He seems to have a different idea of how involved the president can be with the justice department. I'm sure he'd benefit from your constitutional wisdom.

Does he have a different idea?

Is that why Trump is under indictment right now?

Is that why he's likely to be impeached?

Is that why his re-election chances are worse than ever?

Oh wait.....

[Poopadoop]

We also know that if we're catching drugs at ports of entry, then we're probably doing a good job at detecting them. Which means it's unlikely that drugs are moving through ports undetected.

Not really a fair judgment though. All you know is you're stopping x number of drugs from getting through poe's. You don't know how many are getting through. For all you know, you could only be catching 5%. I'm not saying that's the number, I'm saying the number could be anywhere between 0 and 100%, and you will never know what it is.

So the undetected drugs must be coming through some other way. And if it's not ports of entry....then there aren't a lot of options left. It's either over land and a wall would stop it. Or its through underground tunnels, and a wall would stop that too. Or its coming via light aircraft, which would admittedly thwart a wall. However, since the wall is doing everything else, it's possible that we might have more available resources to patrol the skies.

Again you don't have enough information to know what % of drugs come overland, and what % come in other ways the Wall can't deter. You also forget to account for the fact that blocking one route just diverts the traffic to other routes.

Basically you can't stop drug trade or even put a serious dent in it as long as the demand is there. Solving the drug epidemic starts from within.

[Poopadoop]

"My kid's an alcoholic. I might not be able to bomb the liquor store, but I can burn down the bar down the road."

[TheSpoonald]

You also forget to account for the fact that blocking one route just diverts the traffic to other routes

If I didn't know better, I might say you're arguing *for* a wall here

[TheSpoonald]

"My kid's an alcoholic. I might not be able to bomb the liquor store, but I can burn down the bar down the road."

My lifeguard analogy was WAY better

[oskar]

Or its through underground tunnels, and a wall would stop that too.

fantastic

[Poopadoop]

If I didn't know better, I might say you're arguing *for* a wall here

Not really. I can see why people will think it will help, but people are wrong.

[Poopadoop]

My lifeguard analogy was WAY better

Congrats.

So, why the focus on stopping bad people from bringing drugs into the country (which never works) and not on stopping good people in the country from becoming addicts (which at least sometimes works)?

[TheSpoonald]

fantastic

Were you not aware that the wall prototypes have ground-penetrating radar, or sonar, or whatever scientific shit that can see 10 feet below the earth's surface?

EDIT: Before you say "what about a tunnel 11 feet deep?" the answer is "fuck off". If the cartels can dig a tunnel that deep, for miles, and have it not cave in, and not be detected.....then more power to them.

[TheSpoonald]

So, why the focus on stopping bad people from bringing drugs into the country (which never works) and not on stopping good people in the country from becoming addicts (which at least sometimes works)?

Dude...that's exactly what "Make America Great Again" means

Haven't we been over this?

[Poopadoop]

The biggest problem here is that at least some of your politicians are taking an easy line on the drug epidemic by blaming it on outsiders 'drugs coming in through the borders - arrrrgh!' . That's much easier than saying 'what is our society doing wrong when so many people feel the need to dope up - what can we do to fix things here?'

Making it harder to smuggle drugs won't stop people from smuggling drugs, it will just increase the price of drugs.

Getting a lot of people to stop taking drugs will not only fix their problem it will fix the smuggling problem.

[Poopadoop]

Dude...that's exactly what "Make America Great Again" means

Haven't we been over this?

I don't know what you're talking about here. What efforts has Trump made to get people to stop being drug addicts?

[Poopadoop]

I don't know what you're talking about here. What efforts has Trump made to get people to stop being drug addicts?

And before you answer 'he spent x dollars, arrrgghghggh!!!' let me clarify that I mean what has he done that's actually been effective?

[MadMojoMonkey]

The Government Accountability Office publishes an annual report showing that fraud, waste, and abuse in the government is enough to pay for many many many walls.

The Green New Deal costs enough to pay for 1000 walls.

If those things are wrong and need to be dealt with, then that's a wholly different discussion. It has absolutely nothing to do with my questions.

Unless your position is that those things you mention are "supposed" to do the work of a wall, but they're really bad at accomplishing what a wall will accomplish more efficiently, in which case, please elaborate and draw that line more clearly than the spaghetti squiggles you throw out as though they're linear thought.

It doesn't matter how else the money might be spent. Even if you could make an argument that there are more effective measures of border control....none of them are permanent. That's a unique feature of a wall, and it's kind of a dealbreaker. Voters have been misled on immigration too many times, going back to Reagan. If you pass a bill that puts sensors, patrols, and drones on the border....how am I to know that the next president won't just cut the funding for those things and leave the border unsecure again?

You can't un-build a wall.

lolwat? You just said what? FYI: check out the word "demolition." Fascinating concept. Goes back centuries.
Did you know that if you hit things with other things... the things break?
Get this... if you leave a wall alone for 200 years... it crumbles all on its own. I know... 2nd law of Thermo has some pretty wild applications, right?

Also, a wall without sensors, patrols, and drones = no difference if it's 5 feet tall or 50. If no one's watching, it will be breached, tunneled, laddered, whatever. That will take time, but how much time? IDK, but I think we can both agree there's nothing permanent about it once the manpower goes away.

And frankly, effectiveness and cost SHOULD NOT MATTER AT ALL. These are bogus, feckless, diversionary arguments.

Agreed. Now that you've discredited the positions that only you have brought up, can you get to the question?
(I bet you feel pretty burned by yourself, while also swimming in the pride of a sick burn. You're a complicated man.)

The election of 2016 was largely a referendum on Immigration. The winning candidate had a wall as the top plank in his platform. America voted for a wall. All the counter arguments about costs, necessity, effectiveness, and other measures were aired. The debate already happened. All opinions were heard, and a vote was taken. America voted for a wall. Democracy has spoken. The POTUS has a mandate to build the fucking thing.

Anyone who thinks that they have an argument stronger than that is just a desperate narcissist.

Wait... you said he was elected 'cause populism sticks it to the man.
You also said it was because Clinton was widely perceived to be a criminal (though that was a long time ago).

Which is it?
Maybe some of each?
Maybe not an actual majority on any of them, then? Maybe, but not necessarily, a majority consensus I mean.
Maybe some supported Trump to stick it to the man, others to build a wall, others 'cause Clinton is more criminal than Trump. Some a combination. Some non of the above.

The actual "mandate" thing you're talking about is making a pretty big assumption about why each voter supported Trump and how much overlap they had on specific issues.

At any rate... now that you've criticized the non-sequitur nonsense that you invented in response to nothing I actually asked,
can you answer the questions?

How else might the money be spent to address the same concerns?
Is a wall our best option?

***
I tend to agree that Trumps election was largely predicated on people who really liked shouting "build that wall." Personally, I think it'd be an expensive and epic failure to accomplish its stated goals, but I'm excited to run the experiment. If 'Murica wants a wall, then 'Murica should build an epic fuckin wall worthy of our name. If that's not the most cost-efficient solution, then so what. Is it awesome?!
I think a wall is a bad symbol. I think there are better ways to solve problems than by clawing onto an us/them mentality. However, sometimes it really is us/them. That's the brutal reality of the world and of humans. Maybe a wall is the best move. Maybe it's really us vs. them. I just really doubt it is in this case.
Walls around prisons? Yes.
Walls around nations? No.

[TheSpoonald]

Not really. I can see why people will think it will help, but people are wrong.

So what?

That's a serious question. So what?

America voted for a wall. Who or what would ever presume to overrule that? And what kind of sick deranged narcissist would do so on the grounds that "those people are wrong".

[MadMojoMonkey]

Drugs are killing people. If you're 40 years old in America there is almost ZERO chance that you don't know someone who has died of a drug overdose. Life expectancy actually dropped for the first time in virtually forever.

Now if you're going to tell me that you KNOW where all those drugs are coming from, and how they are getting in here.....then the question is "why aren't they being stopped"?

Now your argument completely fucking fails. Because if you KNOW where the drugs are.....go get them!!! If drugs are getting in undetected, then by definition, you have no fucking idea how they get in here.

Where are the drugs coming from? Big pharma.
Why aren't they being gone and gotten? The FDA has approved them.
They aren't "getting in undetected" except that they are totally in and not getting "detected" because big money has pushed through gov't approval before the consequences were well known. (Not necessarily the fault of the pharma companies that produced and sold the drugs. It depends what they knew and when they knew it and how they responded when they found out.)

The American opioid epidemic is home-brewed, and doctor prescribed medications causing drug poisoning is far and away the leader in drug related deaths.
Are you excluding this from your analysis? If so, why?

[Poopadoop]

So what?

That's a serious question. So what?

America voted for a wall. Who or what would ever presume to overrule that? And what kind of sick deranged narcissist would do so on the grounds that "those people are wrong".

Last time I checked, Mojo was right. America didn't decide between wall/no wall. They decided between Capt. Retard and the Lizard Queen.

[Poopadoop]

Who or what would ever presume to overrule that? And what kind of sick deranged narcissist would do so on the grounds that "those people are wrong".

I'll keep that in mind if I'm ever asked to make the final decison on whether or not to build the Wall. Right now, I'm simply talking about whether it's a good idea or not, and whether it will benefit the opiod crisis.