- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Nancy and Dems keep repeating open the government
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:29 pm to Cole Beer
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:29 pm to Cole Beer
quote:
I don't understand why Trump won't just accept their deal and re-open the government.
Because they already admitted hat they would act in bad faith. When Trump met with Nancy & Chuck awhile back, he flat out asked them if we reopen the government would they reconsider the wall. They told him No, so he left the meeting.
0
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:33 pm to tarzana
quote:
The longer this fracas goes on the worse the president looks.
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:35 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
I’m not quoting your entire novel you wrote, but keep in mind that Obama did the same thing in 2013 to not harm his pet project
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:38 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
No, that's not how it works. Apparently you've never really been involved in serious negotiations.
And you're wrong again. Nothing new.
quote:
I'm forever amazed at how your voice recognition software identifies the shite coming out of your mouth as words. Surely you're too spastic to actually be able to type.
That's a response to 'I don't care about the govt opening?' I type 100 wam (could do 120 wam back in the day). Sorry that you're a tard. I don't expect it to get any better.
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:41 pm to Zach
quote:
And you're wrong again
Note I said, "serious negotiations". If that was your approach, the negotiations weren't serious. Trust me on this.
quote:
I type
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:44 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:Who is ""extorting""?
Because you shouldn't negotiate under threat of extortion.
No bill has been sent to the POTUS!
I guess that is worth repeating for the slow learners.
No bill has been sent to the POTUS!
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:48 pm to Plx1776
quote:
Trump caved to rinos and dems initially, in the past, and signed off on spending bills that had shite in them that he was absolutely against.
...and he got $1.5 billion for a wall. The irony is that the gov't shutdown is hindering spending down that money on building the parts of the wall that've already been funded.
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:50 pm to ApexTiger
quote:
The purpose of the shutdown is to focus and get to work so that we can re open the government.
WTH does that sentence even mean?
Posted on 1/24/19 at 3:53 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
No bill has been sent to the POTUS!
Who would be the one to send it?
...oh, right.
Posted on 1/24/19 at 4:00 pm to Cole Beer
quote:
not even with his name on it.
Good lord there is some stupid talking points but this is asinine
This post was edited on 1/24/19 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 1/24/19 at 4:05 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:So AGAIN you are saying the Senate is extorting itself?
Who would be the one to send it?
Posted on 1/24/19 at 4:16 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Can anyone give a valid reason why not to put up a wall?
Is it 100% effective? No. We're not looking for 100%. We're looking for the most effective method. In the long run, one wall is cheaper than the rest of the options. How many billions have been spent over the years dealing with illegal immigration? Support that with some technology and an actual reduction in the personnel currently utilized (which is not effective, obviously).
Think of a neighborhood that wants some extra security...do they hire a guard and put cameras on each house? No, they put up a fence with limited entry points and hire 1-2 guards to monitor.
It's not 5.7 billion a year for the wall. The wall is not only the most physically effective, it's also the most cost effective...yes there is upkeep, but the reduction in necessary personnel to maintain a walled border versus an open border would more than cover that cost.
Is it 100% effective? No. We're not looking for 100%. We're looking for the most effective method. In the long run, one wall is cheaper than the rest of the options. How many billions have been spent over the years dealing with illegal immigration? Support that with some technology and an actual reduction in the personnel currently utilized (which is not effective, obviously).
Think of a neighborhood that wants some extra security...do they hire a guard and put cameras on each house? No, they put up a fence with limited entry points and hire 1-2 guards to monitor.
It's not 5.7 billion a year for the wall. The wall is not only the most physically effective, it's also the most cost effective...yes there is upkeep, but the reduction in necessary personnel to maintain a walled border versus an open border would more than cover that cost.
This post was edited on 1/24/19 at 4:18 pm
Posted on 1/24/19 at 4:27 pm to Steadyhands
quote:
Can anyone give a valid reason why not to put up a wall?
That's not how it works in the real life.
First you identify a problem.
Then you propose a solution.
Then you show how your solution will be cost-effective.
In other words, the burden of proof is on the one making the proposal. You don't just propose something and then tell everyone to prove you wrong.
And I'm not talking about all your anecdotes, or rationalizations as 'proof'. I'm talking cost-benefit analyses. The president just hasn't made a case out side of, "Muh WALL 11!1" and "Illegal immigration is a disgrace. ...a disgrace." You've got to actually PROVE how effective it will be, with like numbers and shite.
But I can make a case that we don't need a wall in one sentence:
Illegal immigration has plummeted since 2005, without having to build a wall.
Posted on 1/24/19 at 4:57 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:That was done.
First you identify a problem.
Then you propose a solution.
Then you show how your solution will be cost-effective.
It was done for the wall.
Dems signed off on it.
It was done many many many times over.
E.g., No wall, and the latest Migrant Caravan could not have been stopped in Tijuana.
If the next "Caravan" proceeds to an unwalled region, US taxpayers (instead of complicit Mexicans) will be stuck with the bill.
Posted on 1/24/19 at 5:03 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
It was done for the wall.
Link?
Page 4 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News