The AVERAGE is 83-90 IQ. This is not good stock.
Posted on 04/09/2019 4:24:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
President Donald Trump made his plea during his 2019 State of the Union address, "Walls work and walls save lives, so let's work together, compromise, and reach a deal that will truly make America safe." Yes, there is ample evidence that walls can and do work around the world in curtailing illegal immigration. But when the president has at times claimed that most Americans want a wall, there is no evidence to support such a claim.
In fact, there is evidence that fewer people support an expanded border wall as a result of President Trump's handling of the issue. Emily Elkins' article, "Americans Used to Support a Border Wall. What Changed Their Minds?" appeared in The Federalist on January 14, 2019. It summarizes the poll results on the issue starting in 2007.
"Analyzing more than 150 polls conducted between 2007 and 2018 from the Roper Center iPoll Databank reveals that an average of 43 percent of Americans opposed building a border wall between 2007-2014. Opposition increased to 48 percent in 2015, 58 percent in 2016, and 61 percent in 2017, and then back to 59 percent in 2018."
A Gallup poll conducted in late January of this year confirmed that 60% of Americans oppose major wall construction. But that is not to say that Americans are not open to alternatives to deal with the illegal immigration problem. The Gallup summary states: "Though a majority of Americans reject major expansion of walls on the U.S.-Mexico border, three-fourths of the public favors another method of increasing border security -- the hiring of 'significantly more' border patrol agents."
Two things stand out in that statement. Americans don't support "major expansion" of the wall and do support hiring "significantly more" border patrol agents. The issue of a border wall and illegal immigration has been around for decades. It has now been so politicized that any meaningful compromise before the 2020 election seems a pipe dream at best. Neither side can give ground, or they risk pushback from their base in a critical election year.
Both parties are locked into their positions with no compromise in sight. But why should we look to Washington for the best way to deal with the border issue? Why not ask those who are forced to protect and manage our border: the border patrol agents themselves.
Border patrol agents know where the weak points are. They know where no wall would be needed. They have relationships with border agents around the world and know what systems work for various terrains.
Brandon Judd, president of the union that represents thousands of border patrol agents, has been a supporter of President Trump. He confirms the "humanitarian crisis" on our border. According to Judd, the Border Patrol Council conducted a voluntary survey last year of agents in Tucson, Ariz., and Laredo, Texas, and found that nearly 90 percent of them agreed that a "wall system in strategic locations is necessary to securing the border." Nearly 700 of the 5,350 border patrol agents in Tucson and Laredo responded to the survey.
It's certainly not the whole answer, but border patrol agents believe that a "wall system in strategic locations" would help. Instead of starting with politicians, maybe it is time we take the problem out of Washington and challenge a task force of border patrol agents to come up with a recommended plan to best address the illegal immigration, illicit drug trafficking, and MS-13 gang problem. Let them come with their recommendation for where to use a wall, security technology, or increased border agents and how to work best with the necessary Mexican authorities.
If you don't trust Brandon Judd because of his endorsement of President Trump, let border agents recommend and eventually choose the border agents they want involved in constructing the plan. Let them work independently with the goal of coming back to Washington with the plan. The only commitment needed from Washington politicians would be the agreement from both parties to work with the task force to shape and present the plan for an up-or-down vote without amendments in both houses of Congress.
It's time to listen to and learn from the people who deal with the problem every day. If their plan is not approved by the House and Senate and signed by the President, it would still provide valuable input to be considered for a future plan that just might pass when combined with a more comprehensive immigration plan.
Idiot NeverTrumpers.
It’s a good solution, however I would think that after 40+ years, they have already solicited the opinion of the border patrol. It then gets political, and their message to Washington is ignored.
What I think would work is to first off close the border to everything but commercial traffic and those with work visas crossing the border to go to work everyday. The second part is securing the border, according to ICE specifications. Have Trump bring in his best project manager to run the project. Finally, bring in the technology.
The poll question wanted to know if every inch of the border should be walled . I wouldn’t even agree with that -and I totally support the wall. GIGO
Anti-wall screed. Build that wall.
Hiring more people as opposed to buying a wall makes a lot of sense. Any idiot knows that we can’t build a wall along the entire border. Pick out the spots carefully and patrol the others. This combination is a win-win.
You are the idiot here. The wall is forever politicians come and go and can decrease the number of agents on a whim.
The substance is not the issue. The Dems don’t want the border secured. They benefit from both legal immigration and illegal aliens. They are just different sides of the same coin. Immigration will make the Dems the permanent majority party within a decade.
I would suggest you go to the mouth of the Rio Grande and travel to the pacific along the border. It will be obvious that a continuous wall is not required.
If you are lazy or fundless, you can trace the border on Google Earth . It will become apparent the wall is in many areas, of no real value
Walls are just force multipliers. They reduce personnel needs. We need to change our asylum laws, shut off the job magnet thru mandatory e-verify, increase interior enforcement, and fully implement the VISIT program to identify and deport visa overstays who comprise 40% of the illegal population.
Trump has not proposed building a 2000 mile wall. It is a phony strawman made up by the Dems.
A wall from Brownsville to San Diego. Nothing else will do. Accept no substitutes.
I’m old enough to remember the Cold War. Back then most people DID NOT want Reagan to build up our military, particularly our nukes, for various reasons (such as hating Reagan, or the cost, or trusting the Soviets, etc.).
Point being that national defense isn’t something that the clueless masses should be deciding.
More border patrol is worthless as long as they are mandated to merely be America’s welcome committee.
You can hire all the people you want an then they get told not to do their jobs. Can you do that to a wall?
The AVERAGE is 83-90 IQ. This is not good stock.
I call BS. Most people want this whole immigration debacle fixed. From a barrier, to an end to catch and release and an end to birthright citizenship & chain migration. In addition enforce our laws and remove those who don’t belong.
A wall can be blown-up or torn down, so let’s not forget needed statutory changes: eliminate chain migration; eliminate the diversity lottery; mandatory e-verify; reduce asylum admissions; easier deportation; punish employers hiring illegals; jail for forged documents; etc.
Why not loudspeakers on trucks broadcasting the border is closed, no amnesty claims allowed, no detention in America and awaiting is armed security. Heavily armed. Risk of injury and death certain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.