Tucker Carlson: The Left Fears Trumps Wall Because They Know it Will Work?

[Lammie]

Are you just playing dumb, or are you actually this misguided and deluded? I highly advise you to take a look at the australian immagration system, a system that has proven time and time again to WORK.

You simply send back boats full of illegal immigrants. You take NONE of them in, this is the only way to discourage people from risking their lives on these cranky boats. The only immigrants that get in are the ones who apply for an official visa, and can prove that they can benifit the economy one way or another (degree, expierence etc.).

Now ofcourse, this isn't 100% comparable to the situation the U.S. is in, but the same principal can be applied across the board.

SMALL DIFFRENCE: AUSTRALIA IS A MOTHERFUCKING ISLAND  

They already have a natural barriere making it much easier to simply send people back.

Don't want people in? You shoot. Want people in? You accept them for real.
Trying something in between won't work and have never worked and will never.

But again, if you want to build that wall do. It's not useful but I don't give a damn as you'll pay for it directly.

There's little or no difference between caravans coming to a border and boats coming to a shoreline.

There  are ALL KINDS of in-between solutions. Ending birthright citizenship coupled with work permits is an example. However the person still has to be identified, have a background check and such.

And yes, the people voted for Trump on this issue and the people want it. This is how you GOT TRUMP, the inaction and don't care attitude of the senators and congressmen on this very issue.

However, you are not alone with your opinion. You stand with the "cultural elite of Washington" who share your scorn and disdain for the wishes of the actual people. After the total chaos and the thousands of rapes and murders resulting from the recent "migrant caravans" into Europe, you guys really should have learned.

Hey, want more TRUMP-like people voted in? Just keep it up.

I've been seeing it in my own country (the Netherlands) for years now. The upcoming Marrakech Agreement that we are signing will only make illegal immigration WORSE by giving more rights to illegals.

Although the agreement is ''not binding'' it will rapidly be used in court by illegals using soft-law.

The current situation is that we have absolutely no idea WHO WE ARE TAKING IN, that's the entire problem, there are ''background checks'' but it's not a check you can really take seriously. For all I know it's already too late, and possible terrorists have already invaded, it's just damage control from here on out.

If you don't see this as a problem, then I truly have no idea what you're thinking, left or right, democrat or conservative, you can't deny that this is VERY, VERY dangerous to my, and ultimately, your culture.

Total chaos is on the horizon.

[allthingsluxury]

The movement is going global, there is a reason why you can see it spreading all over the world. It is a response to the neglect that has persisted for generations.

[cryptodv]

Fear-mongering is at it's highest right now, but Trump pulls out of Syria while also saying that terrorist are coming in through the borders of Mexico. 

[Spendulus]

Fear-mongering is at it's highest right now, but Trump pulls out of Syria while also saying that terrorist are coming in through the borders of Mexico. 

I don't have the impression there was EVER fear mongering to get support for the wall.

"No wall" is a position of laziness and apathy, and a "don't care, whatever will happen will happen." attitude.

"Build the wall" is a pragmatic and practical "can do" solutions oriented approach. Frankly it's ridiculously overdue.

[DireWolfM14]

~ it's stupid to believe any kind of wall will solve the problem.

It is stupid to believe the wall will solve the problem, and it's just as stupid to believe it won't help.

[Spendulus]

~ it's stupid to believe any kind of wall will solve the problem.

It is stupid to believe the wall will solve the problem, and it's just as stupid to believe it won't help.

In the real world, there is neither the straw man argument or any need for the rebuttal to it.

You know damn well the solutions has dozens of parts and policies and one essential part is that fucking wall!

[TECSHARE]

~ it's stupid to believe any kind of wall will solve the problem.

It is stupid to believe the wall will solve the problem, and it's just as stupid to believe it won't help.

In the real world, there is neither the straw man argument or any need for the rebuttal to it.

You know damn well the solutions has dozens of parts and policies and one essential part is that fucking wall!

However believing that letting millions of impoverished people in to the country will solve poverty is a perfectly acceptable conclusion.

[Spendulus]

~ it's stupid to believe any kind of wall will solve the problem.

It is stupid to believe the wall will solve the problem, and it's just as stupid to believe it won't help.

In the real world, there is neither the straw man argument or any need for the rebuttal to it.

You know damn well the solutions has dozens of parts and policies and one essential part is that fucking wall!

However believing that letting millions of impoverished people in to the country will solve poverty is a perfectly acceptable conclusion.

Some time ago, walking through some wild country, I came across the remains of a house and outbuildings perhaps two hundred years old. This was rather interesting, there were a total of perhaps ten buildings. Many had functions that were discernible, such as the shed where animals were slaughtered for meat.

The main house was small by our standards, of course. Some plants still grew where the vegetable gardens had been, onions seem to never die. The gardens were next to the house, and there was a rock wall surrounding them.

Now exactly how would they have done without that wall? There were wild pigs, and deer, rabbits, everything out there. And they're all hungry. Those in the home had dogs, too, who had a job to do both day and night. They had guns, and no doubt ate some of the varmints that crept in.

But without that wall, the garden would have never survived.

[mOgliE]

You people are incredibly blinded. I've never seen this in my life.

You're in fact not able to have a discussion, you're just plain bots.

You're talking and answering me exactly as if I said that I want the wall to not be built, that I want open borders, that I want to do nothing.

While my VERY FIRST POST is a post of congratulations to this popular initiative, saying that even if I don't think the wall is a good idea, the fact that the people are pushing it this way and actually paying for it is and example of democracy and how things should be.

Yet you're all simply seeing I disagree with the wall idea, hence putting me in the "he wants more refugees" table.


This is incredible, you're not only blinded, you're complete binary. This is the reason why you're called fucking nazis, not because of your immegration concerns, not because of your dubious ideals, but because you have only 2 points of view:
-Someone agrees with everything you say or believe  -> he's a gentleman and an intelligent being
-Someone slightly disagrees with the solution you propose but salutes you for the method and says if you do it this way you have the right to do it and government shouldn't oppose it -> he's a traitor, an idiot and just wants more rapes and crimes

You simply proved you're not able or not willing to have any kind of discussion.

Ahahahahahah
This is awesome xD
Honestly: the wall idea is stupid as fuck and Trump and his supporters aren't anyway better than Clinton and her supporters.

But to see part of the population actually tying a project together, directly raise the funds and trying to enforce this on the Nation, that's awesome! That's how democracy should be! Bottom-up not the other way around!

Respect to the man and the people trying to pull all of this! I disagree with pretty much everything he says and thought but at least he's seriously trying to do something he believes is right rather than just crying while doing nothing!  
(or waiting for the gvt to do it or him)

However, you are not alone with your opinion. You stand with the "cultural elite of Washington" who share your scorn and disdain for the wishes of the actual people. After the total chaos and the thousands of rapes and murders resulting from the recent "migrant caravans" into Europe, you guys really should have learned.

Hey, want more TRUMP-like people voted in? Just keep it up.

However believing that letting millions of impoverished people in to the country will solve poverty is a perfectly acceptable conclusion.

[TECSHARE]

You people are incredibly blinded. I've never seen this in my life.

You're in fact not able to have a discussion, you're just plain bots.

You're talking and answering me exactly as if I said that I want the wall to not be built, that I want open borders, that I want to do nothing.

While my VERY FIRST POST is a post of congratulations to this popular initiative, saying that even if I don't think the wall is a good idea, the fact that the people are pushing it this way and actually paying for it is and example of democracy and how things should be.

Yet you're all simply seeing I disagree with the wall idea, hence putting me in the "he wants more refugees" table.


This is incredible, you're not only blinded, you're complete binary. This is the reason why you're called fucking nazis, not because of your immegration concerns, not because of your dubious ideals, but because you have only 2 points of view:
-Someone agrees with everything you say or believe  -> he's a gentleman and an intelligent being
-Someone slightly disagrees with the solution you propose but salutes you for the method and says if you do it this way you have the right to do it and government shouldn't oppose it -> he's a traitor, an idiot and just wants more rapes and crimes

You simply proved you're not able or not willing to have any kind of discussion.

Ahahahahahah
This is awesome xD
Honestly: the wall idea is stupid as fuck and Trump and his supporters aren't anyway better than Clinton and her supporters.

But to see part of the population actually tying a project together, directly raise the funds and trying to enforce this on the Nation, that's awesome! That's how democracy should be! Bottom-up not the other way around!

Respect to the man and the people trying to pull all of this! I disagree with pretty much everything he says and thought but at least he's seriously trying to do something he believes is right rather than just crying while doing nothing!  
(or waiting for the gvt to do it or him)

However, you are not alone with your opinion. You stand with the "cultural elite of Washington" who share your scorn and disdain for the wishes of the actual people. After the total chaos and the thousands of rapes and murders resulting from the recent "migrant caravans" into Europe, you guys really should have learned.

Hey, want more TRUMP-like people voted in? Just keep it up.

However believing that letting millions of impoverished people in to the country will solve poverty is a perfectly acceptable conclusion.

Yes, I am sure all the past interactions I have had with you are not indicative enough of your ideology, and you were just about to introduce a reason based, logical debate to defend your position before you were so rudely interrupted. Get over yourself, or at least actually present the argument instead of crying about how we aren't interested in a debate (as you conveniently avoid one yourself).

[mOgliE]

Yes, I am sure all the past interactions I have had with you are not indicative enough of your ideology, and you were just about to introduce a reason based, logical debate to defend your position before you were so rudely interrupted. Get over yourself, or at least actually present the argument instead of crying about how we aren't interested in a debate (as you conveniently avoid one yourself).

As usual you don't read or don't think or both. I wasn't here to make an argument, I was here to congratulate the initiative presented by OP. You're the ones forcing a debate and all yelling at the fact that someone might slightly disagree with you. It's incredible how you're in fact exact copy-paste of the "offended left" you're all crying about.


Argument was presented already:

Said what I had to say. Thinking the wall will prevent illegal chaotic immigration is really a lack of imagination. They'll climb it, they'll dig under, they'll go by sea, they'll fly over... Wall is a high cost low efficiency mean.

There is no logical error in my post. I said it and I'll say it again, you want no illegal immegration there are only two solutions:
-Shoot anyone trying to pass
-Accept everyone trying to pass

Anything in between won't work. Try it if you want, but it won't work.

Wall will be costly and innefficient. Accept illegal migrants or shoot them. Wall can't stop people determined enough. People are travelling thousands of kilometers by foot in places you would never go to reach Europe. Why would they turn away for a simple wall in Mexico? Makes no sense.

[TECSHARE]

Yes, I am sure all the past interactions I have had with you are not indicative enough of your ideology, and you were just about to introduce a reason based, logical debate to defend your position before you were so rudely interrupted. Get over yourself, or at least actually present the argument instead of crying about how we aren't interested in a debate (as you conveniently avoid one yourself).

As usual you don't read or don't think or both. I wasn't here to make an argument, I was here to congratulate the initiative presented by OP. You're the ones forcing a debate and all yelling at the fact that someone might slightly disagree with you. It's incredible how you're in fact exact copy-paste of the "offended left" you're all crying about.


Argument was presented already:

Said what I had to say. Thinking the wall will prevent illegal chaotic immigration is really a lack of imagination. They'll climb it, they'll dig under, they'll go by sea, they'll fly over... Wall is a high cost low efficiency mean.

There is no logical error in my post. I said it and I'll say it again, you want no illegal immegration there are only two solutions:
-Shoot anyone trying to pass
-Accept everyone trying to pass

Anything in between won't work. Try it if you want, but it won't work.

Wall will be costly and innefficient. Accept illegal migrants or shoot them. Wall can't stop people determined enough. People are travelling thousands of kilometers by foot in places you would never go to reach Europe. Why would they turn away for a simple wall in Mexico? Makes no sense.

Ok, so you aren't here to make an argument, but you in fact made one, a poor one at that, which was quickly refuted. What you are describing is a textbook example of a logical fallacy called a "false choice" where two extremes are presented as the only solutions. The solution doesn't have to be perfect to produce positive results.

You made a poor argument, and people pointed it out. You want some one to kiss your boo boo and tell you its ok your ideas are dumb because you tried? You demand to be treated like an intellectual equal but you bring nothing to the table. You are like a child demanding to sit with the adults, but you still insist on eating your boogers in front of everyone at that table. Then you cry about the food that some one else hunted, cleaned, and prepared for you, and demand to be served a rare albino lobster instead as you pound your fists on the table throwing a fit.

[mOgliE]

Ok, so you aren't here to make an argument, but you in fact made one, a poor one at that, which was quickly refuted. What you are describing is a textbook example of a logical fallacy called a "false choice" where two extremes are presented as the only solutions. The solution doesn't have to be perfect to produce positive results.

Wall will be costly and innefficient. Accept illegal migrants or shoot them. Wall can't stop people determined enough. People are travelling thousands of kilometers by foot in places you would never go to reach Europe. Why would they turn away for a simple wall in Mexico? Makes no sense.

Did I say it wouldn't produce any result? I said innefficient.

You made a poor argument, and people pointed it out. You want some one to kiss your boo boo and tell you its ok your ideas are dumb because you tried? You demand to be treated like an intellectual equal but you bring nothing to the table. You are like a child demanding to sit with the adults, but you still insist on eating your boogers in front of everyone at that table. Then you cry about the food that some one else hunted, cleaned, and prepared for you, and demand to be served a rare albino lobster instead as you pound your fists on the table throwing a fit.

I ask you to read words, all the words not just the ones you chose.

Innefficient. Not "will produce no effect".

Saying the extreme solutions should be the ones considered because they're the most effective is NOT a false choice fallacy.

But again you don't read.

Oh and your whole metaphor is not really sharp as, again, I just came here to congratulate the man quoted in the OP. So I came at the adult table to cheer on someone, saying he had the right method if not the best goal, and got immediately caught by the rest of the "adults" because criticizing the goal is not something allowed here.

You're a special snowflake don't worry <3

[TECSHARE]

Ok, so you aren't here to make an argument, but you in fact made one, a poor one at that, which was quickly refuted. What you are describing is a textbook example of a logical fallacy called a "false choice" where two extremes are presented as the only solutions. The solution doesn't have to be perfect to produce positive results.

Wall will be costly and innefficient. Accept illegal migrants or shoot them. Wall can't stop people determined enough. People are travelling thousands of kilometers by foot in places you would never go to reach Europe. Why would they turn away for a simple wall in Mexico? Makes no sense.

Did I say it wouldn't produce any result? I said innefficient.

You made a poor argument, and people pointed it out. You want some one to kiss your boo boo and tell you its ok your ideas are dumb because you tried? You demand to be treated like an intellectual equal but you bring nothing to the table. You are like a child demanding to sit with the adults, but you still insist on eating your boogers in front of everyone at that table. Then you cry about the food that some one else hunted, cleaned, and prepared for you, and demand to be served a rare albino lobster instead as you pound your fists on the table throwing a fit.

I ask you to read words, all the words not just the ones you chose.

Innefficient. Not "will produce no effect".

Saying the extreme solutions should be the ones considered because they're the most effective is NOT a false choice fallacy.

But again you don't read.

Oh and your whole metaphor is not really sharp as, again, I just came here to congratulate the man quoted in the OP. So I came at the adult table to cheer on someone, saying he had the right method if not the best goal, and got immediately caught by the rest of the "adults" because criticizing the goal is not something allowed here.

You're a special snowflake don't worry <3

"I said it and I'll say it again, you want no illegal immegration there are only two solutions:
-Shoot anyone trying to pass
-Accept everyone trying to pass"

Hmmm looks different than "inefficient" to me. Looks exactly like that false choice fallacy I mentioned where you claim it either works or it doesn't.

If you had come to the adult table as an adult we wouldn't be having this particular conversation. Snowflake, that's... original. You ALMOST had a thought of your own for a moment there. It almost made sense too! You were so close! Keep trying.

[mOgliE]

"I said it and I'll say it again, you want no illegal immegration there are only two solutions:
-Shoot anyone trying to pass
-Accept everyone trying to pass"

Hmmm looks different than "inefficient" to me. Looks exactly like that false choice fallacy I mentioned where you claim it either works or it doesn't.

If you had come to the adult table as an adult we wouldn't be having this particular conversation. Snowflake, that's... original. You ALMOST had a thought of your own for a moment there. It almost made sense too! You were so close! Keep trying.

That was a summary of a previous post. Hence less complete because an answer to someone who was supposed to have read the whole thought.

The important part of the reasonning is that I say the two extremes solutions should be most considered because most efficient. Again read my whole posts don't just cherry pick what you need for your argument.

Can't say any better: read. If you can't, learn to.

[Spendulus]

.....
The important part of the reasonning is that I say the two extremes solutions should be most considered because most efficient. Again read my whole posts don't just cherry pick what you need for your argument.

Can't say any better: read. If you can't, learn to.

The important part of my reasoning is to call "Bullshit!" when I see it, and I, along with others, did.

[Quickseller]

The constitution specifically requires the president to protect the country against invasion. The various “caravans” and exactly this — an invasion — other illegal immigration is not far from that, if not also an invasion. The caravan is arguably an act of war, and the same for governments failure to do anything to stop it that are in a position to do so.

Tucker is right, a wall will stop both illegal immigration and the flow of illegal drugs that kill tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Americans every year. The later is harming millions of additional American lives.

Democrats have historically been opposed to illegal immigration and many prominent Democrats in leadership positions have specifically been in favor of a wall in the past. They likely don’t want Trump to have a win, nor an accomplishment.

[Spendulus]

....
Democrats have historically been opposed to illegal immigration and many prominent Democrats in leadership positions have specifically been in favor of a wall in the past. They likely don’t want Trump to have a win, nor an accomplishment.

Although they gave these concepts lip service, they did not act on them. It's seemed quite reasonable to consider both Repub and Dem as not really in favor of stopping the invasions of the past, or the 10-100x invasions of the future.

It's not clear why this is so.

[Quickseller]

....
Democrats have historically been opposed to illegal immigration and many prominent Democrats in leadership positions have specifically been in favor of a wall in the past. They likely don’t want Trump to have a win, nor an accomplishment.

Although they gave these concepts lip service, they did not act on them. It's seemed quite reasonable to consider both Repub and Dem as not really in favor of stopping the invasions of the past, or the 10-100x invasions of the future.

It's not clear why this is so.

I suspect Trump will make progress in this regard.

Neither side has taken action on the topic of illegal immigration likely because this is a topic that 'fires up' both Dem and GOP bases, and is something that is effective in fundraising.

IMO illegal immigration has gotten bad enough so it can no longer be ignored. Although the topic of illegal drugs entering our country is separate from illegal immigration, both enter largely via similar mechanisms, and illegal drugs are killing hundreds of Americans every day, and these are drugs that many take only because of addiction and would love to not have available to them.

[TECSHARE]

"I said it and I'll say it again, you want no illegal immegration there are only two solutions:
-Shoot anyone trying to pass
-Accept everyone trying to pass"

Hmmm looks different than "inefficient" to me. Looks exactly like that false choice fallacy I mentioned where you claim it either works or it doesn't.

If you had come to the adult table as an adult we wouldn't be having this particular conversation. Snowflake, that's... original. You ALMOST had a thought of your own for a moment there. It almost made sense too! You were so close! Keep trying.

That was a summary of a previous post. Hence less complete because an answer to someone who was supposed to have read the whole thought.

The important part of the reasonning is that I say the two extremes solutions should be most considered because most efficient. Again read my whole posts don't just cherry pick what you need for your argument.

Can't say any better: read. If you can't, learn to.

Oh, good thing I have you to tell me what the IMPORTANT part of the reasoning is. I don't know if I could have figured that out without you dictating to me which logic is a valid consideration or not. Read, that's... funny, coming from you. Let me know when you get done with Manufacturing Consent.