30 Democrats In Puerto Rico With 109 Lobbyists For Weekend Despite Shutdown

[Rambunctious]

We already do with our taxes

Still not an answer.....how telling....

 

[Faun]

We already do with our taxes

Still not an answer.....how telling....

Of course it’s an answer. It doesn’t cease being one simply because you don’t like the answer.

 

[rightwinger]

From the Quinnipiac poll:

An overwhelming majority of U.S. voters believe that security along the southern border is a problem, with 48 percent saying that it’s a “serious problem” and 38 percent saying it’s a “minor problem.” Only 14 percent said that border security is “not even a small priority,” the Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll survey found.

Of course security at the southern border is a concern. That doesn't mean a wall is a good idea. There are lots better ways to deal with the problem than a dumb assed wall. Just because 48% say it is a problem doesn't mean 48% want a wall.

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Stiff penalties against employers, immigration reform, expand work visas,

All more effective than walls

None of those things will work without a wall...either that or gun towers and mine fields...take your pick....we don't just have a few poor people trying to cross...we have caravans full of poor people trying to get in....and drugs and killers and rapists....

Jailing employers will cause the jobs to dry up

A wall would be meaningless

 

[ABikerSailor]

Of course security at the southern border is a concern. That doesn't mean a wall is a good idea. There are lots better ways to deal with the problem than a dumb assed wall. Just because 48% say it is a problem doesn't mean 48% want a wall.

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

I saw a report where a journalist was shown one of the drug tunnels that they had found. The thing was 70 feet down, and went right under the border and a highway. Currently, the BEST ground penetrating radar is capable of going down 15 meters, or 45 feet, which is half of what the depth of the tunnel is.

Border Patrol, when interviewed, also said that they were finding new ones on a regular basis, as well as said that the only way they can find them is if they happen on them by accident, or if they get good intelligence as to where one is. Other than that? They have no way of finding them.

And the problem is, more are being dug every day. Even the BP agent said so.

 

[Rambunctious]

Of course security at the southern border is a concern. That doesn't mean a wall is a good idea. There are lots better ways to deal with the problem than a dumb assed wall. Just because 48% say it is a problem doesn't mean 48% want a wall.

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Stiff penalties against employers, immigration reform, expand work visas,

All more effective than walls

None of those things will work without a wall...either that or gun towers and mine fields...take your pick....we don't just have a few poor people trying to cross...we have caravans full of poor people trying to get in....and drugs and killers and rapists....

Jailing employers will cause the jobs to dry up

A wall would be meaningless

RW I know you know the hands of employers are tied...the dems put a rule in place that says employers con not refuse documents no matter how forged they appear....

 

[ABikerSailor]

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Stiff penalties against employers, immigration reform, expand work visas,

All more effective than walls

None of those things will work without a wall...either that or gun towers and mine fields...take your pick....we don't just have a few poor people trying to cross...we have caravans full of poor people trying to get in....and drugs and killers and rapists....

Jailing employers will cause the jobs to dry up

A wall would be meaningless

RW I know you know the hands of employers are tied...the dems put a rule in place that says employers con not refuse documents no matter how forged they appear....

Got a link to back up your claim?

 

[eagle1462010]

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

I saw a report where a journalist was shown one of the drug tunnels that they had found. The thing was 70 feet down, and went right under the border and a highway. Currently, the BEST ground penetrating radar is capable of going down 15 meters, or 45 feet, which is half of what the depth of the tunnel is.

Border Patrol, when interviewed, also said that they were finding new ones on a regular basis, as well as said that the only way they can find them is if they happen on them by accident, or if they get good intelligence as to where one is. Other than that? They have no way of finding them.

And the problem is, more are being dug every day. Even the BP agent said so.

Google is your friend. Lol

Use it.

 

[iceberg]

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

I saw a report where a journalist was shown one of the drug tunnels that they had found. The thing was 70 feet down, and went right under the border and a highway. Currently, the BEST ground penetrating radar is capable of going down 15 meters, or 45 feet, which is half of what the depth of the tunnel is.

Border Patrol, when interviewed, also said that they were finding new ones on a regular basis, as well as said that the only way they can find them is if they happen on them by accident, or if they get good intelligence as to where one is. Other than that? They have no way of finding them.

And the problem is, more are being dug every day. Even the BP agent said so.

then put cameras on the walls that will see a few miles.

makes me wonder how far out from a wall they'd be to start digging under it. to go 70' down and then say 2 miles into the US, thats some heavy equipment. i doubt you see tim robbins walking out in the desert dropping sand out of his pockets while he does this with a rock hammer.

 

[ABikerSailor]

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

I saw a report where a journalist was shown one of the drug tunnels that they had found. The thing was 70 feet down, and went right under the border and a highway. Currently, the BEST ground penetrating radar is capable of going down 15 meters, or 45 feet, which is half of what the depth of the tunnel is.

Border Patrol, when interviewed, also said that they were finding new ones on a regular basis, as well as said that the only way they can find them is if they happen on them by accident, or if they get good intelligence as to where one is. Other than that? They have no way of finding them.

And the problem is, more are being dug every day. Even the BP agent said so.

then put cameras on the walls that will see a few miles.

makes me wonder how far out from a wall they'd be to start digging under it. to go 70' down and then say 2 miles into the US, thats some heavy equipment. i doubt you see tim robbins walking out in the desert dropping sand out of his pockets while he does this with a rock hammer.

Actually, cameras wouldn't do much good. One of the tunnel entrances that the BP agents being interviewed said was in a bathroom, and the whole bathroom floor dropped down to the tunnel level.

And, while they don't use a rock hammer and drop stones out of their pockets, the BP agents said they do use hand tools to dig them (available from any hardware store), and they pack the dirt in 50 lb sacks and transport them away.

Considering that most tunnels begin and end in buildings, having a camera that can see a couple of miles isn't going to do any good.

 

[iceberg]

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

I saw a report where a journalist was shown one of the drug tunnels that they had found. The thing was 70 feet down, and went right under the border and a highway. Currently, the BEST ground penetrating radar is capable of going down 15 meters, or 45 feet, which is half of what the depth of the tunnel is.

Border Patrol, when interviewed, also said that they were finding new ones on a regular basis, as well as said that the only way they can find them is if they happen on them by accident, or if they get good intelligence as to where one is. Other than that? They have no way of finding them.

And the problem is, more are being dug every day. Even the BP agent said so.

then put cameras on the walls that will see a few miles.

makes me wonder how far out from a wall they'd be to start digging under it. to go 70' down and then say 2 miles into the US, thats some heavy equipment. i doubt you see tim robbins walking out in the desert dropping sand out of his pockets while he does this with a rock hammer.

Actually, cameras wouldn't do much good. One of the tunnel entrances that the BP agents being interviewed said was in a bathroom, and the whole bathroom floor dropped down to the tunnel level.

And, while they don't use a rock hammer and drop stones out of their pockets, the BP agents said they do use hand tools to dig them (available from any hardware store), and they pack the dirt in 50 lb sacks and transport them away.

Considering that most tunnels begin and end in buildings, having a camera that can see a couple of miles isn't going to do any good.

fair point on the "inside buildings" part. i was speaking more from remote areas but if they don't usually put them there, my camera idea doesn't fit the scenario. also - point taken on my dropping gravel sarcasm - it didn't fit the situation you were speaking of either.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Of course security at the southern border is a concern. That doesn't mean a wall is a good idea. There are lots better ways to deal with the problem than a dumb assed wall. Just because 48% say it is a problem doesn't mean 48% want a wall.

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

As a person that came from a construction family, I can tell you those tunnels take months to years to build, depending on how articulate they are. El Chapo spent a million dollars just on one tunnel.

But I would rather them waste time on tunnels than just bringing drugs or people over in a few minutes each pass. And like the border patrol agents say, they are eventually found.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

As a person that came from a construction family, I can tell you those tunnels take months to years to build, depending on how articulate they are. El Chapo spent a million dollars just on one tunnel.

But I would rather them waste time on tunnels than just bringing drugs or people over in a few minutes each pass. And like the border patrol agents say, they are eventually found.

You DO realize that after those tunnels are built, that drugs and people can come over in a few minutes on each pass, only this time they are unable to be detected?

And................the BP agents said that the only way they find a tunnel is if they accidentally stumble on them, or they get solid human intelligence on where they are at.

 

[BULLDOG]

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

I saw a report where a journalist was shown one of the drug tunnels that they had found. The thing was 70 feet down, and went right under the border and a highway. Currently, the BEST ground penetrating radar is capable of going down 15 meters, or 45 feet, which is half of what the depth of the tunnel is.

Border Patrol, when interviewed, also said that they were finding new ones on a regular basis, as well as said that the only way they can find them is if they happen on them by accident, or if they get good intelligence as to where one is. Other than that? They have no way of finding them.

And the problem is, more are being dug every day. Even the BP agent said so.

then put cameras on the walls that will see a few miles.

makes me wonder how far out from a wall they'd be to start digging under it. to go 70' down and then say 2 miles into the US, thats some heavy equipment. i doubt you see tim robbins walking out in the desert dropping sand out of his pockets while he does this with a rock hammer.

The reports I've seen show them working from inside a warehouse 1/4 to 1/2 mile from the border. Excavated soil is loaded into trucks inside the warehouse and hauled to a dump site miles away.

 

[BULLDOG]

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

As a person that came from a construction family, I can tell you those tunnels take months to years to build, depending on how articulate they are. El Chapo spent a million dollars just on one tunnel.

But I would rather them waste time on tunnels than just bringing drugs or people over in a few minutes each pass. And like the border patrol agents say, they are eventually found.

You do't know what you are talking about. 36" and larger pipelines are regularly drilled under rivers all across the country and have been for quite a while.
https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endange...e/2013noa/pdf/nisourcehcpfinalappndxj_hdd.pdf

 

[eagle1462010]

This system isn't military grade and can detect tunnels up to 1000 feet in the ground.

Boogles the mind how uniformed some are in the age of the internet.

 

[hunarcy]

A Quinnipiac poll of 1,147 voters reached on landlines or cell phones from Dec. 12-17 found that 54 percent of respondents opposed the wall and 43 percent supported it. A Harvard CAPS/Harris online survey of 1,407 registered voters conducted Dec. 24-26 found that 56 percent of those surveyed did not support a wall, while 44 percent did.

Just 35 percent of those surveyed supported including money for the wall in a federal spending bill, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll of 2,440 adults conducted online Dec. 21-25.

More than two-thirds of Americans don’t think the wall should be a priority, according to a poll of 1,075 adults by NPR, PBS News Hour and Marist. That poll was conducted Nov. 28-Dec. 4 using live telephone interviews to reach both landlines and cell phones.

Regardless of Americans’ opinions about the wall, they’re not happy with how the government shutdown is being handled by either Congress or Trump. Just 18 percent of Americans polled say they approve of how Congress has handled the shutdown, with 60 percent disapproving, a new HuffPost/YouGov survey finds. As for Trump, 38 percent approve of how he’s handling it, and 49 percent disapprove, according to the poll.

From the Quinnipiac poll:

An overwhelming majority of U.S. voters believe that security along the southern border is a problem, with 48 percent saying that it’s a “serious problem” and 38 percent saying it’s a “minor problem.” Only 14 percent said that border security is “not even a small priority,” the Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll survey found.

Of course security at the southern border is a concern. That doesn't mean a wall is a good idea. There are lots better ways to deal with the problem than a dumb assed wall. Just because 48% say it is a problem doesn't mean 48% want a wall.

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Stiff penalties against employers, immigration reform, expand work visas,

All more effective than walls

Simplistic pablum that does nothing to solve the problems. Try again.

 

[hunarcy]

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

I saw a report where a journalist was shown one of the drug tunnels that they had found. The thing was 70 feet down, and went right under the border and a highway. Currently, the BEST ground penetrating radar is capable of going down 15 meters, or 45 feet, which is half of what the depth of the tunnel is.

Border Patrol, when interviewed, also said that they were finding new ones on a regular basis, as well as said that the only way they can find them is if they happen on them by accident, or if they get good intelligence as to where one is. Other than that? They have no way of finding them.

And the problem is, more are being dug every day. Even the BP agent said so.

No one said that the wall would stop ALL those who would illegally enter. But, a wall would stop many.

 

[Oldstyle]

Well...since all of you liberals in America would disapprove of Trump even if he ended world hunger...got rid of every nuclear weapon on the planet...and ended global warming forever...I'm not shocked that you disapprove of his wanting to secure the border!

Securing the border is the right thing to do. It should have been done decades ago but you liberals reneged on the deal that Tip O'Neil made with Ronald Reagan to do just that.

Why don't you get back with me after he ends world hunger and gets rif of all the nuclear weapons on the planet, or stops global climate change, and I'll reevaluate that pig. So far, he's just been a spoiled despot who cares more about himself than the country. Building a useless wall and securing the border aren't the same thing.

Why would a wall be "useless"? The reason Democrats don't want a wall is that it WILL keep people from crossing the border that they want as future Democratic voters. If the wall really were useless then they'd be voting for it.

Are you against citizens voting any way they choose?

Not at all...what I AM against is flooding the entire country with illegals simply because you think they'll vote for you.

Are you against entitlements? Because if you aren't then you have to face the cold hard truth that you can't have open borders and an entitlement society because you can't pay for it. So which do you want most, Bulldog? The cradle to the grave land of entitlements that you on the left continually seek or the votes to keep liberal Democrats in power? You can't have both and trying to do so will destroy this nation.

Illegals don't vote dumb ass. I don't care what Hannity told you.

I didn't say they have voted...I'm staying that Democrats are counting on their votes in the future which is why they don't want a secure border now.

So you didn't answer my question...do you want a porous border or do you want lots of entitlements?

 

[Oldstyle]

Its not Trump's tantrum....its the American peoples tantrum...we want the border secure like they promised after 9-11....build the wall....

A Quinnipiac poll of 1,147 voters reached on landlines or cell phones from Dec. 12-17 found that 54 percent of respondents opposed the wall and 43 percent supported it. A Harvard CAPS/Harris online survey of 1,407 registered voters conducted Dec. 24-26 found that 56 percent of those surveyed did not support a wall, while 44 percent did.

Just 35 percent of those surveyed supported including money for the wall in a federal spending bill, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll of 2,440 adults conducted online Dec. 21-25.

More than two-thirds of Americans don’t think the wall should be a priority, according to a poll of 1,075 adults by NPR, PBS News Hour and Marist. That poll was conducted Nov. 28-Dec. 4 using live telephone interviews to reach both landlines and cell phones.

Regardless of Americans’ opinions about the wall, they’re not happy with how the government shutdown is being handled by either Congress or Trump. Just 18 percent of Americans polled say they approve of how Congress has handled the shutdown, with 60 percent disapproving, a new HuffPost/YouGov survey finds. As for Trump, 38 percent approve of how he’s handling it, and 49 percent disapprove, according to the poll.

From the Quinnipiac poll:

An overwhelming majority of U.S. voters believe that security along the southern border is a problem, with 48 percent saying that it’s a “serious problem” and 38 percent saying it’s a “minor problem.” Only 14 percent said that border security is “not even a small priority,” the Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll survey found.

Of course security at the southern border is a concern. That doesn't mean a wall is a good idea. There are lots better ways to deal with the problem than a dumb assed wall. Just because 48% say it is a problem doesn't mean 48% want a wall.

You don't believe that a wall is a good first step to establishing a secure border? Please tell me what the good first step should be.

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

So are you liberals ready to put more border patrol agents on the border? I don't think you are, Bulldog because I don't think you really want to secure the border.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

More border patrol agents, drones, more judges to deal with refugees, lots of ways that work to deal with the situation.

Those are great ideas and I hope they're included in any deal that passes. But what is so wrong about including physical barriers where a large number of people are walking over on a daily basis? The Rio Grande vector is really active, probably because there is no fencing or wall along the river. You have seen the people coming over in rafts. Sometimes they swim.
Then they walk through the desert, and most of them make it. A wall would be sensible there, if it could be built.

What’s wrong with a wall? For one, it would work fantastic, but two, a wall is there to stay. If Democrats ever get power again, they won’t be able to remove the wall.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

I just watched a news report where they showed THREE tunnels going under existing border wall.

Three.

They could spend the money on, oh, I don't know, things Republicans know nothing about.

Things like:

training

more border agents

equipment

drones

weapons

body armor

Instead, they want to spend billions on a pile of rocks because Republicans think rocks are "hi tech".

As a person that came from a construction family, I can tell you those tunnels take months to years to build, depending on how articulate they are. El Chapo spent a million dollars just on one tunnel.

But I would rather them waste time on tunnels than just bringing drugs or people over in a few minutes each pass. And like the border patrol agents say, they are eventually found.

You DO realize that after those tunnels are built, that drugs and people can come over in a few minutes on each pass, only this time they are unable to be detected?

And................the BP agents said that the only way they find a tunnel is if they accidentally stumble on them, or they get solid human intelligence on where they are at.

And so how do more drones, agents, weapons, equipment stop any of this?

In 2017, we apprehended over 310,000 border crossers. The wall will help stop people just like that.