Maybe we can make a replica of this border wall on our southern border. It actually has an understated beauty and millions of people visit it each year. They make money off of this border wall and it’s a national attraction, in China, nonetheless, it’s a tourist attraction. The funny thing is that the government is fighting over essentially what is currently in place and the combatants have all, one time or another, voted in favor of placing, repairing or replacing the exact same thing that they are arguing about. It wasn’t immoral in 2010, why would it be now? Why would you want to tear down an existing barrier and replace it with another barrier that would be just as effective or ineffective, however you glass full option points you toward. People are going hungry folks. Just replace the parts that are in need. Use the other part of the funding for more sophisticated methods, like building a real life Spiderman that will catch the drug dealers in his web, lol, we’re not there yet. Compromise is good for the soul, it also will put food on the table for many. These people will not be alright if you prolong this. They will not be ok. It’s difficult buying food without money. I know.

Be consistent in how you vote or how you represent the people. It’s not your view you are representing, it’s your constituents. While I get it, we all get upset at the person in charge, you want to maintain your principles and your representative views. If you decided prior to update, replace, or fix the barrier where it wasn’t effective or it was dilapidated, then stick to that. You shouldn’t change your views as the person who heads the Oval Office changes. The American people are looking for consistency and efficiency. There will be items where you will disagree and then you can stick to those principles and your constituents will thank you for it. But if you had already decided that you weren’t going to just build a whole brand new wall, which I think is a waste of money, then stick to that.

Update: Both sides have made their case, I still remain confused. Is it the money being spent that they object to or is it that it will be 30 feet tall, not that 30 feet will make that much of a difference. I agree that stopping people that feed off of other people’s misery for a profit is a must, i.e. people and drug smugglers and anyone else and I guess people that throw temper tantrums… maybe, but I don’t quite know where they disagree? It was too general of an argument from both sides to see what is holding back a compromise. The President is a better speaker when he is extemporaneous, Pelosi seemed like she was resolute, Schumer is from New York and after reviewing his argument, it seems that they both believe in effective border security and the problem is what they believe would be effective measures. I say open the government for two months on the agreement that they will come to an agreement and work towards a compromise. Illegal citizens make up less than 1% of crime statistics, so if the argument is, they’re just coming here to commit heinous crimes, then that might not be enough to sway reasonable people. It seems to me, that since this is how they support their families abroad, committing crimes would be counter intuitive to their needs and goals. I do agree though on stopping smugglers. I hate to say this, it generally isn’t people that just immigrated that take this country for granted, it usually is people that have enjoyed it’s freedoms for a lifetime. We don’t know how good we have it because we don’t know how bad we can have it. I leaned towards the Dems argument which seemed to be a more grounded argument. That being said, we should have permanently disturbed any drug smuggling coming over the border by now and with that being said, most drugs come by air, sea and even underground (tunnels) then it comes through land that is not a port of entry, so unless we can make the wall go 30 feet under the dirt, float on water or levitate, it will have hardly any impact on drug smuggling. I think an honest assessment of the southern border should be done and IF there is any sections that actually need a barrier rebuilt, then I think it would be a good idea to allow the campaign promise to become realized, because increasingly, it almost seems it’s about full filling a campaign promise against not allowing that campaign promise be realized.

Maybe we can make a replica of this border wall on our southern border. It actually has an understated beauty and millions of people visit it each year. They make money off of this border wall and it’s a national attraction, in China, nonetheless, it’s a tourist attraction. The funny thing is that the government is fighting over essentially what is currently in place and the combatants have all, one time or another, voted in favor of placing, repairing or replacing the exact same thing that they are arguing about. It wasn’t immoral in 2010, why would it be now? Why would you want to tear down an existing barrier and replace it with another barrier that would be just as effective or ineffective, however you glass full option points you toward. People are going hungry folks. Just replace the parts that are in need. Use the other part of the funding for more sophisticated methods, like building a real life Spiderman that will catch the drug dealers in his web, lol, we’re not there yet. Compromise is good for the soul, it also will put food on the table for many. These people will not be alright if you prolong this. They will not be ok. It’s difficult buying food without money. I know.

Be consistent in how you vote or how you represent the people. It’s not your view you are representing, it’s your constituents. While I get it, we all get upset at the person in charge, you want to maintain your principles and your representative views. If you decided prior to update, replace, or fix the barrier where it wasn’t effective or it was dilapidated, then stick to that. You shouldn’t change your views as the person who heads the Oval Office changes. The American people are looking for consistency and efficiency. There will be items where you will disagree and then you can stick to those principles and your constituents will thank you for it. But if you had already decided that you weren’t going to just build a whole brand new wall, which I think is a waste of money, then stick to that.

I can smell it. I can see it coming. It’s not all that strange of a story. People are foaming at the mouth at the chance of challenging President Trump for the Oval Office and they are going to make a crucial mistake, over confidence. While President Trump’s style of tit for tat makes him vulnerable, he has made some in roads that other presidents have refused to address. Trump has renegotiated several pacts, all the free trade pacts, and tackled China when no one would even try. He has also cracked down on illegal immigration, albeit I liked the old way better, but that plays strongly into his base and even leaks to some moderate lefties. He is getting us out of costly wars and the stock market seems to have no ceiling. People might disagree with his New York attitude towards civility, basically meaning civility is for the dinner table and no where else (please pass the potatoes), but that might not be enough to dethrone the king. He does have some weak points, climate change and immigration and the Russia debacle, but will that be enough to oust him in a robust economy? I don’t know that it will be. I will say though, if someone had stolen his phone or changed his password on twitter a long time ago, he would have a way better chance of getting re-elected.

There is one person that can definitely beat him, and it isn’t Joe Biden, sorry Joe, can’t call you a guarantee, bu there is one….. There’s always one.