President Trump suggests declaring state of National Emergency in order to bypass Congress and build border wall

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,303
164
600
#1
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/co...eet-at-white-house-as-shutdown-stances-harden

President Trump stood firm Friday on his demands for a border wall after the second White House meeting with congressional leaders this week broke up with no apparent deal, warning Democrats the partial government shutdown could last "years" and saying he could even declare a "national emergency" to bypass Congress if necessary.

“We can call a national emergency [to build a border wall] because of the security of our country,” Trump told reporters in the Rose Garden, during a lengthy and impromptu press conference.

“I may do it,” he said, before adding, “If we can do it through a negotiated process, we’re giving it a shot.”
President Trump has signaled he will continue border talks through the weekend. The government has been shutdown for two weeks.
 

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
16,268
1,621
470
Brampton, Ontario
#2
If Trump gets the wall, it will secure his re-election next year.

It shows he can still outsmart the Dems, even when they control Congress. Republicans are running on borrowed time, so Trump needs fulfill his promises soon or the future of the country will be in jeopardy.
 
Last edited:
Likes: TheGreatYosh

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,303
164
600
#3
If Trump gets the wall, it will secure his re-election next year.

It shows he can still outsmart the Dems, even when they control Congress. Republicans are running on borrowed time, so Trump needs fulfill his promises soon or the future of the country will be in jeopardy.
If he gets a wall through dysfunction and power grabbing? Making the wall the absolute referendum on the efficacy of Trump's presidency is a poor move considering how poorly Americans think of the initiative.
 
Aug 11, 2018
558
420
205
#7
If Trump gets the wall, it will secure his re-election next year.

It shows he can still outsmart the Dems, even when they control Congress. Republicans are running on borrowed time, so Trump needs fulfill his promises soon or the future of the country will be in jeopardy.
I wouldn't call a desperate attempt to push his wall through at the last second particularly smart considering Democrats offered 25(!) billion in funding for it less than a year ago which Trump declined. Now we're down to 5 billion if even that. It's kinda sad for someone who ran on making great deals.
 
Feb 27, 2018
537
655
225
Texas
#10
This has drug on too long to give in so the wall is an unavoidable reality at this point. If Trump gets the wall it assures his reelection. If you live in a border state where current illegal immigration deterrents aren't working you understand this better than those that don't.
 
Likes: Liberty4all
May 24, 2005
197
106
1,110
forums.wuggawoo.co.uk
#11
Last edited:
Jan 27, 2018
288
383
230
#13
I was thinking, is a wall really a 16th century solution to a 21st century problem? What technologies do the border law breakers use that make a wall useless. Is a door to your home also a 16th century solution?

The wall will likely have cameras and drones and all sorts of toys to help border agents. Seems like a reasonable solution but will certainly look jarring.
 
Aug 11, 2018
558
420
205
#15
Last edited:
Apr 9, 2009
27,004
1,420
815
#16
This has drug on too long to give in so the wall is an unavoidable reality at this point. If Trump gets the wall it assures his reelection. If you live in a border state where current illegal immigration deterrents aren't working you understand this better than those that don't.
I live on the Mexican American border. I can assure you that those of us Texans who actually live on the border do not want the wall, much less have to pay for it ourselves.
 
Dec 3, 2018
839
1,276
215
#17
The wall is going to happen. It is not the solution the immigration crisis, but it is A solution - and there's not a lot of that being bandied about. So it has the support of a lot of people. Trump ran on this issue and he'll cash in every chip to make sure it happens.
 
Likes: pramod
Feb 27, 2018
537
655
225
Texas
#18
I was thinking, is a wall really a 16th century solution to a 21st century problem? What technologies do the border law breakers use that make a wall useless. Is a door to your home also a 16th century solution?

The wall will likely have cameras and drones and all sorts of toys to help border agents. Seems like a reasonable solution but will certainly look jarring.

It's not just a wall. It'll be a wall with 21'st century tech supporting it. Along with CBP. People just reducing it to a wall only are intentionally or not being obtuse.
 
Feb 27, 2018
537
655
225
Texas
#20
I live on the Mexican American border. I can assure you that those of us Texans who actually live on the border do not want the wall, much less have to pay for it ourselves.

And as someone who drives daily around illegal immigrants I'm telling you the shit as is isn't working. I also know folks along the border who DO want the wall so it goes both ways.
 

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,303
164
600
#21
How do you come to that conclusion? He campaigned on it and won.
That is not what a referendum is. And his border wall was not a leading cause for his victory, as cited by the people who voted for him. The economy was in 2016, and healthcare was the leading issue during the midterms.

Independently, the border wall polls in the negatives, with the majority of Americans opposed to its construction. This is the most generous poll for the wall so far, coming in at 53/43 against.
 
Dec 3, 2018
839
1,276
215
#22
Polls?
And Trump didn't even win the majority vote.
It says that 44% are in favor of it. By my estimates, that's still about 52 million people who want the wall. And that's just 44% of voters, which is a much smaller subset of all Americans.

Saying that the majority of Americans are against the wall is a bit misleading, especially when that majority is so small. 56% is hardly a dominant majority.

We're literally talking about a majority of voters, how can you not talk about the popular vote. lol
I swear this comes up in every Trump thread, and I know that it has been explained multiple times, but you people seem to intentionally miss the point.
 
May 24, 2005
197
106
1,110
forums.wuggawoo.co.uk
#24
It says that 44% are in favor of it. By my estimates, that's still about 52 million people who want the wall. And that's just 44% of voters, which is a much smaller subset of all Americans.

Saying that the majority of Americans are against the wall is a bit misleading, especially when that majority is so small. 56% is hardly a dominant majority.


I swear this comes up in every Trump thread, and I know that it has been explained multiple times, but you people seem to intentionally miss the point.
lol you can't ratio votes against voted vs non voters like that...the hell
 

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,303
164
600
#25
It says that 44% are in favor of it. By my estimates, that's still about 52 million people who want the wall. And that's just 44% of voters, which is a much smaller subset of all Americans.

Saying that the majority of Americans are against the wall is a bit misleading, especially when that majority is so small. 56% is hardly a dominant majority.


I swear this comes up in every Trump thread, and I know that it has been explained multiple times, but you people seem to intentionally miss the point.
If Donald Trump got 44 percent of the vote in 2016, not only would he not be president, it would be the largest margin of victory in a Presidential election since the 70s.
 

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
16,268
1,621
470
Brampton, Ontario
#26
And as someone who drives daily around illegal immigrants I'm telling you the shit as is isn't working. I also know folks along the border who DO want the wall so it goes both ways.
I was watching a nightly podcast and they had a Houston guy on. The Canadian wanted to move to America and even with background checks and company sponsorships, he was denied. But the Houston guy said it's very easy for illegals to just meet up somewhere in Mexico and cross the border. They're even given credit cards when they arrive to start a new life.
 
Last edited:
Dec 1, 2017
1,431
556
240
#27
The wall works in certain areas already.
But there are certain areas where you don't need it.

I wish he would clear up exactly what he envisions the wall to be rather than say

"WALL, or SLATS, or whatever you want to call it." WTF is it then?

However. I tend to believe the wall is more about his ego. He is not as vocal or vehement on addition border security measures. Or anything actually, except the collusion thing.
 
Likes: JareBear
Dec 3, 2018
839
1,276
215
#28
lol you can't ratio votes against voted vs non voters like that...the hell
Huh? The article said that of the voters polled, 44% were in favor of the wall. If I was mistaken, it was assuming that the poll was speaking for all voters rather than just those who responded (the article seems confused on this as well).

If Donald Trump got 44 percent of the vote in 2016, not only would he not be president, it would be the largest margin of victory in a Presidential election since the 70s.
The article was a survey of voters on specific issues. That is unrelated to how many people voted for Trump.
 
Aug 11, 2018
558
420
205
#29
It says that 44% are in favor of it. By my estimates, that's still about 52 million people who want the wall. And that's just 44% of voters, which is a much smaller subset of all Americans.

Saying that the majority of Americans are against the wall is a bit misleading, especially when that majority is so small. 56% is hardly a dominant majority.


I swear this comes up in every Trump thread, and I know that it has been explained multiple times, but you people seem to intentionally miss the point.
The original post talked about the majority of the voting population. I'm sure that poll doesn't 100% align with that, but it's easily close enough. No need to move the goalposts on this, it was a pretty straight forward statement about the wall popularity among voters. (Though admittedly that poll isn't about a straight "Do you want a wall or not" but still) How is it misleading to say the majority doesn't want it when 56% doesn't want it? What world do you live in, jeez.

How are people missing the point where someone brings up the election as a counterpoint to someone saying the majority don't want the wall. It's a stupid point considering Trump didn't even get the majority votes. This has nothing to do with the electoral college.
 
Last edited:
Likes: azz0r

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,303
164
600
#30
Huh? The article said that of the voters polled, 44% were in favor of the wall. If I was mistaken, it was assuming that the poll was speaking for all voters rather than just those who responded (the article seems confused on this as well).


The article was a survey of voters on specific issues. That is unrelated to how many people voted for Trump.
I'm simply illustrating how wide a gulf 44 percent is from the majority. If Republicans got 44 percent of the votes on the general ballot in the 2018 midterms, the Dems would have the Senate as well, despite a historically unfavorable map.

So 44 percent is a stark minority when it comes to surveying political issues. We should keep that in mind in this discussion where Trump is signaling potentially forcing unpopular policies onto the country with unprecedented unilateral power using the military, bypassing Congress.
 
Likes: JareBear
Jul 28, 2018
107
99
150
#31
Now his dumbass followers (the same morons who believed Mexico would pay for the wall) are going to expect him to do this, and he's never going to do this. This was just another one of Dump's "I'm so manly!!!!" tirades.

Americans like the Wall just fine. People who happen to be present in this landmass (but aren't Americans) don't like the idea, sure.
Speaking of dumbasses.
 
Last edited:
Likes: azz0r
Dec 3, 2018
839
1,276
215
#35
How is it misleading to say the majority doesn't want it when 56% doesn't want it? What world do you live in, jeez.
I'm saying it is misleading to say the majority of AMERICANS don't want the wall when the poll only surveyed voters.

And I also think it is misleading to say a majority want something when that majority is small. You don't go around saying 56% of people means everybody wants this thing, because 6% is within the margin of uncertainty. More than 6% would have a different answer depending on how the question was worded, what day of the week it was asked on, whether they just watched CNN or Fox News, which people among the representative sample were asked, and all sorts of variables. If they did that exact same survey twice, I'd wager the result would be at least +/- 6% away from 56%.

How are people missing the point where someone brings up the election as a counterpoint to someone saying the majority don't want the wall. It's a stupid point considering Trump didn't even get the majority votes. This has nothing to do with the electoral college.
Trump lost the popular vote largely due to... you know what? Let's do the math. In New York City, Clinton had about 2 million votes more than Trump. Clinton had 2 million more votes than Trump in Los Angeles. Clinton won the popular vote by... 3 million votes. So, two cities represent the ENTIRETY of Clinton's lead in popular votes. They are big cities, sure, but do these two cities represent the collective voice of America by themselves?

Presumably, I'd bet that if you similarly removed NYC and Los Angeles from the polls on how popular the wall is, that 56% against may turn to 56% for.
 
Likes: Joe T.

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,303
164
600
#37
Didn’t every single poll have Clinton winning the election by a landslide? Why should I take polls seriously?
They did not. You're conflating the iterative polling leading up to election night with that HuffPo piece that said Hillary had a 99 percent chance of winning. All the actual polls lined up well within the margin of error for every state, and called the popular vote almost exactly.

Remember, Trump won three states Obama carried in 2012 by a combined 100k votes, impossible for polls to discreetly predict. Most polls gave Trump ~35 percent chance of winning, which is still a good chance relatively speaking, as we can all see.

But disbelieve polls all you want, it's no matter. It's interesting people look way back to 2016 to misinterpret data, instead of looking at the major election that just happened, which polls called accurately as well (Dems slightly over performed the models).
 
Likes: 404Ender
Aug 11, 2018
558
420
205
#38
I'm saying it is misleading to say the majority of AMERICANS don't want the wall when the poll only surveyed voters.

And I also think it is misleading to say a majority want something when that majority is small. You don't go around saying 56% of people means everybody wants this thing, because 6% is within the margin of uncertainty. More than 6% would have a different answer depending on how the question was worded, what day of the week it was asked on, whether they just watched CNN or Fox News, which people among the representative sample were asked, and all sorts of variables. If they did that exact same survey twice, I'd wager the result would be at least +/- 6% away from 56%.


Trump lost the popular vote largely due to... you know what? Let's do the math. In New York City, Clinton had about 2 million votes more than Trump. Clinton had 2 million more votes than Trump in Los Angeles. Clinton won the popular vote by... 3 million votes. So, two cities represent the ENTIRETY of Clinton's lead in popular votes. They are big cities, sure, but do these two cities represent the collective voice of America by themselves?

Presumably, I'd bet that if you similarly removed NYC and Los Angeles from the polls on how popular the wall is, that 56% against may turn to 56% for.
This entire post reads like you just get your right wing talking points online somewhere and don't actually get why and when to use them because you're completely missing the points I'm making and pivoting a lot.
 
Last edited:
Likes: azz0r
Nov 5, 2016
3,402
2,187
270
I don't care where (just far)
#39
They did not. You're conflating the iterative polling leading up to election night with that HuffPo piece that said Hillary had a 99 percent chance of winning. All the actual polls lined up well within the margin of error for every state, and called the popular vote almost exactly.

Remember, Trump won three states Obama carried in 2012 by a combined 100k votes, impossible for polls to discreetly predict. Most polls gave Trump ~35 percent chance of winning, which is still a good chance relatively speaking, as we can all see.

But disbelieve polls all you want, it's no matter. It's interesting people look way back to 2016 to misinterpret data, instead of looking at the major election that just happened, which polls called accurately as well (Dems slightly over performed the models).
I could be wrong but I thought numerous polls had Hillary at like over 90 percent heading into Election Day. Again I could be wrong
 
Likes: Ryujin
Oct 3, 2004
1,257
788
1,290
Montreal, Quebec
#41
The majority of voting capable Americans think the wall is a poor idea.
The majority of eligible voters in the US are incapable of putting themselves in a border patrol agent's shoes and asking themselves if an improved fence/barrier - or any fence/barrier - would make their job along that border easier/more efficient. Drop a few illegal immigrants in their backyards for a week or two and see how they feel after that.
 

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,303
164
600
#42
I could be wrong but I thought numerous polls had Hillary at like over 90 percent heading into Election Day. Again I could be wrong
Those were punditry polls that would analyze polling data through a lens of informal prediction based on prognostication rather than raw data and statistical models.

The data is all there for people to analyze again.
 
Likes: azz0r
May 22, 2018
3,147
2,174
240
#43
I would love to see the dumbass try this. The political fallout would be absolutely hilarious and it would set one hell of a precedent that neither party would want. He would catch shit from all sides. Not to mention that it wouldn't actually work.
 
Last edited:
Likes: azz0r
Jul 12, 2004
3,060
230
1,305
#46
They did not. You're conflating the iterative polling leading up to election night with that HuffPo piece that said Hillary had a 99 percent chance of winning. All the actual polls lined up well within the margin of error for every state, and called the popular vote almost exactly.

Remember, Trump won three states Obama carried in 2012 by a combined 100k votes, impossible for polls to discreetly predict. Most polls gave Trump ~35 percent chance of winning, which is still a good chance relatively speaking, as we can all see.

But disbelieve polls all you want, it's no matter. It's interesting people look way back to 2016 to misinterpret data, instead of looking at the major election that just happened, which polls called accurately as well (Dems slightly over performed the models).
Holy shit. This whole thread is filled with some fucking insane mathematicians.

We need to teach basic stats in high school. This is embarrassing.
 
Likes: azz0r
Jun 17, 2004
3,915
406
1,320
35
USA
#47
I'm saying it is misleading to say the majority of AMERICANS don't want the wall when the poll only surveyed voters.

And I also think it is misleading to say a majority want something when that majority is small. You don't go around saying 56% of people means everybody wants this thing, because 6% is within the margin of uncertainty. More than 6% would have a different answer depending on how the question was worded, what day of the week it was asked on, whether they just watched CNN or Fox News, which people among the representative sample were asked, and all sorts of variables. If they did that exact same survey twice, I'd wager the result would be at least +/- 6% away from 56%.
By this logic, any statistical analysis based off of a sample is "misleading". And could you please explain how you've calculated 6% as the margin of uncertainty? Do you have the sample size? That link isn't very helpful

And speaking of "how the question was worded", the poll cited asked who supported a wall, not who supports the USA paying for one. That number dips significantly once you ask the people if they want federal dollars to go towards building it:

Opposition to wall is 65-33 when cost is included in poll

and a more recent poll, that unfortunately doesn't show the disparity between "wants" and "wants to pay for", but can be compared to the other recent poll cited above:

Just 35 percent of those surveyed in the opinion poll said they backed including money for the wall in a congressional spending bill.

The wall is not popular by any measure. Even conservatives themselves can't agree that a wall is necessary, which is exactly why it hasn't happened. Even the Heritage Foundation agrees it is not the right strategy:

I am all for secure borders, an expensive border spanning wall that will require constant maintenance and be easily surpassed by those who want to get into the country for the wrong reasons is not the way to do it. It seems most people who actually analyze the economics of the project agree

Trump lost the popular vote largely due to... you know what? Let's do the math. In New York City, Clinton had about 2 million votes more than Trump. Clinton had 2 million more votes than Trump in Los Angeles. Clinton won the popular vote by... 3 million votes. So, two cities represent the ENTIRETY of Clinton's lead in popular votes. They are big cities, sure, but do these two cities represent the collective voice of America by themselves?

Presumably, I'd bet that if you similarly removed NYC and Los Angeles from the polls on how popular the wall is, that 56% against may turn to 56% for.
No

why is this BS talking point so popular? Los Angeles and New York City are both part of the USA voting block. They are just as much a part of the voting public as any and every other city. Taking them out of the national popular vote is meaningless, because once you do, you are no longer citing the national popular vote. You are instead citing the national popular vote minus the people who don't agree with you. The only reason you are able to push this bad math is because these areas happen to populace and easily grouped. Divide them up into a number of groups the size of the average overwhelmingly pro-Trump town and you will no longer be able to pull this shit because the talking point becomes a long list instead of two cities... And regardless of how you divide these cities, the overall national popular voter remains the same. How does that work???

When anyone is referring to the "majority" of American voters, or the "national popular vote", New York and California are very much, and should very much be, part of the dataset. To exclude them is completely arbitrary, unless you are studying demographics that make up the majority.
 
Last edited: