Random Politics & Religion #36

Good Times Donald, good times brah.

Deeps South votes Blue since 1877 switch’s Red in 1964 and stays Red.

Not a myth. Conspiracy debunked.

Also the “Southern strategy” wasn't an appeal to racism. It was an appeal to law and order and states rights. The left can only make the argument that concept of “states rights” has to be a dog whistle for racism. Which is an extremely shallow argument to make. As states rights is a foundational concept to America’s founding.

So every time a state switches to red its cause racism? No wonder you’re so ignorant if you believe something like that.

The reality is as the south became LESS racist it became MORE republican.

lol, where did he say that? You are the one making up the conspiracy that the South didn't flip Red in the mid-20th century (it did). Nobody has even mentioned racism, except you. You are going full Lordgrim on this one, keep it up.

The “switch” myth is further debunked because from 48 to 84 the southern states were swing states solidly democrat before the and solidly republican after then. This was the time when the old guard of democratic racists were becoming irrelevant and the GOP message of economic opportunity was taking hold.

<triggered>

lol, no its not. Again, why are you anxious to bring racism into your conspiracy?

Heres more people debunking this stale myth.

After how many trucks drive through the holes?

Second paragraph.

Chanti you are jumping way too far ahead, they can't even provide a good reason to BUILD the wall, much less try to justify the costs of maintaining it.

Nixon's code words were "forced busing" not "state's rights" and it was an appeal to racists in the north east as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

How many trucks drive through when there isn’t a wall vs when there is? Is it easier to drive through when there there is no wall or when there is a wall?

Lol at these “if it isn’t 100% effective we shouldnt do it” arguments. All of you likely lock your doors at night even though thieves can pick locks and just break windows. Why do we build walls around jails if prisoners get out anyways? Security is an illusion amirite?

You aren’t willing to defend the border, just admit it.

When NSA certifies safes and facilities to house classified material they use a standard based on time. It's assumed that a determined attacker will eventually compromise the security of the facility and gain access to material. They then determine a facility rated at level "X" would be capable of holding off attackers for "Y" amount of time. This usually results in safes being a certain thickness around key components and buildings having a certain number of doors, cipher locks and motion sensors.

The same idea applies to border security, by erecting a physical barrier you increase the amount of time it would take to cross as well as providing an indication that the area was breached. The longer an intruder spends in an open area sawing through a wall, the more time someone has to notice the intruder and call in ICE. And even if the intruder gains entry they still leave behind a very visible indicator of how and where they got in, allowing ICE to modify it's patrols and routines to be more effective.

Basically the wall servers the same purpose that locking your doors and windows do for homes. No home is going to keep out a determined intruder, at best we can hold them off and provide some sort of visible sign that the location has been intruded upon.

Yeah but what are they going to do about those tunnels?

And these words of wisdom from Trump?



Problem is either that proponents are pretending or are completely ignorant to the fact that the “bad guys” aka the cartels already have extensive tunnel complexes in place. That these organizations generate a GDP of small nations onto themselves. They have the firepower/funds to acquire firepower to render a physical wall obsolete.

So let’s stop pretending that if they intended to breach the barrier they’d waste their time with conventional tools.

Ignorant of what? I'm sorry that we don't jump to conclusions every time you post some inane link and pretend that it's supposed to mean something. Name one P&R topic in which you are vastly more educated than me.

Ever play Pitfall ? Just put some alligators in there !

Live feed of illegal immigrants:

If I know illegal immigrants like I think I do...they won't get past the alligators.

I'm pretty sure it is legal to booby trap the southern border. Land mines alligators bottomless pits. We have all sorts of "security" methods to keep em out !

America is terrible why would these sons of *** want to come here remember Trump is President. Stay in Mexico where it is paradise.

Meanwhile....

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-mexico-wall-funding-money-pay-us-border-government-shutdown-trade-deal-a8721341.html?utm_source=reddit.com


And yet who can forget:

Before you decide to take up the mantle to White Knight for your glorified indignation:

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/278255308009267200

Don’t be too slow to catch on.

Don’t be these guys:

Walls are immoral we should just shoot them as they cross the border save a lot of money and time.

I'm sure I could find a lawyer that would argue since they aren't US citizens killing them is perfectly legal.

Why don’t you name a topic where you haven’t been “Meh I don’t know guys, but both sides are the same, so yuk yuk yuk.”

This discussion is just getting absurd. The whole barrier thing boils down to statistics.

Can a border wall be breached? Duh, yes.
Can your home locks/security system be breached? Duh, yes.
So why use them? Because it decreases the likelihood of such an event occurring.

One thing that people forget about criminals is that the smart (and often the stupid) ones often aim for the path of least resistance. Every single deterrent that is in place (that the criminal knows about) decreases the odds that they will choose that particular target. Every potential action has a list of pros and cons, and the two are weighed to determine if the action is worth the potential cost of failure, similar to how any business works.

Is a wall going to stop every criminal every time? Duh, no. But it will be enough to tip the scales for many (the exact percentage being pure speculation), such that they either won't try in the first place or will get caught in the attempt.

What about tunnels, wall-breaching equipment, and other methods of subverting the barrier, you ask? All of those things require time, resources, manpower, etc. All of that is an extra bit of weight on the scales against attempting the crime in the first place.

So what we really should be talking about, is what percentage of crime could potentially be stopped with the introduction of a wall vs. the costs of putting up and maintaining it? It's not a yes/no question the way that you all are approaching it, it's a "how much" question.

I suggest we just put chips in illegal immigrants so the government can monitor them...

And if they *** about civil rights...well they aren't US citizens.

Lame attempt, considering that you also paint me as a far-right radical. Pick one and stick with it.

I should add that I find this hilarious from a guy who swears he's not a leftist but has argued from the left side of nearly every argument he's ever presented in here.

Remember when for the past 10 years people have bitched about the border and did nothing. A wall is something. At least Trump is doing something. Better than Congress.