Trump asked how he will make Mexico pay for his wall...

[fredtoast]

(03-11-2016, 12:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 3. You do realize if we cut aid to Mexico and we redirect that money to construct a wall, Mexico is in a sense paying for the wall. Lefties ask "How's he going to make Mexico pay for the wall?" and when a reasonable method is given that falls into the "that doesn't count' category.

So, Mr. Political Expert, please explain why Trump refuses to say this when asked the same question over and over again.

I know why he refuses to say this and instead prattles on about visa fees and port usage fees.

Do you?

[JustWinBaby]

(03-11-2016, 01:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I know why he refuses to say this and instead prattles on about visa fees and port usage fees.

Because liberal heads explode when you try to explain the concept of net cash flows?

[GMDino]

(03-11-2016, 12:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to the obvious point that is not sticking home. He did not threaten to use military power against Mexico to build the wall. That's just something someone said in an attempt to increase circulations. The lefties eat it up. Even if he did threaten you have no ides if he "wants" to.

I wonder if the sold shovels or ladders in East Germany or in North Korea/

So you're saying the quote was false or made up.  Or that when he says he will use the US military strength Mexico won't want a war he's not threatening to use military power.


Also I wonder if you know the difference in the distance to cross, size of the boundary  and geography of those three locations?

[GMDino]

(03-11-2016, 01:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So if we continue to give $2 Billion in aid and Mexico writes us a check for $1 Billion Then you would consider Mexico paying for the wall?

Of course not...which is why all the sane people know Mexico is not paying for the wall that will never be built anyway.

But it is a great, really huge, distraction from anything of substance so the "poorly educated" will keep voting for him.

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 01:57 PM)GMDino Wrote: So you're saying the quote was false or made up.  Or that when he says he will use the US military strength Mexico won't want a war he's not threatening to use military power.


Also I wonder if you know the difference in the distance to cross, size of the boundary  and geography of those three locations?

Nope. I am simply saying he never said he would go to war with Mexico over the wall. Even when asked

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 01:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So, Mr. Political Expert, please explain why Trump refuses to say this when asked 

Mr Gutter in the house. I am out. Gonna leave this debate to the seat guys

[Vas Deferens]

(03-11-2016, 01:03 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: 2.  How much does a wall like that cost?  I mean, aren't most stadiums these days $1B themselves?  I know we're not putting up flat screens and whatnot, but damn sure seems like its going to cost more than 10 - 20B right? 

Trump’s dubious claim that his border wall would cost $8 billion

Quote:We spoke to a retired estimator and economist for one of the nation’s largest construction firms. He worked through some of the math, though he did not want to be identified publicly. Roughly, he said a wall of this type would cost at least $25 billion — and that is not counting a video system to keep watch on the border. Building the wall would also require at least 40,000 workers a year for at least four years, but he doubted it could be built so quickly.

[Rotobeast]

Maybe Trump will dump toxic/nuclear material 20 miles deep across the border, making it lethal to attempt to cross ?

Maybe he'll annex 50 miles per year, until the agree to build a wall ?

Could be a wall of bullets from automated turrets ?

Who knows with this guy !

[Benton]

(03-11-2016, 02:48 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Maybe Trump will dump toxic/nuclear material 20 miles deep across the border, making it lethal to attempt to cross ?

Maybe he'll annex 50 miles per year, until the agree to build a wall ?

Could be a wall of bullets from automated turrets ?

Who knows with this guy !

Ever been to Reynosa or many of the towns 50 miles south of the border? I'd bet even money Mexico would gladly give up the first couple hundred miles of landfills and towns in poverty.

The waste dump idea could work. But then it effects the soil on our side, too. I've never understood the wall as that's something you can go up and over. But a flaming moat? That's a deterrent (you go across, you burn, you dig under, you maybe burn).


Mark it down. Benton for President, 2020, Flaming Moats to Make America Greater Again

[GMDino]

(03-11-2016, 02:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nope. I am simply saying he never said he would go to war with Mexico over the wall. Even when asked

Damn...it's been so long I forgot the rule that it had be said explicitly and exactly to count.  Rather than everyone fully understanding what he actually said.

[fredtoast]

(03-11-2016, 01:56 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Because liberal heads explode when you try to explain the concept of net cash flows?

Thanks for proving the extent of your political knowledge.

I'll be sure to check back when I want more right-wing rhetoric instead of logic.

But forget about the liberals.  Why doesn't Trump give this explanation to his own rabid followers?

[fredtoast]

(03-11-2016, 02:56 PM)Benton Wrote: I've never understood the wall as that's something you can go up and over. 

Trump owns the largest ladder producer in Mexico.

[NATI BENGALS]

Man. The pro Trump arguements are getting weak.

If someone asked how are you going to get Timmy to pay for your lunch. And i said Timmy doesnt want to meet me in the street. Most people would think I was threating violence on Timmy to get him to pay for my lunch.

Only this is a presidential candidate that has said he would go after families and now is throwing around the word war like it doesnt mean shit.

So we would have a giant race war at home , multiple wars over seas , a war with mexico , and a douche president in charge of a world wide reality TV show. Sounds like a fantastic futuristic view.

[*bfine32*]

(03-11-2016, 04:29 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Man. The pro Trump arguements are getting weak.

1) If someone asked how are you going to get Timmy to pay for your lunch. And i said Timmy doesnt want to meet me in the street. Most people would think I was threating violence on Timmy to get him to pay for my lunch.

2) Only this is a presidential candidate that has said he would go after families and now is throwing around the word war like it doesnt mean shit.

3) So we would have a giant race war at home , multiple wars over seas , a war with mexico , and a douche president in charge of a world wide reality TV show. Sounds like a fantastic futuristic view.

1) Your analogy is off base and purposely slanted to make what Trump said appear more inciteful. A correct anaolgy would be: Members of Timmy's family keep walking across your yard, causing it harm; yet all the while you are paying their electric bill. You ask them repeatedly not to do it, but they refuse. So you say I'm going to put up a fence in my yard to keep Timmy's family from walking across my yard and being as his family members walking across my yard is the only reason I need this fence; him and his family are going to pay for my fence. Then for some reason someones asks your are you going to fight Timmy if he doesn't pay for the fence and you say; I've been working out; Timmy doesn't want to fight me. Nowhere have you said you would fight Timmy if he didn't pay for your fence.

2) He didn't throw the word around; he was asked the question and he actually deflected from saying Yes, we will go to war.

3) Which of those do we not have now?

[JustWinBaby]

(03-11-2016, 03:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Thanks for proving the extent of your political knowledge.

I'll be sure to check back when I want more right-wing rhetoric instead of logic.

But forget about the liberals.  Why doesn't Trump give this explanation to his own rabid followers?

Well, net cash flow has nothing to do with any rhetoric but with finance and accounting....something liberals often prove they don't understand, and when they don't understand or don't like something they attribute it to "right-wing rhetoric".  It's a very defensive reflex born of ignorance, apparently.

But, yeah, the net cash flow thing was a joke that also served to make a point, which you unintentionally illustrated exceptionally well, yet again.

Or is your point that, like all politicians, Trump is using rhetoric and empty promises to win votes? Not so much of an outsider, after all.

[SteelCitySouth]

(03-11-2016, 04:51 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: something liberals often prove they don't understand

"right-wing rhetoric"  

reflex born of ignorance

[GMDino]

(03-11-2016, 04:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) Your analogy is off base and purposely slanted to make what Trump said appear more inciteful. A correct anaolgy would be: Members of Timmy's family keep walking across your yard, causing it harm; yet all the while you are paying their electric bill. You ask them repeatedly not to do it, but they refuse. So you say I'm going to put up a fence in my yard to keep Timmy's family from walking across my yard and being as his family members walking across my yard is the only reason I need this fence; him and his family are going to pay for my fence. Then for some reason someones asks your are you going to fight Timmy if he doesn't pay for the fence and you say; I've been working out; Timmy doesn't want to fight me. Nowhere have you said you would fight Timmy if he didn't pay for your fence.

2) He didn't throw the word around; he was asked the question and he actually deflected from saying Yes, we will go to war.

3) Which of those do we not have now?

The highlighted means you will fight Timmy if he doesn't pay you...and you think you will win because you are bigger.  That's all.


Although in your analogy Timmy's family crosses your yard and most of them do it to go to work for you and one or two doesn't so you build a fence and charge everyone else left on Timmy's side of the yard who isn't crossing.  

[Benton]

(03-11-2016, 04:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) Your analogy is off base and purposely slanted to make what Trump said appear more inciteful. A correct anaolgy would be: Members of Timmy's family keep walking across your yard, causing it harm; yet all the while you are paying their electric bill. You ask them repeatedly not to do it, but they refuse. So you say I'm going to put up a fence in my yard to keep Timmy's family from walking across my yard and being as his family members walking across my yard is the only reason I need this fence; him and his family are going to pay for my fence. Then for some reason someones asks your are you going to fight Timmy if he doesn't pay for the fence and you say; I've been working out; Timmy doesn't want to fight me. Nowhere have you said you would fight Timmy if he didn't pay for your fence.

 

Well, 'war' and 'street fighting' aren't synonyms for a reason. Using your analogy it's (change to make it what he's actually saying in italics):

Members of Timmy's family keep walking across your yard, causing it harm; yet all the while you are paying their electric bill. You ask them repeatedly not to do it, but they refuse. So you say I'm going to put up a fence in my yard to keep Timmy's family from walking across my yard and being as his family members walking across my yard is the only reason I need this fence; him and his family are going to pay for my fence. Then for some reason someones asks your are you going to fight Timmy if he doesn't pay for the fence and you say: I'm going to kill Timmy.

[Benton]

(03-11-2016, 04:51 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Well, net cash flow has nothing to do with any rhetoric but with finance and accounting....something liberals often prove they don't understand, and when they don't understand or don't like something they attribute it to "right-wing rhetoric".  It's a very defensive reflex born of ignorance, apparently.

But, yeah, the net cash flow thing was a joke that also served to make a point, which you unintentionally illustrated exceptionally well, yet again.

Or is your point that, like all politicians, Trump is using rhetoric and empty promises to win votes?  Not so much of an outsider, after all.

[fredtoast]

(03-11-2016, 04:51 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Well, net cash flow has nothing to do with any rhetoric but with finance and accounting....something liberals often prove they don't understand, and when they don't understand or don't like something they attribute it to "right-wing rhetoric".  It's a very defensive reflex born of ignorance, apparently.

But, yeah, the net cash flow thing was a joke that also served to make a point, which you unintentionally illustrated exceptionally well, yet again.

Or is your point that, like all politicians, Trump is using rhetoric and empty promises to win votes?  Not so much of an outsider, after all.

You are making this way too complicated.

All I am asking is why Trump never uses this "obvious" explanation whenever he is asked how he will make Mexico pay for the wall.

And the only point your "joke" proved is that you don't know the answer.  Nothing "unintentional" about they way I proved that.