NationStates

New haven america wrote:

Telconi wrote:
But it isn't a relative one.

Relative deterrence is like having a dog, If I have a big ol' loud dog, a burglar is more likely to pass on my house to attempt to burgle a house without a big ol' mean dog.

This doesn't work with something like border protection, a migrant cannot pass on to the other United States next door that doesn't have a wall. Therefore, he'll continue attempting to enter.

Border patrol has K9 units, deary.

Telconi wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:
You need to stop taking rhetoric analogy notes from Donald Trump.

Border Patrol has K9 units, so.

https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/alo ... ciplines-2

And this is relevant how?

The Rich Port wrote:

Telconi wrote:
And this is relevant how?

I don't know, it's your stupid analogy.

So you're saying that this dog in your analogy isn't a dog, but a wall?

Eastfield Lodge wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:
I don't know, it's your stupid analogy.

So you're saying that this dog in your analogy isn't a dog, but a wall?

Apparently, he's saying that what currently exists is like having a small poodle guarding your house. Deterrence to some burglars but not enough. What you need is a big ol' Rottweiler to really put the burglars off, and and apparently that role can filled by the wall.

The Rich Port wrote:

Telconi wrote:
And this is relevant how?

I don't know, it's your stupid analogy.

So you're saying that this dog in your analogy isn't a dog, but a wall?

The Rich Port wrote:

Telconi wrote:
And this is relevant how?

I don't know, it's your stupid analogy.

So you're saying that this dog in your analogy isn't a dog, but a wall?

Eastfield Lodge wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:
I don't know, it's your stupid analogy.

So you're saying that this dog in your analogy isn't a dog, but a wall?

Apparently, he's saying that what currently exists is like having a small poodle guarding your house. Deterrence to some burglars but not enough. What you need is a big ol' Rottweiler to really put the burglars off, and and apparently that role can filled by the wall.

Eastfield Lodge wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:
I don't know, it's your stupid analogy.

So you're saying that this dog in your analogy isn't a dog, but a wall?

Apparently, he's saying that what currently exists is like having a small poodle guarding your house. Deterrence to some burglars but not enough. What you need is a big ol' Rottweiler to really put the burglars off, and and apparently that role can filled by the wall.

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:
I don't know, it's your stupid analogy.

So you're saying that this dog in your analogy isn't a dog, but a wall?

That's how analogies work.

Their point was migrants wouldn't have any other choices in country so they'd sooner try and cross the wall than not.

Eastfield Lodge wrote:Apparently, he's saying that what currently exists is like having a small poodle guarding your house. Deterrence to some burglars but not enough. What you need is a big ol' Rottweiler to really put the burglars off, and and apparently that role can filled by the wall.

You're all missing the point of the analogy. Holy shit how can so many people not understand this analogy?

Telconi wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
Yes, I'm sure an obstacle that takes a few minutes to climb over will stop the kind of people who are willing to ford a fucking river in the freezing night to get to the US....

Which is a problem isn't it, there is no relative deterrence.

The Black Forrest wrote:

Telconi wrote:
Which is a problem isn't it, there is no relative deterrence.

Desperation will outweigh deterrence. If you are pretty much going to die and or loose your kids, you are going to go for it. The great wall of donnie will not stop the problem.

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:
I don't know, it's your stupid analogy.

So you're saying that this dog in your analogy isn't a dog, but a wall?

That's how analogies work.

Their point was migrants wouldn't have any other choices in country so they'd sooner try and cross the wall than not.

Eastfield Lodge wrote:Apparently, he's saying that what currently exists is like having a small poodle guarding your house. Deterrence to some burglars but not enough. What you need is a big ol' Rottweiler to really put the burglars off, and and apparently that role can filled by the wall.

You're all missing the point of the analogy. Holy shit how can so many people not understand this analogy?

Relative deterrence is like having a dog, If I have a big ol' loud dog, a burglar is more likely to pass on my house to attempt to burgle a house without a big ol' mean dog.

The Rich Port wrote:

The Empire of Pretantia wrote:That's how analogies work.

Their point was migrants wouldn't have any other choices in country so they'd sooner try and cross the wall than not.

You're all missing the point of the analogy. Holy shit how can so many people not understand this analogy?

Relative deterrence is like having a dog, If I have a big ol' loud dog, a burglar is more likely to pass on my house to attempt to burgle a house without a big ol' mean dog.

... Except that's not at all what he explained his analogy to mean. The wall is a deterrent, meant to DISCOURAGE immigrants from coming to America. It's a shitty analogy because it's using a different facet of a security system to do it. A dog is a dog, not a wall. A guard dog is indeed a deterrent... And America the country has guard dogs.

Except it's not, but I guess that doesn't matter to fuckin' anybody.

A better analogy would have been "Not having a wall is like having 3 walls to a house instead of 4". Now that's a shitty analogy as well... But it's better.

Telconi wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:


... Except that's not at all what he explained his analogy to mean. The wall is a deterrent, meant to DISCOURAGE immigrants from coming to America. It's a shitty analogy because it's using a different facet of a security system to do it. A dog is a dog, not a wall. A guard dog is indeed a deterrent... And America the country has guard dogs.

Except it's not, but I guess that doesn't matter to fuckin' anybody.

A better analogy would have been "Not having a wall is like having 3 walls to a house instead of 4". Now that's a shitty analogy as well... But it's better.

You quite evidently didn't understand the explanation, and have instead hung up on dogs being dogs, and therefore the same.

The Rich Port wrote:

Telconi wrote:
You quite evidently didn't understand the explanation, and have instead hung up on dogs being dogs, and therefore the same.

And you're hung up on a stupid analogy.

The wall isn't a deterrent, marginal or otherwise.

Moving on.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpos ... 73418566a9

Trump's dictator boner shrinks back.

"Congress should do this". OK.

President Donald Trump has rejected a plan proposed by a bloc of Senate Republicans who had hoped to break an impasse over the government shutdown, leaving Congress and the White House with little obvious way out of the extended battle over Trump's border wall.

Plus, Democrats were highly skeptical. They all remember the president and his allies ripping up a tentative agreement providing $25 billion in border security in exchange for a path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of Dreamers.

“You saw what happened last time. Trump backed out,” said Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

Cannot think of a name wrote:Trump won't even negotiate with his own fucking party.

President Donald Trump has rejected a plan proposed by a bloc of Senate Republicans who had hoped to break an impasse over the government shutdown, leaving Congress and the White House with little obvious way out of the extended battle over Trump's border wall.

Also, worth remembering...

Plus, Democrats were highly skeptical. They all remember the president and his allies ripping up a tentative agreement providing $25 billion in border security in exchange for a path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of Dreamers.

“You saw what happened last time. Trump backed out,” said Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

Rezmaeristan wrote:

The Alma Mater wrote:
So.. the shutdown is all the fault of FOX News ?

I've been a little behind on this, show clip please? I'm sure it's like on Youtube or something.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said last Tuesday that the president was willing to sacrifice his $5 billion demand for a border wall in order to keep the government open. Trump later changed his stance, leading to a government shutdown after Democrats and Republicans failed to compromise on a spending bill.

"The Senate voted 100-0 to pass a clean CR [continuing resolution] and sent it to the House," Costello, a Republican, said while speaking on MSNBC, referring to a stopgap measure that passed through the Senate Wednesday but did not include money for the wall.

"Sean Hannity and a few other people screamed fire. The president then fell in line behind Sean Hannity."

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

Cannot think of a name wrote:Trump won't even negotiate with his own fucking party.

Also, worth remembering...

First of all, Mr. President...

This is not how to authoritarian, not at all.

Second of all, you've gone completely rogue and will most likely be removed from the premises not by the Dems, but by your own damn party!

Cannot think of a name wrote:Trump won't even negotiate with his own fucking party.

President Donald Trump has rejected a plan proposed by a bloc of Senate Republicans who had hoped to break an impasse over the government shutdown, leaving Congress and the White House with little obvious way out of the extended battle over Trump's border wall.

Also, worth remembering...

Plus, Democrats were highly skeptical. They all remember the president and his allies ripping up a tentative agreement providing $25 billion in border security in exchange for a path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of Dreamers.

“You saw what happened last time. Trump backed out,” said Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

Infected Mushroom wrote:Maybe it will go on for 28 days

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

Cannot think of a name wrote:Trump won't even negotiate with his own fucking party.

Also, worth remembering...

First of all, Mr. President...

This is not how to authoritarian, not at all.

Second of all, you've gone completely rogue and will most likely be removed from the premises not by the Dems, but by your own damn party!

Wallenburg wrote:

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
First of all, Mr. President...

This is not how to authoritarian, not at all.

Second of all, you've gone completely rogue and will most likely be removed from the premises not by the Dems, but by your own damn party!

Seeing as congressional Republicans could easily reopen the government sans border wall if they really wanted to, this is little more than another scene in the last month of political theater.

Cannot think of a name wrote:

Wallenburg wrote:Seeing as congressional Republicans could easily reopen the government sans border wall if they really wanted to, this is little more than another scene in the last month of political theater.

This might be the theater they have to go through in order to sell their undermining the President at this point. They have to make the college try to meet the president so they can go, "Look, we tried to meet his needs and he wasn't agreeable so we had to turn to the democrats to get this done."

Infected Mushroom wrote:Maybe it will go on for 28 days

Big Jim P wrote:Oh, and if Congress got off their asses and passed a budget instead of this temporary funding bullshit, we might avoid these shutdowns in the future.