- Joined
- Oct 15, 2005
- Messages
- 20,177
- Reaction score
- 3,822
He ran on the promise of building a wall. Pretty obvious that it should be built, if America still has a functioning democracy.
Regardless of whether it's stupid or not, a waste of money or not, how does it reflect on American democracy if even a president cannot cash on his promises? Where's the incentive to vote if nothing will be done? When even the elected leader of a country is without authority?
Like with ObamaCare, or pulling out of Iraq, you had to get it done, because it was a large part of why people voted for the guy. If it hadn't been done, it would have reflected on the government even worse than an unfinished package or a premature withdrawal of troops.
A half-assed wall, or fence, is still better than no wall. At the very least it will serve to reinforce some kind of trust to the people that voted.
More recently, a wave of new congressmen and women ran on opposing Trump’s platform, and won overwhelmingly. Since the Congress controls spending and passage of laws, this is the relevant application of democracy to concern yourself with. Trump ran explicitly on funding the wall through direct payment by the Mexican government to avoid trade sanctions. He hasn’t gotten that payment, so the wall hasn’t been built. Congress is simply holding him accountable to his own campaign promises here.

