“Weak on border security” is a surreal policy phrase looking for content to attach itself to. It’s like “weak on Martian spies”... there is something very surreal about this whole thing. They keep adding details to the basic fiction of an insecure border. nytimes.com/2019/01/25/us/
Conversation
I think the reason it seems weird is that “believes in a wall” is the actual “weak on border security” position. Nobody who wants to be actually strong on border security would prioritize a symbol like that. They’d ask CBP what they want and give them that. More people probably.
2
1
If this weren’t the “WH side” of the story it would be pure crackpottery from a fringe cult like flat eartherism.
I mean, prayer in schools is a more real issue because enough people seriously believe in it. This is like one of Terry Pratchett’s small gods looking for believers.
1
6
I think even most of The Base is only supporting the wall as a political tactic. Unlike say Obamacare which many were supporting because they desperately need healthcare. The only people who literally believe in Wallabism are people who also fall for Nigerian prince scams.
Replying to
I think there's an element of "fitness signaling", in the Darwinian sense, that's viscerally appealing to supporters. The wall is ostentatious, sure; but it's showcasing *just how much* we're willing to invest in defending sovereignty.
Replying to
Yes, it's a political tactic, the primary goal is a pause in immigration. The value of a wall is that it takes effort to tear down, unlike just writing a new policy.



