BrooksBearLives said:

---

Trump is the kind of guy who goes to Olive Garden and brags he negotiated free breadsticks into the meal.

---

The Hamburglar in Chief would never be caught eating in an Olive Garden

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

Florda_mike said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

---

His problem is he's slowly realizing that outrage doesn't work anymore and he's really got nothing else to advance his failing political agenda.

Plus the left has to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or we'll call their asses out for being the hypocrites they are. This puts them at a major disadvantage for saying what they truly want to say.

riflebear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Trump is the kind of guy who goes to Olive Garden and brags he negotiated free breadsticks into the meal.

---

Obama is the guy who goes to Olive Garden and brags that his socialist policies worked to allow free breadsticks salad and even Water for everyone.

---

LMAO

Doc Holliday said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

---

His problem is he's slowly realizing that outrage doesn't work anymore and he's really got nothing else to advance his failing political agenda.

Plus the left has to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or we'll call their asses out for being the hypocrites they are. This puts them at a major disadvantage for saying what they truly want to say.

---

Don't quote FlordaMike. The guy can't spell Florida. He's an old racist that follows me around and I think he wants to make out with me.

Sorry, buddy. Wrong kind of Liberal.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

---

His problem is he's slowly realizing that outrage doesn't work anymore and he's really got nothing else to advance his failing political agenda.

Plus the left has to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or we'll call their asses out for being the hypocrites they are. This puts them at a major disadvantage for saying what they truly want to say.

---

Don't quote FlordaMike. The guy can't spell Florida. He's an old racist that follows me around and I think he wants to make out with me.

Sorry, buddy. Wrong kind of Liberal.

---

See what I mean

BBL is clueless as he doesn't know why I "misspell" Florida even though I've explained it numerous times here

LMAO on BBL

I'm beginning to think he's a prissy feminine gay but won't admit it unfortunately out of shame. Why feel guilty as his Democrat Party supposedly defends "LGBTQ" or whatever it is

Florda_mike said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

---

His problem is he's slowly realizing that outrage doesn't work anymore and he's really got nothing else to advance his failing political agenda.

Plus the left has to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or we'll call their asses out for being the hypocrites they are. This puts them at a major disadvantage for saying what they truly want to say.

---

Don't quote FlordaMike. The guy can't spell Florida. He's an old racist that follows me around and I think he wants to make out with me.

Sorry, buddy. Wrong kind of Liberal.

---

See what I mean

BBL is clueless as he doesn't know why I "misspell" Florida even though I've explained it numerous times here

LMAO on BBL

I'm beginning to think he's a prissy feminine gay but won't admit it unfortunately out of shame. Why feel guilty as his Democrat Party supposedly defends "LGBTQ" or whatever it is

---

BBL's been making an effort to be civil, Florda. Cut him some slack, 'K?

Oldbear83 said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

---

His problem is he's slowly realizing that outrage doesn't work anymore and he's really got nothing else to advance his failing political agenda.

Plus the left has to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or we'll call their asses out for being the hypocrites they are. This puts them at a major disadvantage for saying what they truly want to say.

---

Don't quote FlordaMike. The guy can't spell Florida. He's an old racist that follows me around and I think he wants to make out with me.

Sorry, buddy. Wrong kind of Liberal.

---

See what I mean

BBL is clueless as he doesn't know why I "misspell" Florida even though I've explained it numerous times here

LMAO on BBL

I'm beginning to think he's a prissy feminine gay but won't admit it unfortunately out of shame. Why feel guilty as his Democrat Party supposedly defends "LGBTQ" or whatever it is

---

BBL's been making an effort to be civil, Florda. Cut him some slack, 'K?

---

He does this. It's amazing how many times we are all talking and Florda comes in and crosses a line so spectacularly that the people he agrees with have to tell him to back off.

It's happened at least a dozen times. So sad.

riflebear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Trump is the kind of guy who goes to Olive Garden and brags he negotiated free breadsticks into the meal.

---

Obama is the guy who goes to Olive Garden and brags that his socialist policies worked to allow free breadsticks salad and even Water for everyone.

---

That analogy makes no sense.

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

contrario said:

---

This is exhausting. BBL thinks there isn't a deal that was made and nothing new came out of the tariffs threat. Doc, 83 and others think this is a groundbreaking deal and huge strides were made. The truth is somewhere in the middle and both sides are too hard-headed, or ignorant, to admit that.

---

I'm begging for details. I've been searching everywhere for something and finding nothing.

This is the closest I've found.

Quote:

---

The Trump administration has been trying to pressure Mexico to enter into a "safe third country" agreement, which would deem Mexico a safe place for migrants and make it harder for asylum seekers who pass through the country to wait until they reach American soil to file a claim.

But the deal announced Friday made no mention of the issue.
A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to share details of closed-door talks, said Mexico had expressed openness to the idea during negotiations, and said the two countries would continue to discuss the issue over the coming months.
Mexico has been insistent that it has not agreed to the provision, which would require approval from local lawmakers.
Instead, Ebrard said during a press conference in Mexico City Monday, if the deal announced Friday does not begin to drive down migrant numbers in the next 45 days, officials will open up new discussions in which the U.S. will again push for the safe third country measure and Mexico will propose establishing a regional refuge system in conjunction with the United Nations and the governments of Guatemala, Panama and Brazil three countries that are often starting points for migrants headed to the U.S.
"They wanted something else totally different ... to be signed," Ebrard said Monday. "But that is what there is here. There is no other thing." As for Trump's tweets hyping a secret measure? Ebrard said he'd provided a full account for transparency's sake.
Mexico fears that being designated a safe third country would only add to the number of asylum applications it receives. Those numbers have climbed dramatically in recent years and the government has admitted it does not have the resources to keep up.

As a practical matter, Mexico would have difficulty integrating thousands of additional migrants into a barely growing economy, making them targets to expand the ranks of Mexican organized crime groups.
Over the weekend, Trump also claimed another new element of the deal, tweeting that Mexico had "AGREED TO IMMEDIATELY BEGIN BUYING LARGE QUANTITIES OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT FROM OUR GREAT PATRIOT FARMERS!" The administration has yet to reveal the details of any such provision, and Mexican officials say no agreement on farm goods was reached as part of the talks.
Ebrard told reporters the talks had focused on migration, not commerce, and hypothesized that Trump was calculating an economic boost resulting from his decision not to implement the tariffs.
"We do not have a specific agreement on products of that nature," he said.

---

This is from the AP. They're non-political.
https://www.apnews.com/7bedd8e672dd4f6ca3ffe2b3fd78fe0f

And here's Trump waiving the "secret deal" on a piece of paper.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-repeatedly-flashes-piece-paper-claims-part-secret/story?id=63639120

And, of course, the stable genius waived the secret deal that he said HAD TO REMAIN SECRET in public, aaaaand people have already hacked the picture and read it.

Nothing new.

---

The AP is political, they are just not as political as other media.

---

Then cite a media source that isn't biased for proof Trump accomplished something here. Heck, cite a source that shares your bias, just make it a factual cite not one of riflebear's opinion tweets.

contrario: when you have what you describe it is not an impasse: the burden of proof rests with the one making the claim. That burden has not been met.

---

All media is biased. Comes from being in business and catering to a target audience.

I miss the old United Press International (UPI). They were biased too, but AP and UPI kept each other more or less honest because they would call out the really outlandish stuff, while today it's all about which team the media outlet joins.

---

OK, use a biased source then to prove that Trump is honest about big ag buys. LARGE.

---

You're more bitter and sour than usual today. quash. Everything all right at home?

---

All I did was ask you to provide a source. Again. All you did was duck. Again.

For someone who *claims* to value honesty you sure plug your ears when it comes to the tariffist.

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

contrario said:

---

This is exhausting. BBL thinks there isn't a deal that was made and nothing new came out of the tariffs threat. Doc, 83 and others think this is a groundbreaking deal and huge strides were made. The truth is somewhere in the middle and both sides are too hard-headed, or ignorant, to admit that.

---

I'm begging for details. I've been searching everywhere for something and finding nothing.

This is the closest I've found.

Quote:

---

The Trump administration has been trying to pressure Mexico to enter into a "safe third country" agreement, which would deem Mexico a safe place for migrants and make it harder for asylum seekers who pass through the country to wait until they reach American soil to file a claim.

But the deal announced Friday made no mention of the issue.
A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to share details of closed-door talks, said Mexico had expressed openness to the idea during negotiations, and said the two countries would continue to discuss the issue over the coming months.
Mexico has been insistent that it has not agreed to the provision, which would require approval from local lawmakers.
Instead, Ebrard said during a press conference in Mexico City Monday, if the deal announced Friday does not begin to drive down migrant numbers in the next 45 days, officials will open up new discussions in which the U.S. will again push for the safe third country measure and Mexico will propose establishing a regional refuge system in conjunction with the United Nations and the governments of Guatemala, Panama and Brazil three countries that are often starting points for migrants headed to the U.S.
"They wanted something else totally different ... to be signed," Ebrard said Monday. "But that is what there is here. There is no other thing." As for Trump's tweets hyping a secret measure? Ebrard said he'd provided a full account for transparency's sake.
Mexico fears that being designated a safe third country would only add to the number of asylum applications it receives. Those numbers have climbed dramatically in recent years and the government has admitted it does not have the resources to keep up.

As a practical matter, Mexico would have difficulty integrating thousands of additional migrants into a barely growing economy, making them targets to expand the ranks of Mexican organized crime groups.
Over the weekend, Trump also claimed another new element of the deal, tweeting that Mexico had "AGREED TO IMMEDIATELY BEGIN BUYING LARGE QUANTITIES OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT FROM OUR GREAT PATRIOT FARMERS!" The administration has yet to reveal the details of any such provision, and Mexican officials say no agreement on farm goods was reached as part of the talks.
Ebrard told reporters the talks had focused on migration, not commerce, and hypothesized that Trump was calculating an economic boost resulting from his decision not to implement the tariffs.
"We do not have a specific agreement on products of that nature," he said.

---

This is from the AP. They're non-political.
https://www.apnews.com/7bedd8e672dd4f6ca3ffe2b3fd78fe0f

And here's Trump waiving the "secret deal" on a piece of paper.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-repeatedly-flashes-piece-paper-claims-part-secret/story?id=63639120

And, of course, the stable genius waived the secret deal that he said HAD TO REMAIN SECRET in public, aaaaand people have already hacked the picture and read it.

Nothing new.

---

The AP is political, they are just not as political as other media.

---

Then cite a media source that isn't biased for proof Trump accomplished something here. Heck, cite a source that shares your bias, just make it a factual cite not one of riflebear's opinion tweets.

contrario: when you have what you describe it is not an impasse: the burden of proof rests with the one making the claim. That burden has not been met.

---

All media is biased. Comes from being in business and catering to a target audience.

I miss the old United Press International (UPI). They were biased too, but AP and UPI kept each other more or less honest because they would call out the really outlandish stuff, while today it's all about which team the media outlet joins.

---

OK, use a biased source then to prove that Trump is honest about big ag buys. LARGE.

---

You're more bitter and sour than usual today. quash. Everything all right at home?

---

All I did was ask you to provide a source. Again. All you did was duck. Again.

For someone who *claims* to value honesty you sure plug your ears when it comes to the tariffist.

---

Oh please.

Honesty is subjective, like your definitions.

For instance, you call yourself 'libertarian' quash, but to most conservatives you are clearly a liberal.

You hate Trump, you always have, just own it and move on.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

riflebear said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Trump is the kind of guy who goes to Olive Garden and brags he negotiated free breadsticks into the meal.

---

Obama is the guy who goes to Olive Garden and brags that his socialist policies worked to allow free breadsticks salad and even Water for everyone.

---

That analogy makes no sense.

---

Actually, it makes perfect sense (if you have at least half of a brain and a lick of common sense).

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "tax reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

I'm not obliged to accept your labels, quash.

I'm not 'ducking' because you're not accurate.

You can throw poo at the President all you want, but all you'll do is cover yourself with the muck.

Trump is every bit as honest as any of his predecessors, and while that's not a high standard, it's enough that you should realize you look the fool for trying to apply a special standard to Trump just because you don't like him.

Remember the guys demanding Obama provide a 'real' birth certificate?

That's you, boyo, just on the other team.

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "taxhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mexican-ambassador-us-admits-no-specific-deal-made-trump-buy-more-american-agricultural-1442991%3famp=1 reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

---

It depends on the meaning of "agreed." There is a mutual understanding that agricultural trade will increase significantly in the next few months, but no binding agreement that I know of.

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "taxhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mexican-ambassador-us-admits-no-specific-deal-made-trump-buy-more-american-agricultural-1442991%3famp=1 reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

---

It depends on the meaning of "agreed." There is a mutual understanding that agricultural trade will increase significantly in the next few months, but no binding agreement that I know of.

---

"Mexico has agreed to immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers!" What do you think Trump meant?

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "taxhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mexican-ambassador-us-admits-no-specific-deal-made-trump-buy-more-american-agricultural-1442991%3famp=1 reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

---

It depends on the meaning of "agreed." There is a mutual understanding that agricultural trade will increase significantly in the next few months, but no binding agreement that I know of.

---

"Mexico has agreed to immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers!" What do you think Trump meant?

---

I think he meant what the ambassador said, that Mexico expects to trade a lot more with us in the near future. Trump is a salesman, which makes his language difficult to parse sometimes. In this case I think he's focused on results and wants to call attention to what he believes is important. If he were a lawyer, like many politicians, he would do the same thing in more artful ways.

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "taxhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mexican-ambassador-us-admits-no-specific-deal-made-trump-buy-more-american-agricultural-1442991%3famp=1 reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

---

It depends on the meaning of "agreed." There is a mutual understanding that agricultural trade will increase significantly in the next few months, but no binding agreement that I know of.

---

"Mexico has agreed to immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers!" What do you think Trump meant?

---

I think he meant what the ambassador said, that Mexico expects to trade a lot more with us in the near future. Trump is a salesman, which makes his language difficult to parse sometimes. In this case I think he's focused on results and wants to call attention to what he believes is important. If he were a lawyer, like many politicians, he would do the same thing in more artful ways.

---

Honest question. Do you REALLY believe that?

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "taxhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mexican-ambassador-us-admits-no-specific-deal-made-trump-buy-more-american-agricultural-1442991%3famp=1 reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

---

It depends on the meaning of "agreed." There is a mutual understanding that agricultural trade will increase significantly in the next few months, but no binding agreement that I know of.

---

"Mexico has agreed to immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers!" What do you think Trump meant?

---

I think he meant what the ambassador said, that Mexico expects to trade a lot more with us in the near future. Trump is a salesman, which makes his language difficult to parse sometimes. In this case I think he's focused on results and wants to call attention to what he believes is important. If he were a lawyer, like many politicians, he would do the same thing in more artful ways.

---

Honest question. Do you REALLY believe that?

---

No, I think he wants us to believe he has a covenant signed in blood and as long as no one steals his Trapper Keeper we'll never guess it isn't there.

Sam Lowry said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "taxhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mexican-ambassador-us-admits-no-specific-deal-made-trump-buy-more-american-agricultural-1442991%3famp=1 reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

---

It depends on the meaning of "agreed." There is a mutual understanding that agricultural trade will increase significantly in the next few months, but no binding agreement that I know of.

---

"Mexico has agreed to immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers!" What do you think Trump meant?

---

I think he meant what the ambassador said, that Mexico expects to trade a lot more with us in the near future. Trump is a salesman, which makes his language difficult to parse sometimes. In this case I think he's focused on results and wants to call attention to what he believes is important. If he were a lawyer, like many politicians, he would do the same thing in more artful ways.

---

Honest question. Do you REALLY believe that?

---

No, I think he wants us to believe he has a covenant signed in blood and as long as no one steals his Trapper Keeper we'll never guess it isn't there.

---

LOL. That was funny.

I don't know if I'll give him the credit you do. Trump notoriously does his own thing. But you make an interesting point. +1 for the trapper keeper joke.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "taxhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mexican-ambassador-us-admits-no-specific-deal-made-trump-buy-more-american-agricultural-1442991%3famp=1 reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

---

It depends on the meaning of "agreed." There is a mutual understanding that agricultural trade will increase significantly in the next few months, but no binding agreement that I know of.

---

"Mexico has agreed to immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers!" What do you think Trump meant?

---

I think he meant what the ambassador said, that Mexico expects to trade a lot more with us in the near future. Trump is a salesman, which makes his language difficult to parse sometimes. In this case I think he's focused on results and wants to call attention to what he believes is important. If he were a lawyer, like many politicians, he would do the same thing in more artful ways.

---

Honest question. Do you REALLY believe that?

---

No, I think he wants us to believe he has a covenant signed in blood and as long as no one steals his Trapper Keeper we'll never guess it isn't there.

---

LOL. That was funny.

I don't know if I'll give him the credit you do. Trump notoriously does his own thing. But you make an interesting point. +1 for the trapper keeper joke.

---

Thanks!

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

quash said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

The foreign minister did in fact mention the 6,000 troops. He also stated that the deal involves extending the Remain in Mexico policy and accelerating the deployment of the guard, and that he considers it a fair bargain. Some people might argue that these are small concessions in exchange for canceling the tariffs. Of course, those same people were telling us last week that the tariffs were the worst disaster in modern history and would surely lead to the collapse of our economy if we didn't cancel them immediately. Let's hope Mexico shows progress in the next 45 days so y'all don't have to change your minds yet again.

And this all assumes we're to take Mexico's version of the story at face value. In fact both governments are trying to spin it to their own advantage, and the evidence is mixed. It's true that the national guard project was announced last March, but it was never presented to the Mexican people as having anything to do with border control. The reaction has been harsh, with the government at pains to emphasize that Mexico "kept its dignity intact." They were clearly under pressure during the lengthy negotiations, so I wouldn't necessarily assume they were planning to do all this anyway.

---

Let's dial that back down from 11. Tariffs weren't going to be the worst disaster in modern history, and not even the worst disaster ot Trump's presidency. Beyond the immediate effect of extra taxes (which wipes out any tax benefit from the ballyhooed "taxhttps://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mexican-ambassador-us-admits-no-specific-deal-made-trump-buy-more-american-agricultural-1442991%3famp=1 reform" for average Americans) there is the longer term problem of lost market share for American producers. No artistry in that deal.

Any sign of LARGE ag buys?

---

It depends on the meaning of "agreed." There is a mutual understanding that agricultural trade will increase significantly in the next few months, but no binding agreement that I know of.

---

"Mexico has agreed to immediately begin buying large quantities of agricultural product from our great patriot farmers!" What do you think Trump meant?

---

I think he meant what the ambassador said, that Mexico expects to trade a lot more with us in the near future. Trump is a salesman, which makes his language difficult to parse sometimes. In this case I think he's focused on results and wants to call attention to what he believes is important. If he were a lawyer, like many politicians, he would do the same thing in more artful ways.

---

Honest question. Do you REALLY believe that?

---

No, I think he wants us to believe he has a covenant signed in blood and as long as no one steals his Trapper Keeper we'll never guess it isn't there.

---

LOL. That was funny.

I don't know if I'll give him the credit you do. Trump notoriously does his own thing. But you make an interesting point. +1 for the trapper keeper joke.

---

Who needs a trapper keeper when you can just keep important documents in your front jacket pocket

Florda_mike said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

---

His problem is he's slowly realizing that outrage doesn't work anymore and he's really got nothing else to advance his failing political agenda.

Plus the left has to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or we'll call their asses out for being the hypocrites they are. This puts them at a major disadvantage for saying what they truly want to say.

---

Don't quote FlordaMike. The guy can't spell Florida. He's an old racist that follows me around and I think he wants to make out with me.

Sorry, buddy. Wrong kind of Liberal.

---

See what I mean

BBL is clueless as he doesn't know why I "misspell" Florida even though I've explained it numerous times here

LMAO on BBL


I'm beginning to think he's a prissy feminine gay but won't admit it unfortunately out of shame. Why feel guilty as his Democrat Party supposedly defends "LGBTQ" or whatever it is

---

I have met him a few times at football tailgates. He is not a small man and you wouldn't talk **** to his face. Why do you keep insulting real Baylor people?

Oldbear83 said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

---

His problem is he's slowly realizing that outrage doesn't work anymore and he's really got nothing else to advance his failing political agenda.

Plus the left has to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or we'll call their asses out for being the hypocrites they are. This puts them at a major disadvantage for saying what they truly want to say.

---

Don't quote FlordaMike. The guy can't spell Florida. He's an old racist that follows me around and I think he wants to make out with me.

Sorry, buddy. Wrong kind of Liberal.

---

See what I mean

BBL is clueless as he doesn't know why I "misspell" Florida even though I've explained it numerous times here

LMAO on BBL

I'm beginning to think he's a prissy feminine gay but won't admit it unfortunately out of shame. Why feel guilty as his Democrat Party supposedly defends "LGBTQ" or whatever it is

---

BBL's been making an effort to be civil, Florda. Cut him some slack, 'K?

---

So how do ya feel about this BBL character now?

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Brooks, you're unhinged. Like completely unhinged brother.

We know POTUS lives rent free in your head, but he isn't a king or dictator, and he will be out of office in 6 years.

Nothing bad or crazy is happening, we're not in a major war, the economy is on fire, people are happy and their buying power is tremendous.

There is simply the rise of populism because your political views have been at the forefront for the past 20 years. It's time to respect that not everyone thinks like you. OK. Coexist.

Calm down.

---

You only said one wrong thing. The economy is not on fire for BBL because he's probably either a government worker on on entitlements. Those are under attack with Trump. Hence BBLs Trump paranoia due to fear

---

His problem is he's slowly realizing that outrage doesn't work anymore and he's really got nothing else to advance his failing political agenda.

Plus the left has to walk on eggshells not to offend anyone or we'll call their asses out for being the hypocrites they are. This puts them at a major disadvantage for saying what they truly want to say.

---

Don't quote FlordaMike. The guy can't spell Florida. He's an old racist that follows me around and I think he wants to make out with me.

Sorry, buddy. Wrong kind of Liberal.

---

See what I mean

BBL is clueless as he doesn't know why I "misspell" Florida even though I've explained it numerous times here

LMAO on BBL


I'm beginning to think he's a prissy feminine gay but won't admit it unfortunately out of shame. Why feel guilty as his Democrat Party supposedly defends "LGBTQ" or whatever it is

---

I have met him a few times at football tailgates. He is not a small man and you wouldn't talk **** to his face. Why do you keep insulting real Baylor people?

---

How do you know I wouldn't talk **** to his face.

What's a "real Baylor people" anyway?

Why do you label people?

BBL is nothing but a prissy liberal that'll pick up his toys and go home when he gets his feelings hurt

I don't care what he is or where he came from! He's an anti American liberal is all

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Wow. You call names and then accuse me of labeling. Firing the sunset gun a little early aren't we?

Real Baylor people graduated from Baylor. This is a Baylor forum. Surprised I had to explain that to you.

Brooks is bigger stronger younger and smarter than you. I dont think you would call him names to his face. Internet name callers dont usually show up anyway.

---

Again what does it matter if someone graduated from Baylor or wherever?

Can we not criticize and question a professional student like BBL that happened to choose Baylor instead of somewhere else?

Are you insinuating those that didn't graduate from Baylor shouldn't be here? That's probably half this poli board at least truth be known btw

Half? I can only name three, but one of them actually attended Baylor for a few years. Half would be around 200 regular posters. Can you name 4 or are you just full of crap?

I labeled Brooks as a Baylor man. I am sure he is ok with that. You called him names.

And yes, this is a Baylor board. I wouldnt go on a Tech or Aggie board and be disrespctful to alumns. I would get banned pretty quickly. Instead Sicem tries to be tolerant and look what we get.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Half? I can only name three, but one of them actually attended Baylor for a few years. Half would be around 200 regular posters. Can you name 4 or are you just full of crap?

I labeled Brooks as a Baylor man. I am sure he is ok with that. You called him names.

And yes, this is a Baylor board. I wouldnt go on a Tech or Aggie board and be disrespctful to alumns. I would get banned pretty quickly. Instead Sicem tries to be tolerant and look what we get.

---

Funny how you pick and choose what question you answer and actually answered nothing

Very clever .... or deceitful?

Baylor man? Ha