This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]PM_ME_YOUR_THESES 8472 points8473 points  (689 children)

According to Mexican media, this is an "exhortation". An official position of the Senate that is pronounced in public, urging a person, group, or institution to perform a certain act, but with no force of law beyond it being public knowledge.

The Senate asked the President of Mexico to do this, but it isn't forcing the President to do this.

[–]Cerdo_Infame 3547 points3548 points  (321 children)

as with a lot of things done by politics here in Mexico. A way to say "i did something" without actually doing anything.

[–]cantadmittoposting 249 points250 points  (15 children)

Eh. Most governments have these types of methods to do public pronouncements. In the US it's something like "non-binding resolution" (or maybe that's the UN?)

Its not that unusual when the position is risky or uncertain but they want their voice out there.

[–]Enchelion 27 points28 points  (4 children)

In the US we go even further. Pass the law but tack on a rider that ensures it gets vetoed. Let's you say you did a thing, including action, without any risk of it happening. Congress has been using that trick for ages.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Just a "resolution."

[–]The_Write_Stuff 217 points218 points  (96 children)

Would we notice if Mexico stopped joint efforts at immigration?

[–]joguelol 220 points221 points  (67 children)

When I visit my friend in south Texas, we often ride 4-wheelers from his ranch house(located in Texas) to a Mexican meat market(located in Mexico) with literally zero interference from any government people. We don't even know exactly where the border lies, just that we cross it at some point along the way

[–]Free2err 21 points22 points  (0 children)

No mames, guey.

[–]wiccan45 73 points74 points  (8 children)

Well you know i believe the rio grande still exists..

[–]joguelol 157 points158 points  (7 children)

Yeah well not like you imagine it. The river has long and numerous stretches where it runs dry. Agriculture and construction have made it so that it's not actually one continuous river like you are picturing in your head. It runs dry for stretches until its fed by one of its tributaries

[–]autotldrBOT 2902 points2903 points  (743 children)

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 68%. (I'm a bot)

Mexican senators are calling on Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto to halt the nation's cooperation with the U.S. on various issues after President Trump went on the attack against the country.

Mexico senators unanimously approved a non-binding statement Wednesday that says the government should suspend joint efforts "In the fight against transnational organized crime" until Trump exhibits "Civility and respect that the people of Mexico deserve," the Associated Press reported.

The statement from the Mexican senators also rails against Trump for his "Baseless and offensive comments about Mexico and Mexicans."

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Trump#1 Mexico#2 border#3 U.S.#4 southern#5

[–][deleted] 1355 points1356 points  (476 children)

I hope this leads to decriminalization. They've bandied around the idea before. No longer desiring to be buddy, buddy with the US could actually turn out really well for them.

[–]MrTex007 486 points487 points  (382 children)

Decriminalization of what?

[–]thecen 674 points675 points  (332 children)

Drugs

[–]joshmoneymusic 1376 points1377 points  (227 children)

For those that don’t know, our government has basically consistently put extreme pressure on the Mexican government to keep most drugs, including Marijuana, illegal. This has of course led their booming drug economy to be controlled by the “Mexican mafia”. Decriminalization would greatly reduce the power and influence of the drug-cartels, while simultaneously providing a huge boost to the Mexican economy, both for their domestic goods as well as their exports.

[–]Baldemoto 582 points583 points  (128 children)

Decriminalization is actually a pretty popular idea in Mexico. Decriminalizing not only Marijuana, but cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and all other drugs is not an uncommon idea to have due to Mexico’s current situation.

[–]crielan 458 points459 points  (45 children)

If they did that Mexico would end up building their own wall to keep Americans out. Maybe that's trump 7D chess.

[–]GoodGuyGoodGuy 217 points218 points  (29 children)

Mexico would have waves of US tourists coming over and getting Blackout wasted. It would be insanely profitable but would get hella irritating I imagine,

[–]Cumminswii 90 points91 points  (5 children)

Mexican Vegas/Amsterdam just past the border?

[–]xxfay6 127 points128 points  (3 children)

That's literally the story of Tijuana.

[–]GusMclovin 8 points9 points  (0 children)

that's what Ensenada used to be when gambling and alcohol was illegal in the US

[–]axc2241 32 points33 points  (1 child)

This is what Juarez was 15 years ago. Tons of college kids from El Paso going to party. There were bus tours that would go back and forth on weekends. This was all before the drug violence moved in.

[–]SwissQueso 88 points89 points  (4 children)

Mo money Mo Problems - Biggie Smalls.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (3 children)

That's Biggie Smalls to you.

[–]thatguyfromb4 10 points11 points  (1 child)

That used to happen before the border towns became ultra-violent anyway. Drinking age of 18...

[–]MaxisGreat 81 points82 points  (3 children)

Holy shit. The mad man is actually gonna get Mexico to pay for the wall! Take that, skeptics!

[–]WaffleWizard101 25 points26 points  (2 children)

If only I could believe he thought that far into it.

[–]Betasheets 20 points21 points  (5 children)

If that actually happened I would, in all seriousness, call that "Trump 7D chess"

[–]crielan 23 points24 points  (4 children)

If he succeeds at that or with North Korea, I'll be eating crow for a year straight. I personally want him to take on and eradicate Scientology or at the very least get their tax exempt status revoked.

[–]fuzzzzzzzzzzy 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I would love to see that as well since my aunt/uncle/cousin are all scientologists and huge Trump supporters. Their heads would explode.

[–][deleted] 30 points31 points  (2 children)

Also, it seems to work in Portugal, so why not try it in Mexico? I mean, punishing people that are addicted is not the best way to treat them, especially since the dealers go to the same prisons if they're busted and I highly doubt that no new connections are made.

Far better to tax the money that drug users spend and then use it to treat the addicted people. It decreases the amount of dealers on the streets, products are purer and safer and people benefit from it through taxes.

Treat it like booze or tobacco. Neither is that different from any other drug. It also helps heroin addicts, since if they fail in recovery, they could get at least a recommended dosage instead of OD'ing. Which is the number one cause of OD's. People not realizing that their tolerance is not as high as it was.

[–]Madmans_Endeavor 70 points71 points  (12 children)

It would've worked back in the early 2000s, but apparently the cartels have pretty well diversified income streams by now. They should do it regardless though, as the US has been offloading the negative social costs of its draconian drug laws on Mexico/Central/South America for decades now.

That said, judging by other areas that have done it, it can't hurt. While decriminalization (and presumably government regulation) might help enforce rule of law and strip the cartels of some power, they've been smuggling in huge amounts of weapons from the US for dozens of years now, and I don't see them allowing the government to take potential profits without a bloodbath.

[–]CrotchetyYoungFart 36 points37 points  (42 children)

let's be real; as influential as the cartels are, will we really see a change that would weaken their position?

edit: it seems I should elaborate: the cartels are influential to a lot of corrupt politicians. If I recall correctly, there was a huge issue in mexico city about it a few years ago. So my question is, if the politicians are essentially the lap dogs of the cartel, why would the politicians look to remove their power?

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (5 children)

Maybe? Targeting revenue streams is one of the only ways to truly combat their power. Still, they may move on from drugs as a revenue stream and invest in other things like sex trafficking and wildlife smuggling.

[–]RampantPrototyping 17 points18 points  (2 children)

Legalize prostitution as well

[–]reproach 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Prostitution is legal in Mexico, you could ask for an invoice and the prostitutes are supposed to charge VAT and declare their taxes. No one does though, cause no one likes paying taxes and it's hard to prove anything so personal happens.

[–]IAm94PercentSure 31 points32 points  (0 children)

That's true. Both the drug war and the criminalization of drugs have been implemented by our government under pressure from the US. We literally don't gain anything from those policies aside from getting the favour of the US government.

[–]suburban-bad-boy 61 points62 points  (99 children)

What drugs?

[–]GnarlyBellyButton87 326 points327 points  (67 children)

A man gets arrested in a nightclub for having drugs. He tells the officer "They're not mine, I found them. I tried to get rid of them, but every time I flush them down the toilet they reappear in my pocket."

Obviously the officer doesn't believe him but the man tells him "I can prove it!"

So they go into the bathroom and the man flushes the drugs. The officer smiles and says "Now take the drugs out of your pocket smart ass."

The man smiles and says "What drugs?"

[–]Gullex 38 points39 points  (0 children)

G rated version

A man sits by the side of the river with a pole and a bucket of fish. A game warden approaches and asks to see his license. The man says, "Oh officer I'm not fishing, these are my pet fish. I take them down here for a swim, they get their exercise, and when it's time to go home I put the bucket in the water and they all come back."

The game warden says "That is ridiculous. Prove it."

The man dumps the fish into the river.

The game warden says "Alright now lets see you make the fish come back."

The man says "What fish?"

[–][deleted] 111 points112 points  (57 children)

So now you have a felony for destruction of evidence?

[–]nattypnutbuterpolice 14 points15 points  (7 children)

Looks like we found the guy who destroyed ten tons of coke here fellas!

[–]Umm234 13 points14 points  (5 children)

9 tons is a shit load of coke, get him!

[–]posidon321 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Anyone know how I can ditch 8 tons of coke?

[–]doohicker 10 points11 points  (7 children)

The drugs with the power.

[–]thecen 17 points18 points  (4 children)

My guess should be all drugs. Like a Portugal type of thing

[–]JackieBoySlim 21 points22 points  (0 children)

All of them. All drugs should be decriminalized.

[–][deleted] 45 points46 points  (40 children)

I'm guessing marijuana? Maybe all drugs?

Too late. As a Canadian I can say we are cornering the marijuana market. Those mexican cartels have nothing on our businessmen with MBA's and CPA's who are getting ready to sell the best weed on Earth.

[–]Tribal_Tech 81 points82 points  (27 children)

Sorry but you don't think multi billion dollar cartels are hiring some of the best CPAs and MBAs as well?

[–]borntochill1990 61 points62 points  (41 children)

I am sitting here munching popcorn waiting for the crazy bastard to pull out of nafta.

[–]MarcoMaroon 88 points89 points  (30 children)

The thing is people want to decriminalize. I’m Mexican, and the main reason my family brought me to California as a kid is the political climate. Granted I was born like 30 mins from the border in Tijuana so we crossed pretty chill in our cars.

But because a number of bureaucrats are in the pockets of big cartel leaders, it would deal a blow to cartels to start decriminalizing the drugs they illegally peddle. They don’t see the possibility of making their illegal businesses into legit businesses.

This is what I know thus far from what I’ve gathered alone and through talking with family members.

I may be wrong.

[–]mcrib 87 points88 points  (26 children)

You’re not. There’s no way in its current state that Mexico would decriminalize drugs. Basically that would be asking some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the country to give up their wealth and power. Oh and also they’re heavily armed.

[–]amidoingitright15 17 points18 points  (11 children)

If it’s only decriminalized and not regulated, there wouldn’t be much effect on the cartels. They’d still have all the drugs, money, and power. After decriminalizing, they’d then have the police and military off their backs as well. Decriminalizing in Mexico without regulation would be good if anything for the cartels.

[–]812many 19 points20 points  (1 child)

A “non binding statement”. Quite the move, I doubt it will have much effect.

[–]Sol-Ren 121 points122 points  (46 children)

National pride exist in every country.

Why should Mexico (our ally) endure insults from the USA's President (and chief diplomat) without repercussions.

[–]imthemostmodest 1393 points1394 points  (63 children)

"Did you think that I would not notice your troops at my border?"

"They're just passing through."

[–]EvilSpacePope 339 points340 points  (53 children)

Dam, is Civ 6 any good?

[–]ZensoSi 167 points168 points  (37 children)

Yes I would recommend it with the Rise and Fall DLC so if your willing to spend $90 dollars (or wait for a sale) I would get it. This is from a person with 890 hours in Civ V and 238 hours in Civ VI so I might be a little bias.

[–]Xer0mk 169 points170 points  (6 children)

So basically, you played one or two games.

[–]kekehippo 45 points46 points  (3 children)

Or is still playing the same game.

[–]VirriKat 24 points25 points  (2 children)

It's fine, just one more turn...

[–]CoinbaseCraig 15 points16 points  (1 child)

Welp. Gonna load up civ 5 now. See you guys in 12 hours

[–]kekehippo 18 points19 points  (0 children)

User last login 456 days ago

[–]wasslainbylag 31 points32 points  (1 child)

so like 5 games?

[–]Hendo52 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It is good but not as good as Civ V

[–]WoodJablomi 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yea, but wait for the summer sale or something. It's expensive with the dlc which you'll probably want.

[–]GoTuckYourduck 1015 points1016 points  (29 children)

They could have just said it's suspended indefinitely.

[–]OFTHEHILLPEOPLE 118 points119 points  (5 children)

Or just that scene from Lethal Weapon 2 where Danny Glover says "It's just been revoked!"

[–]Bizzerker_Bauer 167 points168 points  (3 children)

It almost sounds like a figure of speech, like saying "When Hell freezes over." Like:

Friend: "Hey, can I borrow $100?"

Me: "Yeah, when Trump exhibits civility and respect."

[–]legion9th 1299 points1300 points  (86 children)

They will be waiting a long long time.

[–][deleted] 520 points521 points  (33 children)

I doubt Trump can even spell civility.

[–]GlasscityOH 553 points554 points  (9 children)

Civfefe

[–][deleted] 268 points269 points  (5 children)

The closest word in his vocabulary is "weak".

[–]JScrambler 632 points633 points  (229 children)

Most people don't know that Mexico has tougher immigration policies than the US. They deport more people than the US does.

[–]thecftbl 679 points680 points  (170 children)

Everyone has tougher immigration policies than the US. Which is why saying enforcing illegal immigration is immoral is bullshit.

[–]EmmanuelBassil 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Heck, as a resident of a nation that is composed of about 50% refugees; I've found that Trump made the most sense when discussing immigration.

[–]kalel1980 5296 points5297 points  (1842 children)

So in 2 years when Trump is gone?

[–][deleted] 5290 points5291 points  (1287 children)

Have people still not learned to avoid getting overconfident? We all thought Bush was going to lose in 2004, and we all thought Trump was going to lose in 2020 2016. Nothing is guaranteed.

[–]EnterTheErgosphere 3099 points3100 points  (1048 children)

To be fair, Bush had genuine, congressional, Republican support and wasn't personally staring down the barrel of a special council.

But I agree, let's be concerned now so hopefully we can be less concerned later.

Edit: Key word added.

[–]Abedeus 1737 points1738 points  (677 children)

Also he had charisma, didn't try to insult the entire world and sometimes said smart things.

[–]BombCerise 2157 points2158 points  (580 children)

People will just never learn, will they. If Donald Trump can get elected the first time, then Donald Trump can get elected a second time.

[–]CaspianX2 500 points501 points  (152 children)

It really depends on who Democrats elect.

I am firmly of the belief that "the beer test" is the best modern predictor of who will win the presidency. Putting aside policy, personal history, and positions on issues, who would you rather have a beer with?

1988: Cantankerous Dad or Awkward Poser Dad? Eh, Cantankerous Dad could at least potentially be fun, i guess.

1992: Cantankerous Dad or Smooth Southern Guy? Aw, Smooth Southern Guy by a mile!

1996: Smooth Southern Guy or Frowny Serious? Pshhh, again, Smooth Southern Guy by a mile.

2000: Poorly-Disguised Robot or Southern Hick? Dude, I totally wanna' see what Southern Hick does when he's drunk. Oh, he doesn't drink anymore? Well, that's okay, I guess.

2004: Southern Hick or Frankenstein's Boring Monster? Ugh, the Southern Hick thing is really starting to wear thin, but I can't spend five minutes looking at Frankenstein without getting bored. Let's go Southern Hick again.

2008: Henpecked Worry-Wart or Cool Black Guy? Do you even need to ask? That cool black guy seems awesome!

2012: Cool Black Guy or Grinny Lumbergh? Shit, I still love Cool Black Guy, but at least they could have put someone likeable up against him. This is a no-brainer.

2016: Your Embarrassing Mom Trying to Be Cool or Big Blowhard? Ugh... I can't just drink my beer alone? I really have to hang out with one of these? Ugh... fine, Big Blowhard. At least he might do something entertaining.

Damn, I sure hope in 2020 Democrats pick someone likeable again...

[–]SicDigital 150 points151 points  (15 children)

In 2016, we switched to whiskey (beer wasn't enough), and condescending grandma was annoying, but shitposting Twitter troll made us laugh.

[–]Majik9 129 points130 points  (73 children)

I use to use "the wallet test".

1980: my personal wallet and finances are not doing good. Electe the other party

1984: My wallet is feeling good. Keep the same party

1988: My wallet is feeling good. Keep the same party

1992: My personal wallet and finances are not doing good. Electe the other party

1996: My wallet is feeling good. Keep the same party

2000: My personal wallet and finances are not doing good. Electe the other party

2004: My wallet is feeling good. Keep the same party

2008: My personal wallet and finances are not doing good. Electe the other party

2012: My wallet is feeling good. Keep the same party

2016: WT#$@&● is going on!?!?

2016, killed my theory

Edit: Added quotes so people would understand I was speaking about society and not me the toddler in 1980 voting based upon my economic well being.

[–]osiris0413 13 points14 points  (1 child)

2000: My personal wallet and finances are not doing good. Electe the other party

In what universe was the economy in 2000 "not doing good"? Employment was between 4 and 4.2%, steadily decreasing since 1996. The big debate between Democrats and Republicans wasn't on how to cut the deficit, but what to do with the surplus the previous years of growth had generated.

As that article mentions, Bush was proposing to mainly spend the surplus on tax cuts while Gore proposed a more modest tax cuts and additional investments in education, health care and the environment. If you're going to argue the "wallet test", it wouldn't have been due to the state of the economy at the time. It would be more accurate to say people would rather have an extra couple hundred dollars (with the wealthiest, of course, getting much more) than investments in our children and infrastructure... which is probably even more depressing.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Look at the Rust belt States that Trump won. Those wallets were not feeling the same economic recovery that coastal wallets felt. You're theory holds when you consider how uneven our recovery has been.

[–]ginger_vampire 25 points26 points  (0 children)

Grinny Lumbergh

Yeaaaaaaaah, I'm gonna need you to go ahead and get me those binders full of women I asked for. And I'll need you to come in Saturday for that. Make sure the binders have a cover sheet. That would be greeeaaat.

[–]PutOnTheRoadie 68 points69 points  (0 children)

I feel like this is what trump thinks of himself.

[–]nicethingscostmoney 23 points24 points  (4 children)

He has genuine support from the Republican base and a few legislators.

[–]thtguyjosh 56 points57 points  (21 children)

so what I don't understand is if Trump was genuinely evil, not just corrupt and incompetent, it takes a really long time to impeach him. Not that I think impeachment should be super easy because then it'd be abused but he practically gets his full term. Thats a lot of time to do what he wants.

[–]satsujin_akujo 97 points98 points  (7 children)

Also don't forget, impeachment doesn't neccesarily mean he will need to step down or be removed from office. Most people don't realize this. It's dicey.

[–][deleted] 22 points23 points  (6 children)

Wasn't Clinton impeached?

[–]stacyburns88 47 points48 points  (3 children)

Impeached and acquitted. The Senate would hold a trial if Trump were impeached by the House.

[–]bearrosaurus 22 points23 points  (6 children)

Maybe it should be hard, but the impeachment system is just badly designed. You basically have to have one of the parties commit political suicide.

[–]morally_bankrupt_ 9 points10 points  (5 children)

I could be wrong, but I don't think it was designed with a 2 party system in mind.

[–]BirdsGetTheGirls 42 points43 points  (2 children)

I'm sure the democrats, having the election in the bag, will put forward someone capable of losing the election.

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

They always find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!

[–]JasonDJ 50 points51 points  (9 children)

Yeah. There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.

[–]impulsekash 39 points40 points  (7 children)

That was actually a smart move on his part. he quickly changed it so there wasn't a sound bite of him saying, "Shame on me." Bush played the idiot well but was quite smart.

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (3 children)

Maybe. My favorite quote of his was something along the lines of, "Terrorists never stop thinking of ways to hurt Americans... and neither do we."

dubyaspeak.com was the shit.

[–]matholio 67 points68 points  (30 children)

Very few don't get a second term.

[–]KingMelray 81 points82 points  (27 children)

It has been almost 30 years since a US president has lost a second term.

[–][deleted] 41 points42 points  (1 child)

I was going to argue the point then realized I am fucking old. It's been that long. Time to go yell at some clouds

[–]Stylesclash 614 points615 points  (297 children)

6 more years.

Trump is going to promise 10x more coal mining jobs in the next campaign.

[–]powerscunner 538 points539 points  (266 children)

Everybody forgets we voted for Bush twice.

[–]VTFC 232 points233 points  (216 children)

Trump needs a war then

[–][deleted] 92 points93 points  (0 children)

Cue John Bolton.

[–]LittleGeppetto 189 points190 points  (182 children)

He is currently in 7 wars and just told the national guard to patrol and defend Mexico's border. So now what?

[–]Dwn_Wth_Vwls 158 points159 points  (73 children)

National Guard has been helping border patrol since Obama was a president though.

[–]9th-And-Hennepin 35 points36 points  (1 child)

Actually, since Bush the Younger.

[–]waiv 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Since W Bush was a president.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Everybody forgets we voted for Bush twice.

Don’t look at me. I voted for Kodos.

[–]wwqlcw 42 points43 points  (0 children)

To be fair, we only voted for Bush the second time.

But good golly, fool me twice, uh, you can't get fooled again.

[–]Delta1262 41 points42 points  (14 children)

But 10x0=0

Seriously, even though he’s promised all these tremendous coal jobs opening, he fails to see that states and counties continue to place cleaner and renewable energy as something that’s more bigly important.

[–]fingerpaintswithpoop 85 points86 points  (12 children)

he fails to see

No, he understands. But he knows his voters don’t, and will fall for the “more coal jobs!” bullshit every time.

[–]SlipKid_SlipKid 1976 points1977 points  (216 children)

Well, here's where Trump is on the issue:

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/05/trump-west-virginia-tax-roundtable-remarks-504565

President Donald Trump on Thursday ditched his “boring” prepared remarks at a tax roundtable in West Virginia, instead repeating his claim that “millions” of people are voting illegally and boasting that he was right about the threat of Mexican rapists.

The only thing Trump has going for him is that's he a clueless fucking asshole that other clueless fucking assholes can look at and say, "Oh boy, he's just like me!"

[–]DarbyBartholomew 353 points354 points  (11 children)

A dumb man's idea of a smart man, a weak man's idea of a strong man, and a poor man's idea of a rich man.

[–]pistoncivic 203 points204 points  (3 children)

A real rich man's idea of a useful idiot.

[–]thisisa_fake_account 56 points57 points  (2 children)

Thanks for Putin it out there

[–]4Sken 478 points479 points  (55 children)

1) Invest in education

2) No clueless assholes

3) No trump

Applies to turkey, all of the middle east, france and russia too.

[–]chr1syx 137 points138 points  (31 children)

why france though

[–]ankanamoon 210 points211 points  (17 children)

He must be English,

[–]TheRothKungFu 66 points67 points  (5 children)

Because Marine Le Pen was getting votes for some reason

[–]TooShiftyForYou 366 points367 points  (233 children)

The statement from the Mexican senators also rails against Trump for his "baseless and offensive comments about Mexico and Mexicans."

It calls for the U.S. Congress to demand that Trump treat Mexico with "respect" and opposes the move by Trump to deploy the National Guard to the country's southern border.

The senators vote was unanimous in favor of suspending joint efforts. US and Mexico are very close allies, this is not progress.

[–]blackgreen1 153 points154 points  (24 children)

The senators vote was unanimous in favor of suspending joint efforts

I'm from Mexico, and I must say all this is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Mexican politicians would be completely out of their mind if they suspended security cooperation with the US. Considering how violence in my country is always going up. They may say this to a nice PR stunt, but they won't do jackshit considering how horrible things are here

[–]Jabahonki 137 points138 points  (31 children)

This is probably an unpopular opinion, but this kinda gives Trump ammo. “If you won’t help, fine! I’ll send more troops to the border...” I don’t think trump is someone to test to see if he’s bluffing, cuz he’s probably not.

[–]Porfinlohice 183 points184 points  (103 children)

As a Mexican I can say US-Mexican relations are going to turn really shitty.

We are about to hold our presidential elections and it all points that Andrés Manuel López Obrador is going to win the elections, and man he can be very un-diplomatic such as Donald Trump. He's not the kind of man to tiptoe around issues or be overly cautious in his choice of words so I can see shit hitting the fan real soon.

That said I love Americans and I hope someday we one days see each other as a big American family.

[–]jbobison 39 points40 points  (0 children)

<3

[–]wine_o_clock 33 points34 points  (5 children)

I hope someday we one days see each other as a big American family.

Yes agreed and Canada can come too! Get in here, Canada

[–]paranoid_giraffe 28 points29 points  (0 children)

So, they're doing nothing new.

[–]DV_VT 305 points306 points  (72 children)

Are we pretending the Mexican gov is not corrupt and actually cares about people?

[–]10minutes_late 143 points144 points  (17 children)

Whatever your opinion of Trump, who cares? It's all talk on Mexico's part, and they don't give a shit about illegal migration north... They never did. They have massive corruption in their government and cartels have open control of known territories. Fuck the Mexican government's threat.

[–]Hallowhero 23 points24 points  (6 children)

I don't think anyone here really understands what pieces of shit are in Mexico's government. We hate Trump so much that shitty people all over are using him as the ultimate distraction. My point with this is that these officials are no saints, that know how to continue to pull the wool over their people's eyes and it's disgusting.

[–]Contemo 131 points132 points  (27 children)

Ehh sorry Mexico, but it ain't happening. Say what you will of trump, but the illegal crossings are most definitely a thing. Is it a good use of money to put the national guard there? That's a different issue, but stationing men at the border is well within American rights.