The Washington Post claims to be the pinnacle of journalism. But there’s a reason why so many people don’t take them seriously anymore.
During a visit to the border city of Calexico, California on Friday, President Trump had a message to those seeking to exploit an immigration loophole that lets asylum seekers into the U.S. if they claim to be a family with children.
It’s a loophole that has led to a massive increase in the number of people flooding across our border — skirting the normal pathways to immigration — and has completely swamped border stations that are trying to process and temporarily house everyone.
It’s a crisis, plain and simple.
Trump sent a message to asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, telling them that our immigration system can no longer handle them because there’s far too many to handle.
“We have our system full. We can't do it anymore,” the president said, according to Fox News.
He also said, “Our country is full, our area is full, the sector is full. We can’t take any more. Sorry. Can’t have it. So turn around. That’s the way it is.”
But mainstream media outlets like the Washington Post exploded, focusing solely on his “our country is full” statement without focusing on the context, which clearly showed he was talking about our ability to properly handle a giant flow of people into our country. The Post’s national correspondent, Philip Bump, even wrote a piece arguing that we can, actually, physically fit more human bodies into the U.S.
Bump started out by arguing — based on U.S. Census Bureau data — that there are enough vacant rental properties, vacation homes, ski chalets, and unsold homes to house “a bit over 45 million more people before America’s really full” at a rate of 2.6 people per household. It’s actually a surprisingly high number.
Next, Bump argued that if we cover America from border to border, sea to shining sea with high-density housing on par with the densest country on earth, we would “have enough space for another 19.5 billion people.”
But that wasn’t enough. The Post author then figured out, mathematically, how many people you could squeeze into the U.S. if they were standing shoulder to shoulder. At 5 people per square meter, Bump determined that we could fit 45.8 trillion people into the U.S., which is something like 6,000 times the population of the earth.
It was a useless exercise because Trump wasn’t talking about our country being physically full. But it was just another way for the Post to show their rabid anti-Trump bias by trying to prove that he is wrong.
The New York Times did a slightly more serious piece about how our country could realistically handle more people because of “an aging population and declining birthrates among the native-born population.”
But they apparently haven’t been talking to presidential candidate Robert “Beto” O’Rourke, who warned that in ten years large swaths of our country could become uninhabitable and useless for growing things.
“If you look at the climate, which in this ten-year window we do not do everything we possibly humanly can, the generations that follow us...we may not be able to live in some of the cities that we call home today, like El Paso, Texas,” he said during his first public campaign appearance.
“We may not be able to grow our own food and our own fiber, feed and clothe ourselves in this country,” O’Rourke continued. “Along this current trajectory, there will be people who will no longer live in the cities they call home today. There is food grown in this country that will no longer prosper in these soils.”