Well reasoned and argued.

A country that cannot feed itself will not survive. It will be dependent on whoever provides the people's food much like a pet. Haiti grew its own food prior to the slave revolt. Zimbabwe was once the breadbasket of Africa until the farmers were slaughtered and the crops burned in the fields.

If we do not resurrect our farmlands, we have a future of the people standing in UN food distribution lines.

To imagine that cutting off the water to farms will have some effect on the invasion is extremely short sighted. The invaders will have the water and YOU and I will be paying the bill, and we STILL have to import our food. As long as we can pay for it that is. After all, without the ability to grow our own, an exporter can charge whatever it wishes.

I fail to see how the growers are scamming anyone when they have lost farms, orchards and ranches that have been in families for generations. I see no scam in rich topsoil blowing away as dust. Some of these growers have lost everything they have. Now you might say they employed criminal aliens and deserve the loss. Even if it is true, I fail to see how such "scamming" to the point of losing everything is beneficial. Or how the loss of tens of thousands of acres of farmland benefits us.

The water doesn't end up in the poor downtrodden family farms. The promoters just make it look that way just like the illegals supporters use "splitting up families" and "hard working tax paying good hearted people".
Once they get their way, and the water, they'll just continue driving out family farms the way they did before this opportunity came along.

The real results aren't going in that direction AG.

If you believe that cutting off the water to the farms is beneficial, you will just continue to believe it no matter what evidence turns up.

I will not allow criminal immigration to become the hobgoblin.

When he said in his SOTUS that jobs were #1, I immediately wondered who for, government, hb1 visas, illegals, or other countries.

I didn't see the whole thing but I am certain he made no mention of simple step #1 - stop giving tax credits to companies that outsource or anything about stopping the bleeding of sending jobs overseas or reversing it. To say nothing of the big solution, getting government out of the way of the private sector.

He scores high on polls that people like him, well, yes, we all have that friend who is dishonest and bends the truth, omits, and for himself yes sounds like they make a point or pull at our heartstrings but we still admire him and are smart enough to know not to do business with him.

The only thing I am getting out of it is that he admits to problems that are real but does not mention that they should be solved for everyone but for his own ends.

Just like Walmart running off mom and pop business wherever they land.

That's a knotty problem isn't it?

The mom and pop businesses are usually overpriced and sell outdated goods. They don't have the inventory turnover and high costs. Walmart has high quality goods, lower prices and a record of raising employment.

Mom and Pop need to change the way they do business. If they can't, Walmart will run them off.

In case you think I do not have sufficient sympathy for the mom and pops, my direct competitor is Petco, just a few blocks away.

Walmart raises employment alright. At entry level wages. What do you mean Mom and Pop's don't have high costs? That's bordering on absurd. Take a look at most mom and pop's leases and you;ll see that not only are they getting socked with about triple or quadruple what Walmart is paying, they also usually foot the bill for the triple net's that Walmart or other chains in the same property are not. The mom and pops are subsidizing the chains in that regard. And what is this outdated goods thing? That's also ridiculous. Mom and pop has to face to face it with their customers. I cannot see the majority of them getting that by.