Who should be the next POTUS?? Trump(Pro)....Clinton(Con)

I am sorry for my late response as I have been busy with life.. Here is the link which was also posted on Mr. Trump"s Immigration Reform page: http://www.nytimes.com... My point is that all of the lives that were lost could have been prevented if our current immigration laws were enforced, which are not due to sanctuary cities, and because of the Obama Administration. A nation that doesn't enforce its laws is simply not a nation. To prevent more innocent lives from being taken, we must simply deport the illegals. We don't know who's going to commit a crime in the near future. It's better to be safe than sorry. And I never said that they were more violent than native born groups. All I'm saying is that the deaths and the horrors that families face can be protected. 1.Border Wall: The water that people use from the Rio Grande mainly comes from the reservoirs that are built. There are also the Devil, Pecos, and Nueces Rivers, not to mention countless other rivers in Texas that can be used for water supply.[1] Most of the irrigation is done before the river reaches "El Paso anyways as stated in the source, so the people South of "l Paso depend on it for water supply which is provided by the reservoirs. The Falcon International and Armistead Reservoirs are operated by the Federal Government making it impossible to travel through illegally, especially since it requires a boat.[2] The reservoirs don't need a Wall, and even if it was built, we would still have half the reservoirs, because the international boundary is right down the middle. It is virtually impossible to cross the Big Bend Area as well because of the Chisos, Mariscal, Santiago Mountains, and Carmen Mountains with elevations from 1800 to 4500 feet. The region is also a part of the Chihuahuan Desert making it miles from any help.[3] The mountains range on both sides of the border, so the trek would be extremely long and dangerous. So again, a wall is not necessarily needed. Mexico is going to pay for the Wall, and my opponent has not refuted this claim, so I assume my opponent concedes this point. The businesses and landowners would receive money to compensate for their land. And besides, who would want to live in fear that an illegal could cross the river at anytime and run through private property? The wall isn't going to intrude private property as much, so compensation will be minimal anyways. The main economy of the region is agricultural, and that won't get affected as the farmland is far from the border itself due to erosion control and such. The other is mining which is far from the river itself as well.[4] Unless Con can provide specific examples as to how the wall will be bad for the economy, this argument is invalid. Bombing the wall? That's a ludicrous idea. A breach in the wall isn't going to anything, as the Border Patrol would obviously find out in an instant. And besides, if they Mexican government allows this to happen in plain sight, there will obviously be retaliation by Mr. Trump, most likely making Mexico pay for the damages. The USBP, along with the Department of Defense and Army Corps of Engineers are developing technology to stop underground tunneling, most of which includes motion sensor technology.[5] Walls can be repaired in desert areas during night or during the winter. But how would it get damaged in the first place? The Gulf of Mexico, especially the Mexican border is patrolled by the U.S. Coast Guard making it impossible to go from Mexico to Padre Island as my opponent claims. I'm pretty sure Mr. Trump knows where and where not to build a wall. According Con's source about half of the illegals come from Mexico compared to all the other countries combined for the other half. Mexico is clearly a greater threat because of our border. This number does not include the people that come from Honduras, Guatemala, and other Central American countries that are undocumented. The people here from overseas have overstayed their visas, and here is Mr. Trump's proposal on that: "Enhanced penalties for overstaying a visa. Millions of people come to the United States on temporary visas but refuse to leave, without consequence. This is a threat to national security. Individuals who refuse to leave at the time their visa expires should be subject to criminal penalties; this will also help give local jurisdictions the power to hold visa overstays until federal authorities arrive. Completion of a visa tracking system " required by law but blocked by lobbyists " will be necessary as well."[6] There are more people here from crossing the border from Mexico than from overseas. 40% of the illegal immigrants overstay their visas, while the 60% cross the border illegally.[7] We should focus on the border first as it's the greater problem. If immigrants help the economy so much, why don't we just let everyone come in? The answer to that is because a nation without a border is not a nation. I, as a citizen of the United States am required to pay my taxes to the federal government. Currently, as a Texas Resident, it is cheaper for me to pay the penalty imposed by Obamacare than to get health care, while illegals get free health coverage from my taxpayer money.[8] Anti-Mass Deportation Rebuttals: My opponent is being politically correct with his argument. The illegals should have thought about the consequences before they came illegally in the first place. If parents want their children to have a better life, they should fight for it, like America did. As an American, I care about my family that came here legally. I'm saying no to coming here illegally. Legally it's perfectly ok. If these illegals receive health care, and I don't, I feel cheated. There are laws that keep order, and this is one of them. No one is above the law.....not Hillary Clinton, not you, not me, and definitely not the illegals. You are thinking about the lives of those illegals and refugees, not the lives of Americans like me. My opponents arguments in this section are based on political correctness and emotions. VA Reform: It was under the Obama Administration, which Hillary was a part of in which resulted in the current condition of the VA. She was responsible for it, and if she couldn't do anything then, what's she going to do now? My opponent concedes that Hillary Clinton is a criminal... 1. Trump was joking about Russia hacking Hillary Clinton 33,000 emails that she deleted not to hack classified information. And even if they did hack, what does it tell us? That our current security isn't effective 2. Trump faces far more backlash than Hillary Clinton because of the biased media. Trump receives backlash from politicians, and some people, while Hillary receives backlash from just Republicans and a majority of the people. If she continually lied about her server, what prevents her from doing it again? She isn't being arrested or being disciplined. 3. The refugee process may be thorough, but it still has flaws. It only takes a couple of terrorists to get by for terrorist attacks to happen. That was the instance in the Boston Marathon Bombing attack. Also, about 13% of the Syrian Refugees support ISIS.[9] A small portion can prove fatal as was the case in the France attacks. 4. It shows strength in an issue if she didn't accept the money. Instead, it shows that she values the donation money over the fact that the countries hate women and LGBT. These donations show that she is willing to forget her position on women's rights and LGBT for money. Points to be noted: -My opponent fails to refute my claims about Mexico paying -Con concedes that Hillary is a criminal -My opponent fails to use certain examples provided in context (Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings) -Con's third argument is completely hypocritical as she is one of those people -My opponent twists the truth in his argument about Trump losing the lawsuit -Con uses unreliable sources like the book by John O'Donnell- A person with bad relation with Trump -My opponent fails to talk about the other states that share a border with Mexico Final Statement: I, Pro have refuted all of Con's arguments and rebuttals up to this. Con fails to provide sources proving accusations against Mr. Trump. And one of Con's sources was simply biased against Mr. Trump. I have also proven that Hillary Clinton wouldn't make a good President, due to her email scandal. Not to mention how big of a hypocrite she is on the issue of Women's Rights and LGBT Rights. I would like the voters and Con to ponder upon this question: Why does Donald Trump want to become POTUS? He already has enough money to live a couple of lifetimes. He's already popular through his show "The Apprentice." The answer is, that he is running for America, Americans, Children, Police Officers, and our Veterans. For all of the reasons, I urge a Pro ballot for this debate. Thank You for a great debate, and I hope I have changed your mind about Mr. Trump P.S. The media is liberal and against Trump, be careful what you cite [1]http://texasalmanac.com... [2]http://www.ibwc.state.gov... [3]http://www.desertusa.com... [4]https://www.britannica.com... [5]https://www.cbp.gov... [6]https://www.donaldjtrump.com... [7]http://www.politifact.com... [8]http://cnsnews.com... [9]http://www.foxnews.com...