Politics is a funny thing. One day, an idea is treated as an absolute moral failing, a relic of a backwards era that has no place in a modern, civilized society. Then, a few years pass, reality hits the ground, and suddenly, those same ideas start appearing in bipartisan legislation and executive orders from the very people who campaigned against them. Honestly, it's enough to give you whiplash. When we talk about the hill trump was right on, the most glaring, undeniable example is the physical security of the U.S. southern border.
For years, the "Wall" was a punchline. It was a chant at rallies and a symbol of division for critics. But if you look at the current state of American migration policy in 2026, you'll see that the fundamental argument—that physical barriers are a necessary component of border management—has largely been settled. It wasn't just about a wall, though. It was about the entire philosophy of "deterrence" and "controlled entry" versus the chaotic "catch and release" systems that dominated the early 2020s.
The Narrative Shift on Physical Barriers
Remember 2016? Back then, the mere suggestion of a wall was framed by many as a xenophobic fantasy. Fast forward through the record-breaking migration surges of 2022 and 2023, and the tone changed. It had to. Blue city mayors in New York and Chicago started pleading for federal intervention as their social services buckled under the weight of thousands of arrivals.
Suddenly, the "big, beautiful wall" didn't seem like such a fringe idea. By late 2023, even the Biden administration waived 26 federal laws to allow for more border wall construction in Starr County, Texas. They cited an "acute and immediate need" to prevent unlawful entries. That's a massive admission. It proved that when the chips are down, the physical geography of a border matters more than the rhetoric used during an election cycle.
The data supports this. In sectors where modern fencing and surveillance technology were installed, the "turnback" rate—where migrants see the barrier and choose not to cross or are easily intercepted—increased significantly. Critics used to say, "Show me a 50-foot wall, and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder." It's a catchy line. It’s also kinda wrong. Barriers aren't meant to be 100% impenetrable; they are designed to slow people down so Border Patrol agents can actually do their jobs. Without them, it's just a footrace across an open field.
China, Trade, and the "America First" Economic Reality
It wasn't just the border. If you look at trade policy, the shift is even more dramatic. For decades, the Washington consensus was "Free Trade at all costs." Trump blew that up. He slapped tariffs on China, renegotiated NAFTA into the USMCA, and was called a protectionist dinosaur for it.
👉 See also: Why the Recent Snowfall Western New York State Emergency Was Different
But look at where we are now.
The Biden-Harris administration didn't just keep most of those China tariffs; they doubled down on them. In 2024, they hiked tariffs on Chinese EVs to 100%. They kept the steel and aluminum protections. Why? Because the "hill" Trump was right on here was the realization that China isn't playing by the same rules. The idea that global trade would naturally lead to a democratic China was a total bust.
Economists like Robert Lighthizer, the former U.S. Trade Representative, argued that decoupling—or at least "de-risking"—was the only way to save the American middle class. At the time, Wall Street hated it. Now, it’s basically the official platform of both major parties. We’ve realized that relying on a geopolitical rival for 90% of our antibiotics and high-end semiconductors is a recipe for disaster.
The NATO Wake-up Call
"Obsolete." That’s what Trump called NATO back in 2016. The foreign policy establishment nearly had a collective heart attack. They argued that questioning the alliance was a gift to Putin.
Then 2022 happened. When Russia invaded Ukraine, the reality of European defense spending became impossible to ignore. For years, the U.S. had been footing the bill while countries like Germany failed to meet the 2% GDP spending requirement. Trump’s blunt, often abrasive demands that Europe "pay up" were viewed as transactional and uncouth.
✨ Don't miss: Nate Silver Trump Approval Rating: Why the 2026 Numbers Look So Different
However, by 2024, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg reported that a record number of allies were finally meeting that 2% target. They didn't do it because they wanted to; they did it because the era of "peace through wishful thinking" ended. The critique that NATO was lopsided and that the U.S. couldn't be the world's piggy bank forever was a hill Trump was right on, even if the way he said it ruffled every feather in Brussels.
Urban Decay and the "Law and Order" Rebound
Let’s talk about the domestic front. Between 2020 and 2022, there was a massive cultural push toward "defunding" police and moving away from traditional prosecution. Trump campaigned heavily against this, warning that "radical" policies would lead to a collapse in urban safety.
He was mocked for being an alarmist.
Then came the "retail theft" epidemic. Viral videos of smash-and-grabs in San Francisco and Los Angeles became a daily occurrence. Major retailers like Target and Walgreens started closing stores, citing "organized retail crime" and safety concerns for employees. By 2025, the pendulum had swung back so hard it almost broke. Deep-blue cities began electing "tough on crime" mayors and DAs. Even in San Francisco, voters recalled a progressive DA in favor of someone more traditional.
The reality is that people—regardless of their politics—want to feel safe walking to their cars at night. The "law and order" rhetoric that was dismissed as a dog whistle turned out to be a pre-requisite for a functioning city. It turns out, you can’t have a thriving economy if people are afraid to go shopping.
🔗 Read more: Weather Forecast Lockport NY: Why Today’s Snow Isn’t Just Hype
What Most People Get Wrong About the "Wall"
The biggest misconception about the border wall is that it was ever supposed to be a continuous, 2,000-mile concrete monolith. It wasn’t. Even the original plans called for a mix of steel bollard fencing, technology-heavy "virtual walls," and natural barriers like the Rio Grande.
The effectiveness of the barrier isn't just in the steel. It's in the infrastructure that comes with it. When you build a wall, you also build all-weather roads. These roads allow Border Patrol to move 60 mph instead of 5 mph through the brush. You add lighting. You add sensors. You add cameras.
When people argue about the hill trump was right, they often get bogged down in the aesthetics of the wall. But the real "hill" was the concept of sovereignty. The idea that a country without a defined, controlled border isn't really a country at all. This is an idea that has become mainstream again, not because of a change in heart, but because the alternative—unmanaged mass migration—became politically and logistically unsustainable for both parties.
The Practical Reality for 2026 and Beyond
So, where does this leave us? We are living in a "post-consensus" world. The old rules of globalization and open borders are being rewritten. If you’re looking for actionable insights on how this affects you, consider these three shifts:
- Supply Chain Resilience: If you’re in business, stop looking for the cheapest supplier in China. The "America First" trade logic is here to stay. Onshoring and "friend-shoring" (trading with allies like Mexico and Canada) are the new standards.
- The Rise of Sovereignty: Expect more friction between local and federal governments regarding immigration. As we’ve seen, "Sanctuary" status is easy to maintain when the problem is 1,000 miles away, but much harder when it’s on your doorstep.
- Infrastructure over Rhetoric: In the coming years, expect to see more "stealth" border construction. It might not be called "The Trump Wall," but the steel is going into the ground regardless.
Moving Forward
It’s easy to dismiss a political figure because you dislike their personality or their tweets. But history is rarely that simple. Sometimes, the most polarizing figures are the ones who point out the most obvious cracks in the foundation before everyone else is ready to see them.
Whether it’s the necessity of physical border security, the danger of over-reliance on a hostile China, or the need for Europe to defend itself, the "hills" that were once considered radical have become the new baseline for American policy. Acknowledging this isn't about partisanship; it's about observing how reality eventually wins out over ideology.
To stay informed, look past the headlines and watch the actual policy shifts. Pay attention to where the money goes—whether it's into domestic manufacturing or border infrastructure. That's where the real story is.