When Minnesota Governor Tim Walz ridiculed former President Donald Trump’s progress on building a border wall, he painted a picture that deserves closer scrutiny. Walz claimed, “Donald Trump had four years. He had four years to do this, and he promised you, America, how easy it would be. ‘I’ll build you a big, beautiful wall, and Mexico will pay for it.’ Less than 2% of that wall got built, and Mexico didn’t pay a dime.” While it’s true that Trump didn’t fulfill his full promise, Walz’s assessment of the situation is both misleading and an oversimplification of a more complex issue.

Let’s break down the facts. During his time in office, Trump’s administration constructed a total of 458 miles of what was referred to as a “border wall system,” according to a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) status report from January 2021. Out of that total, 52 miles were built in locations where no barriers previously existed, while the remaining 373 miles replaced dilapidated or outdated fencing with robust new barriers.

Walz’s “less than 2%” claim stems from the 52 miles of new construction when measured against the nearly 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. In this narrow sense, he’s technically correct in his math. However, this narrow perspective fails to consider several crucial elements. First, Trump never promised to build a wall along the entire border. During the 2016 campaign, he often referred to needing about 1,000 miles of wall, not 2,000. When considering that goal, Trump made progress, completing 15% of the additional miles needed. This is a significant distinction that undermines the governor’s simplistic 2% talking point.

Moreover, Walz’s comment overlooks the fact that Trump’s administration oversaw the largest border wall expansion of any U.S. president. The hundreds of miles of replacement fencing, in many cases, were far more than cosmetic upgrades. The original barriers, often made from outdated materials like Vietnam-era landing mats, were replaced with 30-foot-tall steel bollards, equipped with lighting and modern technology. These upgrades transformed sections of the border from easily permeable barriers to serious deterrents, making a tangible impact on border security.

In fact, experts caution against downplaying the significance of these replacements. The reality is that in many cases, replacing old vehicle barriers (which allowed people to walk right through) with formidable new structures made a substantial difference in securing the border. Walz’s comment minimizes this achievement and fails to acknowledge how much border security was improved during Trump’s tenure.

That being said, there is no denying that Trump’s claim that “Mexico will pay for the wall” did not materialize. Walz is right to point out that U.S. taxpayers ultimately bore the financial burden of the $15 billion allocated for wall construction. Trump did attempt to pivot this promise by arguing that the benefits from the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) or potential future tolls would compensate for the cost, but these claims remain unsubstantiated. Funds were drawn from annual congressional budgets, as well as diverted from counternarcotics and military construction funds, underscoring that Mexico never footed the bill.

It’s essential to view Trump’s border wall progress through an honest lens. Was the wall finished to the extent Trump had hoped? No. Was Mexico paying for it? Also no. But did Trump make significant progress toward improving border security and advancing construction of a robust wall? Absolutely.

This issue brings into sharp focus a broader challenge in political discourse today—how easily complex achievements are reduced to oversimplified talking points. Walz’s comments exemplify this problem, as they obscure important details that reveal the actual progress made under the Trump administration.

The border wall represents more than just a campaign promise—it stands as a symbol of national sovereignty and the rule of law. Trump’s efforts, though incomplete, took major steps toward securing our southern border, a cause that resonates with millions of Americans who believe in enforcing immigration laws, protecting national security, and ensuring the safety of American citizens.

The debate over border security will undoubtedly continue. But if we are to have an honest discussion about it, we must acknowledge the full picture, not merely cherry-pick statistics to serve political narratives. Let’s give credit where it’s due, while also recognizing where promises fell short. It’s only by engaging in good faith that we can move toward the secure border our nation needs.