After reviewing President Trump's first 100 days objectively you can argue that his major success has been in immigration and border control.
Despite whether you agree with it or not, he has changed the policy settings and achieved a part of what he promised in the election.
The United States is cracking down on illegal immigrants, particularly from Mexico, with a wave of deportations. The border security is tighter than ever, as anyone who's travelled to the States will attest.
The only blip is the so-called Muslim ban which is still mired in constitutional law arguments with Maryland judges debating it on May 8.
Immigration is what he campaigned on and what he has moved on first. It is the topic of the age. It was the New Zealand topic of the week as Winston Peters went on an ill-informed and frankly ugly rampage against two Herald journalists, who happen to be Asian.
The pair crunched immigration numbers and found that the top five source countries for skilled work visas last year were the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, South Africa and the United States of America.
Not the Asian and Indian myth that is popularly accepted, including by Winston Peters.
He said the data was incorrect.
He said it was "propaganda written by two Asian immigrant reporters". He said that "stating the top five source nations for work visas are not Asian is completely wrong".
All I can take from that is that Winston Peters can't read, or he doesn't know what he's talking about or he is deliberately spreading so called "fake news" for electoral advantage.
What reporters Tan and Singh wrote is bang on, and they even report in their piece that China and India are the biggest source countries for permanent residents.
But they are not among the top five for direct migrant workers.
Obviously all Mr Peters read was the headline and then frothed off at the mouth without engaging his brain first.
So how are the Chinese and Indians that Winston and others don't like getting in?
Through student visas, racking up the residence years and then bringing their family in through reunification policies. So if you're concerned about the influx that's where you have to make changes.
For another example of that from this week's news; The sex offender from Afghanistan we chose not to deport got into this country in first place because his sister was already here. He's no skilled worker and with no English and with his criminal behaviour he's no good to anyone.
Talk to any New Zealand employer and he or she will tell you of the skill shortage and lack of skilled New Zealanders to fill the jobs that will fuel our productivity. They're all supportive of bringing in the skills. So am I. In fact, we need more.
But it is also a fact that there is a very real fear amongst many New Zealanders that we're bringing in too many of the wrong immigrants.
Has Peters addressed that? Nope. Actually I have no idea of what his policy is other than he doesn't like immigration and it's a vote catcher.
Did National's recent tinkering with the thresholds address that either?
Nope, the party just made it harder to bring in skilled people who are the very people we need. We're cutting off our nose to spite our face, just to calm the electorate.
Labour is even worse when Andrew Little proclaims he wants to broadly slash tens of thousands of immigrants indiscriminately.
There is no doubt that immigration is the topic of 2017 worldwide. My problem is that I can see no New Zealand politician who is addressing the issue in a logical, educated and grown up manner. It's sound bites and clickbait and vote-catching and alternative facts.
So I ask you: Has anyone got the answer?