In the great game of American politics, it can be a risky move to give the nascent campaign of a popular opponent room to breathe. But that’s exactly what President Donald Trump appeared to do this week when he picked El Paso for a campaign-style rally around immigration. We suspect that whoever advised launching the president’s re-election campaign in southwest Texas may soon be looking for a new job.

Team Trump chose a border town to double down on the president’s calls for a wall to keep “dangerous” undocumented people out of the country.

But even as the president delivered his address to some 7,500 supporters inside the El Paso County Coliseum, he was pointing a spotlight on the person Texas has already showed can challenge him, Democratic rising star and El Paso native son Beto O’Rourke.

The 46-year-old three-term congressman raised a record $80 million and drew national attention as a potential 2020 presidential candidate in his close but ultimately failed attempt to unseat Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in 2018.

With a slew of other Democratic hopefuls recently announcing their candidacy, O’Rourke has remained elusive about a possible run. But his participation in Monday’s pro-immigrant “March for Truth,” which ended in a rally with some 7,000 enthusiastic supporters near the Trump event, certainly looked like the actions of a potential candidate with a competing message to the president’s.

Inside the County Coliseum, Trump supporters chanted “USA! USA!” and “Build the Wall!” while the president spoke of a dire threat from illegal immigration and an El Paso that “thanks to a powerful border wall” has become “one of America's safest cities.”

Meanwhile, O’Rourke offered a more hopeful vision of his hometown. El Paso, he said, was safe “not because of walls, but in spite of walls. Secure, because we treat one another with dignity and respect. That is the way we make our communities and our country safe.”

To chants of “No Wall!” and “Viva Beto!” O’Rourke spoke of the nonprofits, activists and volunteers who help immigrants find food, clothing and shelter upon arrival in the U.S., emphasizing that in El Paso, “We stand for America and we stand against walls. We know there is no bargain in which we can sacrifice some of our humanity to gain a little more security.”

Clearly, Trump and O'Rourke offer competing views of the potential threat and inherent value of the more than 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. But this fact cannot be denied: El Paso was safe long before any physical barrier was erected along the border. As Mayor Dee Margo told CNN this week, "going back to 2005 we were one of the safest cities in the nation" while construction on the 10 miles of fencing in El Paso did not begin until 2008 and was completed in mid-2009.

And as Margo made clear in a recent op-ed for USA Today, "Our city police's community-relations efforts and the cooperation between our law enforcement agencies contributed to making our city a safe place to live and work before border fencing was put in place. In fact, between 1996 and 2006, the number of reported violent crimes fell by more than 34 percent."

As journalists, we’d like to point out that politicians can have competing views on how to make this country more secure. But they can’t have competing facts. Facts, as President Ronald Reagan was fond of saying, “are stubborn things.”

We don’t agree with many of O’Rourke’s policy prescriptions for this country. But we recognize the power of a hopeful vision in politics and the resonance such a vision can have with the electorate.

For his own sake, Trump would do well to recognize it too.