March 22, 2016

"Doesn't Trump sound a lot like a Democrat sometimes?"

"This is him explaining how his administration would be different from Reagan's...."

159 comments:

Terry said...

Blogger Terry said...
This is why I will not vote for Trump. He does not seem to understand that we have a federalist system.
Maryland is not a poor state. If Baltimore is a shambles, why is it my responsibility to fix it?
Maryland median household income = $76,165
United States median household income = $53,657

http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/median-annual-income/

CJinPA said...

His answer never really seemed to get to the difference with Reagan, other than "the country has changed." His idea of incentives for businesses to locate in areas is very old, a Kemp-Reagan idea.

But David Frum has written about this in Atlantic: Trump's supporters and restless working class white voters don't really give a damn about the size of government, "cutting waste" and entitlement reform. Their desire goes beyond mere economic. They believe they are literally forgotten. And when they're remembered, it's to be used as a symbol for the old, ugly America that is rightfully dying. I don't think there's much specific policy in there, which is one reason Trump offers so little specific policy.

MikeR said...

"This is why I will not vote for Trump. He does not seem to understand.." Clinton, on the other hand, understands?

Mostly seemed like a sensible set of comments by Trump. Democrats say this stuff? Maybe during Pres. Bush's time, not under Pres. Obama! Enough nation-building, enough Iraq, enough Afghanistan, enough Libya, enough Syria. Doesn't work, at least not for us.

Danno said...

Sounding like a Democrat is preferable to sounding like a Socialist.

Hagar said...

He was talking to the Washington Post editorial board.

His "we" may refer to "we, the people" rather than "we, the Federal Government," though that, of course, will be the immediate supposition for people of a Democrat bent.

mccullough said...

Trump combines optimism and pessimism into his remarks as well as any politician I've seen. Even his slogan, Make America Great Again, combines both.

Sounds like he wants federal enterprise zones in cities to remove the local zoning and red tape for private development. Sounds like the schools he wants to build are going to be run privately as well.

This straddles conservativism and liberalism.

mccullough said...

I wonder if he favors federal charter schools in the worst cities.

dmoelling said...

That a supposed big time real estate guy doesn't know about enterprise zones chapter and verse should be astonishing. These were around when he was young. Atlantic city was one big enterprise zone and trump was the only casino company to lose money at the time. His actual business skills seem pretty much reality TV than real. To fix a Baltimore requires some real changes in governance and policy. Trump doesn't know or want to disclose that everyone will need to take a haircut to fix problems this big.

tim in vermont said...

I think he wants to be Bill Clinton with class.

Bay Area Guy said...

Trump does sound like a Democrat at times, particularly on trade issues -- that is a good thing (politically).

Trump never claimed to be a Conservative, and isn't one. Cruz is.

Even rock-solid Reagan had a few Democrat tools in his bag. As I recall, he pledged to appoint the first woman on the Supreme Court (and did it).

Chuck said...

Professor; I guess I am grateful to your son, for linking to the WaPo interview transcript.

Have you read it? Read the whole thing? It is some astonishing jibberish. Trump's rambling dissertation on First Amendment press privileges in relation to libel laws would not last 30 seconds as a radio call-in rant. It's not just wrong; it's deeply ignorant. It's not even a sensible point of view.

I've said several times before in your blog comments, that you are eminently equipped to take Trump apart on this subject. But now I have just got to say that someone like you wouldn't even know where to begin in dismantling Trump's stream-of consciousness screed. Trump can't even put two sensible sentences together, much less make a legal argument that would provide you any traction.

So you can forget about my request for a Trump-rebuttal from you, on a subject in which you are an expert. It's just too dignifying to Trump, to think about such a thing.

Saint Croix said...

Marco Rubio is Barack Obama, 2008. He's the aspirational, hopeful candidate with a wonderful story. In a different time and place, he would have been a fantastic and hard-to-beat candidate. Unfortunately he ran into Donald Trump. Who is Donald Trump?

Donald Trump is Barack Obama, 2012. He's the racist demagogue who has identified groups of evil people and is running on fear and hostility. Obama's campaign was so evil that he actually inspired race riots. He did not mean to inspire race riots. He was just trying to get "his people" out to the voting booth, via fear and anger. But he did inspire race riots. The media forgot to report that Obama started race riots. Obama gets a pass on the race riots.

For some reason, the media is now worried about race riots. Oh no! Angry white people! But Little Baby Satan stymied the media by switching up his victims-of-hate.

Out: Black people
In: Hispanics

Out: Jews
In: Muslims

The media, which is perpetual stuck five decades behind everybody else, is waiting for Donnie to say something bad about black people, or Jews. They almost got him with the Klan. "Oh no," said Little Baby Satan, "I hate the Klan!" And then he went back to screaming about Hispanics and Muslims.

He's a racist demagogue, stirring up fear and anger about "those people," and by those people he means Hispanics and Muslims. Is this a good campaign strategy? Well, if the Democrats nominate a socialist or a felon, the demagogue might win by default. Romney should have beaten the racist Obama in 2012, but it turns out large numbers of Republicans don't trust Mormons. Anti-Mormon bigotry! Oh no!

So, yes, Obama has severely fucked up the Republican primary. Nobody trusts our aspirational and hopeful minority with the cute foreign name. And people seem to think that it's fine to be a racial demagogue, depending on who the victims are. Gee, thanks, Obama! Thanks liberals! Thanks, media!

On the positive side, black people who want to vote for a pimp and a thug have a candidate this year. Yay!

tim in vermont said...

OMG, The one string banjo is plinking away again.

Big Mike said...

Yes; that's why I'm for Cruz.

Terry said...

MikeR said...
"This is why I will not vote for Trump. He does not seem to understand.." Clinton, on the other hand, understands?

I am not a republican, MikeR. I am registered as an independent. My big issue is federalism. Cruz is marginally stronger in his endorsement of federalism than Trump is. I see no difference between Trump and Clinton on the subject of federalism.

EDH said...

Democrats today don't sound like this kind of Democrat anymore.

Kemp Republican, Scoop Jackson Democrat.

As far as schools, politically does it make any sense to pick a fight with the teachers unions at this point?

rich hahn said...

Sounds like what Jack Kemp would say.

Trump also wants to return school control to state and local control.

All in all, a Conservative approach to some of the country's problems.

Bay Area Guy said...

Some of you (cough, Chuck, cough) have lost sight of the objective.

Folks who are against Trump -- every time you rail against him, you make Hillary smile.

Folks who are for Trump -- congrats on the primary victory! Now, you gotta pivot to the General, which means hugging Ryan, McConnell, and GOP folks you don't like too much. Don't take it personal, it's purely a numbers game to get 70 million votes (to get 270 EV). Thanks.

Brando said...

Fixing a Baltimore (or any other blighted part of a city, or rural area for that matter) requires action on the state and local level. What good does it do to ease federal regulations (which often don't apply to many local businesses) or federal tax rates (which aren't even an issue if you're not running in the black anyway) when the real problems are local licensing, zoning, crime, etc.? The local powers that be have far more tools in the box to deal with these issues. It starts with safety--if residents and visitors don't feel safe in those neighborhoods, no economic revitalization will take place, period.

As for Trump--who knows if he has Democratic or Republican ideas? He'll say whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear, and swing with the wind the next moment. Anyone worried he might secretly be a leftist should just wait a few days, he'll be talking like William F Buckley again.

Chuck said...

rich hahn said...
Sounds like what Jack Kemp would say.

Trump also wants to return school control to state and local control.

All in all, a Conservative approach to some of the country's problems.

Well Jack Kemp has been dead for years, and I'm not sure what Jack Kemp would make of politics in 2016. But it certainly does sound like what John Kasich has been saying in this campaign; Kasich has built his campaign around those themes. Returning power to states and localities. That's Kasich's main message, as opposed to thinking of things "much, much, much stronger than waterboarding."

mccullough said...

Reagan was a Democrat until he was 51 years old. One of his big achievements was to raise Social Security taxes to improve its solvency.

He also ran deficits as a percentage of GDP during his 8 years that were almost the same as the deficit to GDP ratio FDR had in his first two terms. He was anti-communist like FDR, Truman, and JFK. He built up the military, which is now a traditional GOP position but wasn't at the time.

Reagan's conservatism was mostly symbolic. He was an FDR and JFK Democrat but the Dems had gone too far left.





bbkingfish said...

The "We're in really bad shape" part of the Trump quote has been the main Republican talking point of the last 7+ years.

I guess Jaltcoh must be talking about the "We have to fix it" part, which does sound more like a Democrat.


mccullough said...

The federal government could dismantle state zoning laws and development regulations tomorrow if it wanted to. The federal government already spends billions of dollars a year on local and state primary and secondary education. Nothing would stop the federal government from using this money to build privately run federal charter schools funded directly by the federal governs end since the local and state governments are so dysfunctional.

Brando said...

"Reagan was a Democrat until he was 51 years old. One of his big achievements was to raise Social Security taxes to improve its solvency."

I don't think there's anything un-conservative about doing that, though--if a program is going to go insolvent, you have to either trim it or find additional revenue. And certainly by the '80s SS was generally accepted on the Right as a worthwhile program (at least the biggest part of it--old age benefits, which functions more like a public insurance program than welfare, with caveats).

His tax cuts and deficit spending were a new thing for conservatives, who up to that point were more of the Eisenhower/Nixon mold of shunning deficits and accepting higher taxes if necessary to close budget gaps. Nowadays, it's almost anathema in GOP politics--I can't remember the last presidential nominee who didn't call for additional tax cuts, let alone favoring tax increases.

jr565 said...

He sounds like a democrat ALL the time. The only reason I'd think he was a republican is because he's running as the Republican. National review had the same argument.

Achilles said...

What I read didn't sound like a Democrat. What I read made sense.

Democrats list off a bunch of problems and have one solution, more government. It inevitably fails.

Trumps solutions were mostly market based and removing the federal government. He sounded like someone whose point of view was not government based. It makes sense as he had to solve problems all his life without government.

I was a Cruz supporter at the start. Now I am a Trump supporter. Cruz has the ideology but he is a lawyer who has worked in government all his life. Trump isn't perfect or even close. But he is better than any of the other candidates in the race because he is not a lawyer who has never had a real job.

Brando said...

"The federal government could dismantle state zoning laws and development regulations tomorrow if it wanted to."

It probably could, though there'd be a lot of fights in the courts over it (pre-emption and federalism arguments, etc.). The easier route (and the one I expect) would be conditioning federal money grants on some of these changes.

But the crime issue is paramount. We lose almost a person a day in Baltimore to murder, and we're less than a tenth the size of NYC. I can't imagine trying to set up shop in West Baltimore unless I had a gang's blessing.

Bay Area Guy said...

@Chuck

I always liked Kemp. He seemed to have that great balance of explaining conservative ideas, and how they applied in the real world, without coming off as a condescending A-hole. Great man.

Historical footnote -- Reagan should have tapped Kemp for VP in 1980. Yes, Kemp was young and inexperienced, but, he woulda been Prez in '88. Kemp was much more of a Reagan protege than Bush 1.

Oh well, I can dream, can't I?

jr565 said...

Danno wrote:
Sounding like a Democrat is preferable to sounding like a Socialist.

Six of one, half a dozen the other. Wasserman Shultz was asked what the difference between a democrat and a socialist and she coudnt come up with an answer. So, maybe Trump is more like a democrat from 10 years ago. Which might be a fair cop, and certainly preferable to a modern democrat, I suppose.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

No; he's evil, and evil people can't be Democrats. Oh, he's also dangerous. He's dangerous, and evil, and stupid, but also scary-smart (with secret plans and what not). And racist! Oh, and sexist.

Democrats can't be evil stupid sexist racists, do Trump can't be (or even sound like) a Democrat.

Achilles said...

jr565 said...
"He sounds like a democrat ALL the time. The only reason I'd think he was a republican is because he's running as the Republican. National review had the same argument."

This is the depth of analysis I have come to expect from nevertrumpers.

He has pledged a market based HSA health care reform package repeatedly on the trail. You can't even count the people who willfully lie about his position. Interesting thing is most of those liars supported Romney in 2012. The irony there is obvious, but too deep for nevertrumpers.

You will all be back on board and defending Trump's Health care reform proposals in 2 months. I would stop lying and casting aspersions at those of us you disagree with now.

dreams said...

He wasn't sounding like a corrupt Democrat when he said this.

“There is something going on, Maria,” he said. “Go to Brussels. Go to Paris. Go to different places. There is something going on and it’s not good, where they want Shariah law, where they want this, where they want things that — you know, there has to be some assimilation. There is no assimilation. There is something bad going on.”…

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/03/22/flashback-new-york-times-mocked-trump-for-saying-there-is-something-bad-going-on-in-brussels/

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Also, importantly, Trump is so extreme. Read a paper, duh! He's an EXTREMIST.
You can't say that he has many positions/uses many arguments/seems to have a natural affinity to many beliefs in common with Democrats, because that implies that he might have a mixed ideology (with some Leftists beliefs/values and some Rightist beliefs/values), and someone like that is hard to describe as EXTREME overall.

So no, it can't be the case, sorry. Trump is a dangerous extremist, so it can't be true that he sometimes sounds like a Democrat. The science is settled, the narrative is set. Sorry, kid.

jr565 said...

Achilles wrote:
He has pledged a market based HSA health care reform package repeatedly on the trail. You can't even count the people who willfully lie about his position. Interesting thing is most of those liars supported Romney in 2012. The irony there is obvious, but too deep for nevertrumpers.

You will all be back on board and defending Trump's Health care reform proposals in 2 months. I would stop lying and casting aspersions at those of us you disagree with now.

The fact that you are a Trump supporter makes me doubt every word you are uttering.

jr565 said...

Achilles,
I didn't say "doesn't trump sound like a democrat sometimes". The article did (and the link currently isn't working, so I cant necessarily discuss points in the article that would or would not prove that he acted like a democrat). But, I've noticed it. This article noticed it. National Review noticed it. Cruz, the actual conservative notices it. Why don't you?
What exactly was your beef with the establishement? That they weren't conservative enough or that they were too conservative? is your beef with Obama that he delivered a health care system and not the republican? I dont really care to hear about how establishmen repubs are bad from Trumpbots. since i have no idea, frankly, what their grievance actually is.

jr565 said...

I wil say this, Achilles. You better hope Trump actually has support and can win the general. Because if we are led down this path, by Trumpbots, to where it fractures the party, and he can't even win,we'll hold you and the Trumpbots responsible. And if Romney was a loser who can't beat Obama, what will that make Trump?

mccullough said...

Since many states and cities are going to need a federal bailout soon, any bailout could be conditioned on states and cities reforming their laws, including zoning and licensing and public contracting laws.

Brando said...

"Historical footnote -- Reagan should have tapped Kemp for VP in 1980. Yes, Kemp was young and inexperienced, but, he woulda been Prez in '88. Kemp was much more of a Reagan protege than Bush 1."

But you know Reagan in 1980 was trying to unite his party, and Bush was part of the moderate wing. Kemp wouldn't have helped him with that, and at the time at least the Reagan camp was worried about losing moderates to Carter or a third party.

"He has pledged a market based HSA health care reform package repeatedly on the trail."

You are aware that the HSAs that Trump supports are already the law, and has been since the early '00s, and 20 million Americans use them, right? If Trump is planning on doing something different with HSA he hasn't said so. I wouldn't honor his ramblings about health care as any sort of program.

"Since many states and cities are going to need a federal bailout soon, any bailout could be conditioned on states and cities reforming their laws, including zoning and licensing and public contracting laws."

Maybe only a Republican could propose something like that, as it would be massive stimulus spending (sort of like Nixon in China) focused on constituencies that are (currently) firmly Democratic. But conditioning it (sort of Marshall-Plan-like) on local reforms could be enough to get conservatives on board (though the money would have to come from somewhere). Maybe they could start it in a single city as a pilot project and see if it can work there first. Baltimore would be a good start.

mccullough said...

The GOP broke their coalition themselves. Trickle down nonsense has never worked and they have no other ideas. The GOP had the presidency and Congress for four years and governed poorly. Their entire platform is tax cuts for the rich and military adventurism. They lost the culture battle on gay marriage.

Their policies have never appealed to blacks and don't appeal to Latinos who both like government social spending programs, which is why W did well with Latinos.

Rubio was shiny wrapping around the same stale policies that Jeb, Kasich, and Cruz also ran on (though Cruz is less militaristic). Now they sound like Grievance Studies professors in their attacks on Trump.

They are an incompetent party at the federal level.

Terry said...

Blogger jr565 said...
I wil say this, Achilles. You better hope Trump actually has support and can win the general. Because if we are led down this path, by Trumpbots, to where it fractures the party, and he can't even win,we'll hold you and the Trumpbots responsible. And if Romney was a loser who can't beat Obama, what will that make Trump?

The winner-take-all election system in the US pushes us towards a two party system. The goal for conservatives is to move the middle to the right. The belief that one party will dominate government with 40% of the votes while two smaller parties, with similar policy preferences, are locked out with 30% of the vote each, is a fantasy.

Chuck said...

Bay Area Guy said...
@Chuck

I always liked Kemp. He seemed to have that great balance of explaining conservative ideas, and how they applied in the real world, without coming off as a condescending A-hole. Great man.

Historical footnote -- Reagan should have tapped Kemp for VP in 1980. Yes, Kemp was young and inexperienced, but, he woulda been Prez in '88. Kemp was much more of a Reagan protege than Bush 1.

Oh well, I can dream, can't I?


You know who the great protege' of Jack Kemp is now, don't you? The one leading American politician who worked with Kemp and who molded himself in the image of Kemp? Who was one of Kemp's speechwriters?

It was Paul Ryan.

CStanley said...

There have been many times I felt that Trump sounded like a Democrat, but this passage wasn't particularly one of them. I find myself wondering why JAC thought so....was it because he was giving a roundabout criticism of GWB doing nation building? Or because he was calling for federalize do building of infrastructure? If it's he latter, yes, I can see that being a left leaning idea, but if it's the former, historically it's usually been the left that called for nation building abroad. GWB flipped on this and then predictably, the left began attacking it for him when the policy began to fail.

Sebastian said...

@jr565: "What exactly was your beef with the establishment?" There you go again, demanding logic from Trumpkins. "The GOPe was not conservative enough, therefore we support someone who doesn't even pretend to be conservative." So unfair.

Anyway, Trump only sounds like a Dem part of the time. He is a populist loose cannon who changes his mind when he wants to or needs to. He just "gets along with the Republicans" for convenience.

Of course, Reagan favored amnesty, ran from Lebanon, and served as tax collector for the welfare state. And he did like Kempian enterprise zones -- talk about government waste. Sounds like Trump wants more of the same.

traditionalguy said...

Trump is OK with Iowa Corn Farmers. And he is OK with FDR's Social Security scheme and LBJ's Medicare add on. Trump is OK with protective Tariffs. Trump is OK with The War on Drugs. Trump is OK with the VA if done well.

What Trump does well is lead a Nation called the USA. The Globalist cabals are running the DC Government now to eliminate our nation, so that alone is a hell of a Revolution.

So what Trump is not a Pure Conservative ideologue, but neither are the voters who elected Reagan and will elect Trump. The voters want what Trump wants, stupid.

Fabi said...

Jack Kemp was a decent guy. Paul Ryan is a pussy -- is that why you like him, Chuck?

Paddy O said...

"They are an incompetent party at the federal level."

Speaking as a Californian, where everything is run by Democrats, I can attest to the fact that Democrats are an incompetent party at every level.

Vote corruption! Vote Democrat!

hombre said...

Trump is no longer a Democrat. He is now a Republican shill for Hillary.

BDNYC said...

"Trump is OK with Iowa Corn Farmers. And he is OK with FDR's Social Security scheme and LBJ's Medicare add on. Trump is OK with protective Tariffs. Trump is OK with The War on Drugs. Trump is OK with the VA if done well.

What Trump does well is lead a Nation called the USA. The Globalist cabals are running the DC Government now to eliminate our nation, so that alone is a hell of a Revolution.

So what Trump is not a Pure Conservative ideologue, but neither are the voters who elected Reagan and will elect Trump. The voters want what Trump wants, stupid."

So what you're saying is Trump wants to protect Leviathan which was created over decades by an unholy bipartisan alliance. Some revolution.

mccullough said...

Paul Ryan's proposals are fantasy just like Kemp's policies were. Enterprise zones didn't work because the schools in those areas are shit and crime is high and transportation sucks. So you have more than half the local population that is part of a permanent underclass in society with little education, no skills, no work ethic, and not even an ethic among men that doesn't believe in financially supporting their children or even helping to raise them and be involved in their lives.

BDNYC said...

I would vote for Paul Ryan in a heartbeat. He's a decent man, thoughtful, amiable, reasonable, experienced, hard working, responsible, etc., and his number one priority has been imposing fiscal discipline at the federal level. He's not a theocrat or a nativist. Yes, please.

Bay Area Guy said...

@Chuck

Yes, Paul Ryan is a protege of Kemp -- I like Ryan too! An honorable, decent man.

He has a tough position as Speaker, though, dealing with all these angry factions. Politically, as Romney's running mate in '12, he was too much the choir boy, when Romney needed a little more fight in him.

Trump has plenty of fight, we need to translate that into a winning strategy for the General. I'd like to hear Trump supporters on how they plan to win the General, now that they've pretty much won the Primary.

mccullough said...

Ryan is an amiable guy but his fiscal proposals don't add up at all. You can't cut taxes and not increase the deficit. We're on the left side of the Laffer Curve. Block granting Medicaid to the states is worth a shot but the states' fiscal messes are as bad as the federal one. His Medicare proposal is fantasy and borders on cult thinking. And we can't afford the military he wants.

Ryan is a professor. It's all good on the chalkboard but it's based on assumptions that are demonstrably false.

Fabi said...

Paul Ryan's number one priority has been imposing fiscal discipline at the federal level? Are we talking about the same guy here? Continuing Resolution Ryan -- that guy? Maybe there's another Paul Ryan somewhere that you guys are slobbering over.

jr565 said...

mccullogh wrote:
The GOP broke their coalition themselves. Trickle down nonsense has never worked and they have no other ideas. The GOP had the presidency and Congress for four years and governed poorly. Their entire platform is tax cuts for the rich and military adventurism. They lost the culture battle on gay marriage.
And i take it you are not therefore a conservative or a republican. WHen the argument was OBAMA was giving us big govt, the tea party demanded that the republicans fight it, and NOT act like RINO's. But it seems like being a RINO is actually quite fine.

jr565 said...

mcullough wrote:
Paul Ryan's proposals are fantasy just like Kemp's policies were. Enterprise zones didn't work because the schools in those areas are shit and crime is high and transportation sucks. So you have more than half the local population that is part of a permanent underclass in society with little education, no skills, no work ethic, and not even an ethic among men that doesn't believe in financially supporting their children or even helping to raise them and be involved in their lives.
So did you vote for Obama last time round?

jr565 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jr565 said...

Trump can't even acknowledge that our entitlements are the main driver of our economic woes. It was pointed out to him that cutting waste fraud and abuse would only deal with a small fraction of the spending, and would not address the issue. And yet he refuses to address cutting entitlements. Sounds like a democrat to me.
If the establishment were douchenozzles for letting Obamacare get passed, and the argument was that spending was going up, and jobs were going to be affected, and the debt is actually harmful then the tea partiers are attacking the establishment for not addressing those realities and instead "cutting deals" like JOhn Mccain did with the democrats. What do they want these same establishment republicans to do if Trump says he wont cut entitlements? Should they go along with him because he's a "republican" or should they fight him on it?
If you wnat them to go along, I really dont know why you'd be mad at "the establishment" and if you want them to not go along, I really dont know why you'd vote for Trump.

Tank said...

jr565 said...

Trump can't even acknowledge that our entitlements are the main driver of our economic woes. It was pointed out to him that cutting waste fraud and abuse would only deal with a small fraction of the spending, and would not address the issue. And yet he refuses to address cutting entitlements. Sounds like a democrat to me.


You can not talk about cutting SS and Medicare and get elected.

End of story.

mccullough said...

Here is a breakdown from a few years ago on the largest tax deductions/credits/exclusions for individual tax payers

It doesn't include the earned income tax credit, which is $68 billion this year.

jr565 said...

Tank wrote:

You can not talk about cutting SS and Medicare and get elected.

So you're saying Trump is deliberately lying?

jr565 said...

mcullough wrote:
Here is a breakdown from a few years ago on the largest tax deductions/credits/exclusions for individual tax payers

It doesn't include the earned income tax credit, which is $68 billion this year.
Who did you vote for in the last three elections, and why?

mccullough said...

Each party's main tenet is that the other party is worse. Most of the ideas from each party are inane. This is why most voters are independent and don't identify with either party.

jr565 said...

mcullough, which republicans do you think talked the talk and/or walked the walk and tried implementing ideas you think would work. The establishment republicans were bad because? and the non establishment republicans were good because? Who is offering the ideas that we are supposed to adopt that will supposedly solve problems.

Achilles said...

jr565 said...

"I dont really care to hear about how establishmen repubs are bad from Trumpbots. since i have no idea, frankly, what their grievance actually is."

My grievance is that the GOPe falls into the same trap as the progressives. Every problem has a government solution. Bush had a republican house and senate and what did he do with it? We got medicaid part B. Then we nominate McCain who is tough on immigration once every 6 years, and then Romney who fought for and passed Obamacare before Obama did.

Every one of the GOPe power brokers says what they need to around election time then somehow some way supports policies that dissolve our borders and send manufacturing overseas. They fight for free trade but not for lowering corporate income taxes. They fought harder for amnesty than they did for ending obamacare.

Trump puts America and Americans first. I am willing to bet he hates bureaucrats more than I do which is saying something.

mccullough said...

72% of tax payers take the standard deduction. Obama proposed to get rid of the charitable contribution. Paul Ryan proposed calling it at $17,000 per taxpayer. The non-profit industry screamed bloody murder. So each of them changed their mind.

jr565 said...

Mcullough wrote: "Each party's main tenet is that the other party is worse. Most of the ideas from each party are inane. This is why most voters are independent and don't identify with either party.",

while both parties may be bad, it is very possible that one party is worse

mccullough said...

Mitch Daniels and Phil Bredesen were the only two good governors over the last 25 years. Neither would run for president because the process and Washington is so dysfunctional.

Paul Ryan has been in the House for 18 years. Mitch McConnell has been in the Senate for 32 years. Pelosi has been in the House for 30 years. And after 30 years in the Senate (following four years in the House), Harry Reid is finally retiring. Our legislators are career politicians with stale ideas and fat bank accounts. The one thing both parties in Congress agree on is that term limits are bad.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
traditionalguy said...

BDNYC...The Leviathan will be cut deep. Education Dept of Pretense Education will ne gone. The EPA of pretend clean water and pretend clean air will go away and the State EPAs will do the real job the Feds never did while they hijacked their authority to feed an Enviro Hoax about controlling weather. The Energy Dept will be gone.The budget for those fictional super employers will be spent building Roads, bridges, airports and bus lines.

The old time wealth transfers among Americans will still be negotiated in Congress. But all transfers overseas will dry up.

Then a Pure Conservative can try to do it better.

Diamondhead said...

"Education Dept of Pretense Education will ne gone. The EPA of pretend clean water and pretend clean air will go away and the State EPAs will do the real job the Feds never did while they hijacked their authority to feed an Enviro Hoax about controlling weather. The Energy Dept will be gone.The budget for those fictional super employers will be spent building Roads, bridges, airports and bus lines."

When we gather at the river, the beautiful, the beautiful river...

Achilles said...

jr565 said...
"Mcullough wrote: "Each party's main tenet is that the other party is worse. Most of the ideas from each party are inane. This is why most voters are independent and don't identify with either party.",

while both parties may be bad, it is very possible that one party is worse."

Which is why we will count on your vote for Trump in November.

jr565 said...

Achilles wrote:
My grievance is that the GOPe falls into the same trap as the progressives. Every problem has a government solution. Bush had a republican house and senate and what did he do with it?

When Trump says he's going to make great deals, isnt' he saying the solutions will be more govt based? Who is he proposing to make deals with? If he was in line with republicans he woudln't need to make deals with them.
The only thing that Trump really exhibits that shows he's a republican or a conservative is his disdain for the establishment. But democrats share that same disdain. They have disdain for entirely different reasons. For repubs the disdain is because the person who is talking the talk isn't walking the walk. For democrats its beucase the establishment is racist,sexist, homophobic and should instead be a socialist/collectivist etc.

jr565 said...

achilles wrote:
Which is why we will count on your vote for Trump in November.

at that point, i dont know if Hillary wouldnt' be better.

walter said...

Blogger Bay Area Guy said...
Trump does sound like a Democrat at times, particularly on trade issues
--
Shades of Gephardt

jr565 said...

mcullough, again, who did you vote for in the last three elections?

Brando said...

"Trump can't even acknowledge that our entitlements are the main driver of our economic woes. It was pointed out to him that cutting waste fraud and abuse would only deal with a small fraction of the spending, and would not address the issue. And yet he refuses to address cutting entitlements. Sounds like a democrat to me."

Whenever I hear someone say they're going to save money by cutting "waste fraud and abuse" I know they're either not serious or don't know what they're talking about. Government actually spends a lot more than they save (just in employee hours) trying to curb waste and fraud and abuse, the fact is large systems are often inefficient just in trying to be "fair" and "competitive" (take a look at the government procurement process for a good example of this). When Trump holds that up as his solution to budget woes he's basically saying "I got nothing." Which would at least be honest if he could admit that, but Trump can never be wrong.

"They fought harder for amnesty than they did for ending obamacare."

Did they? I'm not sure what beyond "every Republican voting against it" they could have done to stop Obamacare. Even with a small minority in Congress they held fast enough to make the Dems pass a draft bill through reconciliation (which might have helped kill it in the Supreme Court if John Roberts hadn't decided to save the day). As for amnesty, some Republicans (like Prez Bush) favored it, but the GOP was able to kill it.

"Trump puts America and Americans first."

Not sure what you're basing this on, but I have never seen Trump put anything other than Trump first. Did he put Americans first when he lent his name to clothing lines that produced their products overseas?

"I am willing to bet he hates bureaucrats more than I do which is saying something."

A guy who just "hates" bureaucrats (you know, the people who will be working under his administration and implementing all these government programs that he favors) isn't going to accomplish much. I'd rather see someone who understands them, and why they do what they do (hint--this starts with Congress and the laws the bureaucrats are tasked with implementing), and how to improve their efficiency and accountability. I have yet to see a reason to expect this out of a man who has been proud of not understanding such basic things.


walter said...

So..24 hr news cycle and all..the NYT OTR comments are no longer anyone's concern..

Hagar said...

If you are planning to win an election by getting a whole lot of Democrats to vote for you, it is not unreasonable that you would sometimes sound like a Democrat.

Diamondhead said...

"at that point, i dont know if Hillary wouldnt' be better."

At least after her presidency there will still be a conservative party. And doesn't really matter whether conservatives decide to vote for him in November. The man has 70% disapproval ratings. The loss is baked in. Only thing that matters is making sure Hillary doesn't have 60 votes in the Senate.

jr565 said...

Trump is an awful lot like Sanders. They have almost the same platform in many cases:

We need to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, invest $1 trillion in our roads and our bridges and our rail system.
Bernie Sanders
Nov. 29, 2015, remarks at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner in Manchester, N.H.

We have infrastructure that we have to fix, we have bridges and roads and tunnels and everything’s falling apart.
Donald Trump

Obama also had that same desire to fix infrastructure. Which is why we got a stimulus that pushed shovel ready jobs rather than grow economy. Trump supported that stimulus.
Why shouldn't I vote for Sanders?

Fair Trade:
We need trade policies that are fair for the American worker, fair for poor people around the world, and not just designed to make the CEOs of multinational corporations even richer than they are today.
Bernie Sanders
Jan. 2 in Worcester, Mass.

We need fair trade, not free trade. We need fair trade. It’s gotta be fair.
Donald Trump

Trump is also pro tarrifs, which most people say will in fact lead to higher prices and loss of jobs. Again, same as Sanders.

Social Security:
What we must do is say, of course we’re not going to cut Social Security but we are going to expand Social Security benefits.
Bernie Sanders
Jan. 26 meeting with Iowa Steelworkers in Des Moines, Iowa

We’re not gonna cut your Social Security and we’re not cutting your Medicare. We’re gonna take jobs back from all these countries that are ripping us off. We’re going to become a wealthy country again we’re going to be able to save your Social Security.
Donald Trump
Dec. 11, 2015, rally in Des Moines, Iowa
Neither will cut. Both lie to you and say that no cuts are going to occur. How is trump goign to do it? Good deals. How is Sanders? Raise my taxes. Both are full of shit.

Why then is Hillary not the better choice. At least if I get the same, its not the republican pushing it.

CStanley said...

I'm beginning to think the conservatives who are trying to figure out how to counter Trump should:
1. Promote a write in or "none of the above" campaign for the top of the ticket
And
2. Remind everyone that a GOP Congress, regardless how much you think you hate them, is the best stopgap against Hillary Clinton.

jr565 said...

Hagar wrote:
If you are planning to win an election by getting a whole lot of Democrats to vote for you, it is not unreasonable that you would sometimes sound like a Democrat.
he doesn't seem to have that consideration when it comes to getting republicans to vote for him who have a problem with his policy suggestions. He is basically running as a democrat and telling the establishment they are losers. They may well be, but he's just cut off his nose to spite his face.

Birkel said...

FDR was anti-communist?
Did anybody tell Uncle Joe?

William Chadwick said...

I pointed out the similarities between Trumpism and statist pseudo-liberalism to some Trumpites on generally pro-freedom but disturbingly pro-Trump blog--including the anti-free-trade crowd's resort to the Argument from Pity, the favorite fallacious argument of "liberals." (And by "liberals" I mean of course "tax-happy, coercion-addicted, power-tripping government humpers and State fellators.") The response was basically "You're a poo-poo head!"--which is how "liberals" and "progressives" generally argue (except for "poo-poo head" substitute "fascist" or "racist"). Disturbing and weird.

Achilles said...

Brando said...

"A guy who just "hates" bureaucrats (you know, the people who will be working under his administration and implementing all these government programs that he favors) isn't going to accomplish much."

Expansion. Trump built things. He had people who could barely tie their shoes telling him he had to come as close to R-38 level insulation as possible. He had people telling him you have to have a hand rail on every flight of stairs over 3 feet high and an access ramp. For every project he started he had to pay a dozen environmental studies majors to write an environmental impact statement that cost millions. He had to upgrade the sewer, roads, electrical grid in the area and have a bunch of do nothings say he didn't build that.

My 3 little businesses spend most of their time dealing with government compliance. Taxes are the largest line item even above payroll. Each one has to deal with at least 5 different government agencies.

Trump had to deal with more. I guarantee he understands what is really ailing this country more than any of the lawyers who have never had a real job. He understands my issues and problems at a personal level and my hope is he will do better than the lawyers.

Achilles said...

jr565 said...

[a bunch of garbage]

"Why then is Hillary not the better choice. At least if I get the same, its not the republican pushing it."

All of your analysis is facile and surface level.

There is no point to discussing this with someone who will not read his actual proposals and would rather make up a bunch of crap fed to him by the media.

The last line outs you. You will either be helping Cruz and Trump beat Hillary in a month, or you will be outed like many of the GOPe as a false flag operation that just lies to republican voters while pushing the plutocrat/globalists agenda.

mccullough said...

There is a Conservative party in the US? I thought half of them died shortly after the 16th Amendment was passed. The other half died during the New Deal. The war was lost 100 years ago. We're arguing about details on how much bigger and more intrusive the federal government should be. When they had the reins from 2002-2006, the GOP grew the shot out of the government and added another entitlement program. The Dems then grew it some more and added another entitlement program when they came in power. What is the GOP going to do to one up the Dems?

jr565 said...

Why is he running as a republican anyway?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/07/21/why_donald_trump_didnt_run_as_a_democrat_127475.html
"Let’s go further, however, and point out that this guy has never really been on the GOP team.

Certainly, there are thrice-married Republicans in this country. There are also Republicans who consider Bill Clinton a successful president, just as there are Republicans who believe George W. Bush was “the worst president in history.” Some Republicans care so little about abortion that they can’t explain if they are pro-life or pro-choice. There are also Republicans who have said that all 11 million illegal immigrants in this county deserve “a path” to citizenship—and there are other Republicans who have called for an impenetrable wall between the United States and Mexico. There are even a few Republicans who have donated money to Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid.

But there are no Republicans about whom you can accurately say all those things—unless you count Donald Trump. In a recent interview, Ari Fleischer, who was White House press secretary under George W. Bush, said it was clear that Trump was “no conservative.” The real issue is more basic: there’s not much evidence he’s even a Republican."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-donation-history-shows-democratic-favoritism/2011/04/25/AFDUddtE_story.html

And

"Judging by his petulance on the 2016 campaign trail, the easiest explanation is that Trump broke with the Democrats because he was peeved at the titular head of the Democratic Party. His pattern of donations changed markedly during Barack Obama’s second term as president. This change actually began a year earlier and it coincides with the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Association dinner. Trump was a guest, and listened as the president made fun of Trump’s hair, his supposedly garish architectural taste, and his fixation with Obama’s birth certificate.

The Donald kept up a tight smile as this roasting went on, but his expression froze in pique when the entertainer who followed Obama kept piling on. “Donald Trump often talks about running as a Republican, which is surprising," said comedian Seth Meyers. “I just assumed he was running as a joke.”

It sounds then like Donald is a good little Democrat, but got pissed when comedians made fun of his hair. And was threatening to run as a republican if they didnt kiss his ass more.

Achilles said...

William Chadwick said...
I point out that Trumps actual positions are different than what the nevertrumpers contend they are.

If you look around the people jumping up and down and screaming poopoo head are the nevertrumpers. When Trump pushes for an actual repeal of Obamacare and installs a HSA/free market system like he has repeatedly stated in this campaign I will expect apologies.

jr565 said...

mcullough wrote:
hen they had the reins from 2002-2006, the GOP grew the shot out of the government and added another entitlement program. The Dems then grew it some more and added another entitlement program when they came in power. What is the GOP going to do to one up the Dems?

Get Trump elected. Thanks!

Brando said...

"My 3 little businesses spend most of their time dealing with government compliance. Taxes are the largest line item even above payroll. Each one has to deal with at least 5 different government agencies."

As a business owner, I trust you know the difficulties of dealing with regulators from that standpoint and I assume Trump (as a former builder) knows that too. But that's a very different skill set from understanding how these agencies work (particularly when we're talking about a lot of agencies that the businessman hasn't had to deal with) from the inside. Business skills and government skills don't always translate to one another. And the job of president is running the bureaucracy, and getting it to work better. Pure antagonism towards the agencies that work under you is not going to cut it.

"Trump had to deal with more. I guarantee he understands what is really ailing this country more than any of the lawyers who have never had a real job. He understands my issues and problems at a personal level and my hope is he will do better than the lawyers."

It would be nice if he evidenced any of that. So far, his pronouncements seem to boil down to "we're going to get better deals" (how, he has yet to explain) and "get the best people running things" (again, how? Who are these best people who only would work for Trump and no other president?). His random pettiness and cruelty doesn't suggest he gets anyone but himself. Maybe you think his self-regard could be channeled for good things, but I'm not seeing exactly how that will happen.

khesanh0802 said...

@jr565 I scrolled to the bottom and was going to say something brilliant about combining the best of R and D ideas was pretty appealing and you beat me to it.

Treating policy positions as if they require something like religious orthodoxy seems very foolish to me.

Achilles said...

jr565 said...
Why is he running as a republican anyway?

[more garbage provided by the wapo]

I am glad you trust the Wapo to vet republican candidates and their motivations.

Diamondhead said...

"I point out that Trump's actual positions are different than what the nevertrumpers contend they are."

If you don't like his positions now, just wait a while. If you do like them, just wait a while. That's the point. The man is saying what YOU want to hear right now. He will say what THEY want to hear when it suits him.

Brando said...

"When Trump pushes for an actual repeal of Obamacare and installs a HSA/free market system like he has repeatedly stated in this campaign I will expect apologies."

No one is going to repeal Obamacare without replacing it with something that can get majority support. We already have HSAs, and I'm curious as to how his "free market" system would be different from what we have now.

jr565 said...

Achilles, as reason pointed out he seems to want to replace Obamacare with.... Obamacare.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/09/29/donald-trump-wants-to-repeal-obamacare-r

"elley: How do you fix it?

Trump: There’s many different ways, by the way. Everybody’s got to be covered. This is an un-Republican thing for me to say because a lot of times they say, "No, no, the lower 25 percent that can’t afford private. But–"

Pelley: Universal health care.

Trump: I am going to take care of everybody.

Universal Mandate?
I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.


So, Obamacare. Just better. Why would it be better? because Trump is great.

Pelley: The uninsured person is going to be taken care of. How? How?

Trump: They’re going to be taken care of. I would make a deal with existing hospitals to take care of people. And, you know what, if this is probably—

Pelley: Make a deal? Who pays for it?

Trump: —the government’s gonna pay for it. But we’re going to save so much money on the other side. But for the most it’s going to be a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition with lots of competitors with great companies and they can have their doctors, they can have plans, they can have everything.
He is literally describing Obamacare. He's just promising that you will keep your doctor. Where did I hear that before?

Achilles said...

Brando said...

"It would be nice if he evidenced any of that. So far, his pronouncements seem to boil down to "we're going to get better deals" (how, he has yet to explain) and "get the best people running things" (again, how? Who are these best people who only would work for Trump and no other president?). His random pettiness and cruelty doesn't suggest he gets anyone but himself. Maybe you think his self-regard could be channeled for good things, but I'm not seeing exactly how that will happen."

1. He has stated that policy specifics at this point are a fools errand. I agree. As long as the paradigm is correct that is what I am looking for. Lawyers get bogged down in semantics and details. Business owners understand the limitations of plans and specifics. I expect him to look at the problem and find a way to fix it. I would expect a lawyer to form up a bunch of committees and talk about the issue and never get anything done.

2. He has promised to end the EPA, Department of Ed, and IRS among others. I trust him on that far more than I trust Cruz who is long on ideology and short on experiencing the misery and suffering bureaucrats cause.

jr565 said...

Achilles wrote:
I am glad you trust the Wapo to vet republican candidates and their motivations.

Sure. Anyone who raises an objection is just an establishment. Maybe Trump can put out a periodical called "Trump: the best republican in the history of the universe" and THEY can vet Trump.

Achilles said...

jr565 said...

"Trump: —the government’s gonna pay for it. But we’re going to save so much money on the other side. But for the most it’s going to be a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition with lots of competitors with great companies and they can have their doctors, they can have plans, they can have everything."

He described a free market voucher system. Combined with HSA's a medicare/medicaid voucher would be an excellent direction. He has also said he wants to remove the state insurance commissions by taking away the state borders issue.

You have to totally misrepresent it in a puerile way to get Obamacare out of that.

J. Farmer said...

Yes, Trump sounds sometimes like a Democrat. That's part of why he's been winning. The two most popular government programs are Social Security and Medicare. Rubio wanted to voucherize and basically abolish Medicare. Really really unpopular. Trump vowed to protect Medicare. Really really popular. Even Obamacare itself is split about 50/50 in terms of approval. This is a good strategy for Trump.

Achilles said...

jr565 said...
Achilles wrote:
I am glad you trust the Wapo to vet republican candidates and their motivations.

"Sure. Anyone who raises an objection is just an establishment. Maybe Trump can put out a periodical called "Trump: the best republican in the history of the universe" and THEY can vet Trump."

Or you can read his speeches, go to his website, and think for yourself.

I know it is a crazy idea.

jr565 said...

"Or you can read his speeches, go to his website, and think for yourself.

I know it is a crazy idea."

I'm not convinced Trump even knows whats on his own website. You certainly woudnt know it based on how he articulates his "policy suggestions" when he's in debates or on the stump.

Chuck said...

jr565:

There's actually more to your point about Trump's blandly pro-Obamacare promise to repeal and replace Obamacare...

Trump has repeatedly gone back to his promise that he would make sure people would not be getting sick and dying on sidewalks:

“There will be a certain number of people who will be on the street dying, and as a Republican, I don’t want that to happen,” Trump said.

“We’re going to take care of people who are dying on the street because there will be a group of people that are not going to be able to think in terms of private or anything else.”


http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/268523-trump-were-going-to-take-care-of-people-who-are-dying-on-the

Which is patently ridiculous. Trump is so incomprehensible, that one never knows if Trump is talking about Medicaid (which ObamaCare expanded, over the objections of Tea Party Republicans) and the expansion of Medicaid (and on that latter point, John Kasich is the real standup Republican, who took a huge amount of intra-party criticism for his remarkably successful Medicaid expansion program in Ohio), or if Trump is simply talking about hospitals' responsibility to admit and treat indigent patients.

That latter issue -- emergency admissions of indigents -- has been the subject of federal law since the EMTALA act of 1986.

Trump is just too stupid to recognize how foolish he sounds, to the people who really know about such things.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Brando said...A guy who just "hates" bureaucrats (you know, the people who will be working under his administration and implementing all these government programs that he favors) isn't going to accomplish much.

Possibly true, Brando. But it's also certainly true that a guy (or gal!) who doesn't hate bureaucrats isn't going to accomplish much (w/r/t making gov. smaller and/or more efficient). And it's probably true that the type of person you'd prefer ("someone who understands them, and why they do what they do...and how to improve their efficiency and accountability") would be either unwilling or unable (or both!) to bring about those changes.

If the necessary change is to get rid of a bunch of 'em and/or get government out of the business of doing X then I'm not sure who's more likely to accomplish that task--it's entirely possible the actual answer is "neither one" and I guess that's pretty much where we are today.

Hey, at least they're unionized! (Sigh).

Ann Althouse said...

"Professor; I guess I am grateful to your son, for linking to the WaPo interview transcript. Have you read it? Read the whole thing? It is some astonishing jibberish. Trump's rambling dissertation on First Amendment press privileges in relation to libel laws would not last 30 seconds as a radio call-in rant. It's not just wrong; it's deeply ignorant. It's not even a sensible point of view."

Thanks for the push.

I'd read parts but not all of it, mainly the stuff with Attiah that I blogged about.

Chuck said...

J. Farmer said...
Yes, Trump sounds sometimes like a Democrat. That's part of why he's been winning. The two most popular government programs are Social Security and Medicare. Rubio wanted to voucherize and basically abolish Medicare. Really really unpopular. Trump vowed to protect Medicare. Really really popular. Even Obamacare itself is split about 50/50 in terms of approval. This is a good strategy for Trump.


Did you get a free ObamaPhone?

This is where it gets personal for me. You are saying that you've rejected a Republican like Marco Rubio, who frankly and intelligently discussed Medicare reforms for the generation that is still decades away from Medicare eligibility, and whose future benefits are truly in jeopardy as things currently stand.

You've gone out of your way to falsely suggest that Marco Rubio would "abolish" Medicare. You hateful, miserable lying piece of shit.

Then there is Trump -- alone among Republicans -- promising to not reform anything in the Medicare benefits system. Great. Do nothing.

Now I am not sure whether you'd like to make the Republicans more like "the Party of Free Shit," or whether you should just remain a Democrat, and keep out of Republican primaries.

Birches said...

"He described a free market voucher system. Combined with HSA's a medicare/medicaid voucher would be an excellent direction. He has also said he wants to remove the state insurance commissions by taking away the state borders issue."

You know he also said that if you purchased a plan across state lines, the plan would have to be compliant with your state's coverage requirements, right?

Birches said...

There are a whole lot of people who've projected what they want on Donald Trump...

Michael said...

Here is the sad fact about bureaucracies, wherever they operate. Go in and mark every other door or cubicle with an X and then let the head of the department decide if the X means stay or go. With half gone there would be absolutely zero difference in output. None. I have seen it over and over even in the same companies who prune people viciously and then rebuild (starting immediately) and then prune again. Over years and years.

mccullough said...

Trump isn't a Republican any more than Sanders is a Democrat. But he's winning enough primary votes to obtain the nomination unlike Sanders. The national GOP is a weak, desiccated group with no ideas and weak leadership. Mitt Romney is the leader, running from state to state to try and stop Trump. Mitt should spend his fortune on a forming a third party of whiny country club Republicans. The can name it the Whig Party. It would have about 3% of the electorate, slightly more than the Libertarian Party.

William Chadwick said...

Achilles said (in response to my post):

"I point out that Trumps actual positions are different than what the nevertrumpers contend they are."

So Trump is NOT a statist on trade? Good to know.

"If you look around the people jumping up and down and screaming poopoo head are the nevertrumpers."

If you say so; although one group arguing stupidly doesn't justify another group arguing stupidly.

Bruce Hayden said...

Of course Trump sounds like a Democrat on occasion. The demographic that is at least partially driving his candidacy (Jacksonians) have been a Democratic constituency since their namesake, Old Hickory, was elected President some two centuries ago. They are ripe for being switched, thanks to being so disrespected by Obama and the Democrats for so long. If Trump can convert a large percentage of this demographic (along with other working class Whites), and pick up most of the usual Republican demographics, beating Hillary should be fairly straight forward.

Alex said...

Donald Trump = Hitler... please don't pay attention to those Muslims bombers... didn't happen.. Trump=Hitler.... GO BERNIE!

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

Trump bears an uncanny resemblance in word and action to the mythical American conservative identified by The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution. A hybrid of classical liberalism and Judeo-Christian religious or moral philosophy.

However, he may be a generational or progressive liberal or pro-choice cultist in disguise.

Terry said...

Obviously, Clinton and Sanders are the only candidates with serious plans to defeat Islamic terrorism by cracking down on their enablers in the National Rifle Association, the American Legislative Exchange Council, and, of course, by putting the fiendish Koch Brothers behind bars.

Terry said...

Here is my suggestion for the people that will never vote for Trump (I am in that club):
Attack Hillary. The MSM will do what they can to defeat Trump. The MSM will not significantly criticize Hillary.
My God, the woman is a horror. She accomplished nothing of importance in the 1.25 terms as senator that her husband finagled for her. Ditto for her four years as secretary of state. Why the Hell did Obama appoint her? Hillary is a liar. She sold her political influence to foreign powers. She is pro-amnesty, pro-BLM, and anti-gun when a large percentage of Americans take the opposite positions.

Qwinn said...

Remember how Trump called for a total ban on Muslim immigration "until we figure out what's going on"? Did anyone hear him walk that back at all at the time? Because I didn't.

But now, he says "I would be extremely careful about people from the Middle East coming into our country." When asked about his previous call to shut down Muslim immigration, he says: "I didn't say shut it down. I said you have to be very careful. We have to be very, very strong and vigilant at the borders. We have to be tough."

He didn't say shut Muslim immigration down. That stuff we were talking about for weeks? We must have made it all up.

So yes, he sounds like a Democrat. He lies through his teeth like the best of them.

shiloh said...

Indeed, Trump is quite the chameleon as he could of just as easily run as a Dem.

Cleveland "con"vention will be must see reality tv ...

But what part will Clint Eastwood play? And will George and Dick still be in the witness protection program ~ stay tuned.

Michael K said...

Haven't had time to read all the comments.

"His tax cuts and deficit spending were a new thing for conservatives,"

The tax cuts were Kemp-Roth. The spending, aside from military buildup, were Tip O'Neill. That was the price he had to pay to get his agenda enacted by a Democrat Congress, especially after Dole lost the Senate for him.

Chuck said...

Terry said...
Here is my suggestion for the people that will never vote for Trump (I am in that club):
Attack Hillary. The MSM will do what they can to defeat Trump. The MSM will not significantly criticize Hillary.

Terry, I'll go further; I hope she's indicted. On general principles, I'd like to see her campaign get derailed. But particularly so, in light of how General Petraeus was run down.

But of course, if Hillary is indicted, say, in June after all the primaries are done and she has the delegate count sewn up, then what? Sanders? Biden? George Wallace? Henry Wallace?

It just seems a pity to me, that in such a winnable year for Republicans, we may be putting up the most ridiculous candidate since Alf Landon.

Chuck said...

mccullough said...
Trump isn't a Republican any more than Sanders is a Democrat. But he's winning enough primary votes to obtain the nomination unlike Sanders. The national GOP is a weak, desiccated group with no ideas and weak leadership. Mitt Romney is the leader, running from state to state to try and stop Trump. Mitt should spend his fortune on a forming a third party of whiny country club Republicans. The can name it the Whig Party. It would have about 3% of the electorate, slightly more than the Libertarian Party.


Right now, the Not-Trump vote in the Republican Party is about 60-65%. What do you expect in a general election?

Terry said...

Chuck wrote:
"It just seems a pity to me, that in such a winnable year for Republicans, we may be putting up the most ridiculous candidate since Alf Landon."
I agree. But what are you going to do?
What is the not-Cruz vote in the GOP? 70-75%? I mean actual votes cast.
I don't think that Cruz can win against Hillary. Against Sanders he can, probably.
The Democrats and the MSM have an arsenal of weapons they have built up over the years to use against people like Cruz, and he does not have what it takes to overcome them.

Saint Croix said...

Doesn't Trump sound a lot like a Democrat sometimes?

Quick, which one is Trump!

Obama is "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

"I have a great relationship with the blacks."

Obama is "light-skinned" and has "no Negro dialect."

And you got to love "There's actual political science that backs that up."

"I love the Muslims. I think they're great people."

"But you have people coming in, and I"m not just saying Mexicans, I'm talking about people that are from all over that are killers and rapists and they're coming into this country."

"That's all hymies want to talk about, is Israel; every time you go to Hymietown, that's all they want to talk about."

"Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again"

Steven Davis said...

I'm surprised Althouse isn't on this:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/03/22/anti_trump_ads_try_to_win_over_mormons_by_slut_shaming_melania.html

mccullough said...

Petraeus wasn't run down. He got a slap on the wrist. While he was head of the CIA he gave his girlfriend classified information and then lied about it to the FBI. He's a disgrace who got off easy.

Michael K said...

"Right now, the Not-Trump vote in the Republican Party is about 60-65%. What do you expect in a general election?"

The vote is split among candidates but that does not mean it is all "NOT TRUMP." That is a few die hard losers who prefer to work with Hillary for the graft than take a chance.

I expect that the Never Trump's will be around 15% and the Democrat crossovers will outnumber them big time.

We could either of us be wrong.

We will see unless the GOPe prefers to throw the election in the Rules Committee.

ken in tx said...

I think Trump is running as a Republican because their process is more democratic. It allows an outsider a fair chance to gain the nomination. The Democrat process is rigged. No outsiders allowed. Usually it is a contest between insiders. Sanders is a fluke, and he won't win the nomination.

Michael K said...

"While he was head of the CIA he gave his girlfriend classified information and then lied about it to the FBI. He's a disgrace who got off easy."

I did not know that. My impression is that he gave her recollections of Afghanistan, and she had a secret clearance but no Need to Know.

You could be correct but I would like to see evidence that it involved the CIA. Certainly, Deutsch violated rules at CIA by taking files home.

Phil 3:14 said...

Trade wars and growing deficits from Medicare and Social Security. I don't care if you call yourself a Dem or a Republican, I'm not going to vote for that!

And that's not even mentioning who's going to pay for that f'ing wall.

ken in tx said...

Recently, Sanders supporters learned how rigged the Democrat process is in Travis Co. TX. Sanders won the Travis Co. D primary. However, many Sander's delegates did not show up at the county convention, which selected Clinton delegates to go to the state convention. Sanders supporters protested, but the rules were rigged against them.

BTW, I have seen no Hillery stickers in Austin, only Sanders.

Fabi said...

This looks like it will be the election thread tonight, so, I think both of the contests may tell stories, even though the outcomes of each shouldn't be in doubt.

Cruz should easily take the Utah caucus. The country's two leading Mormon politicos -- Romney and Beck -- have gone all-out against Trump and that should produce a knock out. I'd be surprised to see Cruz with less than 65%, especially since it's a caucus -- a format that has been in his favor. Kasich probably brings in 20% and Trump 15%.

Trump should win the Arizona primary with ease. If the traffic disruptions by the Soros brown shirts have the negative impact I would assume, plus any collateral vote from the terrorist bombing this morning, Trump should certainly see 50% of the vote -- a first in a Republican primary this season, I believe -- Kasich may limp in with 15% and Cruz takes the remainder.

Fabi said...

I forgot about American Samoa. How rude! I have no idea what will happen there -- Tony Rocky Horror has not weighed-in on the election.

Diamondhead said...

"That is a few die hard losers who prefer to work with Hillary for the graft than take a chance."

35% of Republicans would consider a third party if Trump is nominated. Do you imagine that all of them are in a position to benefit from "graft" if Hillary is elected? Give me a break. The "GOPe" seems just fine with a Trump candidacy, btw.

gadfly said...

@Michael K said . . .

I expect that the Never Trump's will be around 15% and the Democrat crossovers will outnumber them big time.

The Trump Hive Mind is at it again. The magic of 15% comes from too close a connection with the Hive and Trump's bull crap, and not enough with the real conservatives who will do #NeverTrump in a New York Liberal Minute. We represent the GOP base upwards of 35-40%. Just 3 million conservatives sitting on their hands doomed Mittens in 2012 - and Willard Mitt never had negatives as bad as Trump has garnered. Also, Mitt's Mormon friends would have been hard pressed to find a nude picture of Ann Romney everywhere on the internet but the Hive loves and adores Trump family values.

Ann Althouse's son doesn't understand us Cons either, but future political influence depends on protecting the base now and bringing back the shaky TEA Party to our side. Failing that, expect the Libertarians, already the largest American political leanings group at 44% according to Gallup, will have real members instead of leaners the next time around. In the same conservatives were at 38%.

Michael K said...

"35% of Republicans would consider a third party if Trump is nominated."

Polls are useless right now but you are welcome to think they tell you the facts.

shiloh said...

"I think Trump is running as a Republican because their process is more democratic. It allows an outsider a fair chance to gain the nomination. The Democrat process is rigged."

SC ~ Trump 32.5% wins all 50 delegates // Hillary ~ 73.5% wins 39 delegates/Sanders 14

OH ~ Kasich 47% wins all 66 delegates/Trump 35.6% wins 0

OH ~ Hillary 56.5% = 81 delegates/Sanders 42.7% = 62 delegates

FL ~ Trump 45.7% wins all 99 delegates

NJ/AZ/MT/SD/NE are winner take all for Reps.

Indeed, the Rep primaries are unfairly front loaded which is working out perfect for Trump. Oops!

Michael K said...

"The magic of 15% comes from too close a connection with the Hive and Trump's bull crap, and not enough with the real conservatives who will do #NeverTrump in a New York Liberal Minute. "

I'm not yet a supporter but am more of a libertarian Republican.

I do think this is a revolution and have been saying so for a while. What I like has little to do with what has happened and I don't think what you want will either.

Diamondhead said...

"Polls are useless right now but you are welcome to think they tell you the facts."

Better to go on your feelings.

shiloh said...

btw, speaking of useless, history tells us the Reps greater turnout this election cycle means squat as regards to the general election.

carry on

mccullough said...

35% of Republicans is about 8% of the electorate. They would form their own third party but they could never agree on a nominee. Maybe they should form two parties: half of them could dig up Calvin Cooldige's bones and put on top hat on his skull and run him and the other half could run Mitt Romney. They could have an undercard debate on C-SPAN 3 before the Trump Hillary debate.

shiloh said...

I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat. ~ Will Rogers

Soooo, when did the Republican party become a discombobulated mess? ok, 8 years of Cheney/Bush changed everything.

Terry said...

At this point I do not believe Hillary will be indicted for her insecure handling of secure information. The FBI does not want to be seen as interfering in the political process, at least not a political process as important as a presidential election.
At some point it becomes a political issue. If the American people want to elect Hillary, regardless of her problems with handling secure information, who is the FBI to tell them otherwise?
The time to indict Hillary would have been late last year, before the primary and caucus season started.
What I expect (and I could be wrong) will be a release of information that lays out the grounds for indicting Hillary, without an actual indictment. That way the FBI can say that they told us what she has done and how damaging it has been.
This is a democracy, after all. The JD doesn't get to decide who is and who is not an acceptable choice to head the executive branch (outside of constitutional restrictions).

shiloh said...

Re: Hillary's FBI problem. Keep hope alive!

Saint Croix said...

I swear, Donald Trump represents every rap video I have ever seen in my life. He is all in on the Pimp Thug life style. For his reelection campaign, he will have a gold "Trump" implanted on his teeth. The only thing keeping him from being a white rapper is that he can't actually sing or dance, and has no talent whatsoever. He's like Jay-Z, if you strip him of all musical ability, bleach the hell out of him, and his daddy gave him $200 million dollars. I don't know why the hell I'm picking on Jay-Z. He's a pudgy, fat, old Vanilla Ice who cannot dance, rhyme or sing. If this was a sit-com, Will Smith would play Barack Obama. He raps happy! And he's really unhappy that Meat Loaf is moving into his house. With apologies to Meat Loaf, I did not mean to insult Meat Loaf by comparing him to the Republican nominee for President. Now I'm going to have to wash Meat Loaf's car to make up for this. Hey, at least I didn't link to Hot Patootie Bless My Soul. I would find this a lot more amusing if we weren't handing him nuclear launch codes. Tell us again about the big wall that Mexico will pay for because of your mad diplomacy skills. I think we'll call that song, "Pay For My Wall, Bitch!" Without any dancing or singing to distract us from how fucking stupid this is.

jr565 said...

It's looking more and more like trump is inevitable. And so, if the never trumps don't want Hillary they need to rally around the big democrat named Donald. But can he please stop with the inane messaging. I don't want to have to support someone who says we are going to torture people as a matter of course. Or who says we will ban all Muslims. And trump is not going to get any votes beyond his base if he doesn't learn how to not put his foot up in his mouth. Can he do that?

wildswan said...

If people would answer Trump's points.

That Islamic terrorism is a problem and we need to be able to distinguish those who support jihad from those who do not before we let in hundreds of thousands of Muslims.
That Obama is always outmanouvered in international negotiations and always insulting our allies without making new friends and Hillary was his Secretary of State.
That unemployment in this country is massive among certain groups and so illegal immigration should be prevented as it takes away jobs from Americans as fast as they are created.
That PC is stifling free speech.
That the government is bankrupt.
The the government is over-regulating.
That the government is over-reaching.

Avoid the Democratic talking points that sound so clever and are so stupid - OOH Donald Trump he's so scary, so stupid, so hairy, OOOH Donald Trump. Grow up. Explain what you are going to do about the problems.
Hillary will get us all killed. You saw what she did to her ambassador. You see how the Iraq-run-away-quickly worked out. Now we are doing, sneak-back-slowly-with-insufficient-force. So, being dead, it won't matter that the country would have been bankrupt if it survived. But if we are going to live, what would you do about the millions underemployed - just ignore them like the Democrats and Republicans? What about the slow collapse of Obamacare - just pretend it isn't happening?

Take on the issues that Trump has exposed or lose. That's my opinion for all you never Trumpers.

Guildofcannonballs said...

Walk this way, talk this way, walk this way, talk this way, just gimme a kiss Saint Croix.

Like this.

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/rundmc/walkthisway.html

Guildofcannonballs said...

"Sooo, when did the Republican party become a discombobulated mess? ok, 8 years of Cheney/Bush changed everything."

Do you mean governors, state legislators, and the House and Senate majority party members, or just the POTUS race? By some measures the GOP isn't doing all that bad, in terms of getting elected, or are they?

Is there anyplace on the Internet to see who did better in 2014 for instance? Thanks in advance Sir.

Brando said...

"Trade wars and growing deficits from Medicare and Social Security. I don't care if you call yourself a Dem or a Republican, I'm not going to vote for that!

And that's not even mentioning who's going to pay for that f'ing wall."

There won't be a wall, at least not one that covers the entire border, because to build along the Rio Grande they'd have to set it back behind American owned private property. And the only people who would pay for what they do build will be the U.S. taxpayer. The real question (for the part of the wall that could exist) is how well patrolled it will be, as immigrants and smugglers have had no problem scaling and tunneling under walls. But hey, why interrupt a Trumpgasm with inconvenient facts?

The trade wars and "leave it be" attitude on entitlements (oh wait, I forgot the trillions he'll save eliminating waste, fraud and abuse!) are right out of the Democratic playbook--pure economic ignorance. I thought Republicans were against stuff like that, but apparently I was wrong.

"I expect that the Never Trump's will be around 15% and the Democrat crossovers will outnumber them big time."

That's not how the polls are looking right now, anyway. It could change, but it seems Trump's appeal is among those who lean GOP already. He'd need the disaffected Sanders fans to cross the aisle if he's going to get any significant crossover.

The thing to remember is that Mitt Romney did extremely well with the white vote, but still lose because racial minorities broke hard for Obama. Trump doesn't have much more room among white voters to gain, and would need to do a lot better than he's currently polling among minorities--certainly better than Romney's 27% of Hispanics (n.b.--Bush won over 40% of Hispanics in 2004, and it was still a close election--and there are more hipsanic voters now). As for turnout, I don't think the Left is going to have any trouble turning out voters with Trump on the ballot.

So for Trump to win, he has to not only unite the GOP coalition, he's got to reach beyond it--well more than he's doing now. We have several months to go and will see what he does to do that.

Achilles said...

shiloh said...
"I am not a member of any organized party — I am a Democrat. ~ Will Rogers

Soooo, when did the Republican party become a discombobulated mess? ok, 8 years of Cheney/Bush changed everything."

Over 30 state legislatures/governorship's, house and senate. They also aren't running a felon who is only out of jail because she is rich and politically connected and a village idiot posing as a socialist. At least the idiot is an honest human being.

Saint Croix said...

I know this is not the Ted Cruz thread. That is because Ted Cruz is Eddie Haskell. You old white people know what I'm talking about.

Imagine poor old Mrs. Cleaver, trying to decide whether to vote for Vanilla Ice Cube or Eddie Haskell. She shakes her head. Of course, there's no way in hell Mrs. Cleaver is voting for Vanilla Ice Cube. But she's got this suspicion about Eddie Haskell, right? Mrs. Cleaver is not happy.

Eddie Haskell, after stabbing both Sidney Poitier and Ricky Ricardo in the back, is wondering why nobody trusts him. He's got the TrustEddie signs. "Come on, you fools! We have to stop Vanilla Ice Cube! Mrs. Cleaver!"

Eddie Haskell is exploring a unity ticket with Ricky Ricardo. The only problem is, Vanilla Ice Cube and his gang of Silly Mutineers are all on motorcycles, zooming around Mrs. Cleaver's house, with their "I hate foreigners" flag.

"No soy Cubana!" screams Eddie Haskell, out the window. "No soy Cubana!"

"Only I can save you, Mrs. Cleaver," whispers Eddie Haskell.

Meanwhile, he's on his cell phone. Which makes Mrs. Cleaver a little suspicious. Because Eddie Haskell is all nice-nice with Mrs. Cleaver while he's screaming to Ricky Ricardo, in Spanish. "Puta! Te necesito ahora! Ahora! Puta! Everything is great, Mrs. Haskell!"

Vanilla Ice Cube is banging on the door. "Let me in, bitch! Didn't you read the WaPo? I'm fucking normal! Let me in!"

Maybe Vanilla Ice Cube somehow gets enough delegates to win the Republican nomination outright. For this to work, Vanilla Ice Cube has to get off his motorcycle, stop waving his flag, and put on a suit, and hope that everybody has amnesia or wasn't paying any attention at all to his antics for the last six months.

"Damn it," says Vanilla Ice Cube, on the phone with his agent. "I should have dialed back the crazy!" His agent is reading his lousy poll numbers to him over the cell phone.

"She's a felon! I'm not a felon! As far as people know! This is bigotry! Anti-male bigotry! You're beautiful, Mrs. Cleaver! I'll fuck you doggie style, Mrs. Cleaver, just vote for me! Sorry about all the motorcycle tracks in your garden! Will you open the door for a minute? Bitch! Why does she not like me, I don't get this."

Meanwhile, Ricky Ricardo, who is, let's face it, every woman's choice for the Senior Prom, is sitting on the curb, with his great poll numbers and lousy delegate count. And Vanilla Ice Cube, with his awful poll numbers and great delegate count, walks up to him.

"Hey, wetback."

"Shut up, idiot, I'm talking to Eddie Haskell. You know there's a Supreme Court vacancy for you, Eddie."

"I got all the delegates. You got to be my veep."

"Are you really this stupid? Go away."

Meanwhile Jeb Bush and the Angry Mormon Choir are chasing the Vanilla Ice Cube gang around Mrs. Cleaver's house.

Mrs. Cleaver is yelling out of her upstairs window. "Ricky! Ricky Ricardo! I love you!"

What should we watch? MTV? Nickelodeon? I Love Lucy reruns? It's up to you, America!

Michael K said...

"Trump doesn't have much more room among white voters to gain, "

Actually, there are a lot of people who rarely vote coming out to primaries which tend to be low turnout. This is a very unusual year and predicting is hard, especially about the future.

aritai said...

Seems he's always given at least one warning to those who poke him in the eye, unlike his opponents. He's treating U.S. issues with about the same intensity Reagan, the Pope and Bill Casey treated the Soviets. They're much more alike than different. Reagan had minimal patience with bullying. Consider the Iran hostages. He didn't have to do anything other than be elected for them to be returned. When the U.S. started pushing back against the Sovs the world changed. The same will happen in the U.S. where you seem to be your own worst enemy, with pockets of decay in wonderful communities, including some beautiful well maintained and desperately poor black neighborhoods near Baltimore, of all backgrounds and races that are more like abscess than decay. Consider how well the various people of multiple races and religions, and for that matter all east Asian communities do. It's not like they don't have their gangs and criminals and desperately poor but what the do have is a sense they can and do "do better" with less. Same as earlier German, Irish, and Italian immigrants to the U.S. a century and more ago. Why them and not these others? And now that law enforcement can't do their job in these areas, they might just as well secede and be told to run their own affairs and be wished well, perhaps even denying residents protections from the outside. i.e. they can enforce "rough justice, including hanging miscreants from lamp posts for things you would find abhorrent in other places. What, hang for B&E? Same as stealing a horse 150 years ago because that often equated to a slow death for the victim" . Same should happen in all ghettos, either police yourself or not only won't we go there, we won't deliver anything either, assimilate, police yourself or starve. New Orleans pretty much fixed itself when those unwilling or unable to police themselves had to relocate elsewhere, turns out they wanted to move earlier but couldn't gather the motivation or necessity until a hurricane leveled the place and leftist built and maintained levies and patronage jobs failed under stress, another example of why governments must not attempt to do what private enterprise can. Houston saved innumerable children by just providing a real education that set expectations beyond dependence. Which is something your pTb has yet to suggest.

They'll get their one chance to reform and police themselves. Not unlike the Muslim community currently has one more chance. Remove your diseased members yourself else he'll have no choice but to remove them all. And then you can try again. I think you are one more killing of innocents away from requiring the government of an immigrant including refugees to vouch for them, perhaps posting a bond, or facing a direct fine from the U.S. payable in either free elections or assets of the criminals in charge. Where elections might well come from the removal from this earth of the current criminals in charge. Shouldn't have to do this more than two or three times before the other miscreants notice and reform. Be interesting to look at every pTb outrageous statement and see if and how he was provoked. A provocation probably includes deciding to run against him or compete in some commercial setting, and after one warning the gloves come off. He's less like a schoolyard bully than the big "Christian" kid deciding to protect those less well off, as well as him/her self once the target becomes them, then all h@ll breaks loose. Rather than your situation today where the assumption is the victim is guilty. Not too bright your leftists are. Willing to partake of the largess of teh success do to others, while heaping abuse on the same.

shiloh said...

"Is there anyplace on the Internet to see who did better in 2014 for instance? Thanks in advance Sir."

Yes, the Reps have done better in low turnout election cycles, 2006 being the exception when Cheney/Bush were all the lazy Dem voters needed to motivate them to vote. And yes gerrymandering has helped Reps, especially 2012 when down ballot Dems had 5 million more votes than Reps, but Reps easily held on to the House.

Did I mention Dems/libs are lazy in off year elections.

ie Obama WI 2012 = 1.6 million / OH = 2.7 million / FL = 4.2 million / PA = 2.9 million / MI = 2.56 million / NJ = 2 million

whereas 2010 Walker WI = 1.1 million / 2014 = 1.25 million

2014 Kasich OH = 1.9 million running against a train wreck Fitzgerald.

2014 Scott FL = 2.86 million

2014 Corbett PA = 1.6 million ... ok, Corbett was a train wreck also

2014 Snyder MI = 1.6 million

2013 Christie NJ = 1.28 million ... ok Luca Brasi hugged Obama

>

Did I mention Dems are lazy in off year elections, especially when "they" hold the White House.

>

but, but, but not to worry as The Donald will surely lead Reps to the promised land and were gonna start winning again!

of course many Reps will argue McCain and mittens were train wrecks as well and you can't compare apples to oranges, but the Reps do appear to have an electoral disadvantage and an ethnic/race disadvantage when it comes to pres elections.

>

It would be interesting to see what the results would be if America ever had an 80% turnout pres election notwithstanding how Reps are always trying to suppress the vote w/new and exciting restrictive voter regulations.

I yield back the balance of my time.

jr565 said...

wildswan wrote:

That Islamic terrorism is a problem and we need to be able to distinguish those who support jihad from those who do not before we let in hundreds of thousands of Muslims.
That Obama is always outmanouvered in international negotiations and always insulting our allies without making new friends and Hillary was his Secretary of State.
That unemployment in this country is massive among certain groups and so illegal immigration should be prevented as it takes away jobs from Americans as fast as they are created.
That PC is stifling free speech.
That the government is bankrupt.
The the government is over-regulating.
That the government is over-reaching.

Those are all good points. And ones I think I agree with. Why doesnt Trump actually articulate those points then? I'd also think that most republicans agree with every one of those points as well. But instead of making those type of arguments, Trump says we'll ban all muslims. He can't state the case, he can only overstate the case.

jr565 said...

(cont) for example, I strongly defend the use of waterboarding when used to deal with people like KSM. But I dont agree with his idea that we'll torture people. because I dont think it is in fact torture. And I wouldn't want to go further than that. So if Trump said, we need to go back to enhanced interrogations in limited cases I'd be with him. Instead he makes the argument that no, it's in fact torture. And that he wants torture. And he wants worse.
I agree, that they don't operate witht he same playbook and we therefore need to replace the rules. But it doesnt mean that WE shoudl start chopping off heads and putting people in cages.
Waterboarding is the tradeoff where we do more than we normally would, but don't resort to outright torture. Even THAT would be too much for someone like Robert Cook.
But if Trump is losing ME then he's doing something wrong. Since I'd be one to normally support him.

Bill Roberts said...

The latest taunt from Trump supporters is akin to this one from Achilles: "You will all be back on board and defending Trump's Health care reform proposals in 2 months. I would stop lying and casting aspersions at those of us you disagree with now."

I've heard that in numerous forms recently. "You'll be back . . ."

No I won't. I've quit trying to make predictions and I won't be surprised if Trump ends up as POTUS. But he'll have to do it without people like me.

William Chadwick said...

As I've said before, for me the key question is always: "Is this candidate better for liberty than the opposing candidate?" Or, more realistically as the republic toboggans down the Road to Serfdom, "Is this candidate less harmful to liberty than the creep running against him/her?" In other words, it's where the candidate comes down on the Statist Scale.

You readers who have heard me explain the Statist Scale please forgive me, but I find that if I don't explain and re-explain everything, someone is sure to usually and deliberately) misinterpret. 0 at one end of the scale represents a pacifistic, libertarian anarchism of the kind represented by Robert LeFevre.* 10 at the other end represents outright totalitarian tyranny a la Hitler, Mao, Stalin, etc. I put Trump's likely opponent, the Alinskyite Witch, at about a 7 or 8 (9 if she could get away with it) along with the Red Diaper Baby in the White House. I'm curious where the Trump fans place the Donald. Would he be closer to a 10 than Ted Cruz, or further away?

*If you don't know who that is, you should look him up.