Trump has supported nearly all of Obama’s economic policy agenda

Redstate Diaries ^ | Aug. 27 2015 | Southernconstitutionalist

[ScottinVA]

“Funny that this stuff didn’t show up there until Megyn at the debates.”

That’s why it’s always a good idea to research the candidate’s background FIRST before jumping in and supporting him/her. Those of us who don’t support Trump are wary of his background. His “philosophies” are tailored to whatever crowd he feels like reaching that day. I for one don’t trust him and never will.

[Gaffer]

I agree with the noob on the self-deportation thing. It is what this country and states should have been doing according to the law all along.

I DO NOT however agree on the “cost-efficient or effective” part at all. How does a country measure its sovereignty in dollars? Reports here in the last couple of days claim that deporting an illegal back to Mexico or farther south would save this country about $700,000 in the long term.

Coupling that with what an effective wall brings far fewer illegals that will take time and money to catch, and less of a chance of actual terrorists entering this country.

[SmokingJoe]

Giuliani was polling 38%, with Fred Thompson far behind at 18%, followed by Romney and then McCain in August 2007. Guess who ended up winning the nomination? McCain. Even more remarkable, McCain’s campaign was broke at the time and Romney had far more money than McCain and could self finance an extent. He still ended up losing to McCain.
You are assuming that polls in August = polls in January and actual voting in February and March. That is often not the case.

[z taxman]

Lol thanks sorta. The noob... how long does this frathouse hazing go on for huh?

[ScottinVA]

“I don’t think it matters. People perceive it differently...they see a leader, someone who takes charge and who can change things...that is really all that matters to people.”

Yep.. and that’s exactly how we ended up with Obama. His candidacy, like Trump’s, was built on a wellspring of emotion, not careful and deliberate research into his background and measurement of that background against his words.

What so many are missing (or ignoring) about Trump is he’s not remotely connected to conservatism. He rolls out the populist rhetoric that sounds great and hopeful, but he has a background of shifting like desert sands.

[9YearLurker]

That’s actually what most of it is—6-7 years old, from the height of Obamamania and financial crisis.

Wrongheaded for sure, though not much more wrongheaded than GWB, McCain, Romney and the like were at the time.

That is—at his worst, Trump wasn’t really more pro-Democrat in his economic positions than the GOPe.

[MichaelCorleone]

I agree that stopping the gravy train so the illegals will self deport is the best way to go.

But given the political landscape of today it would be a pretty tough sell, particularly since terrorism, rape, murder, and destruction of private property doesn’t seem to bother many of our politicians - or corporations either.

Regardless of the methods used, it has to be reigned in - and soon. The real question is who will actually do something meaningful, assuming it’s not too late already (keep in mind we’re talking about early-mid 2017 to even begin making things happen).

[arthurus]

You “combat”China by reducing the artificial overhead on American Industry. America is a much more cost effective place to make stuff except for all the regulation and taxation. China cannot compete with American industry on those terms. Free trade and no tariffs strongly favors the developed entrepreneurial nation over all others. The way to do free trade to the overwhelming benefit of the nation is simply to unilaterally proclaim Free Trade- remove all the barriers no matter what other nations do. If they raise barriers and tariffs, they will fall under the wheels of the free trading nation. That is how England rode the Industrial Revolution to the top of the economic heap in the 19th century and the reverse is how England slid back down. Relatively free trade propelled America to the top and the restrictions imposed by tax and regulation are driving it back down.

[DoughtyOne]

I think your thoughts on that are interesting. I don’t normally disagree with that line of reasoning. I do here, and that may not be wise.

I will say that I don’t see Trump as your normal case, but heck, who knows.

I have predicted he will win the nomination and the presidency.

To me, it seems very unlikely that he will implode, that anyone else isn’t already known well enough to take off if they were going to.

I expect to see his numbers continue to grow. I also expect it to become obvious that he will kick any Democrat’s posterior by a wide margin.

Let me float this out there.

Let’s say Trump implodes.

We have Democrats, Moderate Republicans, and Conservatives voting in the primaries.

We are only a percentage of the Republican part. You have Democrat and Moderate Republicans voting against us. How can Cruz or another Conservative win?

We haven’t had a Conservative nominee since Reagan.

There have been seven general elections. Why do you think a Conservative can win the nomination when if anything, the Party has moved far left since 1984?

Who is your choice? How can they win? What’s your tactic going to be when a RINO gets the nomination, and it’s Hillary, Joe, or Bernie in November against the GOPe selectee?

[arthurus]

China’s managed and artificial State Capitalism is collapsing even as we post.

[Gaffer]

That’s hard to say. For me, it’s one election cycle. :0)

[9YearLurker]

Trump’s plan advocates all that anti-illegal stuff you do, and more. (E.g., an end to anchor babies)

But a wall is also needed. Too bad it is about 30 years and 30 million people too late.

[Democratic-Republican]

"What do you want? Protectionism? You know thats a stones throw away from socialism. Get outta here with your stupidity."

Stupidity? Them's harsh words coming from a n00b.

With a completely straight the Doctor orders the terminal cancer patient:
"Whatever you do, don't smoke or eat fatty foods, the surgeon general says they are bad for you!"

z taxman, can I call you Doctor? If any protectionism actually is required to slow the bleeding you should come to terms with the fact that it will be your own fault, and that of others like yourself. We have now experimented with the diametric opposite of protectionism for a hundred years. What would be the opposite of protectionism anyway? Unemploymentism? Open Borderism? De-Industrialism? Suicidalism?

Let's see, since 1980 the population has increased +100 million, and coincidentally the out-of-workforce total is just about +100 million. We have imported slave wage labor for almost that entire time period, and after signing on to NAFTA and other free-trade agreements ( which they swore would NOT hurt us, BUT HELP US! ) have decimated the 1980's thundering economy to a shell of it's former self. Manufacturing has left, the so-called "service economy" replaced it and is now itself crashing, and we import everything and export almost nothing. Fine work there Doctor.

Protectionism is on nobody's list of favorite choices. However, neither is sticking a knife in your stomach or hacking off a limb, but you do in fact get a knife in your stomach or a limb chopped off in certain cases - a tumor, gangrene, diabetes, etc. Maybe you had better start preparing yourself for some harsh medicine in the near future, it may be something that is unfortunate but necessary to stop the bleeding and turn things around. To quote some famous person: "everything will be on the table".

In such a tragic circumstance you will necessarily need to check your doctrinaire approach at the door while the emergency room physicians try to save the patient. You do want the patient saved, don't you? Or would you rather it die from this prolonged experiment in national suicide? I mean, can you bring yourself to say the following: I would rather the USA die in a "free market, than survive with protectionism".?

Like it or not, some drastic measures are going to need to be implemented. And that includes the USA kicking some foreign ass, as well as the asses of some domestic RINOs.

[9YearLurker]

I see from your previous posts that you’re a big Rand Paul supporter.

That gives you a whole lot of nerve calling Trump a liberal.

[flaglady47]

“Let’s say Trump implodes.”

Trump won’t implode. However, all of his FR detractors will, and probably sooner than later, especially as they never gain any traction here in their attempts to smear Trump. Trump lives inside their heads. And when Trump actually wins the Republican primaries, they will be positively apoplectic. So sad, too bad.

[SmokingJoe]

I have no idea who will win. And I am not saying Trump will not win or Cruz will win. All I am saying is, we shouldn’t assume that just because Trump is comfortably ahead today doesn’t mean he is a lock to win the nomination. Cruz is doing all the right things and patiently and diligently carrying out his plan cause he knows anything can happen in politics in 6 months.

[jonrick46]

The taxes and regulations are the elephant in the room. It has put a burden on our industrial sector that makes things easy for China to be the world’s manufacturer. I hope The Donald makes that burden lighter because it also affects American jobs.

You ask any politician what they see as the effects of these taxes and regulations, and they are evasive and never address the effect on jobs. That is because they like these weights on business. That’s how they get their pockets lined with influence peddling. It is a game for them.

[SmokingJoe]

Cruz is by far the best candidate. If he wins the nomination, he will CRUSH Hilary Clinton.

[DoughtyOne]

Okay, thanks for your additional thoughts.

I am very concerned we are going to wind up with another RINO we can’t vote for.

This is an outside the box move, Trump is.

We won’t have this option again. The last time we had it, was 1980. GHW Bush was slotted for that win. Reagan eased him out.

The thought of waiting until 2052 for another once in 36 years chance, weighs heavily on my mind.

We will not nominate a Conservative. It’s Trump or bust.

If you can see a flaw in that logic, I’d love to see it.

[Olog-hai]

Still and all, when the principle of judging one by one’s enemies kicks in, who speaks up but all the GOP establishment hypocrites, sounding just like the liberals. Interesting and disorienting at the same time. The most conservative-appearing of the GOP are quietly supportive thus far.