Posted on 09/13/2016 1:53:50 PM PDT by reaganaut1
I don’t support this, but it’s being driven by Trump’s feminist daughter Ivanka. However, what can I do? I still want Trump to win so I’m still voting for him. I have to look at the whole picture.
Oh, great, more Nanny State proposals from Republicans. This smacks of Jorge Bush’s MediPill program.
Lord, please save us from the Dims and then save us from the elephants.
Sadly that is not a question most people even ask these days.
Looks like Trump thinks it's time to unveil his "social liberal" side now.
Trump is orders of magnitude better than Clinton, but I harbor no illusions that he is actually what I would consider to be "conservative".
I don't think I've seen anyone on this thread hyperventilating. Pointing out that this proposal is not something that most conservatives would propose or support is a fair observation IMO.
Well, as some one who was only recently persuaded vote for Trump in November, he just lost my vote.
Sorry, I don't really understand that. I figure that anyone really paying attention to things would know that he's not a social conservative or a strict constructionalist from a Constitutional standpoint. (I'm not really sure he actually has a coherent political philosophy at all) However, at this point in the program, the real choice is Clinton or Trump. That is a serious no brainer of a choice.
“How does this make him any different from any other politician?”
CNN wants you to be a part of their #AllinForHillary panel. Glenn Beck’s people as well.
Vote Trump 2016
“Well, as some one who was only recently persuaded vote for Trump in November, he just lost my vote.”
If you send this in to Cankles via the DNC along with a million dollar deposit you can be ambassador to Dummy Islands with her other cronies.
Vote Trump 2016
Feel free to vote for Clinton, then.
Thanks for nothing, Johnny Come Lately.
Enjoy your chains.
I find it interesting that you seem to have no objection to Trump’s socialist proposal but finds issue with me who voices opposition to it.
Because it is only a proposal at this point.
With 55 days to go before the election, kindly get your head out of your pompous rear end and get Trump elected.
If Hillary gets elected, you won’t be able to handle all the things that will upset you—capiche?
So if you are not going to vote for Trump, get off of FR.
We have an election to win, and cannot waste time on numbnuts like you.
* It seems to be an attempt to keep low income moms working their tail off in the work force rather than a child care or dependent senior care issue take them out of their job ( aka then having to go on one of the Federal programs that make them more dependent ).
* Also a bit of uniformity in the code. Now you can do this without an employer needed variant of the "FSA". That is huge IMHO, it is what is missing in Obamacare now, to get it via the website it is with after tax dollars.
Do I share a desire to go to a Flat/Fair Tax with no deductions at the lowest possible rate? Yes.
I think this could be one of a number of programs to get rid of EITC. Talk to tax pro's. The ramp up of IRS agents was not for Obamacare, but to fight EITC fraud. As one freeper noted, get rid of EITC for struggling families and give them a HSA / Direct Primary Care Program until they can buy one on their own ( entrepreneur ) or get a job that has such a benefit.
* Also a bit of uniformity in the code. Now you can do this without an employer needed variant of the "FSA". That is huge IMHO, it is what is missing in Obamacare now, to get it via the website it is with after tax dollars.
It's worthless for low income families because current tax rates, deductions, and tax credits already mean that they don't pay income tax as it is. What good is another deduction for people in that category?
Yes I know it’s a proposal, I got this quaint notion that when you announce a proposal as the candidate for president 60 days before the election, it’s something you intend to make into law when you get elected.
Yeah, I’m strange like that.
As for winning the election, how about trying to win by not turning into socialist-lite.
Yes, aware of that DD, again my hope it was a transplant for EITC, I watched the video and it is an addition too it. Perhaps in the future that can be revisited. The only benefit I see it opening up the day care providers ( per the video ) access and flexibility etc again to keep folks in the work force rather than give up and get on a program.
Well, he wasn’t my first choice in the primary, but my first choice in the primary didn’t last as well as I’d hoped, so I’m stuck with Trump. I’d vote for a vegetable over Hillary Clinton.
Yes, in isolation I’d take Trump over Hillary.
However, seeing how easily he has pulled many pro-claimed conservatives into supporting leftist position just because “we need to win”, I’m entirely unsure that a Trump presidency where he pulls half of the conservative constituency drastically to the left, is any preferable than a Hillary presidency where the conservative opposition is dug in and determined to oppose her agenda.
Yup. The real problem is, it is effectively in isolation. The reality of the situation is a binary solution of Trump/Hillary.
However, seeing how easily he has pulled many pro-claimed conservatives into supporting leftist position just because “we need to win”, I’m entirely unsure that a Trump presidency where he pulls half of the conservative constituency drastically to the left, is any preferable than a Hillary presidency where the conservative opposition is dug in and determined to oppose her agenda.
You mean like they've opposed Obama? They'll have endless hearings that amount to nothing and send harshly worded letters of rebuke to her as she completes the politicization of both the executive and judicial branches of government.
I'm on record here as pointing out that I believe there will be a lot of buyers remorse amongst actual "conservatives" if Trump wins the presidency. I think that is pretty much inevitable. However, the press is not going to forgive him for aborting Clinton's coronation, and as such will perhaps actually be doing their jobs during a Trump presidency. Similarly, the GOPe is going to be opposing him probably more than they did Obama, because it's what they do. Overall, I'd say there is less danger to the Republic for a Trump presidency than the alternative. Therefore, I support his election. Who knows, I may end up being pleasantly surprised at the actual mechanics of a Trump administration. Regardless, we know what a danger a Clinton administration would mean to us all, so there is really no choice, especially as the GOPe purchased the Libertarian ticket (pretty cheaply IMO).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.