Posted on 08/24/2015 7:20:27 AM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
If there was a continual reference to Jeb Bush and another candidate (by this candidate's supporters and/or so on), would you then be persuaded to feel that this GOP presidential election cycle is only between The Donald and Jeb Bush, or would you think that there are other good candidates available, as in Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Scott Walker or others?
Must this be an either/or format?
If so, is this a choice between what could be called a high-energy P.T. Barnum-like atmosphere and a low-energy campaign or are there other options available?
Is it now a choice to being between exciting reality TV or to some what could be said to be boring TV?
Is this a situation where it has been posited by supporters saying their guy is the best and the other guy is the worst and there are no other options available?
Would Cruz, Carson, Fiorina, Walker and others themselves say that one must choose between either The Donald or Jeb Bush, or would they say that there are clearly other excellent options available on the GOP side of the nomination process?
If these GOP candidates have been referred to in a positive light by another candidate for the GOP side, is/are the reference/references to them being made in such a way that they are also good candidates worth of consideration to vote for, or is it only a passing reference?
The big money donors ALREADY own the democrats.
And the GOPe doesn’t really CARE if the dims win the whole shebang. They are perfectly happy as long as their buddies have a spot at the trillion dollar feed trough.
The ONLY people who CARE if the dims win are conservatives.
I heard it too. I thought it was respect, that he did not expect his book to replace the Bible. Besides that, why I you getting upset by a few words Trump might say that you don’t like? It’s not like the rest of the pols, who parrot what advisors come up with.
That’s not a choice. They are the same.
"Being for something before you were against it" didn't work so well for Kerry. But for Trump, no problem.
That's very different from changing ones approach to a problem after learning more about it, and as events change the situation.
Are you seriously suggesting that Trump's decision making process is on the same level as Kerry's. Wow.
I was just surprised as I always thought of Trump as a kind of hedonist. But this article, biased or misinformed or not, takes Trump at his word.
http://www.christianpost.com/news/6-interesting-facts-about-donald-trumps-christian-faith-140522/
I really want to take Trump at his word, but part of me rings with alarm bells worrying that this is a hard sell. Maybe its me being my cynical non trusting self. Don’t know.
The guy’s favorite food is meatloaf. Second favorite food bacon. I mean, really.
Thanks for that. Doesn’t leave much doubt that Trump is a Christian whose views have gotten more conservative through his life experiences.
Except that, in many instances of Trump's....evolving...positions, he has changed his mind (or stated conflicting positions on an issue) within the SAME interview or speech.
That's Creative Problem Solving.
He acts like a businessman with the deal still in play, he wants us to know where he’s going without promising too much to us or revealing too much of his plans to people he will be negotiating with.
Short version:
1. The Senator is a Constitutional conservative. We need to reign in the burgeoning cult of personality surrounding our Presidency. While Mr. Trump has many fine plans, he has shown no clear idea of what he can LEGALLY do to implement those plans. Jeb is a supporter of the Department of Education which tells me all I need to know about his views on the role of the Federal government.
2.Foreign Policy & defense: This is actually the Constitutionally mandated job of the Presidency that most concerns me. Cruz has shown unwavering support for Israel, has promised to tear up the Iran deal, and during Senate hearings has consistently cut through the BS talking points of DoD officials. Bush took how many days to decide if he would have gone to war in Iraq? Trump certainly has more international contacts than anyone else in the field— but those are business contacts. Also, while his “to hell with political correctness” style is wonderfully refreshing in domestic politics, I'd rather he not piss off the few remaining allies Obama has left us.
3. Foreign policy & Immigration: Trump is finally putting substance behind his talking points. Cruz has had the substance there this whole time and as a former Texas Solicitor General, knows this battlefield personally. The two have very similar ideas on immigration so if I was a single issue voter, it might be harder to decide. However, Trumps assertion that he will make Mexico pay for the wall through tariffs is problematic. The President has no authority to institute tariffs. Furthermore, the money to build the wall is available, if only Congress would do its damn job and pass specific funding bills instead of omnibus crap filled with pork. I do NOT want a President fixing our invasion nightmare with executive fiat. As for Bush on immigration... do I really need to spell it out?
4. Religious Liberty: Cruz is the hands down, no near rival, best candidate on matters of religious liberty. He is a God-fearing Christian and a superb lawyer. He will dance rings around any court trying to enforce the Civil Rights Act over the 1st Amendment. And, again, Constitutional expert that he is, Cruz knows exactly how to avert the dismantling of our three-branch republic by the power-hungry SCOTUS. Jeb is far too quiet on this matter and Trump seems more focused on economic issues.
5. Trade and the economy. Negotiating treaties and administering the federal officials who are charged with enacting laws are the only Constitutionally mandated powers the US President has. Trump may well be right nthat we need to be more protectionist in our trade—free trade only works when the other side is a full participant and has a similarly constituted work force and tax structure— but, again, I am tired of Executive orders. Cruz is often derided—unfairly I might add given that McConnell LIED to him in order to secure his support— for supporting TPA. I sincerely hope that this debacle will change his mind about any further authorizations. We need to return to trade treaties ratified by the Senate—elected representatives of the people. I am not convinced that Trump, accustomed as he is to being in charge, will willingly give up the excessive trade authority of the TPA. Furthermore, it is not the role of the President to create jobs—something that both Bush and Trump promise to do. That's pandering to the “gimme” crowd and I won't stand for it from a Republican.
6. Right to life: Cruz and Bush both beat Trump in this category based on their current and past statements.
7. Tax policy: Cruz proposes abolishing the IRS. Trumps tax scheme is certainly far more palatable than Bush's, but would still require the obnoxious bloated bureaucracy of the IRS to administer. Also, again, every one of these candidates, including Cruz this time, likes to talk about tax policy, but tax code is set by Congress. Presidents to appoint those who administer Fiscal policy. Budgetary policy is the purview of the Congress. It's time more Americans learned/remembered this.
8. Education: Jeb supports Common Core. He is therefore a non-starter in my book. Cruz wants to abolish Federal involvement in education entirely. I honestly have no idea where Trump stands on the issue.
Again this is just a synopsis of my talking points regarding my support for Cruz. Once I complete the longer versions and post them, I shall happily provide links to any who are interested.
5.
Ack, typo! Where I said: “Negotiating treaties and administering the federal officials who are charged with enacting laws are the only Constitutionally mandated powers the US President has.”
That was supposed to say: the only Constitutionally mandated ECONOMIC powers the US President has.
Mia culpa, FRiends. Always edit before hitting post!
He’s been consistent. That’s more than you can say for any of the other candidates claiming the mantle of conservatism.
For example, Scott Walker’s immigration position changes depending on what day of the week it is. Trump first said we have to have reform, then said deport everyone, then said deport everyone and bring them back legally, and now he’s deporting anchor babies.
A little consistency would be nice. Cruz is far and away the best mind in the race and since he’s also the best conservative in the race, he’s the clear choice.
This is a novel concept Trump might try:
Before shooting his mouth off, he should learn as much as possible about the subject, analyze what he’s learned, then come up with a stance that he will stand by through thick and thin.
A person who took this path used to be admired as sticking to core principles. Conservatives were the ones who stuck to core principles. Liberals were the ones who vacillated with the political landscape and outside events.
At least Kerry has always been true to his liberal, flip-flopping persona.
Trump is a chameleon and I don’t trust him. Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t vote for him if he was at the top of the GOP ticket. I just have no enthusiasm for him.
There have been conservative news sites and articles all weekend long trying to start a Cruz vs Trump battle. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that the winner of any such battle will be Jeb and the establishment.
Wouldn’t it be lovely if the media and establishment staged a battle and no one showed up?
A game of semantics on your part.
It is actually known as finger-in-the-wind politics...
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.