I think the resemblance is much more a fall back to the time where you could actually talk about issues without having refs run out into the debate waiving yellow and red cards. Much more gridiron movement, get the ball to the goal line rather than some soccer analogy.
To put it more succinctly, both told you their opinions, and then tried to convince you that they are right. There is no dictating what you must believe. And honestly, that is a hugely refreshing thing to see return to politics today.
Go ahead, take a second, and if you have become involved in social media at all, go look at see how the more liberal people express opinions on a topic.. It is rather simple, an image with a bit of text on it, the issue dumbed down to 12 words or less, and a strict dictate that everyone must follow that opinion.
Hillary doesn't have to give a speech, just post an image on instagram and her followers will dutifully paste it into their social media accounts and parrot exactly the opinion of the image. No debate, no challenge, no question.
That really works for about 20% of the population - thinking is tough. Out of the remaining 80%, they too evolve.
Anyway, rambling, but to get back to the topic: Trump is no Reagan. Only Reagan was Reagan. I'd love to see Trump follow in Reagan's footsteps, and know just like Reagan, Trump will make some horrible mistakes.
All that said, it is so refreshing to see more than one candidate in this campaign who can actually hold an opinion, even if others disagree with it. Glad I don't have to choose who to give money to; Trump says he doesn't want it, Cruz does, made that decision easy.
Excellent remark. I probably should have phrased my initial question along those lines.
Your #34 is very good!