Posted on 12/30/2015 12:33:54 AM PST by elhombrelibre
If by "closet democrat" you mean "supported legalization," then yes, my link proves it beyond any reasonable doubt.
...that Trump is and was
I suppose if you're a complete idiot, it is easy to think these things.
But yet you are compeletely blind when Trump lies to you every damned day.
But yet, in all your pathetic hatred against Trump, you don't quite comprehend the irony of your constant prattle in favor of your candidate: "He's principled! He's consistent!" But he's not, and I can prove it beyond any doubt, while you can only throw crap at Trump that does nothing to redeem your "perfect" candidate.
HOWEVER, unlike many of you deluded would-be fascists, I am under NO illusions as to what Trump is, what he wants, and how he's getting there. The man is far more Democrat than Republican, he'll tell people what they want to hear to get their support, and he would waste no time in making deals with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi should he make it to the big office.
Moreover, the sheer nastiness and hyperbole being thrown out by our resident Trump supporters against everyone else makes it awfully difficult to pull that level for him if he gets the nomination. You're doing yourself no favors by attacking people who are pointing out Trump's past record, which is fair game (and not old news, to use a Clinton tactic), and his past associations (with people, like the Clintons and other well-known leftists). Deluding yourself into believing that Trump is the Apostle Paul and has suddenly had the scales dropped from his eyes is just plain stupid. (And yes, I've seen trump compared to Jesus, George Washington, Andy Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, etc.)
So deal with it and stop acting like one of Obama's petulant low-information voters.
Says the nasty retard who then calls me a "fascist" in the same message. What a tool you are.
Any other republican flip flops on a single issue: “AHHHH...GOPe RINO!!!”
Donald Trump flip flops on multiple issues: “Who cares? He’s a principled conservative.”
It’s one thing to support Trump And he does have some good positions. But this kind of cognitive dissonance makes you look stupider than a bag of hammers.
Thank you for making my point.
You do realize I'm not the one actually calling Trump a pure candidate, but am defending myself against the obsessive-compulsive posters who are calling people "fascists," "liberals," "leftists" on this website for supporting him... while supporting a candidate who lies to his supporters about his past positions?
The cognitive dissonance is all on the other side, the people explaining how superior they are because they're Cruz voters-- Cruz voters who don't even know who Cruz is, the stupid crazy schmucks.
Recent events prove he’s a former Clintonista and a present Putinista.
Calm down, raising the “Putinista” card on me is beneath you. I made bashing Putinists cool!
But bottom line, you have to pick the best candidates you have. The GOP and its “conservatives” are Free traders who don’t understand Russia or China any better. Cruz’s wife in fact worked for a free trader so maniacle he is described as, well, “a Pro-China maniac.” That’s true for all of them.
Do I like Trump’s statements on Putin? No, but then I don’t expect Trump to be a foreign policy expert, and support a candidate based on numbering the benefits against the costs.
In the eyes of certain FReepers, Jesus Christ Himself was a RINO - He consorted with prostitutes, befriended tax collectors, and advocated paying taxes to government. In their eyes, HE'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
The FR tradition of the circular firing squad happens every election cycle, and is why we end up with poor candidates - because in the case of every candidate who appears like he's going to beat the Leftists, the cry rings out: "YOUR GUY'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH, AND YOU'RE STUPID".
The FReeper definition of "Conservative" is, "IT SURE AS HELL AIN'T YOU!!"
As Chuck Schumer so accurately observed, "We're united. You're not."
I posted this on another thread, but here it is again: We haven’t watched FNC since Pissy Megyn’s questions during the first debate. I turned there this morning just to check things out.
They played a short clip of Trump discussing Hillary’s (alleged) support of women and the problem she has “at home”, i.e., Bill. After the clip, one of the blonde tarts on stage mentioned — gleefully — that Hillary will have Trump’s “infidelities” to use against him.
Ailes’ dictionary must define “rape” and “infidelity” similarly.
I don’t think Lewinsky will be something Trump gets into deeply. I think everyone will hear names like Juanita Broaddrick, Dolly Kyle Browning, Bobbie Ann Williams, Eileen Wellstone, Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willie, etc.
Yet Trump said it didn’t matter. He said it was unimportant. So it only matters to Trump if he can use it as a political weapon. I’d say that that’s the very definition of a hypocrite. He defended Clinton and bashed Bush but that was when he was a Clintonista. He was funding the Clinton’s; he was praising them; he was inviting them to his third wedding. Now, you can say it doesn’t matter because not of that matters. You can say you’re amoral and in favor of political cynicism and in favor of crony capitalism. But please don’t tell me Trump will be able to trick people into believing that now, only when all know his previous statements on Bill Clinton, his funding of him and Hillary, that Trump is truly in the least bit troubled. He’s not. He’s a fake and phony. He’s not a conservative by temperament, by principle, by values, or by conscience. In all ways, he’s a fraud.
You should realize if you’re against Putin that just as Putin re-positioned himself from communism to ultra-nationalism to stay viable, Trump re-positioned himself from Clintonism to populism to be able to fool conservatives and run as a Republican for president. I get it if you’re for a vain US blowhards but not for foreign ones. I get it if you’re for cynical self-serving frauds, like Trump. But you’re not able to say that the similarities are not there. They have even grown into a mutual admiration society in recent weeks. Undeniable. See what you want, but it’s true.
In 2008 it was because the Democrats were not running on a “war on women” meme. Trump is cauterizing that attack line by pointing out Clinton’s real “War on Women”.
The Bush team swings....and misses again.
Yes of course, as a BUSINESSMAN that WAS unimportant. Now as the man who will defeat Granny Clinton in order to save America it is important. Any questions?
I can see where it is just possible that one’s perspective has changed with different circumstances and rapid deterioration of the nation.
And the Dems are excused from this very thing when they explain that their opinions have “evolved “.
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.