Posted on 01/28/2016 5:41:31 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The Tea Party movement began as a response to federal bailouts of Wall Street and auto makers in 2008 and 2009. These unprecedented government interventions in the economy padded the wallets of special interests by privatizing profits and socializing losses.
Where was Donald Trump on this? As it happens, he appeared on television more than once to discuss what was happening. And when he did, he came in favor of the bailouts that soured conservative voters, especially Tea Partiers, on both George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Of the auto companies, which were failing because of years of union intransigence and incompetent management, Trump said: "I think the government should stand behind them 100 percent...You cannot lose the auto companies. They're great. They make wonderful products."
Of the Wall Street bailout, Trump said on CNN: "I do agree with what they're doing with the banks. Whether they fund them or nationalize them, it doesn't matter, but you have to keep the banks going."
Keep this in mind when you hear Trump complain about how bad George W. Bush's presidency was; he supported some of Bush's worst policy decisions.
Yesterday, we looked at Donald Trump's sudden and convenient conversions on issues dear to conservatives, especially on abortion and gun control, but even on his signature issue of immigration. He makes even fewer pretenses about his lack of conservative beliefs on the topic of fiscal and economic policy.
For those intent on defending Trump no matter what, those who would vote for him, he boasted, even if he shot someone on the street, there might be some way of defending his advocacy of government bailouts of failing businesses. Some might argue that Trump is a changed man.
But Trump's current economic platform, if such a thing can be discerned from his statements and promises, is consistent overall with his past. There is a reason conservative economists such as Thomas Sowell strongly oppose Trump. Like President Obama, Trump believes the commander in chief should have the power to reshape private industries to fit his own vision.
Here's just one recent example: Trump recently said he would force Apple to move its manufacturing operations to the United States. For any conservative, that should be a decision Apple's management makes. It is not for Washington to dictate such things. Private control of private business is a big part of what made America great. But Trump, who says he will make America great again, wants the feds to interfere even more than they do now. And Apple isn't the only company he believes he is entitled to control.
Whatever means Trump deploys to force private businesses to do his will, it will prove costly to taxpayers and consumers. They will be forced either to subsidize industry, pay sharply higher prices for commercial goods, or (most likely) both. All that, in exchange for (at best) a few thousand jobs, none of which will pay as well as those in the glory days of American manufacturing. In practice, though, Trump probably cold not force even a single job to return to the U.S.; his promise was just good campaign fodder.
Trump also talks a big game on the national debt. At the turn of the century, he advocated a 14 percent wealth tax as a means of reducing it, a measure more socialistic and redistributive than anything the Democrats proposed then or since.
On the other hand, it's easy to conclude that he doesn't care much about debt any more. The tax plan he's campaigning on, even when scored dynamically to account for growth, would increase debt faster than everything President Obama has.
Trump also had some comments about the national debt when he was confronted in the October CNBC debate about his four business bankruptcies. "I came out great," he said of the bankruptcies. "That's what I'm supposed to do for the country. We owe $19 trillion. Boy, am I good at solving debt problems. Nobody can solve it like me."
This is the answer of someone who has not thought about the issue, an important one, and certainly not an answer the voting public should want to hear. The United States cannot just declare bankruptcy as if it were a failing business. Sovereign nations either pay their debts or default. There are several recent examples of banana republics doing just that. A sovereign default can be crushing for a nation's citizens, especially for the middle classes that Trump claims to represent. Default would not make America great again.
Americans have first-hand experience of life under an administration that believes debt doesn't matter and that government officials should manipulate private business decisions. They don't need four or eight more years of that, and that's just another reason they don't need Trump.
Facts are not relevant to Trump support.
I saw someone name them
‘Trumpanzees’,
that is not PC. . . . so I will not call them that!
Take care.........pilgrim
Ronald Reagan has one of those too.
How do they say it?
“DAT TRUE”!!
Change and Hope we can believe in.
NOw, don’t go asking her for facts...it’s feelings that matter and Trump hurts her feelings!
Not sure what you are getting at. Where isn’t there objectivity? Give specific examples.
“....Mix in [Trump’s] signature instability: He would never stop treating Kelly nicely, until - turning on a dime - he did . . . just like Carly Fiorina was unattractive until she was “beautiful” . . . and Jeb Bush was a great guy until he was a loser . . . and Ted Cruz was a friend until he was a “nasty” guy that no one would have for a friend . . . and ISIS was Putin’s problem until we needed to obliterate them . . . and he was going to roll over all the “stupid” people on Capitol Hill who’ve screwed everything up until he was going to make deals with his old friends Pelosi, Reid, and Schumer . . . and he was going to round up and kick out 12 million illegal aliens but then bring most of them right back into the country.”....
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430393/donald-trump—thin-skinned-tyrant
I have no reason to believe Trump will do any of that, and he only recently adopted most of those positions.
I gather the we you refer to are the voices in your head. And... speaking of voices, I heard a Cruz ad wherein his shrieking, nasally voice was ranting about changing Washington from a bought-and-paid-for nest of corruption by lobbyists and corporate thieves to one of government by the people... the ad was a PAC ad bought-and-paid-for by corrupt lobbyists and corporate thieves.
Which leads us to
Cruz stood on the debate stage and said NEVER AGAIN to too big to fail government bailouts.
Cruz runs his mouth to an empty Senate floor and to gatherings in IA where he claims to be some sort of prophet needing the 'armor of God' - but what has he done really, except hide his supporters on FEC forms and forget he was born in Canada.
And while we're at it
For any conservative, that should be a decision Apple's management makes
I guess I have to continuously keep up on the type of Constitutional conservatism folks like you support. To me, the Preamble to the Constitution, explaining its context, states that it is to provide for the 'general Welfare' - meaning what is good for the country. Using our tax dollars to subsidize corporate flight used to be a bad idea - and a bad idea now when you consider those IPhones are made by peasants living on gruel.
I find absolutely curious that this paper would go to bat against Trump yet let barry skate. Someone please let me know when they dissect Bernie’s positions.
Lord how I detest our media, all forms of it.
Trump imported Polish workers to do demolition work on one of his hotels. He paid bottom dollar and didn't provide them gloves or hard hats.
Paying bottom dollar is one of the central tenets of The Art of the Deal. Trump is a welfare queen of the cheap labor express.
Good one! That right there is a knee slapper - bringing NR into the thread. Yep, no bias, none at all.
You guys best pray that we get a wall or a fence or snipers on our border. And please tell me that Cruz (Peace be upon him) has changed his position on amnesty, or are we still going with the ‘we’ll have a dialogue’ nonsense?!
And the thing is that most of Trump’s supporters acknowledge what he said and don’t care, and support him anyways while still being against bailouts.
Why do you think that is? And the answer isn’t cognitive dissonance.
Ok, so Trump did not vote for any bailout. Thanks for confirming.
And you don’t care now that Trump said he would force them to come back to the US. If you weren’t in a trance, you would understand how troubling this is on its own merits.
His voting record and cheerleading for liberals and liberal causes over a lifetime should tell you something about how he would vote, given the opportunity. You’re exhibiting the worst characteristics of a blind-fool Trump supporter. If he raped a woman, would you also blurp over it a la Bill Clinton sheeple? I think yes.
WHAT do you want me to do? vote for hillary.
Cruz is NOT going to win, face it. I have.
I know what donald is. there is no choice
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.