Posted on 08/14/2015 8:19:19 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
In what may be the most important development in the 2016 Presidential race to date, Donald Trump has announced, and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) office has confirmed, that the GOP front-runner is consulting with the Alabama Senator in crafting his immigration plan for the future of America.
The real estate mogul’s announcement will send shock waves through Washington D.C. and all across primary states.
Trump, whose campaign has focused primarily on issues of immigration and trade, has seen a meteoric rise since entering the race, with throngs of supporters across the country rocketing him to the top of every single poll, despite an extraordinary effort of establishment Republicans to take him down. Republican pundits have lobbed every imaginable accusation at Trump. Yet these same pundits, while seemingly furious at the man, have demonstrated no similar concern, angst, or passion about the dissolution of our southern border, the rampant exploitation of guest-worker programs, the collapse of middle class wages, and the growing illegal immigrant crime wave.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Forty years won’t do it, if it happens it will be more like four hundred or four thousand or forty thousand.
I see Trump as the Great Destroyer, and Cruz as the Great Rebuilder. More and more, I sense that many of our countrymen see it the same way.
This one certainly does, with one little tweak...
Trump knocks down and rebuilds, Cruz explains why and how it will (Constitutionally) be done.
I had forgotten about Trump’s rescuing of Wollman Rink. Too funny that Pander Paul actually gives DT kudos for it :)
“...the general idea that the culture, the nation, is near collapse.”
One foot over the precipice, one on a banana peel and holding on to a leaf at the tip of a branch on a tiny little bush is about how I see us.
And then re-admit them and give amnesty (let stay) those he approves of; he is trying to bamboozle people respecting amnesty! You mean one has to separate bluster from principle. When it comes to Donald Trump, I don't think that is my problem.
Better trade deals.
He harps on the Chinese manipulating currency as though that were the only problem in our trade imbalance with China. He does that to bamboozle us to make us believe that by curing the Chinese of their habit of depressing their currency to make their trade goods more attractive, he will have solved our trade deficit with China. He does that because there is no effective special interests (voting block) who will object, the damage to American exporters is too diffuse. A coherent policy tells us how he is going to compel the Chinese to lay off their currency. He has to do that by threatening to stop imports and if he does that he risks a trade war. He doesn't want to tell us how because he does not want to lose support. He just blusters on about jobs. He does not tell us which sectors of which industries will be sacrificed in order to force China to change its currency policy or to stop pirating our goods etc. What does he tell us instead? He tells us that is a smart negotiator. He tells us that our negotiators are stupid-they are not stupid they are deliberately favoring one American sector over another. To change that you have to get Congress to go along because this is a matter of treaty. If Trump wants to act unilaterally, honesty as well as coherence requires that he tell us. How will he handle Congress if he does not act unilaterally Congress will fight for their constituents. These observations can be applied to Mexico and the wall etc. etc.Trade is a complicated comprehensive problem which requires a comprehensive solution, we don't get that from Trump.
How to stop ISIS
He proposes to take the oil away from Isis. In order to do that you have to control the ground in order to control the ground you have to have reliable boots on the ground to seize and hold the oilfield. He doesn't tell you that because a majority of the country is against boots on the ground. He is bamboozling us. He assured us that Arab countries will supply boots on the ground and fight Isis but he does not tell us how or what we must do for him to get his wish. Remember, we thought we had the war won and the first shot all our sacrifice disintegrated. How will change that, and what price in blood and treasure? How will the move the country to support waging war? He doesn't tell us because he doesn't want to lose support by talking about reality.
Asked about if there attacks and a flat tax, he allows they would be fine but he won't tell us if he actually would support them as a matter of policy rather he simply repeats a mantra as he does with virtually every issue, taxes should be simpler and reduced. He wants to reduce taxes, how will he pay for a new military? A coherent strategy involves telling us.He rails about the national debt but which entitlement will he him cut?
Interesting set of posts Nathan and I particularly found your essay on Iraq to be fascinating.
I have read your posts on Trump and note a theme: you want specifics. You have a hard time finding coherence in the message. And as far as that goes, that’s fine.
I should then point out that the majority of voters don’t want too much in the way of specifics, don’t much care about specifics, and will make their decision about who to vote for based on more gut level, emotional basis. While many will pooh pooh these “low information voters” I should hasten to point out that they have precisely as many votes per person as the most intellectually astute amongst us.
I will go even further and note that in my view, detailed policy specifics are not only unnecessary, but a hindrance. There is a great deal of irony in your Iraq posts in this regard. Some of the best policy analysts and planners that the world has ever seen were involved in the planning and execution of that fiasco.
They screwed the pooch. Royally. And they did so with the best analytics and planning imaginable.
So I would use the Iraq war as exhibit “A” of the limits of planning and policy. We went into Iraq with great plans, and a great fighting team, and lost just the same. The missing ingredient in my view was leadership. Leadership at the very top that was willing and able to synthesize new data and change course accordingly. Quickly. Unapologetically. And even if it contradicted their oh so carefully constructed plans and assumptions. It was obvious by the time that Saddam got his well deserved neck stretching that the insurgency was more than a passing fancy. And we had the opportunity to declare victory over the tyrant, deliver our list of demands (we want the oil and the bases), and head home. Our objectives should have been redefined. Had we leadership at the top, that might have happened. And we might have extracted some measure of victory as a result.
As it relates to DT, the question in my mind is whether as President this gentleman would have the qualities of leadership necessary to think on his feet? I think the answer is probably yes. as for conservatism and possession of conservative mindset, in my view the preservation of the republic and love for it are some of the most basic expressions of conservatism.
It has been said history rhymes. I believe that it does. And if I were to pick a historical era that most closely rhymes with our current one, I would pick the time around 1856. We all know how well that worked out. Time is short.
Cruz is playing a long game, and playing to win.
If you read his book, you'll understand that he didn't enter this race to end up some liberal Democrat's VP.
It's very early, you know.
Anybody who thinks you can be a successful developer in NY and NJ and not be a master of politics is naive in the extreme. I fully expect that if Trump gets the nomination, NY, NJ, CT, and PA will go R in the general. That alone will make any D path to 270 all but impossible. You'll find supposedly "safe" blue states in play all over the place. Cruz on the ticket will ensure that the red states stay solidly red. The result could well be an historic landslide.
Can you direct me to a source where Cruz has offered detailed specifics that you so require, about his every utterance?
“Trade is a complicated comprehensive problem which requires a comprehensive solution, we don’t get that from Trump.”
Correct, and not to be engaged in on the campaign trail.
“These observations can be applied to Mexico and the wall...”
Congress has already legislated that a wall is to be built.
“How will the move the country to support waging war?”
If it is waged as it has been, it will be a tough sell. Or he can wait, like Obama, until they slaughter a multitude of Americans.
Trump has met with Senator Sessions over immigration and says he will start issuing policy papers in September on immigration, etc., when everybody is back at work.
But again, can I find detailed specifics of any kind by Cruz?
It isn't about empty pride somehow conferred on us by virtue of some personality, although that's par for the course with Trump.
It's about the Constitution. It's about taking back and retaining our liberties. Cruz began studying and memorizing the Constitution at age 14. By the time he graduated high school, he had traveled around Texas and given eighty speeches on our founding documents.
This is a good reminder of what a Cruz presidency will be like:
"That would have seemed unimaginable and yet with the grace of God that's exactly what happened. From the dawn of this country, at every stage America has enjoyed God's providential blessing over and over again when we faced impossible odds, the American people rose to the challenge. Compared to that, repealing Obamacare and abolishing the IRS, ain't all that tough.
The power of the American people when we rise up and stand for liberty knows no bounds.
I believe in you. I believe in the power of millions of courageous conservatives rising up to reignite the promise of America. And that is why today, I am announcing that I am running for President of the United States.
It is a time for truth. It is a time for liberty. It is a time to reclaim the Constitution of the United States. I am honored to stand with each and every one of you. Courageous conservatives. As we come together to reclaim the promise of America, to reclaim the mandate, the hope and opportunity for our children, and our children's children we stand together for liberty."
I was born five days before D-Day and grew up walking behind a plow pulled first by a draft horse who died and then by the mule that replaced him. I see it this way, expecting the federal government to develop a workable health care plan that improved on what we had is like walking behind a horse and expecting to pick up golden nuggets rather than road apples. I am serious, one is just as stupid as the other. I am not talking about either of you of course, I am just amazed that so many liberals believed this insanity was going to work out well. The typical liberal dwells in some kind of fantasy land with very little connection to the real world. Those who say that Obamacare is working well are no more credible than the “breatharians” who claim to live on water and air with no food intake. It is not and was not ever possible for Obamacare to work well unless the goal of it is to destroy healthcare, it does a very good job of that.
I was reading an old New Yorker magazine interview with Trump. People who knew him even then said his thing was to speak in grand, sweeping generalities when he made his promises, and usually fail to deliver.
“People who knew him even then said his thing was to speak in grand, sweeping generalities when he made his promises, and usually fail to deliver.”
First, for a promise to so defined, it has to be specific. Have you ever made or heard of a promise that was a grand, sweeping generality? Second, “people who knew him” is a grand, sweeping generality all by itself. That encompasses his jealous enemies.
Get out there and show him how it’s done, big guy!
Uh...no, LOL.
" Have you ever made or heard of a promise that was a grand, sweeping generality? "
Yeah, Trump's been making them ever since he announced.
"Second, “people who knew him” is a grand, sweeping generality all by itself. That encompasses his jealous enemies."
Of course! That must be it! Anyone who says a negative word about Trump is a hater. He must be praised, and then we know the source is valid.
One of the promises referenced was a huge statue of Columbus, bigger than the Statue of Liberty, that Trump and some foreign artist were going to erect on the Hudson River. It was already made, ready to go.
Never happened.
Then there were the claims of a few years ago about the Obama BC "bombshells" Trump's investigators found. Trump was going to release them at any minute, remember?
We're still waiting.
Amen not to mention the wealth given to cronies to act as guides, Michelle's college pal who got the job of getting Obamacare up and running on the computer...that was meant to fail, it was just to keep up the ruse a little longer.....Donald Trump/Ted Cruz would never have adhered to such a treasurer wrecking plan on the American people....they actually loves their country and countrymen.
This reminds me of other treasury-breaking measures Obama.Jarrett should go to jail for....$$$ for Junkers....big money for shovel ready deals etc...who got all that money?
Yes that is what is needed, American jobs for Americans, and it is the winning issue.
The Free Republic Free Traitor™ Army would call you a protectionist throw back, central planner an union shill.
See the world has changed and Americans no longer need blue collar jobs it is better to de industrialize and pay people to not work and import all out consumables from countries that exploit slave wages. /sarc
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.