I was told yesterday that Trump is a liberal Democrat. My reply:

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Voting for yet another ivy league lawyer who became an elected official who has not even finished his first term is insanity,

Some people claim that Trump only recently arrived at most of these viewpoints, so I'd like to discuss Trump's history with each of these issues (sorry for the length but I think these important topics deserve to be delved into).

I was told yesterday that Trump is a liberal Democrat.

Trump’s political registration records since 1987 are public and available online. During this period, Trump has been a registered Republican for more than twice as long as he was a registered Democrat. If people would bother to read his books, look at the full-page ads he took out on policy issues in the 1980s, and watch his old interviews in their entirety, it should become clear to them that he was never an actual “liberal” and was always to the right of Rudy Giuliani for example. Most of the people attacking Trump from the right only have heard bits and pieces of the full story of his past views or they are prone to great exaggeration about his current positions. He has always leaned towards a nationalist-populist stance that places the safety and economic security of Americans first. Some people may not see that as “conservative,” but it is fundamentally about conserving the nation.

My reply:

Build the wall. Enforce the law. Deport them all. End sanctuary cities. End anchor babies. Slap a moratorium on muslim immigration.

Already in his 2000 book, The America We Deserve, Trump was talking about the problems of an open border and illegals ("America is experiencing serious social and economic difficulty with illegal immigrants who are flooding across our borders…It is a scandal when America cannot control its own borders…It comes down to this: we must take care of our own people first. Our policy to people born elsewhere should be clear: Enter by the law, or leave."). He made clear that he thought Americans' interests (which includes safety) should be put first, which is the main reason for his Muslim entry moratorium proposal now. In 2011, he said on O’Reilly and in a CBN interview that’s on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWzDAvemJG8) that the world has a “Muslim problem,” because of all the Islamic terrorist attacks.

By 2011 in his book, Time to Get Tough, he was calling for a border wall, many more border patrol agends, an end to citizenship for “anchor babies,” and deportation of illegal criminals. In a similar vain to his speeches now, he wrote: “Look, if a nation can’t protect its own borders, it ceases to be a country.” He explicitly wanted U.S. immigration laws wholeheartedly enforced (“This wholesale abdication of a president’s constitutional duties is as shocking as it is foolish…Sacrificing American laws on the altar of political expediency is immoral”).

In 2013 in multiple tweets, his CPAC speech, and an interview with the Breitbart website, he said the proposed amnesty bill was a "monstrosity" and would be the death of the Republican Party.

It’s true that Trump only came around to the idea of actively working to deport all non-criminal illegals last year, but too many Cruz supporters throw up an example or two of his older position on deportations to pretend that he hasn’t been very hardline on securing the border, a separate but related issue, for many years now. (And while we’re on the subject, why did Cruz as recently as Dec. use weasel words to avoid committing to actively working to deport illegals? I listened to him do that twice with my own ears.)

Cut the taxes. Cut the spending. Cut the regulations. Cut the government. Cut the debt. Cut the EPA.

Even in the 1980s, Trump was clearly for fighting government wastefulness and ineptitude and for less regulations on business and cutting back on the bureaucracy. His most famous book, The Art of the Deal (1987), is replete with stories of government overregulation that made doing business an extraordinary challenge. In the Wollman Rink story and some of the nonsense about the NYC convention center especially, Trump exposed the tendency of the government to be incompetent and to egregiously waste taxpayer dollars. Throughout the book, he clearly saw cutting costs and working as efficiently as possible as huge positives. He also discussed the challenges the city government was having with building over the water on, I think, the Hudson River because of hand-tying environmental regulations. In The America We Deserve (2000), he attacked bureaucrats as “morons” and coined the term “buron” (a portmanteau of bureaucrat and moron).

In a 1987 full-page newspaper ad, in which he mainly criticized the trade deficit, he called for federal tax cuts. It’s true that in The America We Deserve (2000), he called for a one-time wealth tax on the very rich to pay off the national debt, but he thought that the ensuing economic boom (that he believed eliminating the debt would create) would more than make up the money lost for most wealthy people. He saw a large national debt as a threat to the future of the country. Overall, he called for much lower taxes for the middle class and effusively praised Giuliani's reduction of taxes in NYC, specifying each tax cut Guiliani enacted and what the benefits of each were. He spent more of the book talking about tax cuts than discussing his one-time tax increase for a tiny percentage of Americans that had a conservative end goal.

Repeal ObamaCare. Get the feds out and allow health insurance to be sold over state lines.

Trump actually entitled one of his chapters in Time to Get Tough (2011), “Repeal Obamacare.” He wrote in depth about all the negatives of Obamacare, and it’s something he mentions in almost all of his speeches. (What he specifically wants to replace it with is on his website under “positions.”)

A lot of conservatives are troubled that in The America We Deserve (2000), Trump said that the ultimate goal of the country should be single-payer health care for all. He has since backtracked on this, but even there, he spent a few sentences on single-payer and made it clear that was something for the future and not now. He then spent the rest of the chapter saying that there were many things we could do now to improve our private health care system as it was then in 2000. The main thing he focused on was--wait for it--eliminating state insurance boundaries and state specific regulations so that insurance buyers would have more (and cheaper) choices. What did he say that Obamacare should be replaced with eleven years later in Time to Get Tough? Allowing insurance to be sold over state lines. It seems obvious what aspect of health care he’s always been most eager to change, and it has nothing to do with single-payer.

Send education back to states.

In The America We Deserve (2000), he called out the damage that teachers unions and federal centralization were doing to the education system. He wanted school choice, decentralization, the ability to fire incompetent teachers, etc. His opposition to Common Core is totally consistent with his stances from over a decade and a half ago.

Get a handle on trade. Make trade deals in our own best interests. Bring back capital. Bring back manufacturing. Bring back jobs. Strengthen the economy.

Already by the 1980s, Trump was talking repeatedly about remedying the trade imbalance and about how we were getting ripped off by foreign nations because of our incompetent leaders and negotiators (as shown by his 1987 full-page ad in the NY Times and WaPo and in several interviews, including one with Oprah that’s on YouTube). This was the main topic of his first political speech in 1988 in New Hampshire (discussed in the somewhat slanted article: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/02/donald-trump-first-campaign-speech-new-hampshire-1987-213595).

He later went into this issue in much more depth in Time to Get Tough (2011) in his chapter on China, which especially criticized China for monetary devaluation that made their goods dirt cheap and our goods uncompetitive, costing us many manufacturing jobs. He wants to use leverage to renegotiate trade deals, with tariffs used as a last resort if certain foreign nations insist on taking advantage of us and refuse to negotiate fairer deals (“Open markets are the ideal, but if one guy is cheating the whole time, how is that free trade?”).

Defend the second amendment.

A lot of people criticize him for writing sixteen years ago in The America We Deserve that he was in favor of banning assault weapons. In that book, however, he actually spent more time criticizing gun control than he did calling for it. In particular, he condemned the Democrats for wanting to take away law-abiding citizens' handguns, which he thought would serve to leave only the criminals armed (he's very tough on crime in the book). Even with the support for a ban on assault weapons at the time, his overall position on guns was actually quite conservative for a New Yorker (not to even mention that he wrangled a very hard to get concealed carry permit for himself in NYC). He has recently said that his sons, who are big hunters and NRA members, helped convince him to move more to the right on this issue.

As I mentioned, he was very hardcore tough on crime and pro-police in The America We Deserve. He eviscertated those who excuse criminals and put their welfare above that of innocent citizens, especially judges who are soft on criminals or let them out of prison prematurely. On the other hand, he lavished praise on mayors like Giuliani who cracked down on crime. This attitude was evidenced earlier too in a 1988 full-page newspaper ad which called for hard anti-crime measures and a reinstatement of the death penalty in NY.

Defend religious freedom. Appoint constitutional conservative judges.

Pushing for religious freedom seems to be a new thing for him that started when some pastors told him (apparently to his surprise) that they held back on political involvement because of fear of losing their tax exempt status. About religion more generally, he has talked in the past about how his former pastor, Norman Vincent Peale, influenced him. He included a photo of his confirmation class as a young teenager at the First Presbyterian Church of Jamaica, Queens in Surviving at the Top (1990), Time to Get Tough (2011), and Crippled America (2015). It’s obviously a favorite photo of his.

I don’t remember him talking much about judges before the last few months (except to criticize Roberts on Twitter for the Obamacare rulings when they came down), but he did talk glowingly of the First Amendment in The America We Deserve (2000). He said in his recent press conference at the Old Post Office in D.C. that he is working with the Heritage Foundation to create a list of around 10 conservative judges that he would commit to choosing from for his Supreme Court picks. Once that list is ready, Trump’s opponents will no longer seriously be able to claim that he will appoint leftists or even moderates to the highest court.

Rebuild our military. Bomb the shit out of ISIS (and take their oil).

By 2000, he was for cracking down hard on terrorism, which he saw as a big growing threat. Terrorism was also a topic that he criticized Bill Clinton and his administration over in his book. The threat of terrorism was a large focus of The America We Deserve. He devoted a whole chapter to it, plus discussed it in various other places in the book. This was, of course, the book where he mentioned Osama Bin Ladin before 9/11.

In Time to Get Tough (2011), he was for strengthening the military, but using it more judiciously (“Only go to war to win”). He devoted an entire chapter to “Taking the Oil.” He predicted that the Iraqis would never be able to keep control over it themselves. In regard to foreign policy he wrote: “American interests come first. Always. No apologies.”

End political correctness. Take the GOP head-on. Take the media head-on. Take the liberals head-on. And win, baby, win.

His whole life he’s been excessively frank and often called out over it (think for example of the old Phil Donahue interview where Donahue unsuccessfully tried to get Trump to take back his calling NYC’s Democratic mayor Ed Koch a “moron”). He has always refused to allow anybody to prevent him from speaking his mind. It’s about time we have a politician like that.

In the America We Deserve (2000), he criticized both parties, and even though some like to pretend that it’s a leftists tome, he spent more of the book criticizing liberals than anyone else specifically (especially on issues of crime and regulations, though certainly not only on those points). He devoted a whole chapter to the media in Time to Get Tough (2011). (He singled out Lawrence O’Donnell, Bob Beckel, Charles Krauthammer, and Chuck Todd for special criticism, e.g. “The thing I find most offensive about Chuck Todd is the fact that he pretends to be an objective journalist, when in reality the guy is a partisan hack.”)

Trump has seemed to be fixated on winning his whole life. It is something he talks about in The Art of the Deal (1987). In the second chapter on the “elements of the deal,” he essentially lays out various ways to help ensure winning as much as possible. The main point of The Art of the Comeback (1997) is essentially how to win (in the frontispiece for that book, he quoted Churchill: “Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival”).

All of the above on a shoestring budget compared to most of the 16 competitors he’s defeated (after they spent 100's of millions of donor bucks).

No PACs. No big donors. No party support.

What’s democrat about any of the above? What’s not conservative? What’s not to like?

He spent several pages of The America We Deserve (2000) criticizing "soft money" and corruption in politics. He also said then that if he ran for president, he would not accept money from big donors (he likewise made a point of insisting then that if he did run, he would be a far less “boring” candidate than usual).

And I’ll add a few more:

Redo the horrid Iran deal. Take a serious look at NATO. Require our allies to pay more for their defense.

Rebuild the Reagan Coalition and attract blue collar workers by making America first again on manufacturing, trade, secure borders, economy and jobs, jobs, jobs!

Make America Great Again!

In his 1987 newspaper ad, he wrote: “Make Japan, Saudi Arabia, and others pay for the protection we extend our allies… ‘Tax’ these wealthy nations, not America. End our huge deficits, reduce our taxes, and let America’s economy grow unencumbered by the cost of defending those who can easily afford to pay us for the defense of their freedom”—a statement entirely consistent with his current stance on NATO and foreign affairs in general.

In his interview with Larry King at the Republican National Convention in 1988 (where he was guest of George H.W. Bush), Trump noted that people he had the most affinity with were the workers like the taxi drivers, not the wealthy. In the History Channel documentary on Trump from a few months ago, Al D’Amato remembered Trump’s positive attitude towards and interaction with the regular folks who worked for him. In the 1980 interview Trump did with Rona Barrett (also shown in the documentary), he said that he thought he was perhaps put on earth to provide jobs for people. He also said that he would be happy to devote his life to this country by running for president, but that he thought it would be a hard life because a good personality is often valued over someone who is right but has unpopular views.

I see what you did there. ;-] By using the double negative you believe Trump will do everything he says. So glad you’re finally on board with the rest of us “good guys”.

Hew has been saying , maybe it is you who has not listened or you refuse to believe it.

Having served only three years in the Senate should not give anyone confidence. Look at the last junior senator that was elected

Actually, only 3 first-term US Senators have been elected to the Presidency in our history, and for good reason.

The 3 are Warren Harding (the country robbed blind by his political friends), JFK (almost got us all killed through incompetence, started Vietnam) and Barack Obama (nothing need be said here).

The skill set for being a Senator (basically being a bullshit artist) and being Chief Executive are very, very different.

The phenomenon of being honored by election to the Senate, waking up the next morning, deciding it's not enough and what the nation needs is for you to be President is a manifestation of ambition sickness.

Like I tell the "meeting addicts" at work - saying and doing are not the same thing.

And then there's the little thing called: "a record"....

FR looks more like DU with the Crony Capitalist Trumpsters all personal all the time. What ever happened to the old FR site.

I don't know. Check with that Jim Thompson guy, I think he runs the place...

He needs a VP with solid conservative credentials to bring the Cruz camp on board. No Kasich. No Rubio. Jeff Sessions would be perfect. DC experience. No question about his positions. He brings in the South. And he was one of the very first on board endorsing Trump.

You’re wrong. They matter a great deal and are most of the reason why were in the position In which we currently find ourselves.

Wow. Well done!
Go Trump

Where does this stuff come from? I'm a Trump supporter, and I have no idea what you're talking about.

I read a lot of Trump threads and the meme that by electing Trump that will destroy or seriously damage the GOPe is a recurring theme...

It's a fantasy because Trump will embrace the GOPe after he is elected...(if)

He will go to the people and let them know what’s going on there, the people will then put pressure on Congress.

That worked so well in 2010, 2012, 2014... / S

Am I wrong? You appear focused on rearranging the furniture while the house burns down. Supporting the Globalist NAU future President is adding gas to the fire.

“Why can’t others see that?”

Because of Trump’s words and stances from the not so distant past. I’d be more excited about the guy if he didn’t come across completely full of shit, lying about what he believes today.

He funded a ton of libs, including Kamala Harris queen of sanctuary cities
He’s for killing babies and supporting PP WITH GOV’T MONEY
He’s for illegals coming right back into the country for citizenship
He’s for promoting LGBT issues WITH GOV’T MONEY
He’s surrounded by liberals including his children and closest advisors;to the point they can’t even vote for him

There used to be a time conservatives were in the camp of ‘not what they say but what they do’

.....he spent a few sentences on single-payer and made it clear that was something for the future and not now.

Ummm....what? Who would be OK with that? It's not a good idea at any point in history. Prepare to be amazed ( while the rest of us are not) by his many position reversals in the next couple of years, if he takes office.

These hacks in DC will either work with him or they will be crushed.

Crushed by whom?

As POTUS Trump has no power over the RNC or individual congressman...

Remember he is running against the GOPe...not likely to make very many friends...

He can pressure them via the bully pulpit...but to actually make them do his bidding by force...?

Trump is not King...

My concern is can Trump govern, he's used to being the "BOSS" of his business having absolute final say...

Can he transition to governing ?

I don't think so..

If he does 10% of what he says—If he can provide real leadership—they should carve his face on mountain tops and name cities after him. I believe he might well be a great president—dispite the Liberals, the media, the GOPe, and the hardshell conservatives. I am willing to give him a chance.

Amen Jim.

Cruz is turning out to be a big disappointment and his "idealist/principled" supporters can't seem to let go - like the monkey reaching into the jug for a banana and ends up stuck because he won't let go - even unto death.

Yes – you are. What do you think started the conflagration in the first place?

That’s all you could argue with, when we all already knew that over a decade and a half ago he called for single-payer health care, which he now rejects? My overall point was that eliminating state boundaries is the only aspect of health insurance that he’s repeatedly been pushing for for many, many years now. That’s what he obviously cares the most about enacting.