What every Trump supporter should know...
Just read this today. Not meaning to start fights, just supplying information you won't hear from the lamestream media.
Trump is likely in the race to hand the election to Hilly. He's not Conservative.
"But before his recent conversion, the views he expressed over the years would make him a mainstream Democrat. This is the great irony of the current moment in American political life: The man leading the primary of a party whose recent success owes largely to a shift rightward has never really been a Republican.
Trump described himself as "very liberal on health care" and was an advocate of a single-payer health insurance system, a view that puts him to the left of Barack Obama. He long considered himself "very pro-choice" and was in favor of drug legalization. Trump once called Mitt Romney's self-deportation proposal "crazy" and "maniacal." Trump said Obama's $787 billion stimulus was "what we need" and added, "It looks like we have somebody that knows what he is doing finally in office."
As those comments suggest, Trump didn't think George W. Bush did a very good job in office. But he didn't stop there. Trump said Bush was "evil."
Trump's financial support for Democrats over the years has been well documented, with checks to Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, and others. That's no surprise, since he said in 2004, "I identify more as a Democrat." He praised Nancy Pelosi as "the best" when she became speaker of the House in 2007. That same year, he said of a prospective Hillary Clinton in the White House: "I think Hillary would do a good job."
To put it mildly, Trump is an uncomfortable fit in the Republican party. And that's why he is unlikely to be there at the end of this process."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/crowded-field-dreams_996630.html?page=3
Trump is likely in the race to hand the election to Hilly. He's not Conservative.
"But before his recent conversion, the views he expressed over the years would make him a mainstream Democrat. This is the great irony of the current moment in American political life: The man leading the primary of a party whose recent success owes largely to a shift rightward has never really been a Republican.
Trump described himself as "very liberal on health care" and was an advocate of a single-payer health insurance system, a view that puts him to the left of Barack Obama. He long considered himself "very pro-choice" and was in favor of drug legalization. Trump once called Mitt Romney's self-deportation proposal "crazy" and "maniacal." Trump said Obama's $787 billion stimulus was "what we need" and added, "It looks like we have somebody that knows what he is doing finally in office."
As those comments suggest, Trump didn't think George W. Bush did a very good job in office. But he didn't stop there. Trump said Bush was "evil."
Trump's financial support for Democrats over the years has been well documented, with checks to Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, and others. That's no surprise, since he said in 2004, "I identify more as a Democrat." He praised Nancy Pelosi as "the best" when she became speaker of the House in 2007. That same year, he said of a prospective Hillary Clinton in the White House: "I think Hillary would do a good job."
To put it mildly, Trump is an uncomfortable fit in the Republican party. And that's why he is unlikely to be there at the end of this process."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/crowded-field-dreams_996630.html?page=3
0
-
Originally posted by popgun
Scout,
I don't think any Republican could have stopped 'bama in '08. His campaign was a perfect storm against the Reps. Everything went right for him, and everything went wrong for the Reps. I agree about the other elections. Mitt would have made a good Prez, but he refused to hammer on 'bamacare, so millions of Conservatives stayed home on election day. Perhaps you were one of them.
If George the Lesser had dumped Cheney in 2004 (He could have said it was for health reasons) & run with Rice as his VP then Rice would have been elected in 2008 in a walk.0 -
Popgun
You have listed reason not to vote for democrats. I'm with you, I do not vote for democrats. However you have not given good reasons to vote for republicans. The republican line of "vote for us because we are not as bad as them" has been voided by the American people. 2008 and 2012 proves this but the NRC refuses to accept it.
Obama didn't get enough votes to win, the republican just failed to get the votes available to them because they really had nothing to offer. In 2008 and 2012 there was more then enough voters that refused to vote for the republican, because of the republicans actions, to have defeated Obama, even allowing for all the vote he got. People just refused to vote for the republican.
We have several local republicans that walk the walk, we worked hard to get them in office. To do it we had the fight the local and state republican party leaders. The republican party on all levels here does not want people who believe in limited powers for the government. We worked hard to get the US congressional seat from the democrats in 2010, and we did. The man we backed and helped get elected has failed to walk the walk. He lied and is a good little republican solider, just what we didn't want. Finding a strong candidate to replace him has been rough. It took a lot of energy out of people when he failed to produce after all the effort to get him elected.
I can vote for a republican candidate, I can't vote for a mainstream republican, I simply do not agree with their agenda. Not being a democrat isn't enough reason.0 -
NObody in politics ever got anything 100% their way. No wonder you're so disillusioned if you believe there is a candidate somewhere - who can win - that you'll agree with 100%. No such animal (unless you yourself run for office.)
In the meantime, here is a good reason - considering what we're going through now, and will go through if Hilly gets in - to support at least some Rep candidates (her and those who share her views.) Carly is a very refreshing change from the 'rat Left.
http://louderwithcrowder.com/wondering-about-carly-fiorinas-stance-on-the-2nd-amendment-wonder-no-more/0 -
Same old standard republican rhetoric of, you'll never agree with someone 100%, along with a disillusioned comment. Try telling someone what they don't know, anyone with enough sense to find their way to the polls already knows this.
I thought, maybe, we were going to have an intelligent discourse on this subject. I see we are not. You are touting the exact stuff coming out of the RNC and, just like them, after all the losses, you still can't accept people do not want what you are selling. It's not their fault, it's the ignorance of the people.0 -
You go ahead and do nothing - or vote for someone who has no chance in Hell of winning and making any kind of a significant difference. Then, when the next Socialist Demorat prez proposes a law to confiscate all your firearms, you complain loudly on how terrible that is and that we need to do "something" about it.
The Republicans are FAR more for freedom - gun rights and general freedom - than are the Social'rats. A third party candidate cannot win.
You're right. Its hard to have an intelligent conversation with some people.0 -
Yeah we put in George W.Bush in as president(conservative) and he started the war in Iraq under False pretense and drove us into trillions of Dollars of debt and we got The Patriot Act I&II and The National Defense Authorization Act!
What a joke as they pull the wool over your eyes! It's all a dog and pony show and The two party system is a scam on WE THE PEOPLE! The NWO is well on it's way to fruition bet on it! All Hail Caesar!
serf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act
This NDAA contains several controversial sections (see article), the chief being ?? 1021-1022, which affirm provisions authorizing the indefinite military detention of civilians, including U.S. citizens, without habeas corpus or due process, contained in the Authorization for Use of Military Force0 -
quote:Originally posted by popgun
You go ahead and do nothing - or vote for someone who has no chance in Hell of winning and making any kind of a significant difference. Then, when the next Socialist Demorat prez proposes a law to confiscate all your firearms, you complain loudly on how terrible that is and that we need to do "something" about it.
The Republicans are FAR more for freedom - gun rights and general freedom - than are the Social'rats. A third party candidate cannot win.
You're right. Its hard to have an intelligent conversation with some people.
Please show me the difference between a (D) controlled congress and a (R) controlled congress....... None is the correct answer.
The (R) party swore an oath to repeal Obamacare, is it done? NO. The (R) party promised to control our borders, is it done? NO. The (R) party promised to have a federal budget, has it been done? NO. The (R) party promised to act like adults and do the nations business, have they done it? NO! For a few years it was because they did not "control" the senate, now they do and have done exactly NOTHING.
The problem is Sir, folks have put their heads in the sand on how corrupt the (R) party truly is, John Boehner is no different than Nancy Pelosi and by his actions, deeds and words, it is highly likely he squats to pee. The (R) party is ROTTEN TO THE VERY CORE, just like the (D) party is.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
37 comments