The Trump/Republican Primary/General Election Megathread

[T.Lex]

If that's the same as nationalist-populist, then yeah.

haha

My first reaction was, "Well, its not."

But now you have me wondering if it is more alike than I care to admit.

 

[nate77]

Nigel Farage and Trump are to appear on stage together in the U.S. tonight to discuss "the Brexit story"

Farage is the ex-UKIP leader behind the Britain exit from the EU.

Wondering what the angle is here... just independence? Surely no one plans to compare US and UK Conservatism.

Farage, and Trump, are both anti-globalist, nationalists.

 

[IndyDave1776]

That constitutional provision only partly means what you think it means. Or, to put it another way, doesn't really apply (as far as I can tell) the way you are trying to stretch it.

The Clinton Foundation was never elected to anything. The donors gave to the foundation.

And, before you go too far down that path of saying the entity is an alter ego for the individual, consider the impact of that if Trump is elected president.

Our defense lawyers will have to make a note of this in case they ever end up defending an illegal purchase/possession charge, like child porn. "No, your honor, my client did NOT purchase that material, his credit card did."

On the second point, if Trump receives gifts/bribes delivered to his corporation's accounts rather than his personal accounts, same deal.

Seriously, if we accept your argument, then any criminal should be able to legally engage in any crime simply by setting up a corporation and carrying out the crime under the auspices of the corporation.

 

[T.Lex]

Our defense lawyers will have to make a note of this in case they ever end up defending an illegal purchase/possession charge, like child porn. "No, your honor, my client did NOT purchase that material, his credit card did."

A credit card is not an entity.

And, entities can be (and have been) charged with crimes, believe it or not.

On the second point, if Trump receives gifts/bribes delivered to his corporation's accounts rather than his personal accounts, same deal.

Ok. Just remember that.

So, you are in favor of Trump's corps being subject to the same transparency that the Clinton Foundation must provide? Trump would be disappointed to learn that.

Seriously, if we accept your argument, then any criminal should be able to legally engage in any crime simply by setting up a corporation and carrying out the crime under the auspices of the corporation.

See above.

When an individual uses corporation assets for personal benefits, it may be considered an "alter ego" of the individual and liability (criminal or otherwise) can attach. That's why the Madoffs of the world can be so difficult to catch - they use entities to shield their misdeeds. And, they have good attorneys to figure out where the lines are and how to get right up to them.

I'm not saying the Clintons are innocent of receiving bribes - I have no idea. I'm just saying that the Clinton Foundation has rather strict disclosure requirements (that Trump's corps are not subject to) that make that more difficult. If they are receiving bribes, they have better ways of receiving them, probably.

At face value, the Foundation appears to be operating appropriately.

Going back to your constitutional point, though, you haven't explained how the Foundation was elected to anything.

 

[indiucky]

And, entities can be (and have been) charged with crimes, believe it or not.

That's good to know....I used to suffer from sleep paralysis (just about one a year now, maybe two) and it's good to know I can charge the "old hag" with something...Disrupting my sleep and sitting on my chest grinning with a mouth full of shark teeth ought to at least get her probation....

 

[BugI02]

What Republican Turncoats Forget | RealClearPolitics


"They lost, and now they want people to believe that their anti-Trumpism is a principled act of heroism. They ingratiate themselves to The New York Times, Washington Post and team Clinton -- the sworn enemies of free markets and conservative values."

 

[T.Lex]

What Republican Turncoats Forget | RealClearPolitics


"They lost, and now they want people to believe that their anti-Trumpism is a principled act of heroism. They ingratiate themselves to The New York Times, Washington Post and team Clinton -- the sworn enemies of free markets and conservative values."

Interesting selective quoting. That reference is to former Romney, et al., operatives.

Here's another:

I certainly don't mean to disparage conservatives who say they won't vote for Trump. One's vote is a matter of personal conscience. But to actively support Clinton is to put the other team's jersey on and then run a lap around the stadium.

The few INGOers who support HRC have always supported HRC (or at least Dems). The regular posters in this thread who do not support Trump DO NOT support HRC.

Another quote:

If they do, they are the unforgivable betrayers of conservative principles.

The reality is that the "Republican Turncoats," the "unforgivable betrayers of conservative principles," voted for Trump in the primary.

 

[BugI02]

Same source, more complete quote. I believe he is speaking in the present tense about the turncoats who supported Romney and W but not Trump

"I got a similar response when I asked oil magnate T. Boone Pickens whether he would vote for Trump. He looked at me with a quizzical expression and replied: "Well, who else is there to vote for?"Right. Who else is there? Yet, amazingly, a caucus of lifelong Republican politicos in Washington are announcing to the world with defiance and self-righteousness that they will vote for Hillary Clinton.They are mostly former Mitt Romney and George W. Bush operatives. They lost, and now they want people to believe that their anti-Trumpism is a principled act of heroism. They ingratiate themselves to The New York Times, Washington Post and team Clinton -- the sworn enemies of free markets and conservative values."

 

[T.Lex]

I do not think INGO has any lifelong Republican politicos in Washington.

But I could be wrong.

 

[Ericpwp]

The reality is that the "Republican Turncoats," the "unforgivable betrayers of conservative principles," voted for Trump in the primary.

 

[BugI02]

View attachment 49561

 

[T.Lex]

Mostly, yes, washing my hands of a Trump loss, as I view it as a betrayal of conservativism.

Not mad, but frustrated by INGOers' inability to recognize non-binary issues.

 

[JettaKnight]

Same source, more complete quote. I believe he is speaking in the present tense about the turncoats who supported Romney and W but not Trump

"I got a similar response when I asked oil magnate T. Boone Pickens whether he would vote for Trump. He looked at me with a quizzical expression and replied: "Well, who else is there to vote for?"Right. Who else is there? Yet, amazingly, a caucus of lifelong Republican politicos in Washington are announcing to the world with defiance and self-righteousness that they will vote for Hillary Clinton.They are mostly former Mitt Romney and George W. Bush operatives. They lost, and now they want people to believe that their anti-Trumpism is a principled act of heroism. They ingratiate themselves to The New York Times, Washington Post and team Clinton -- the sworn enemies of free markets and conservative values."

So with all these life long Republicans going NeverTrump, you come to the conclusion that they're the bad guys and not Trump?

 

[Ericpwp]

If the election is anything other than binary, it's a HRC win. Unless Johnson wins enough states to send it to congress, which isn't going to happen, it is binary. If it isn't binary, it's a singularity.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

If the election is anything other than binary, it's a HRC win. Unless Johnson wins enough states to send it to congress, which isn't going to happen, it is binary. If it isn't binary, it's a singularity.

There also exist people that simply hate both candidates... know who is going to win... and yet, don't support either of them.

Some feel like they have to have a bogeyman or a target for their frustration... so these people become their target.

Clinton sucks.
Trump sucks.
Clinton's going to win. My vote won't change that.
I have zero support for either candidate.

Period. Full stop. No other conclusions can be drawn from that.

Democrats feel the same way you do about people that dislike Hillary. They probably also accuse them of being Trump supporters (which has the added perk of meaning "uneducated racist hicks" if the media is any measurement)

 

[Ericpwp]

So with all these life long Republicans going NeverTrump, you come to the conclusion that they're the bad guys and not Trump?

Trump won, and they are taking their ball and going home. They had their chance to beat him and they failed.

 

[Ericpwp]

There also exist people that simply hate both candidates... know who is going to win... and yet, don't support either of them.

Some feel like they have to have a bogeyman or a target for their frustration... so these people become their target.

Clinton sucks.
Trump sucks.
Clinton's going to win. My vote won't change that.
I have zero support for either candidate.

Period. Full stop. No other conclusions can be drawn from that.

So to them it's a singularity and they will hide out for at least four years.

Democrats feel the same way you do about people that dislike Hillary. They probably also accuse them of being Trump supporters (which has the added perk of meaning "uneducated racist hicks" if the media is any measurement)

All the more reason to stick a Trump up their @##.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The reality is that the "Republican Turncoats," the "unforgivable betrayers of conservative principles," voted for Trump in the primary.

Seriously? It's not my fault that the GOP couldn't do better than Trump with the lone exception of Rand Paul, who the establishment dislikes as much as they dislike Trump. We had Jeb and Rubio who both took clearly anti-conservative stances on select issues and at best paid lip service where they leaned the right way, a washed up CEO who wrecked HP and did not have a rebound to success unlike Trump, and a fistful of light-duty libs who would stand back and let the D's roll us over a barrel and do what comes natural to them. Now, tell me again how this is the fault of those who supported Trump.

 

[BugI02]

So with all these life long Republicans going NeverTrump, you come to the conclusion that they're the bad guys and not Trump?

I've come to the conclusion that they desperately want us to accept their reasoning that being neverTrump is some heroic stand on principle.

"We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."

A heroic stand looks more like that

 

[indiucky]

I've come to the conclusion that they desperately want us to accept their reasoning that being neverTrump is some heroic stand on principle.

"We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."

A heroic stand looks more like that

I'm okay with it either way...Their vote is their choice..I don't think any less of them for voting so...I am doing the best I can to have them not think less of me because I am voting for him....I will do this through Trump's victory and I will not gloat when he beats Hillary by 5 points....

If I do please call me out on it....