Trump on the Second Amendment

[BugI02]

Trump is actually a viable candidate for you? So you believe his rhetoric concerning Mexicans, Muslims, and Blacks?
Here, ill ask you flat out, what exactly appeals to you about Trump?

Strictly that he might be able to stave off a Clinton presidency. I harbor the hope, without supporting evidence, that he may have the financial/economic chops to get started on doing something about the debt but the controversy over his views on immigration have shoved anything else off the stage. We disagree, deal with it . You think he is some kind of modern day paperhanger and I think he's a classic troublemaker stirring things up. At this stage winning isn't everything, its the only thing. Get me somebody putting up Trumps kind of numbers and energizing the masses and I'll gladly back them Won't be holding my breath, though.

P.S. detected an error in my post you referenced - next to the last line should have said 'prefer Cruz/Paul ......' and I effed it up.

 

[BugI02]

I'm not sure why you think I need to support every dumb-*** idea that Trump spouts in order to support his candidacy. Offhand I can't recall - is there a candidate that you support?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Strictly that he might be able to stave off a Clinton presidency. I harbor the hope, without supporting evidence, that he may have the financial/economic chops to get started on doing something about the debt but the controversy over his views on immigration have shoved anything else off the stage. We disagree, deal with it . You think he is some kind of modern day paperhanger and I think he's a classic troublemaker stirring things up. At this stage winning isn't everything, its the only thing. Get me somebody putting up Trumps kind of numbers and energizing the masses and I'll gladly back them Won't be holding my breath, though.

P.S. detected an error in my post you referenced - next to the last line should have said 'prefer Cruz/Paul ......' and I effed it up.

Ah, gotcha. The Trump/Cruz ticket you mistakenly post is what got my attention. Trump is going to ruin the Republican Party. I hate the fact that they all signed a pledge, and while I may not like Trump, they should keep their word, and certainly not backdoor him if he has the popular vote.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I'm not sure why you think I need to support every dumb-*** idea that Trump spouts in order to support his candidacy. Offhand I can't recall - is there a candidate that you support?

Paul... All the way. I'll even write him in on the ballot. And one dumb*** policy is one thing. Multiples quite another. Trump's campaign is reminiscent of the old Southern Strategy.

 

[BugI02]

Possibly, but it's hard to believe there is much strategy behind it. It really seems like he has no handlers and is just winging it most of the time, which can be refreshing. Should I assume that you are in favor of returning to the gold standard and have thought through all the ramifications therein?

 

[BugI02]

I wish that somebody would pop up channeling Goldwater

 

[ATM]

He's NOT a Democrat!

Isn't that enough?

No. I obviously lack proper political indoctrination.

 

[Que]

I'm not sure why you think I need to support every dumb-*** idea that Trump spouts in order to support his candidacy. Offhand I can't recall - is there a candidate that you support?

This is true and caused me to step back. None of us would agree with everything any candidate stands for or policies they want to see enacted. As I sit back and consider the policies Trump has introduced, I can't really think of any. I know that he currently stands for the Second Amendment, but what else does he want to do that you believe is good policy?

 

[Twangbanger]

...Trump is going to ruin the Republican Party...

I'm not so sure it isn't already ruined. So why not "ruin" it some more? I think it needs political chemotherapy, if it's ever to be something useful to the general public again.

For the person talking about staving off Hillary, Trump won't stave off anything. There will likely be no clear winner and a brokered convention, and on the second ballot, when delegates are released to vote their conscience, Trump will quickly fall out of the running and it will be Rubio/Cruz/Bush. And since Cruz hasn't made enough friends, that means it will be Rubio/Bush. Both are pro-immigration, Trump will go Independent, and a lot of his voters will bail the GOP.

But I still like Trump's presence in this race. If he delivers a crap sandwich to the GOP, and they realize they can't get the WH without those voters, it could possibly begin the process of remaking the GOP into something useful which actually represents the interests of little people, instead of just lobbyists and donors (like now).

I want the GOP to get that crap-sandwich. If Hillary has to win for it to happen, so be it. She was probably going to win anyway. If Trump weren't in the race, this primary (and election) would already be over.

 

[BugI02]

This is true and caused me to step back. None of us would agree with everything any candidate stands for or policies they want to see enacted. As I sit back and consider the policies Trump has introduced, I can't really think of any. I know that he currently stands for the Second Amendment, but what else does he want to do that you believe is good policy?

I admit there isn't much to work with, Que. Not many of his policies have been articulated/fleshed out with details. In most other elections I wouldn't go near a candidate like him, but this isn't most other years. I'm focused on that first major hurdle - is there someone who might give a us a chance to defeat the beast and possibly have some coattails where the house and senate are concerned. If Trump puts Jeb on the trailer once and for all he will have done plenty of good in my book. I just don't see anybody else energizing the electorate like he is right now. The key is whether there are net gains from that jolt or if he drives away more potential votes than he garners for our side. I don't think that can be determined yet and it will be difficult to sort from the results when we get to states with open primaries. But look at how people talk about the other candidates. Nobody is championing how with [insert alternate to Trump] we defeat Hillary. Everything seems more couched in [insert alternate to Trump] will be less of a disaster than Trump. Nobody is really talking about the debt overhang either but I don't think Trump is unaware of the problems he faces if elected. I have deep concerns about his ego allowing him to attract good people to his team if he should get elected, but these are all problems well beyond that first big hurdle - can anybody offer hope of notHillary. If you want to contemplate disaster - a complete implosion of the party - have you read any of the latest from the party apparatchiks. Not only are they talking brokered convention but some are actually floating Priebus as a compromise candidate! Or what about opening the back door for Jeb? I understand why people have a difficult time getting behind Trump, especially if some other candidate they like better seems viable. As I've said before my predilection is toward Cruz and Paul, in that order. Depending on who's on my ballot, I will vote for one of those two - even over Trump. I'm am only advocating that if Trump becomes inevitable don't help do the Democrats work for them. If you want ME to coalesce behind your candidate if he wins the nomination you've got it - even Rubio although I don't really like him or trust him. All I'm asking is that others do the same. Fight the good fight for your chosen candidate, that's how the system is supposed to work. But if some other candidate gets the nod I think we all should be prepared to back them rather than tear ourselves apart with civil war.

I look back on this and see I haven't really answered the question about policies but I don't think we've gotten to the stage where candidates - on either side - are proposing real fleshed out potential policies and programs that I can dissect. It's all sound bites - build a wall, destroy ISIS, free college tuition, stop 'gun crime'. It does remind me of the attempts to paint Reagan as unsuitable for the job. Someone herein said Reagan wasn't a raving lunatic in response to that comparison to Trump. I think people forget that Trump is a very successful business man so there must be something to him. The danger is that the part he's not revealing doesn't fit his self-narrative as Republican savior. I'm not blind. I'm not stupid. I can see the risks involved. I believe NO candidate can do 1/10 of the things they promise to do. I think if you believe Trump could turn into Hitler than your major problem is with your fellow Americans, because they would need to be 'only following orders' for that to happen.

 

[Que]

I admit there isn't much to work with, Que. Not many of his policies have been articulated/fleshed out with details. In most other elections I wouldn't go near a candidate like him, but this isn't most other years. I'm focused on that first major hurdle - is there someone who might give a us a chance to defeat the beast and possibly have some coattails where the house and senate are concerned. If Trump puts Jeb on the trailer once and for all he will have done plenty of good in my book. I just don't see anybody else energizing the electorate like he is right now. The key is whether there are net gains from that jolt or if he drives away more potential votes than he garners for our side. I don't think that can be determined yet and it will be difficult to sort from the results when we get to states with open primaries. But look at how people talk about the other candidates. Nobody is championing how with [insert alternate to Trump] we defeat Hillary. Everything seems more couched in [insert alternate to Trump] will be less of a disaster than Trump. Nobody is really talking about the debt overhang either but I don't think Trump is unaware of the problems he faces if elected. I have deep concerns about his ego allowing him to attract good people to his team if he should get elected, but these are all problems well beyond that first big hurdle - can anybody offer hope of notHillary. If you want to contemplate disaster - a complete implosion of the party - have you read any of the latest from the party apparatchiks. Not only are they talking brokered convention but some are actually floating Priebus as a compromise candidate! Or what about opening the back door for Jeb? I understand why people have a difficult time getting behind Trump, especially if some other candidate they like better seems viable. As I've said before my predilection is toward Cruz and Paul, in that order. Depending on who's on my ballot, I will vote for one of those two - even over Trump. I'm am only advocating that if Trump becomes inevitable don't help do the Democrats work for them. If you want ME to coalesce behind your candidate if he wins the nomination you've got it - even Rubio although I don't really like him or trust him. All I'm asking is that others do the same. Fight the good fight for your chosen candidate, that's how the system is supposed to work. But if some other candidate gets the nod I think we all should be prepared to back them rather than tear ourselves apart with civil war.

I look back on this and see I haven't really answered the question about policies but I don't think we've gotten to the stage where candidates - on either side - are proposing real fleshed out potential policies and programs that I can dissect. It's all sound bites - build a wall, destroy ISIS, free college tuition, stop 'gun crime'. It does remind me of the attempts to paint Reagan as unsuitable for the job. Someone herein said Reagan wasn't a raving lunatic in response to that comparison to Trump. I think people forget that Trump is a very successful business man so there must be something to him. The danger is that the part he's not revealing doesn't fit his self-narrative as Republican savior. I'm not blind. I'm not stupid. I can see the risks involved. I believe NO candidate can do 1/10 of the things they promise to do. I think if you believe Trump could turn into Hitler than your major problem is with your fellow Americans, because they would need to be 'only following orders' for that to happen.

You have converted me to the wait and see stance. I make no bones about not liking Trump and although his antics play a role, his supporters are the primary factor for my detesting the thought of him being my President. Many say that he says what they are thinking. When I hear the things he says about minority populations, it angers me. To the last part of your statement, I do believe most of his supporters would follow orders. I've asked numerous people if they believe, if elected, Trump should carry out what he says and most say they agree with him. Others jump right to the protection of 2A without answering. Then they ask me to vote for him if he's forwarded without one thought to my concerns. What would happen if Trump says, "Based on my research on crime, I believe black people should be able to purchase guns, JUST until we find a way to lessen crime in the black communities"? I wonder if this would be acceptable?

I want the same thing that most people on here want. However, I am not willing to help gain these rights/benefits when I believe I will not be able to take advantage of them. Still, I will wait and see.

 

[BugI02]

I can only speak for myself, Que. In the mentioned 'black people allowed to buy guns example' I would fight. No restrictions on 2A are acceptable to me. I get what you're saying about people who assert that Trump says what they are thinking. They are certainly living the unexamined life. That tendency to externalize all of one's problems and believe they don't need to own any part of them is disingenuous. Just as its disingenuous to ignore that the average persons direct experience with crime might obviate that nice, neat narrative that crime cuts across racial lines. What is the dividing line between racism and SA. How do you parse that line? I'm not happy that its the way I am, but if a boisterous group of young males of a certain ethnicity are heading towards me ,without a good avoidance strategy available, I will be at code orange. In some peoples eye this will likely make me seem racist. I'm not, but like you with Trump I am taking a wait and see attitude. My rational brain reciting the statistics of crime cannot overcome the gut level reaction of my reptile brain to prepare for danger. There is more to it than just that broad description of course, the impression is refined as more data becomes available. Manner of dress, body language, what's being said among themselves etc but there's no disguising that that initial gestalt is a bit racist. If I see Trump attempt to leverage that kernal of racism that I would argue is in all(most?) of us I would likely be done. Right now I submit that if he's not Hitler then he is waging a brilliant outsider campaign to capture the nomination. As this process plays out and the field winnows he will no longer be able to paint with broad strokes and will have to give specifics. Then I may yet abandon all advocacy for Trump based on those specifics. Again (and again and again.....) I remind folks that I would MUCH prefer an experienced, adult candidate to Trump - if they have a chance of winning. If the other candidates try to emulate Trump to 'cash in' on what they think is a trend than they would prove themselves be the phonies.

 

[bwframe]

Trump is actually a viable candidate for you? So you believe his rhetoric concerning Mexicans, Muslims, and Blacks?...

What exactly is negative about Trump's "rhetoric concerning Mexicans, Muslims, and Blacks"? Details please, not conjecture.

 

[Twangbanger]

You have converted me to the wait and see stance...

This is the good place to be. We would currently be getting Jeb Bush stuffed down our throats if it weren't for Trump...along with all the NSA spying, probable Syrian wars, unfavorably-negotiated trade agreements, mass uncontrolled immigration and additional gun-purchase hoops to jump through that a Bush Presidency would probably eventually entail.

I don't agree with some stuff Trump says, but that's not the same as saying I'm offended by it. And that's a key distinction. We need to be able to disagree, without necessarily being offended; to suspend judgement for the purpose of discussion. I think when people get offended, they've quit trying to understand the other side, and are just making assumptions about it.

I wish there were a way to reject / reform the "mainstream Republican party," without having to resort to something like a Trump. You shouldn't have to run the party into a brick wall, to get their attention. Unfortunately, that's probably where we are. "They" are no doubt busy working behind the scenes to grease the palms of super-delegates, so they can prevail in a brokered convention (which has now apparently become the pathway to power, in their view).

So although I don't like the sound of Trump ideas like registering people of a certain religion, I take it with a grain of salt. Why? Because 1) he was being baited by a reporter when he said it, 2) he has the unique power of position to be able to strike a serious blow to the GOP establishment, which could be a valuable strategic commodity right now, and 3) I don't think he's going to be the nominee, anyway. In my opinion, just because someone with no political experience has some backward, poorly-considered views toward specific groups of people does not disqualify them from further consideration. If he's capable of changing those views over time (as he has apparently done on things like abortion and gun control), while striking a blow to the current establishment, that could be useful, and does not constitute the establishment of a Fourth Reich to me. Even the worst Archie-Bunker racist voter is capable of having some common interests with the rest of us in terms of what they want in political leadership. If we both agree the current GOP is completely useless to the task of government, that's a starting point.

That's why I'm willing to wait and see. Cruz apparently has just passed The Donald for first place in Iowa. Things are still developing. We could have a political evil genius waiting in the wings, ready to take Trump's thunder and run with it to the detriment of the establishment. I want to see where this goes. Shouting down Trump supporters as racist idiots does nothing to further this project (unless you think 8 years of Hillary or Jeb are good for everybody). If people would quit looking for a racial bogeyman in Trump, and think about the bigger picture of what could be done here, I think it would be more productive. The GOP to me is a house-restoration project, and right now we're in the sledgehammers and pick-axes, hauling crap away in a dumpster phase. If Trump wants to come in and wield an axe for a while, I say let him.

 

[PLM2001]

This guy has my vote. It was a very good read. I think it would be great if my LTCH would be good in all 50 states. I hate having to go to Illinois without my gun.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Trump Is Going To Break Your Heart - Kurt Schlichter - Page 1

too many trump threads.

 

[Denny347]

Trump Is Going To Break Your Heart - Kurt Schlichter - Page 1

too many trump threads.

Great article.

 

[JettaKnight]

This guy has my vote. It was a very good read. I think it would be great if my LTCH would be good in all 50 states. I hate having to go to Illinois without my gun.

Um, unless you're taking the train, you don't have to leave it at home.

You can't carry it around, but you can keep it in your car.

 

[Twangbanger]

Great article.

What this writer misses with his "psycho girlfriend" analogy, is that sometimes - "using" the other person goes both ways. We're using him, also. Trump will only break our hearts if we marry him. I don't believe the GOP will let him hang around long enough to see the Sunday Paper. If he gets off on it for now, hey...good for him.

The only possible way he can mess anything up, is if he's still around running Independent after the convention. And that is something nobody can control. Messing your pants about him right now is just acting hysterical.

 

[2A_Tom]

Trump is no diplomat, he speaks with no PC filter. To many that is refreshing. I will admit I enjoy seeing not only dems and media but mainstream republicans getting their panties in a wad.

I would like to see a Cruz, Rubio ticket. The one thing I have against Cruz is him slamming Trump for the partial quote that the media is playing wall to wall. Cruz actually proposed a bill that would stop refugees from coming to America until we can fix our vetting process, which is actually what trump said.