Why Should Anyone Vote For Trump ?

[phylodog]

You've got me. That stance makes zero sense to me.

 

[HoughMade]

Even if you don't like D's or R's . . . the LP is showing itself not to be an option. Gary Johnson was just calling for open borders on CNN. WTAF?

I know I'm the wrong person to defend Libertarians, but a border is a government property line, not a private property line. I imagine that they don't think that government should own property, but that the private landowners should have full rights to defend their own property.

 

[T.Lex]

That doesn't change my stance. Things could always be worse, I choose not to voluntarily make them that way by voting for another career politician.

You're voluntarily voting for someone who has no experience doing the job at all.

He comes across like a career politician. I honestly haven't looked into his background much, he shut me down pretty quickly when I started listening to him.

It strikes me that your vote is being guided by your impressions. Trump comes across as someone who will radically change things. Cruz comes across as a distasteful politician.

I don't mean that to be insulting - these are emotional decisions, for all of us. That's why they become intense.

I've served for the public since I was 17 but I'm not trying to get elected. That's never been a goal of mine.

You, of course, deserve credit for your public service.

Trump has never done it for 1 day.

 

[JTScribe]

I know I'm the wrong person to defend Libertarians, but a border is a government property line, not a private property line. I imagine that they don't think that government should own property, but that the private landowners should have full rights to defend their own property.

The people are the government, hence it is our property.

I wonder what Gary Johnson would say about the Minutemen or the ranchers patrolling their own land. I imagine he would lambast them for restricting the economic rights of the aliens.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The people are the government, hence it is our property.

I wonder what Gary Johnson would say about the Minutemen or the ranchers patrolling their own land. I imagine he would lambast them for restricting the economic rights of the aliens.

Libertarians will tell you that to have truly free markets, you also have to have free movement of labor. They'll tell you borders restrict that free flow--both into and out of the US. But like so many issues, it sounds good on paper. As long as we have the welfare state we have, open borders will be suicide for our country.

If Johnson is really calling for that, he's a bigger idiot than I previously thought. He's got to be pandering.

 

[jbombelli]

The libertarian party has always been for open borders. This is nothing new.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

A reasonable position. But, since this is INGO, I must say that your position reeks of underinformed, nearsighted bigotry. Or something like that.

You forgot being micro aggressed and something about safe spaces .

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

You're voluntarily voting for someone who has no experience doing the job at all.

You saying that as a negative thing ?

 

[Libertarian01]

Libertarians will tell you that to have truly free markets, you also have to have free movement of labor. They'll tell you borders restrict that free flow--both into and out of the US. But like so many issues, it sounds good on paper. As long as we have the welfare state we have, open borders will be suicide for our country.

If Johnson is really calling for that, he's a bigger idiot than I previously thought. He's got to be pandering.

I agree with this ^^^.

Although I am a Libertarian I do not fall into the "purist" nonsense. A group of people have organized themselves with a tool called government. That government has laid claim to certain property that has been recognized by other governments (aka people in other organizations.) That government has the responsibility to protect the property it has legally claimed from any type of damage and/or abuse. Even IF it is nothing more than to know who has entered its property, it has the responsibility to do this.

There is much that is good in theory that we should move toward, but we must understand that Utopia is always out of reach until we significantly evolve.

All that said, I do support easier access and easier, less time consuming, less expensive ways to become an American citizen. I wouldn't mind returning to the Ellis Island system IF we were to dismantle the welfare state we have created since then.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Timjoebillybob]

He comes across like a career politician. I honestly haven't looked into his background much, he shut me down pretty quickly when I started listening to him.

I've served for the public since I was 17 but I'm not trying to get elected. That's never been a goal of mine.

You might want to give it a brief glance. While he has quite a bit of dealings in politics, he's not really a politician except for the last 3 (not 2 my mistake) years.
He has shown himself to be a very good supporter of the 2nd Amendment including writing the Amicus brief for Heller that was signed by 30 something state Attorney generals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz

 

[phylodog]

You're voluntarily voting for someone who has no experience doing the job at all.

How many of the hundreds in DC who have experience are doing what is right for this country? For me, at this point, someone with zero experience is far more appealing than someone who has years of experience.

It strikes me that your vote is being guided by your impressions. Trump comes across as someone who will radically change things. Cruz comes across as a distasteful politician.

My impressions have served me very well throughout the years.

I don't mean that to be insulting - these are emotional decisions, for all of us. That's why they become intense.


You, of course, deserve credit for your public service.

Trump has never done it for 1 day.

I like that Trump hasn't done it for one day, hell I love it. I know he isn't being elected King and I also know he is somewhat limited in what he can actually accomplish via law. What I see him doing is leading this nation. He isn't a perfect human being, far from it but he has balls and I believe he has an honest love for this country and what it used to represent. I honestly believe he will work to improve things. That is why he will get my vote.

 

[phylodog]

You might want to give it a brief glance. While he has quite a bit of dealings in politics, he's not really a politician except for the last 3 (not 2 my mistake) years.
He has shown himself to be a very good supporter of the 2nd Amendment including writing the Amicus brief for Heller that was signed by 30 something state Attorney generals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz

I won't throw fits if he's elected and I don't necessarily think he will be a disaster but I don't see him as attempting to lead this country away from the cliff. I genuinely don't like his persona. Like I mentioned earlier, he comes across like a cheesy Sunday morning TV evangelist selling blessings for cash. I don't detect sincerity though I won't go so far as to say I think he's lying. I'm just not comfortable with him or his presentation and I don't think he projects the image of a strong leader and this country is in desperate need of one.

With Russian fighters buzzing our carriers for fun we need someone who will pick up the phone and tell the world that the next genius who tries it will be shark food. I just don't see Cruz doing that.

 

[T.Lex]

With Russian fighters buzzing our carriers for fun we need someone who will pick up the phone and tell the world that the next genius who tries it will be shark food. I just don't see Cruz doing that.

Which do you think would give the order to turn the next Russian pilot who does it into shark food? To actually do that which is threatened?

Do you want a president who will say it but not do it, or who will do it?

 

[Hohn]

He's not beholden to the " donor class " and that changes the game in our favor .

You mean he's not beholden to the "voter class". Tell me why Trump won't change his views back to the same authoritarian lefty views he held very recently. How do you know he won't?

 

[Hohn]

I think many of the core assumptions about Trump aren't really supported by evidence. Trump has never once brought down a system. His track record is of thriving within the system. If he went to Prison, he'd be the guy that never got bent over and always seems to have enough smokes.

He's not bringing down the Republican primary process-- he's following it and winning.

Trump manipulates the media to gain advantage, he's not tearing down the media. He gives them the ratings they want, and he gets the free publicity he wants.


The logical conclusion is not that Trump will do anything radically transformative of government whatsoever. Once he's in power, he will assume the necessary form. He will comply with the entrenched system in the way that best suits his interests.

I sort of wish Trump would actually be elected President just to demonstrate to all his supporters how much they've been bamboozled by someone who knows how to manipulate their frustration and anger.

Like Hitler did after the Weimer embarrassment. And Robespierre did. And Lenin did.

There's a word for that: D-E-M-O-G-O-G-U-E.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I'm still dubious whether Trump really ever expected to make it to the nomination. I'm even more dubious that he'd drop a sizable portion of his purported wealth to self fund his campaign in the general. We'll find out soon enough, I suppose.

How Donald Trump Will Sell Out His Supporters in a General Election - The Atlantic

 

[Libertarian01]

I think many of the core assumptions about Trump aren't really supported by evidence. Trump has never once brought down a system. His track record is of thriving within the system. If he went to Prison, he'd be the guy that never got bent over and always seems to have enough smokes.

He's not bringing down the Republican primary process-- he's following it and winning.

Trump manipulates the media to gain advantage, he's not tearing down the media. He gives them the ratings they want, and he gets the free publicity he wants.


The logical conclusion is not that Trump will do anything radically transformative of government whatsoever. Once he's in power, he will assume the necessary form. He will comply with the entrenched system in the way that best suits his interests.

I sort of wish Trump would actually be elected President just to demonstrate to all his supporters how much they've been bamboozled by someone who knows how to manipulate their frustration and anger.

Like Hitler did after the Weimer embarrassment. And Robespierre did. And Lenin did.

There's a word for that: D-E-M-O-G-O-G-U-E.

Take heart, because if all of the above is true: We are stuck with a demagogue for four (4) years balanced by a House and Senate. Plus, Hillary will never get in nor have any significant future chance at the White House.

If he truly sucks he will be removed in four (4) years and the republican machine will have had its nose rubbed in to teach it a lesson to listen to its base - FOR REAL!

Overall, not a bad deal.

Regards,

Doug

 

[phylodog]

Which do you think would give the order to turn the next Russian pilot who does it into shark food? To actually do that which is threatened?

Do you want a president who will say it but not do it, or who will do it?

A leader would do it. A leader would be respected as such and more than likely the warning would be all that was needed to stop the BS. Putin is doing this crap because he can and he knows it. I'd like to see that change. Trump strikes me as the type to do what he says he'll do.

 

[Hohn]

Brazenly stolen from somewhere else: Trump isn't a candidate; he's a murder weapon aimed directly at the heart of the GOP establishment.

OK, let's follow this through. Just like all the Presidents that have gone into a foreign land to take out a bad guy only to have no plan for the "now what?" aftermath.

So Trump takes out the GOP establishment.
1) Who exactly did he take out? Lobbyists? No. Congressional staffers? No. Think tank types? not at all. Wash-Reince-Repeat Priebus? Maybe-- does replacing him matter?
2) Who replaces who is taken out?

A short, incomplete history of "taking's out" that didn't go so well:
-- CIA taking out Mossadegh in 1953
-- Taking out the Serbs in Bosnia
-- Taking out Saddam from an otherwise stable Iraq.
-- Taking out Allende
-- Trying to take out Assad
-- Taking out Qadafi


NOTICING A PATTERN YET?

Want a civl war and a corrupt thugocracy? Well, just "take out" the major sources of stability.

 

[phylodog]

There's a word for that: D-E-M-O-G-O-G-U-E.

Demogogue = a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

I don't find his arguments irrational. I find the current state of the country to be quite irrational.