Donald Trump has the least interventionist plan

[Brett85]

everyone here spouting trump donated to Clinton is like people who wouldn't shut up about Ron Paul's newsletter. With all the dirt on all the other candidates donating to something is on the bottom of the list

I guess if Bernie Sanders had donated money to George W. Bush, that wouldn't be an issue in the Democratic Primary? Get real. Some of you are so anti Rand that you'll support a liberal stooge like Donald Trump just out of spite.

 

[jj-]

^^ and it's extremely easy to explain the donations, they were bribes so that the government wouldn't go after his companies. If you live in New York, you have to be in good standing with the Democrats who run the place. It's just like paying taxes so that the government doesn't confiscate more of your property.

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

I guess if Bernie Sanders had donated money to George W. Bush, that wouldn't be an issue in the Democratic Primary? Get real. Some of you are so anti Rand that you'll support a liberal stooge like Donald Trump just out of spite.

Trump has never held public office. If he liked Hitlery so much he wouldn't be running against her. Unless it's a conspiracy for him to get the nomination and dump the election like Kerry, Cain, and Romney.

 

[Brett85]

^^ and it's extremely easy to explain the donations, they were bribes so that the government wouldn't go after his companies. If you live in New York, you have to be in good standing with the Democrats who run the place. It's just like paying taxes so that the government doesn't confiscate more of your property.

Is picking a liberal Democratic Obama supporter as your running mate easy to explain as well?

 

[Krugminator2]

everyone here spouting trump donated to Clinton is like people who wouldn't shut up about Ron Paul's newsletter. With all the dirt on all the other candidates donating to something is on the bottom of the list

How about his donations to Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, Charlie Rangel, Chris Dodd, and John Kerry? He supported Schumer over Al D'Amato and it isn't like D'Amato was a radical right winger. His single biggest donation was 125k to the Democratic Party, besides his donations to the Clinton Foundation. Seems like supporting single payer health care should be a deal killer, no? Support for an assault weapons ban? Supporting a 15% wealth tax for those with net worth's over $10 million? That should be a deal killer, right?

 

[phill4paul]

I've not seen the R.O.I. promised from the last war. How can Trump deliver were the last two administrations failed? Democracy isn't cheap. As a major exporter I expect something in return.

 

[jj-]

Is picking a liberal Democratic Obama supporter as your running mate easy to explain as well?

Picking Oprah is not in the realm of possibility, it was a tease. It might nevertheless help him by persuading Oprah to not go hard attacking him.

 

[Brett85]

How about his donations to Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, Charlie Rangel, Chuck Schumer, and John Kerry? His single biggest donation was 125k to the Democratic Party, besides his donations to the Clinton Foundation. Seems like supporting single payer health care should be a deal killer, no? Support for an assault weapons ban? Supporting a 15% wealth tax for those with net worth's over $10 million? That should be a deal killer, right?

Nope. The only deal breaker they have is arming the Kurds, apparently.

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Is picking a liberal Democratic Obama supporter as your running mate easy to explain as well?

I thought the whole point of the Ron Paul campaign was to bring the country back to its roots, not be Red vs Blue. This sickens me. And no I'm not voting for Trump, I'm still voting for Rand.

 

[EBounding]

ISIS revenue is from the oil. Trump wants to bomb and take the oil. No need to go and topple Syria like the interventionists want, no need to arm the Kurds as in Rand Paul's plan.

How is directly bombing and "taking the oil" less interventionist than selling/giving weapons to the Kurds?

 

[Brett85]

I thought the whole point of the Ron Paul campaign was to bring the country back to its roots, not be Red vs Blue. This sickens me. And no I'm not voting for Trump, I'm still voting for Rand.

How is picking a liberal Democrat as your VP "bringing the country back to it's roots?" Ron would've picked someone like Judge Napolitano as his VP had he won the nomination. He wouldn't have picked someone who stands for everything he's opposed to.

 

[jj-]

How is directly bombing and "taking the oil" less interventionist than selling/giving weapons to the Kurds?

It's less interventionist because you're not redrawing any maps. Arming the Kurds is just part or the plan, the other part is giving them a homeland.

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

How is picking a liberal Democrat as your VP "bringing the country back to it's roots?" Ron would've picked someone like Judge Napolitano as his VP had he won the nomination. He wouldn't have picked someone who stands for everything he's opposed to.

If the difference between Rand becoming president is picking the Judge or picking Oprah, you'd rather not have Rand?

 

[jj-]

Trump is not going to pick Oprah, but hypothetically, it would be great, as it would bring the black vote to the Republicans.

 

[ZakB]

Also threatening a trade war with Mexico and China seems kinda interventionist. Though I suppose in Mexico's case the threat is to make them build and pay for a wall so we can be more isolationist with them, lol.

 

[francisco]

ISIS revenue is from the oil. Trump wants to bomb and take the oil. No need to go and topple Syria like the interventionists want, no need to arm the Kurds as in Rand Paul's plan.

Ideally I would want a non-interventionist, but from what we have available we can only choose the least interventionist, and that is Donald Trump. Rand Paul wants to redraw the map to give the Kurds a homeland, involve Turkey and a lot of crap. Given the options, I'd prefer just taking the oil...


...At first I wanted Hillary to win so the whole country would explode in her face and Rand wouldn't be blamed for it. But now I'm a little more hopeful, and of all the foreign policy ideas presented so far, Donald Trump has the least interventionist.

Bombing another country and taking their property (oil, in this case) is a non-interventionist policy in your mind????

Smdh

Are you insane? That's the least interventionist policy prescription you've seen?

If some other country did that to us, would you consider that to be intervening in our affairs??

Sounds like you're one of those "Liberty for me, but not for thee" types

 

[Brett85]

Duplicate post.

 

[Brett85]

If the difference between Rand becoming president is picking the Judge or picking Oprah, you'd rather not have Rand?

Oprah is not a Republican. The only way that Oprah could be the VP for Rand is if Rand won the Democratic nomination. And if Oprah was Rand's VP, 50 million Republicans would stay home on election day. It's an absurd idea.

 

[jj-]

Bombing another country and taking their property (oil, in this case) is a non-interventionist policy in your mind????

Smdh

Go buy a dictionary, and look up the word LESS.

 

[Krugminator2]

^^ and it's extremely easy to explain the donations, they were bribes so that the government wouldn't go after his companies. If you live in New York, you have to be in good standing with the Democrats who run the place. It's just like paying taxes so that the government doesn't confiscate more of your property.

But he supported Schumer over D'Amato, who was the incumbent Republican. He supported Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania. He doesn't live in PA. Harold Ford was a Dem Congressman from Tennessee. He supported Bill Nelson in Florida. Bob Kerrey in Nebraska. The list is pretty long.

And yeah, the force Mexico to pay for a wall seems rather interventionist as well as the trade war with China that he intends to win by "talking tough" to them.