The Reluctant Case for Trump

[BamaAla]

Just own it. I'm voting for trump and I'm not really afraid to say so. It's funny, my wife and I were just looking at Facebook and noticed that Jack Hunter again was making a pro Trump post but per usual he prefaced it with the obligatory "I don't like Trump but..." Get over it, don't apologize for supporting the best candidate left in the race.

 

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

Just own it. I'm voting for trump and I'm not really afraid to say so. It's funny, my wife and I were just looking at Facebook and noticed that Jack Hunter again was making a pro Trump post but per usual he prefaced it with the obligatory "I don't like Trump but..." Get over it, don't apologize for supporting the best candidate left in the race.

While I respect your opinion on the matter, I have to vote my conscience. Depending on the Libertarian Nominee, it might be him. Or maybe it'll have to be a write in candidate. But I can't and I won't put my vote to an authoritarian like Trump.

 

[ProBlue33]

My thoughts are this, the OP has nailed it, he is right, and I will add Trump is a buffoon.

BUT
On the debate last night
By the applauses Bush got and the pro-boo's directed at Trump the audience was stacked with establishment hacks for the GOP, Bush lobbyists, Bush has no support in the real world, his support is phantom like and only from die hard neo-cons, that are still under some weird illusion that the Iraq war was necessary.
Just remember the pro-Bush people, are the same idiots laughing at George W joking about it here.



His sparing with Jeb tonight and the crowds reaction reminded me of Ron Paul running, and the same negative crowd reaction, tonight proved one thing to me with finality. Trump is not part of the GOP establishment in any way, he is just using them and they know it, and want to stop it.
Trump is a lot like Perot, and after last night I am going to say 10% Ron Paul.

And you can't say Trump is wrong on jobs fleeing America for pure corporate greed when you watch this


Sorry guys it's gotten to the point were Ron Paul was wrong on the free market, there is just to much greed for it to work without some level of protection type regulation now, Ron was thinking it would work, but that is a bygone era, because of Wall Street greed concerned about only the next quarter, not if jobs stay in America for the middle class.

Somebody on another forum was saying something made in America that cost us $2 costs $15 in China not because of the exchange but because of their tariffs on those goods, and that is a bad deal for America. Trump wants to fix that.

NAFTA is bad for America, and Trump will rip it up.

What is really sad is when the biggest idiot actually might be the best for the country, because of the pure evil stupidity that is going on and needs to be stopped.

 

[Origanalist]

True, but since someone will be winning the presidency this year...who would you rather have it be?

You can stay home, or vote 3rd party...hell even do a write in. But either the GOP or Dem candidate will ultimately win.

Rubio? The Bleeding Heart Neocon.

Cruz? The Liberty Movements own Judas.

Bush? The RINO Heir to the Thrown.

Clinton? The Criminal Traitor.

Sanders? President of the Marxist Book Club.

Wake up man. Someone who we don't like is gonna win. Again. You don't have to vote for the lessor of two evils, but I would hope that you would prefer the lessor evil over the greater evil.

Well, thank you for your concern but I'm fully awake. Trump is in no way a "lesser evil". And really there is literally not one candidate of the two major parties I would vote for for President.

 

[otherone]

Blah, blah blah, how many times does this bullshit have to be responded to in detail? Trump has diarrhea of the mouth and continually has to "clarify", walk back or flat out lie about what came out of him pie hole. This has all been gone over many times already in detail. The guy is a arrogant impulsive loose cannon and I wouldn't trust him for county commissioner.

But...he might just get those trains running on time....

 

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

Well, thank you for your concern but I'm fully awake. Trump is in no way a "lesser evil". And really there is literally not one candidate of the two major parties I would vote for for President.

Origanalist. This isn't a thread about who you should vote for. I'm not asking you to vote vote for anyone. I'm asking you to accept the fact that:

"Why yes, either the Democrat Nominee or the Republican Nominee will win the Presidency this year"

From that rational understanding of how the world works, I am attempting to explore who, out of the possibilities available would be the best for the country.

That doesn't mean you support them. That doesn't mean that you like them. This isn't a thread demanding that you fly the banner of a candidate.

It's a thread about who, and why, is better than the other possible alternatives.

If you want to contribute to the discussion, offer someone running for president, and give a few positions that they hold that are marginal steps in the right direction.

I don't mean to sound like a dick, but it really does seem like you are burying your head in the sand to the fact that someone that we don't like will win. Have the courage to take your head out and let's talk about it.

 

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

But...he might just get those trains running on time....

Trump is an idiot in how he approaches other races. He called for banning Muslims rather than doing what Rand did and call for banning people from the majority of Muslim countries.

He gives in to pretty bad rhetoric...but as I said, I'm hoping that is just for the jingoistic Nascar voters.

At the end of the day, despite the rhetoric, even if he wanted to....he can't touch American citizens. Congress, the Courts, the People won't let him. I'm not concerned about it. Buy he may stabilize immigration...and that is worth consideration.

 

[Origanalist]

Origanalist. This isn't a thread about who you should vote for. I'm not asking you to vote vote for anyone. I'm asking you to accept the fact that:

"Why yes, either the Democrat Nominee or the Republican Nominee will win the Presidency this year"

From that rational understanding of how the world works, I am attempting to explore who, out of the possibilities available would be the best for the country.

That doesn't mean you support them. That doesn't mean that you like them. This isn't a thread demanding that you fly the banner of a candidate.

It's a thread about who, and why, is better than the other possible alternatives.

If you want to contribute to the discussion, offer someone running for president, and give a few positions that they hold that are marginal steps in the right direction.

I don't mean to sound like a dick, but it really does seem like you are burying your head in the sand to the fact that someone that we don't like will win. Have the courage to take your head out and let's talk about it.

Well, I'm sure you don't mean to sound like a dick.





By all means have a lengthy discussion on why any one candidate running would be a "marginal step in the right direction". I will refrain from interjecting myself any further.

 

[specsaregood]

At the end of the day, despite the rhetoric, even if he wanted to....he can't touch American citizens. Congress, the Courts, the People won't let him. I'm not concerned about it. Buy he may stabilize immigration...and that is worth consideration.

Funny, that didn't seem to stop Roosevelt. I'm quite certain the president can do whatever the hell he wants and the congress, courts and people will stand by and take it up the rectum.

 

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

Well, I'm sure you don't mean to sound like a dick.





By all means have a lengthy discussion on why any one candidate running would be a "marginal step in the right direction". I will refrain from interjecting myself any further.

Well, I'm sorry we couldn't find way to have a positive conversation. I tried. I didn't think having a open and pragmatic conversation would be sinworthy, but apparently it is.

I've read a bunch of your other posts, and I really respect your opinions and your outlook on things, and I hope in the future, we may find ourselves in a discussion that will be a little healthier.

 

[William Tell]

I'm not convinced Trump is the lesser of evils. He can't be trusted, the man has never done a good thing in his life as far as I know. He has the potential of being the greatest evil. Slimy politicians are annoying, but despots are worse. Give me one reason why I should think the man has the slightest shred of integrity or honesty in any fiber of his being. When you have a guy who's been always one the side of Democrats or RINO's AKA staus quo all his life what kind of moron does it take to believe he is now anti establishment?

 

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

Funny, that didn't seem to stop Roosevelt. I'm quite certain the president can do whatever the hell he wants and the congress, courts and people will stand by and take it up the rectum.

You have a great point there to the dangers of a strong executive (which I do not believe that Trump will attempt to combat).

But if Bush didn't put Muslims in camps after 9/11, I don't think Trump could get away with internal camps. (And besides, he has never called for this. He has said some dumb things in the spur of the moment, but none are policy positions).

But nevertheless, good point.

 

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

I'm not convinced Trump is the lesser of evils. He can't be trusted, the man has never done a good thing in his life as far as I know. He has the potential of being the greatest evil. Slimy politicians are annoying, but despots are worse. Give me one reason why I should think the man has the slightest shred of integrity or honesty in any fiber of his being. When you have a guy who's been always one the side of Democrats or RINO's AKA staus quo all his life what kind of moron does it take to believe he is now anti establishment?

I can't do that. I can give you a few policy positions he has taken that I can stomach, but I can in no way tell you that I trust that he will stick to his guns.

I don't trust him at all. The only reason to be consistent, is that he will want to win re-election (if he wins in the first place). Just look at Ted, a few years ago I thought he was one of the good guys.

Again, I'm not campaigning for him or defending him. I just want to compare and contrast candidates.

 

[otherone]

Again, I'm not campaigning for him or defending him. I just want to compare and contrast candidates.

Similarly, when its' Rubio versus Clinton, must one make a "reluctant case" for either?

 

[fedupinmo]

If Clinton wins the Presidency, I will flee the country. She is the face of corrupt politics and deserves to be in a prison cell, not in the Oval Office.

If anyone else wins, including Trump, I'll stay and try to salvage what I have and see what happens.

If Clinton wins, gun sales will go through the roof.
If Trump wins, things will be no worse than if any of the RINOs or the naturalized fellow who is not eligible get it.
In fact, the lasting damage seems worst with Cruz opening the eligibles list to Congressional addition, on a level equal to either of the admitting socialists.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Well, thank you for your concern but I'm fully awake. Trump is in no way a "lesser evil". And really there is literally not one candidate of the two major parties I would vote for for President.

The main issue is not the personalities, but the outcome. Our movement has tried to get an ideal candidate nominated across three cycles, without dismantling or confronting the elite-controlled racket that is firmly in place to keep alternatives from winning. Naturally, the Pauls could not win, as the racket stopped them. That kingmaker system has pre-decided which insider will get to be the nominee for decades, and this year it was supposed to be Jeb or Rubio.

Trump has been riding the wave of an outsider trend that (should he get nominated) will have broken down that system for the first time in 36 years. That will be progress, which can make it easier for us in the years going forward. So it is possible for Trump to be personally as evil as the other evil options, while the political impact of his victory remains tactically helpful to the liberty cause.

 

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

Similarly, when its' Rubio versus Clinton, must one make a "reluctant case" for either?

Yes, I would hope we would be willing to talk about the differences between Rubio and Clinton (small list), and about which victory would be better for the liberty movement and for the country moving forward.

My immediate reaction would be to hope that Rubio crashes and burns, destroying the GOP like the whigs, causing an absolute shitstorm with everyone who has a vile hatred for Clinton (myself included)...and opening up a spot in 2020 for someone like Paul to lead a new movement against Tyranny.

There would be no "United States of America" without the Stamp Act and Intolerable Acts.

The case could be made for losing the battle to win the war.....but, I haven't really thought too much about it yet, because I don't see that match up happening.

 

[euphemia]

Here's the thing: The candidates still standing will be the ones at the convention with the ears of the establishment. To get a good platform, it is important for us to look at the candidates with some objectivity so we can vote for the right delegates. We want the good points to be made at the convention and have enough people there who support those positions.

 

[otherone]

Yes, I would hope we would be willing to talk about the differences between Rubio and Clinton (small list), and about which victory would be better for the liberty movement and for the country moving forward.

THIS is precisely why the country is in the mess that it is. When you choose the lesser of two evils, that evil believes that you have chosen it. There is no place on the ballot to write your intentions.

 

[Mad Raven]

Your points are good. I'll do you one better by maybe even voting for Trump. Hell, maybe even Bernie. The thing they both have going for them is they aren't psychopaths. If you can find a leader of a country who isn't a psychopath, you are doing pretty well, my friend.

I'm not voting to have a soulmate, or a God, or a best friend, or my mirror image, or to score points for myself for use at the Pearly Gates. If your legacy is all about who you voted for, I think you need a better legacy.

Keynesians and other fools are the ones who cling to ideals and don't look at the results of their actions. The spirit of real economics is about making the best decision, often for the most likely best bad outcome out of a possible range of bad outcomes.

Principles are important to keep in mind, but people here get so full of themselves. I don't care what my mechanic thinks or does as long as I think he can keep my car alive and charge me fairly compared to the other ripoffs in town. Same kind of thing with electing an administrator. I'm really not worried about someone looking over my scorecard when I'm dead and pointing out that someone I supported or did business with had a poor liberty score.