The Reluctant Case for Trump

[georgiaboy]

It's fun to see these kind of threads showing up again just like they did in '08 and '12. Familiar pattern around here.

I actually had a mind to pull for Trump out of spite. Kristol's ringing anti endorsement nearly settled it.

However, I've come to my senses. I really have no reason to think Trump will attempt to deliver what I'm looking for -- smaller government, net reduced spending, more freedom. In fact, his flamboyance in his business life only leads me to believe he'll be just so if not moreso as president. Ultimately, I must look at his past record, and it all points to profligance. The few solutions he talks about involve charging, taxing, all variety of sources to support his grandiose plans for greatness. Not what I support.

I didn't vote for McCain.
I didn't vote for Romney.
I won't vote for big government any more. Trump is big government. They're all big government. It ultimately won't matter which one of those remaining it is, be it R or D.

I'll pull for Rand in the primary, and either the L or leave it blank in the general.

Oh, and it's not my fault that Obama has been around for the past 8 years, or that a big gov't president will be in the chair in 2016. I didn't nor will vote for any of them. The fault lies with the millions who pulled the lever for any of these lesser candidates.

I blame all those who do, no matter how well rationalized their reasons.

 

[hells_unicorn]

It's fun to see these kind of threads showing up again just like they did in '08 and '12. Familiar pattern around here.

I actually had a mind to pull for Trump out of spite. Kristol's ringing anti endorsement nearly settled it.

However, I've come to my senses. I really have no reason to think Trump will attempt to deliver what I'm looking for -- smaller government, net reduced spending, more freedom. In fact, his flamboyance in his business life only leads me to believe he'll be just so if not moreso as president. Ultimately, I must look at his past record, and it all points to profligance. The few solutions he talks about involve charging, taxing, all variety of sources to support his grandiose plans for greatness. Not what I support.

I didn't vote for McCain.
I didn't vote for Romney.
I won't vote for big government any more. Trump is big government. They're all big government. It ultimately won't matter which one of those remaining it is, be it R or D.

I'll pull for Rand in the primary, and either the L or leave it blank in the general.

Oh, and it's not my fault that Obama has been around for the past 8 years, or that a big gov't president will be in the chair in 2016. I didn't nor will vote for any of them. The fault lies with the millions who pulled the lever for any of these lesser candidates.

I blame all those who do, no matter how well rationalized their reasons.

This is exactly what I've done in past elections, and I'll likely do it again. Ultimately the problem with America is that it is full of Americans, they vote for the scum, they complain about the scum, then they vote in new scum. Oh, and the irrational faith and religious devotion to media pundits has been ingrained in American culture since the very beginning of this country, and we're now seeing the grizzly results of it.

 

[georgiaboy]

This is exactly what I've done in past elections, and I'll likely do it again. Ultimately the problem with America is that it is full of Americans, they vote for the scum, they complain about the scum, then they vote in new scum. Oh, and the irrational faith and religious devotion to media pundits has been ingrained in American culture since the very beginning of this country, and we're now seeing the grizzly results of it.

Yep. Damn red pill.

 

[AuH20]

I could care less if a candidate is "anti establishment" if they're a big government progressive like Trump. Even the establishment candidates in the race are better than Trump.

All the establishment candidates are run by the donor class and are CFR approved. Good or bad, Trump is the one outlier. I haven't voted for an R or D in the last two presidential cycles, but I'm 100% in on Trump. America is dead, so let's have some fun poking the elite scum. I want to see beltway cocktail parties resemble wakes if we can keep pushing Trump up that steep hill. As I see it, it's my vote and I'm entitled to some hijinks.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Let me start out...

Me too...

No

/discussion

 

[Brett85]

All the establishment candidates are run by the donor class and are CFR approved. Good or bad, Trump is the one outlier. I haven't voted for an R or D in the last two presidential cycles, but I'm 100% in on Trump. America is dead, so let's have some fun poking the elite scum. I want to see beltway cocktail parties resemble wakes if we can keep pushing Trump up that steep hill. As I see it, it's my vote and I'm entitled to some hijinks.

Why not just vote for Bernie Sanders then? Sanders is anti establishment and agrees with Trump's support for a single payer healthcare system and Obama's stimulus bill.

 

[AuH20]

Why not just vote for Bernie Sanders then? Sanders is anti establishment and agrees with Trump's support for a single payer healthcare system and Obama's stimulus bill.

Do you see the globalists screaming about Bernie Sanders? Bernie would fit right in with the EU leadership. I'm looking for an agitator.

 

[brandon]

I agree with a lot of OP. It actually kind of summarized some various thoughts that have been floating around my head for a while now.

If trump could just be a bit less of an authoritarian I'd think about voting for him. I won't vote for him. But he does have some upside.

 

[DamianTV]

I have a sad feeling that Trump is gonna win.

If anyone even glimpses at the MSM, the very first thing out of their mouths daily is about Trump, night after night, doesnt matter what else the top news story is, every single time its Trump Trump Trump.

The MSM loves Trump, not because he is a good candidate, but he is sensational in terms of provoking strong emotional reactions in viewers. That translates into more money for the MSM because of a higher number of viewers. To fully understand this, you need to flip the coin and look at the other side. If the MSM constantly blathered about "boring" people, they would lose viewers who are seeking that strong emotional reaction, regardless of positive or negative. Sadly the consequences of this proves one pathetic thing, people dont actually think, they vote completely based on how a candidate makes them feel emotionally, and the stronger the emotion, the more likely they are to respond. These types of people actually want to replace the current form of Tyranny with Trumps version of Tyranny.

Human stupidity wins out, and fucking MSM.

 

[Brett85]

Do you see the globalists screaming about Bernie Sanders? Bernie would fit right in with the EU leadership. I'm looking for an agitator.

Why is foreign policy the only issue that matters? Why doesn't it matter that Trump supports/supported universal healthcare, a ban on assault weapons, partial birth abortion, funding for Planned Parenthood, the TARP bailouts, the auto bailouts, a massive one time wealth tax, Obama's stimulus plan, eminent domain, keeping the public lands, etc? The list goes on and on.

 

[hells_unicorn]

Why is foreign policy the only issue that matters? Why doesn't it matter that Trump supports/supported universal healthcare, a ban on assault weapons, partial birth abortion, funding for Planned Parenthood, the TARP bailouts, the auto bailouts, a massive one time wealth tax, Obama's stimulus plan, eminent domain, keeping the public lands, etc? The list goes on and on.

It's pretty stupid, but that's what it seems to be. Foreign policy is actually the main deal-breaker for me voting for Cruz (though there are several other massive problems), but simply having a comparatively better foreign policy alone shouldn't be cause for throwing support to someone, otherwise we should probably consider becoming Sanders drones, which would yield even worse results than what happened with Obama domestically and probably something around the same in terms of foreign policy.

 

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

I give up.

I spent 4 pages attempting to get people to understand that I'm talking about Old School, using your enemy to your advantage/losing the battle to win the war.....but everyone just wants to get in a pissing match about the quality and purity of the 2016 field.

You plain missed my point, over and over.

Everyone has an opinion, but no one wants to read the thread to find out the questions presented.

Fine, whatever. Stay stuck in the wonderful world of 2016. I'll find a group somewhere willing to plan 2020.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

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.

Rand did not propose a ban on immigration from majority Muslim nations. Rand proposed a ban on immigration from any country known to the US State Department to harbor support or export terrorism. Rand's proposal never mentioned Muslims of any kind, not even by insinuation.

 

[CPUd]

I give up.

I spent 4 pages attempting to get people to understand that I'm talking about Old School, using your enemy to your advantage/losing the battle to win the war.....but everyone just wants to get in a pissing match about the quality and purity of the 2016 field.

You plain missed my point, over and over.

Everyone has an opinion, but no one wants to read the thread to find out the questions presented.

Fine, whatever. Stay stuck in the wonderful world of 2016. I'll find a group somewhere willing to plan 2020.

Learn to make more accurate thread titles and less transparent posts and you'll probably get a more favorable response.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

I give up.

I spent 4 pages attempting to get people to understand that I'm talking about Old School, using your enemy to your advantage/losing the battle to win the war.....but everyone just wants to get in a pissing match about the quality and purity of the 2016 field.

You plain missed my point, over and over.

Isn't it far more likely that we all understand your point but simply reject it unequivocally?

Everyone has an opinion, but no one wants to read the thread to find out the questions presented.

Fine, whatever. Stay stuck in the wonderful world of 2016. I'll find a group somewhere willing to plan 2020.

Why do you think that 'preparing for 2020' necessarily requires some admission that "Trump is better than (whomever)?"

 

[P3ter_Griffin]

I give up.

I spent 4 pages attempting to get people to understand that I'm talking about Old School, using your enemy to your advantage/losing the battle to win the war.....but everyone just wants to get in a pissing match about the quality and purity of the 2016 field.

You plain missed my point, over and over.

Everyone has an opinion, but no one wants to read the thread to find out the questions presented.

Fine, whatever. Stay stuck in the wonderful world of 2016. I'll find a group somewhere willing to plan 2020.

If Trump is what you want (for whatever reason it may be) your time would be much better spent convincing the people of SC to vote for Trump. So much animosity has been created on this website by the vultures over something very few of us will even have a chance to vote for before a victor has more or less been decided. It is like burning bridges for no benefit. And that is completely my style but I wouldn't recommend it to others.

 

[osan]

Wake up man. Someone who we don't like is gonna win.

Valid point.

Again. You don't have to vote for the lessor [sic] of two evils, but I would hope that you would prefer the lessor [sic] evil over the greater evil.

Yes, IF it made any non-marginal, fundamental difference. I seriously doubt that the difference will prove anything but the most narrowly marginal in nature when net-liberty is measured. Oh sure, the superficialities may cut a striking appearance of difference, it us all illusion. Let us be clear that the angles of attack upon the liberties, properties, and other rights of the people are measurably different between, say, republican and democrat mobsters. But at the end of the day, the common man is diminished no matter who holds putative power; he is left as less than he was in all the ways that count/

When democrats rob us, they "redistribute" the wealth to their corporate masters, offering tokens of money and stuff to the dross masses, usually most going to the worst of the scum because those are the ones whose votes keeps the corrupt democrats in power.

When republicans rob us, they "redistribute" the wealth to their corporate masters, offering tokens of opportunity to the same masses. In this, they are marginally superior to the democrats, but at the end of the day, they still expect you to snap-to when commanded, shove your hand up high, and give a heartfelt "sieg HEIL!"** as you goose-step your way down the avenue.

The differences make nothing worth the mention. Each oppresses with violence and the threats thereof. Whether the curtains on those windows be dark crimson or airy-fairy blue, it matters no whit to me and should matter naught to anyone else because when all is said and done, we are all of us diminished at sunset when compared with the previous sunrise. This is true for us all, every single day.

Our remedies for those who understand what true freedom is, are not to be found at the voting booth. The ONLY starting place lies at the doorstep of mass civil disobedience, and that must perforce lead to warfare precisely because Theye are incapable of backing down, save at the end of a barrel. It has been bred out of such people to surrender, even unto their own destruction. History is littered with such examples of tyrants who went to the wall to retain the exercise of power, the prospect of death apparently not enough to prompt them to stand down while they retained the hope of getting away with their lives. It tends to be the nature of such creatures that they must be killed in order to bring a halt to their rampages. Does anyone here believe that the people exercising apparent powers of federal and state governments believe that the people in question are fundamentally different from those of history's most notorious murderers and fiends? Does anyone here truly believe that an Obama would step down if five million very pissed off Americans marched into DC tomorrow morning and demanded he do so?

There are only two avenues of change: Congress and direct civil action. It is clear that Congress has no intentions whatsoever of being faithful to their sworn oaths. Therefore we, being the ONLY remaining instruments of meaningful change, find ourselves right back at the idea of civil disobedience on a scale so massive that Theye would be faced with the very immediate choice of backing down, engaging in acts of open warfare on the people, or most likely simply waiting us out while executing carefully chosen operations against select targets in order to force one of two outcomes.

Firstly and arguably the more desired: wear us down such that the energy to resist dissipates, particularly in the face of the juicy and tasty little carrots Theye would set out for those who would choose to return to the fold. Alternatively, Theye press us beyond the breaking point such that we engage them in open combat, thereby providing the perfect pretext for unleashing full military force upon the "terrorist/insurgents". No matter what we do, Theye get what they [think they] want. The only question remaining being whether we would prevail in the greater fight.

Vote if it pleases you, but at least acknowledge that the act is nothing better than purely symbolic. The so-called "system" is fatally compromised and can no longer provide the avenue of redress originally intended as a major part of its raison d'être.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Even if Trump is not bought out by lobbies, my fear is that he could severely damage GOP establishment, lobbies interests, neocons hold on politics/media and crazy guy could even unravel DGP's masters ongoing freedom operation in Iraq, Syra, Libya etc.
Is he worth the risks?

 

[DamianTV]

I have a lot of reasons for not trusting Trump one bit.

What I fear his intentions are is to get into government, not to make this country "great again", but to benefit financially from the position of power. The best business to be in is in the business of government. This allows one to have a greater degree of influence on the process and application of the law so that it benefits them, while simultaneously preventing competition with that business. Dick Cheney / Halliburton, with pretty much zero competition. That is how I fear Trump will abuse his power.

 

[otherone]

the consequences of this proves one pathetic thing, people dont actually think, they vote completely based on how a candidate makes them feel emotionally, and the stronger the emotion, the more likely they are to respond. These types of people actually want to replace the current form of Tyranny with Trumps version of Tyranny.

Human stupidity wins out, and fucking MSM.