Donald Trump: a progressive's president

[P@triot]

The difference is Trump is ver y conservative on most issues. I don't know how anyone can Deny that

He is?!? Seriously?!? Is that why he gave the maximum amount allowed in campaign contributions to Hillary Clinton? Or is she ultra conservative too in your mind?

Patriot, he gave money to.get favors, he was honest about it, didn't lie about it didn't hide it. He said the systems sucks and I know because I used it to the fullest.

And what "favors" did he get from Harry Reid - a radical progressive Senator from the shit state of Nevada? Where Trump has never lived and has no business interests? Max campaign contributions to Reid as well.

 

[P@triot]

The difference is Trump is ver y conservative on most issues. I don't know how anyone can Deny that

He is?!? Seriously?!? Is that why he gave the maximum amount allowed in campaign contributions to Hillary Clinton? Or is she ultra conservative too in your mind?

He gave money to Hillary because she was his senator and he wanted a return.

Uh...wouldn't it make a hell of a lot more sense to give money to a conservative to defeat Hitlery?!?

I can't believe you bought that line. You do realize that he used to hang out with Bill and Hitlery, don't you?

 

[buckeye45_73]

The difference is Trump is ver y conservative on most issues. I don't know how anyone can Deny that

He is?!? Seriously?!? Is that why he gave the maximum amount allowed in campaign contributions to Hillary Clinton? Or is she ultra conservative too in your mind?

Patriot, he gave money to.get favors, he was honest about it, didn't lie about it didn't hide it. He said the systems sucks and I know because I used it to the fullest.

And what "favors" did he get from Harry Reid - a radical progressive Senator from the shit state of Nevada? Where Trump has never lived and has no business interests? Max campaign contributions to Reid as well.

Maybe Reid supplied the hookers that peed non Obama's bed. I don't care.

Again, which things that he has done do you disagree with?

 

[P@triot]

Now my question is, so far which orders do you have a problem.with?

Approving the pipelines?
His appointments?
Building the wall?
Killing TPP?
His economic policy?
Repealing Obamacare?
His restrictions on abortions?

He's already done things on all of these issues and I have no issues with any of these and I'm as right wing as they come.

To answer you question - none. In fact, I created a thread this morning (Donald Trump: Day 3) praising him. He's done an excellent job. But it's only Day 3 dude. Not ready to crown him Ronald Reagan just yet.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The difference is Trump is ver y conservative on most issues. I don't know how anyone can Deny that

He is?!? Seriously?!? Is that why he gave the maximum amount allowed in campaign contributions to Hillary Clinton? Or is she ultra conservative too in your mind?

He gave money to Hillary because she was his senator and he wanted a return.

Uh...wouldn't it make a hell of a lot more sense to give money to a conservative to defeat Hitlery?!?

I can't believe you bought that line. You do realize that he used to hang out with Bill and Hitlery, don't you?

Yes I do and I realized e he was a democra t and I realize he was liberal.

But that has noth ok ng to do with today.
Reagan was a democrat and supported FDR, but he found the light and was the best presidents in the 20th century.

Trump has done nothing so far to show me he's a secret commie.
He has been honest about his political past and about his policies

 

[buckeye45_73]

Now my question is, so far which orders do you have a problem.with?

Approving the pipelines?
His appointments?
Building the wall?
Killing TPP?
His economic policy?
Repealing Obamacare?
His restrictions on abortions?

He's already done things on all of these issues and I have no issues with any of these and I'm as right wing as they come.

To answer you question - none. In fact, I created a thread this morning (Donald Trump: Day 3) praising him. He's done an excellent job. But it's only Day 3 dude. Not ready to crown him Ronald Reagan just yet.

Good, then if he does something thing I don't like I will say it, but I'm tired of everyone jumping to conclusions based on media propaganda.

Just like a cop shooting or anything else, chill and wait and see the facts.

So far there is nothing to bitch sbout.
If this infrastructure is a boondoggle, then rake him over the coals, but let's just wait and see what it is.

 

[P@triot]

Building the wall?

By the way - the wall is the dumbest idea ever. Don't get me wrong - I love the fact that Trump is addressing the illegal immigration nightmare. But how hard is it for Mexicans to just circumvent the wall by coming in through Gulf coast? Also - the cartels have dozens of tunnels into the U.S. (border patrol has uncovered some of them) for smuggling drugs. It won't be that hard to tunnel under the wall.

All of that money would be exponentially better used on technology. Drones patrolling ALL of the U.S. borders (including the coastal states) would be much better. Money to track down these criminals and prosecute them. Harsher penalties, etc. All would be better than a wall.

 

[P@triot]

Good, then if he does something thing I don't like I will say it, but I'm tired of everyone jumping to conclusions based on media propaganda.

I didn't jump to any conclusions. He did in fact adamantly support Hitlery Clinton and Harry Reid.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Good, then if he does something thing I don't like I will say it, but I'm tired of everyone jumping to conclusions based on media propaganda.

I didn't jump to any conclusions. He did in fact adamantly support Hitlery Clinton and Harry Reid.

He did, maybe he was building a project and wanted to grease the skids.....its business, I don't know, but things like that happen. The NRA gives to democrats, I won't hold it against them.
I think Trump can change the system because he knows both sides of how corrupt it is. The fact that he was honest and didn't make excuses and bullshit, gives me comfort he will. Only time will tell.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Building the wall?

By the way - the wall is the dumbest idea ever. Don't get me wrong - I love the fact that Trump is addressing the illegal immigration nightmare. But how hard is it for Mexicans to just circumvent the wall by coming in through Gulf coast? Also - the cartels have dozens of tunnels into the U.S. (border patrol has uncovered some of them) for smuggling drugs. It won't be that hard to tunnel under the wall.

All of that money would be exponentially better used on technology. Drones patrolling ALL of the U.S. borders (including the coastal states) would be much better. Money to track down these criminals and prosecute them. Harsher penalties, etc. All would be better than a wall.

Good question.

First walls are effective, Berlin Wall, papal wall, wall of Jericho, they all had walls and they work.

Now the main thing going is it will reduce options to cross.the border.
They may do.the gulf, so we can concentrate more there or the pacific.
It makes it more difficult and expensive.to make the journey, reducing the success of those journals.

So now we can concentrate on those ports and on the tunnels.

All in all.it will reduce drugs, human trafficking, crime, and illegal immigration.

And I'm stoked about it.

 

[P@triot]

Building the wall?

By the way - the wall is the dumbest idea ever. Don't get me wrong - I love the fact that Trump is addressing the illegal immigration nightmare. But how hard is it for Mexicans to just circumvent the wall by coming in through Gulf coast? Also - the cartels have dozens of tunnels into the U.S. (border patrol has uncovered some of them) for smuggling drugs. It won't be that hard to tunnel under the wall.

All of that money would be exponentially better used on technology. Drones patrolling ALL of the U.S. borders (including the coastal states) would be much better. Money to track down these criminals and prosecute them. Harsher penalties, etc. All would be better than a wall.

Good question.

First walls are effective, Berlin Wall, papal wall, wall of Jericho, they all had walls and they work.

Now the main thing going is it will reduce options to cross.the border.
They may do.the gulf, so we can concentrate more there or the pacific.
It makes it more difficult and expensive.to make the journey, reducing the success of those journals.

So now we can concentrate on those ports and on the tunnels.

All in all.it will reduce drugs, human trafficking, crime, and illegal immigration.

And I'm stoked about it.

Technology would do a much better job of solving the problem than a wall. And none of it matters if we don't deport the 20 million illegal aliens that are currently here.

 

[there4eyeM]

O. P continues and enlarges on the game of demon-izing everything that does not agree with him/her. This is an example of pre-emptive vilification. IF a bill passes that conflicts with the approved political persuasion, it must be part of 'evil' ('progressive', 'fascist' and other confused terms). 'Evil' people should, of course, like this 'evil' bill. But, these 'evil' people are so perverse that they will complain about it because it came from the President they don't like (the President who is also 'evil', we infer, being a 'progressive' and 'liberal' in his life). They don't like him because of the party affiliation he ran under. Yet, according to O P, Trump is 'left' ('evil', etc.).
So, who is duped, who is duping, and what is the duping about?
In any case, none of this has come about, yet it can be criticized.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Building the wall?

By the way - the wall is the dumbest idea ever. Don't get me wrong - I love the fact that Trump is addressing the illegal immigration nightmare. But how hard is it for Mexicans to just circumvent the wall by coming in through Gulf coast? Also - the cartels have dozens of tunnels into the U.S. (border patrol has uncovered some of them) for smuggling drugs. It won't be that hard to tunnel under the wall.

All of that money would be exponentially better used on technology. Drones patrolling ALL of the U.S. borders (including the coastal states) would be much better. Money to track down these criminals and prosecute them. Harsher penalties, etc. All would be better than a wall.

Good question.

First walls are effective, Berlin Wall, papal wall, wall of Jericho, they all had walls and they work.

Now the main thing going is it will reduce options to cross.the border.
They may do.the gulf, so we can concentrate more there or the pacific.
It makes it more difficult and expensive.to make the journey, reducing the success of those journals.

So now we can concentrate on those ports and on the tunnels.

All in all.it will reduce drugs, human trafficking, crime, and illegal immigration.

And I'm stoked about it.

Technology would do a much better job of solving the problem than a wall. And none of it matters if we don't deport the 20 million illegal aliens that are currently here.

Well if tech is so good we.can use it, but nothing stalls an invasion like a physical barrier .

Hell we can turn it into a tourist attraction and Mexico could as well and charge money to see it or go across or inside it.

It's there to funnel.them to.other places which can be monitored hy tech or people, making it easier to guard.

 

[P@triot]

So, who is duped (progressives), who is duping (Donald Trump), and what is the duping about (Power)?

See the answers in red above. Pretty sad that you needed this explained to you a second time.

 

[buckeye45_73]

O. P continues and enlarges on the game of demon-izing everything that does not agree with him/her. This is an example of pre-emptive vilification. IF a bill passes that conflicts with the approved political persuasion, it must be part of 'evil' ('progressive', 'fascist' and other confused terms). 'Evil' people should, of course, like this 'evil' bill. But, these 'evil' people are so perverse that they will complain about it because it came from the President they don't like (the President who is also 'evil', we infer, being a 'progressive' and 'liberal' in his life). They don't like him because of the party affiliation he ran under. Yet, according to O P, Trump is 'left' ('evil', etc.).
So, who is duped, who is duping, and what is the duping about?
In any case, none of this has come about, yet it can be criticized.

I get it, but the op.is a.good.guy. He is just not a fan of Trump. Why?
Some people don't trust him, and that's fine, but I think hes doing a great job and will win people over with action

 

[Nosmo King]

A need in regions too poor or too inaccessible to pay for interstate highway quality roads?

What?!? It's 2017 - nothing is "inaccessible". You do realize we have 4-wheel drive, helicopters, etc. now - don't you? And if it is "inaccessible" to the state then it will most certainly be "inaccessible" to the federal government as well.

As far as you're "too poor" insanity - the federal government is $20 trillion in debt. They are far more destitute than any state, county, city, or "region" in the U.S. Period.

Let's understand this. Your contention is the federal government should deliver the mail, defend the shores, protect our rights and get out of the way.

Yep. My contention is that we have a legal requirement that holds the federal government to 18 enumerated powers and not one damn more. If you want more - amend the U.S. Constitution. If you can't get the votes to do it, respect the fact that We the People have spoken.

Why then do we have an Interstate Highway system? If it's illegal, if it's unconstitutional, if it's a threat to our federal system of government, why on earth does it exist? Do you imagine that some myopic, stunted fool complained loudly that it was illegal for the federal government to build roads before the Supreme Court and the justices, in their wisdom, told that clown that his priorities were too small to accommodate a great nation?

 

[there4eyeM]

O. P continues and enlarges on the game of demon-izing everything that does not agree with him/her. This is an example of pre-emptive vilification. IF a bill passes that conflicts with the approved political persuasion, it must be part of 'evil' ('progressive', 'fascist' and other confused terms). 'Evil' people should, of course, like this 'evil' bill. But, these 'evil' people are so perverse that they will complain about it because it came from the President they don't like (the President who is also 'evil', we infer, being a 'progressive' and 'liberal' in his life). They don't like him because of the party affiliation he ran under. Yet, according to O P, Trump is 'left' ('evil', etc.).
So, who is duped, who is duping, and what is the duping about?
In any case, none of this has come about, yet it can be criticized.

I get it, but the op.is a.good.guy. He is just not a fan of Trump. Why?
Some people don't trust him, and that's fine, but I think hes doing a great job and will win people over with action

Respectfully, no.
O.P. is re-hashing the divisive, dualistic, dramatic dialog in an invented excuse to do so.
'Evil' by itself is an absurd term in the reality of politics. It is a theological term, not ideological. There are far too many other nouns similarly distorted to discuss here. Point: what does it serve to dilute meaning in discourse? Nothing constructive that can be seen.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The left is so easy to dupe. Donald Trump is a life-long liberal who progressives would worship if he ran for president with a little "D" behind his name. But simply because of that "R" they are rioting, engaging in violence, and losing their minds.

Here is a perfect example. Yet another progressive policy that Donald Trump supports. If this passes (and I pray it doesn't) the left will somehow manage to complain about it despite it being their biggest talking point over the past two decades...

“We will build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our wonderful nation,” he vowed in his Inaugural Address.

Senate Democrats to Unveil $1 Trillion Infrastructure Plan

So you're arguing that conservatives fell for voting for a liberal RINO??

 

[buckeye45_73]

O. P continues and enlarges on the game of demon-izing everything that does not agree with him/her. This is an example of pre-emptive vilification. IF a bill passes that conflicts with the approved political persuasion, it must be part of 'evil' ('progressive', 'fascist' and other confused terms). 'Evil' people should, of course, like this 'evil' bill. But, these 'evil' people are so perverse that they will complain about it because it came from the President they don't like (the President who is also 'evil', we infer, being a 'progressive' and 'liberal' in his life). They don't like him because of the party affiliation he ran under. Yet, according to O P, Trump is 'left' ('evil', etc.).
So, who is duped, who is duping, and what is the duping about?
In any case, none of this has come about, yet it can be criticized.

I get it, but the op.is a.good.guy. He is just not a fan of Trump. Why?
Some people don't trust him, and that's fine, but I think hes doing a great job and will win people over with action

Respectfully, no.
O.P. is re-hashing the divisive, dualistic, dramatic dialog in an invented excuse to do so.
'Evil' by itself is an absurd term in the reality of politics. It is a theological term, not ideological. There are far too many other nouns similarly distorted to discuss here. Point: what does it serve to dilute meaning in discourse? Nothing constructive that can be seen.

Well he's a never trumper type. For some reason is focusing on the negative, but we all have. A TRUMP has changed things, some people haven't figured.it put yet, but they will and people will shitntjeor pants AND be very happy. He is already rolling back the Obama administration bigly.

 

[P@triot]

Why then do we have an Interstate Highway system? If it's illegal, if it's unconstitutional, if it's a threat to our federal system of government, why on earth does it exist?

Why did Ted Bundy brutally rape and murder women? If it's illegal, he must not have done it, right? I mean, nobody could ever break the law. And why do police officers write speeding tickets? I mean, we have a speed limit, nobody would possibly violate that, right?

We have that shit because of progressive assholes like Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, who believed that their view of society trumped the U.S. Constitution. Barack Obama likewise engaged in a host of illegal activity (like signing two Presidential Memorandums in November of 2014 granting amnesty). That's part of what makes progressivism so evil - the belief that laws are irrelevant and that only their view of the world matters.