It's Time: Which Candidate Do You Currently Favor?

[Cecilie1200]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

People said the same about Lincoln, and Reagan. Trump is 100x the diplomat that Obama is. And trump earned his position....Obama was placed.

With all due respect, being a better diplomat than Obama is not a high bar to clear. You can pretty much just shuffle right across that bad boy without lifting your feet.

I was actually aspiring to a bit more than that in the next President.

 

[koshergrl]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

People said the same about Lincoln, and Reagan. Trump is 100x the diplomat that Obama is. And trump earned his position....Obama was placed.

With all due respect, being a better diplomat than Obama is not a high bar to clear. You can pretty much just shuffle right across that bad boy without lifting your feet.

I was actually aspiring to a bit more than that in the next President.

I honestly don't place too much importance on diplomacy.

 

[dcraelin]

the government does not grant monopoly power to unions. In certain highly concentrated markets such as auto manufacturing unions may have some effect as you say, but it is really due to the concentrated markets rather than the unions.

So you dont think competition is desirable in a labor of main street market?, I dont understand you here.

Perfect competition is what you must have been referring to when you said that competition flattens prices. Part of perfect competition is having a uniform product. This is great for trading crude oil, but is a disaster in a labor market where people want to promotions or at a mall where people aren't looking for the best price on mao suits.

Main street competition drives diversity in the market, rather than price parity.


I think most of what you said is just gibberish. "where people want to promotions'?

mao suits....cute

Let me chew this for you: A perfectly competitive job market has a single job description; a perfectly competitive fashion market has a single, uniform product. The stuff you made up does not apply in either of these scenarios. Otherwise, how many more participants are required in the clothing market to flatten prices? Only a mandate to produce mao suits, the only time your bullshit's been put into application, will flatten price through more perfect competition.

Perfect Competition Definition | Investopedia

I have no idea what your talking about.......gibberish....designed to fool yourself into thinking you know something..

This state you're in indicates that you should leave economics to people with at least a high school understanding of it. Being math history and science, it doesn't comply with your unique make it up as you go technique.

I think the vast bulk of economists would agree more with me, even though I think the "profession" is largely a joke.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

People said the same about Lincoln, and Reagan. Trump is 100x the diplomat that Obama is. And trump earned his position....Obama was placed.

With all due respect, being a better diplomat than Obama is not a high bar to clear. You can pretty much just shuffle right across that bad boy without lifting your feet.

I was actually aspiring to a bit more than that in the next President.

I honestly don't place too much importance on diplomacy.

Inasmuch as it's the primary job description of the President, I'm thinking it might be important. And one need only look at the dog's dinner Obama has made of US relations throughout the world to see how much it matters to have someone in office who can fix it. I just don't see Trump's blustering and trash talk as the solution we need.

 

[Programmer]

Perfect competition is what you must have been referring to when you said that competition flattens prices. Part of perfect competition is having a uniform product. This is great for trading crude oil, but is a disaster in a labor market where people want to promotions or at a mall where people aren't looking for the best price on mao suits.

Main street competition drives diversity in the market, rather than price parity.


I think most of what you said is just gibberish. "where people want to promotions'?

mao suits....cute

Let me chew this for you: A perfectly competitive job market has a single job description; a perfectly competitive fashion market has a single, uniform product. The stuff you made up does not apply in either of these scenarios. Otherwise, how many more participants are required in the clothing market to flatten prices? Only a mandate to produce mao suits, the only time your bullshit's been put into application, will flatten price through more perfect competition.

Perfect Competition Definition | Investopedia

I have no idea what your talking about.......gibberish....designed to fool yourself into thinking you know something..

This state you're in indicates that you should leave economics to people with at least a high school understanding of it. Being math history and science, it doesn't comply with your unique make it up as you go technique.

I think the vast bulk of economists would agree more with me, even though I think the "profession" is largely a joke.

This is a total joke. The 'economics' that you are hacking up is high school level and you are 180* from the correct conclusions regarding competition and price and free market outcomes. History clearly does not agree with you. There's never been an economy where competition flattened prices or a free market drove income parity, ever. Economists would give you an F in economics, mainly for not studying and making up theory instead.

 

[Programmer]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

Trump is not being saved. The man is dominating the field. While pundits fuel this flame as you have here, claiming that it is his supporter's emotions that are propping him up, perhaps his correctness, rather than political incorrectness is getting him taken seriously by a broader and broader group.

If there's anything fishy about the polling, I predict the head-to-head between Trump and Clinton will prove the most misleading by this time next year.

 

[koshergrl]

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

People said the same about Lincoln, and Reagan. Trump is 100x the diplomat that Obama is. And trump earned his position....Obama was placed.

With all due respect, being a better diplomat than Obama is not a high bar to clear. You can pretty much just shuffle right across that bad boy without lifting your feet.

I was actually aspiring to a bit more than that in the next President.

I honestly don't place too much importance on diplomacy.

Inasmuch as it's the primary job description of the President, I'm thinking it might be important. And one need only look at the dog's dinner Obama has made of US relations throughout the world to see how much it matters to have someone in office who can fix it. I just don't see Trump's blustering and trash talk as the solution we need.

Obama's shit standing has more to do with his ideology than his diplomacy. He's a crappy diplomat because he wants America disgraced. Diplomacy the way you're referencing it is just pc behavior, and America has had enough.

 

[strollingbones]

and trump is less of a disgrace? really?

 

[koshergrl]

and trump is less of a disgrace? really?

I don't find him disgraceful at all. But then I'm fond of America and Americans.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

Trump is not being saved. The man is dominating the field. While pundits fuel this flame as you have here, claiming that it is his supporter's emotions that are propping him up, perhaps his correctness, rather than political incorrectness is getting him taken seriously by a broader and broader group.

If there's anything fishy about the polling, I predict the head-to-head between Trump and Clinton will prove the most misleading by this time next year.

I'm very sorry if criticizing your hero got your panties in a bunch. Pick them out and stop talking like an Obamabot.

Believe whatever you like about Trump being the "savior" who's adored by the masses for his "honesty" - by which I assume you mean his need to be needlessly confrontational and offensive in order to make headlines. But spare me the emotionalism. I can get that from the leftists.

 

[koshergrl]

I just don't see "diplomacy" as the #1 skill required of a prez. I prefer integrity, the desire to do what's right for our country, and a love of traditional American values (and an understanding of what they are)...and I think that's what most Americans want. We're fed up with kowtowing and the demonization of the us by our leaders...under the umbrella of "diplomacy".

 

[Cecilie1200]

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

People said the same about Lincoln, and Reagan. Trump is 100x the diplomat that Obama is. And trump earned his position....Obama was placed.

With all due respect, being a better diplomat than Obama is not a high bar to clear. You can pretty much just shuffle right across that bad boy without lifting your feet.

I was actually aspiring to a bit more than that in the next President.

I honestly don't place too much importance on diplomacy.

Inasmuch as it's the primary job description of the President, I'm thinking it might be important. And one need only look at the dog's dinner Obama has made of US relations throughout the world to see how much it matters to have someone in office who can fix it. I just don't see Trump's blustering and trash talk as the solution we need.

Obama's shit standing has more to do with his ideology than his diplomacy. He's a crappy diplomat because he wants America disgraced. Diplomacy the way you're referencing it is just pc behavior, and America has had enough.

Oh, it's entirely true that Obama's positions and viewpoint on the world are the heart of what's wrong with him. But the "diplomatic" moves he makes are the active manifestation of his crap, the carry-through of fucking up our nation.

And I haven't said a word about being PC, nor has it been anywhere in my mind. That's just what you're projecting onto my words because you want to cheer on Trump.

We go through this every damned election. There's always some chunk of voters desperately looking to be "Cleverest Guy in the Room" and find The One, the uber-special outside-the-box hero who's going to be the silver-bullet anodyne to "politics". All it ever accomplishes is to waste time and divert attention from finding a real, competent candidate and leaving us all at the mercy of whatever warmed-over, wishy-washy moderate the Establishment chooses to foist on us.

And the saddest thing is that The One is always much less conservative than the viable potential candidates, usually only having the ability to run their mouths flamboyantly and pander to the media's desire to divide the right.

Let's review:

1992 - Ross Perot. This little gremlin launched his campaign on a talk show, for God's sake. He wandered around spouting off with the most blatant reverse psychology tactic since a parent trying to trick a kid into obeying bedtime, insisting that he had to be "drafted" to take the Presidency, and "creative thinkers" simultaneously had a Perot-gasm in their pants and flocked after him. And what did the rest of us get stuck with while they "changed politics forever"? George H.W. Bush, and the Clinton presidency. And only a complete dumbass believed this guy was conservative.

1996 - Ross Perot: The Return. This time around, the right whipsawed back and forth, trying desperately to find someone "fresh and original" to trip on. We had Alan Keyes - Ehrmagerd, we could elect a BLACK MAN! THAT'LL convince the left that we're not racist! (Seriously, people?) We had Steve Forbes - He's a BUSINESSMAN, not a POLITICIAN! What a brilliant idea! (Where the fuck have I been hearing that recently? Hmmm.) We even had a minor national aneurysm over Pat Buchanan, for the love of all that's holy. I distinctly remembering at that point if someone was spiking the water supply with LSD. And, of course, we wound up with 3rd-Party-Messiah Ross Perot doing an encore. Which left the right with the painful spectacle of Bob Dole being turned into an Establishment meat puppet, and the second term of Bill Clinton.

2000 - We Gotta Get A Minority! Hey, look, let's idolize Elizabeth Dole, because she has a vagina! Oh, wait, no, Alan Keyes! He's black, remember?! No, no, Steve Forbes, because he's not a politician! Oh, fuck it. We'll go with George W. Bush.

2004 - Well, at least having an incumbent spared us the humiliation of everyone going all "Beatles" over some OTHER drip.

2008 - Ron Paul: Ross Perot Returns! Because apparently, the GOP disenfranchised have some sort of love affair with creepy Muppet-clones? And what did we get on the ballot? John McCain, who looked like the loudmouthed maverick everyone was lusting after, and turned out to be a through-and-through RINO. Hellooooo, President Obama.

2012 - Herman Cain; no wait, Rick Perry; no wait, RON PAUL! Default to Mitt Romney and an Obama second term.

Look, I get it. The only difference between a professional politician and a whore is that whores have better principles. And it's incredibly hard to respect and trust anyone who actually WANTS the frigging job. But possibly we could get past this deep-seated desire to find The Next Big Thing and draft some heretofore-unknown George Washington-in-hiding, and actually settle down to choosing a real candidate with better qualifications than "You can tell he's honest, because he's so rude about it!" and "Better than the Democrat".

 

[Arianrhod]

Look, I get it. The only difference between a professional politician and a whore is that whores have better principles. And it's incredibly hard to respect and trust anyone who actually WANTS the frigging job. But possibly we could get past this deep-seated desire to find The Next Big Thing and draft some heretofore-unknown George Washington-in-hiding, and actually settle down to choosing a real candidate with better qualifications than "You can tell he's honest, because he's so rude about it!" and "Better than the Democrat".

You've been clear and very detailed about what you don't want in the "whores" you elect. Can you describe what qualifications you think a "real candidate" should have?

 

[Programmer]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

Trump is not being saved. The man is dominating the field. While pundits fuel this flame as you have here, claiming that it is his supporter's emotions that are propping him up, perhaps his correctness, rather than political incorrectness is getting him taken seriously by a broader and broader group.

If there's anything fishy about the polling, I predict the head-to-head between Trump and Clinton will prove the most misleading by this time next year.

I'm very sorry if criticizing your hero got your panties in a bunch. Pick them out and stop talking like an Obamabot.

Believe whatever you like about Trump being the "savior" who's adored by the masses for his "honesty" - by which I assume you mean his need to be needlessly confrontational and offensive in order to make headlines. But spare me the emotionalism. I can get that from the leftists.

I'm sure you're upset that your candidate can't win the race and is trying to align himself as Trump's running mate. It's not my fault; there's no reason to attack me personally.

Write Cruz and advise him to back sounder policy, revolutionize his charisma and lead the message instead of parroting it. Maybe he could come through for you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I just don't see "diplomacy" as the #1 skill required of a prez. I prefer integrity, the desire to do what's right for our country, and a love of traditional American values (and an understanding of what they are)...and I think that's what most Americans want. We're fed up with kowtowing and the demonization of the us by our leaders...under the umbrella of "diplomacy".

You don't? You really don't think the person tasked with representing Americans in their dealings with other nations and with getting Congress to support his policies and move the nation in the right direction and with getting the average everyday American onboard (you know, when it's an actual PRESIDENT, and not a wanna-be dictator) requires diplomacy as his number-one skill?

You can have all the integrity and American values in the world - and you should - but if you can't get other people to work and agree with you, you're just an ineffectual talking head.

Maybe you ought to recheck the definition of "diplomacy", and stop projecting. No one is suggesting "kowtowing and demonization of the US", no matter how radically you want to misread the text to justify Trump's complete inability to do anything more than bloviate.

Why don't we move past Trump's stunningly, orgasmically wonderful ability to offend people and make headlines, and take an actual look at the policies you would have him in the White House "telling it like it is" about?

And let me just say, it ain't easy to find any definitive policy stances from this guy. Most of what I can find are just empty platitudes and pandering.

1) Favors abortion, except for the headline-making "hard cases". And a relative newcomer even on those.

2) One-time tax on wealth to "eliminate the national debt". Also has suggested that we should have a tax on assets over 10 million dollars.

3) Favors hate-crime prosecutions.

4) Total elimination of corporate tax.

5) Legalize drugs, then spend the money to "educate kids" on the evils of the very things he just legalized.

6) Raise import taxes.

7) Supports "assault weapon" ban.

8) Supports vaccines, but thinks they should be used less because they cause autism.

9) Favors universal health care. But not Obamacare. No, no, no, Obamacare is baaaaaad.

10) Raise taxes on hedge fund managers.

11) Opposed Iraq War, but now thinks we should march in there and take their oil to give the money to US victims. Also thinks we should go to war with North Korea and Iran and Syria. Kinda waffles a lot on the issue of military force.

That's from the nice people at Ontheissues.org, which also helpfully provides the actual quotes from the candidates establishing their positions throughout time. Two things are noticeable about Donald Trump: one is that virtually everything he says on the issues sounds like a Tony Robbins video - long on slogans, short on actual "this is what I would do"; the other is that a number of his positions have recently changed (or "evolved", as he puts it), almost as if he's trying to position himself or something.

He likes to talk tough and conservative on immigration, this is true. Like pretty much every "outsider" candidate conservatives have gone ga-ga over over the years, he has a one-note hobby horse to ride, and immigration is it. Even still, the only actual "this is what I can do" that I'm able to find on him is "build a border wall". Nice as far as it goes, but rather simplistic and ineffectual all by itself.

So you tell me: other than his ability to say, "Elect me, and I'll make it better" (his actual directly-quoted "policy" on many of the issues), why is this guy the Great White Hope for conservatives?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Look, I get it. The only difference between a professional politician and a whore is that whores have better principles. And it's incredibly hard to respect and trust anyone who actually WANTS the frigging job. But possibly we could get past this deep-seated desire to find The Next Big Thing and draft some heretofore-unknown George Washington-in-hiding, and actually settle down to choosing a real candidate with better qualifications than "You can tell he's honest, because he's so rude about it!" and "Better than the Democrat".

You've been clear and very detailed about what you don't want in the "whores" you elect. Can you describe what qualifications you think a "real candidate" should have?

I can do better than that. I can tell you exactly why I'm supporting Ted Cruz.

1) Abortion - Supports free choice of businesses to not participate in funding abortions via insurance; supports a ban on taxpayer funding of abortions; supports a full investigation of allegations of trafficking in human body parts against Planned Parenthood, and prosecution thereof if the evidence supports it.

2) Economy - Supports a Balanced Budget Amendment; supports limiting growth of federal spending to inflation rate; wants to audit the Federal Reserve; supports free market solutions over federal spending.

3) Civil Rights - Opposes Supreme Court decision taking legalized "gay marriages" out of state jurisdiction and has suggested a Constitutional Amendment preventing the Supreme Court from voiding individual state laws on the subject; on the other hand, he doesn't appear to have any problem with gays themselves, having attended a fund raiser hosted by a gay couple in their home; authored a brief to the Supreme Court asking them to reverse an 8th Circuit decision to allow the KKK to participate in Kansas' "Adopt-A-Highway" program.

4) Crime - Convert regulatory offenses to civil offenses; supports full monitoring of sex offenders; supports the death penalty.

5) Drugs - Supports lowering minimums and mandatory sentencing on drug offenses; co-sponsored the Smarter Sentencing Act of 2015, to give judges more flexibility on sentencing of drug offenses to end overcrowding of prisons.

6) Education - Supports parental choice in education; opposes Common Core and supports local educational control.

7) Energy and Environment - Opposes moratorium on offshore oil exploration; supports leasing of energy rights on federal lands; opposes federal protection and intervention of environmental "special interests".

8) Government Reform - (This is a big one for me) Opposes use of executive orders to override Congress; Supports reform of IRS vis a vis harassing people for personal beliefs; supports full enforcement of laws, rather than just those the administration likes; supports debt ceiling limits; supports voter ID requirements; supports auditing all federal agencies with an eye toward reform or even elimination; supports a requirement to identify the actual Constitutionality of all proposed laws.

9) Gun Control - Supports the Second Amendment and opposes any unreasonable and burdensome restriction of gun rights.

10) Obamacare - I think we all know he opposes Obamacare in no uncertain terms, and has actually backed up his campaign promises with action; supports expansion of free market choices in healthcare and insurance.

11) Immigration - (Also a big one for me) Opposes Obama amnesty; supports Kate's Law, requiring a mandatory 5-year prison sentence for any deported illegal who returns to the US; supports a border wall AND an expansion of the Border Patrol AND increasing the ability of the police to ask about immigration status; tried to reverse Obama's executive order halting the deportation of illegal immigrants; opposes a "path to citizenship" for illegals remaining in the country.

That's his actual policies that I like. Yes, I know you don't approve of or agree with any of them, Arian, but you asked a conservative why she's choosing him as the conservative candidate, so that's why . . . policy-wise.

On more personal terms, I like that he got elected and immediately started taking stands and fighting for the campaign promises he made, rather than simply giving them lip service to get in office and then forgetting them. I also like that he speaks firmly, confidently, and unapologetically about conservative values and positions, while still managing to sound like a serious, mature adult. I think he calls them like he sees them, but he expresses it in a way that's actually persuasive and effective, rather than bombastic.

The moment that really got me, on a personal level, was when the #BlackLivesMatter jackasses were hijacking rallies and trying to shout down and silence the speakers with their tantrums. They managed to make the likes of Bernie Sanders and whatshisname, that other Democrat non-entity, flee the stage. Trump's rally got unruly and the protesters were escorted out. But when they tried it on Ted Cruz, he answered them politely and respectfully, but firmly; he kept his own supporters from shouting back at them; and he actually got them to stop disrupting and engage in about as much civil give-and-take as primitives like that can manage. It was a masterful performance of REAL diplomacy, and it was Presidential.

I think, if he gets a chance, Ted Cruz is someone who can genuinely bring in and work with moderates, and even principled liberals, without resorting to the "across-the-aisle compromise" that always seems to translate to caving in.

So that's what I'm looking for in a candidate.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think we're approaching the point in the campaign where the voters who aren't hardcore support bases and campaign workers are starting to get a feel for the candidates and leaning one direction or the other, although we obviously still have a lot of time before it's necessary to make a final choice.

So which candidate are you currently favoring, and why?

For myself, I'm currently throwing my support to Ted Cruz. As I've said in other places, he's smart, principled, conservative, and has shown himself to be willing and able to take on and oppose both the Democrats and the establishment of the GOP.

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

Trump is not being saved. The man is dominating the field. While pundits fuel this flame as you have here, claiming that it is his supporter's emotions that are propping him up, perhaps his correctness, rather than political incorrectness is getting him taken seriously by a broader and broader group.

If there's anything fishy about the polling, I predict the head-to-head between Trump and Clinton will prove the most misleading by this time next year.

I'm very sorry if criticizing your hero got your panties in a bunch. Pick them out and stop talking like an Obamabot.

Believe whatever you like about Trump being the "savior" who's adored by the masses for his "honesty" - by which I assume you mean his need to be needlessly confrontational and offensive in order to make headlines. But spare me the emotionalism. I can get that from the leftists.

I'm sure you're upset that your candidate can't win the race and is trying to align himself as Trump's running mate. It's not my fault; there's no reason to attack me personally.

Write Cruz and advise him to back sounder policy, revolutionize his charisma and lead the message instead of parroting it. Maybe he could come through for you.

Allow me to extend the same invitation to you as to Kosher: tell me the actual policies of Donald Trump that make him the Conservative Messiah. And while you're at it, why don't you tell me which of Cruz's polices are "not sound", or "parroting the message"?

The whole point to this thread was to discuss which candidates we support and why, and so far, all I've heard in favor of Trump is "Listen to how abrasive he is; he MUST be tough and honest!"

 

[Slyhunter]

I still really like Trump.

I like him because he's made a success of his life independent of professional politicking. I think he is genuinely interested in helping the US and I trust his ability to get stuff done.

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

Trump is not being saved. The man is dominating the field. While pundits fuel this flame as you have here, claiming that it is his supporter's emotions that are propping him up, perhaps his correctness, rather than political incorrectness is getting him taken seriously by a broader and broader group.

If there's anything fishy about the polling, I predict the head-to-head between Trump and Clinton will prove the most misleading by this time next year.

I'm very sorry if criticizing your hero got your panties in a bunch. Pick them out and stop talking like an Obamabot.

Believe whatever you like about Trump being the "savior" who's adored by the masses for his "honesty" - by which I assume you mean his need to be needlessly confrontational and offensive in order to make headlines. But spare me the emotionalism. I can get that from the leftists.

I'm sure you're upset that your candidate can't win the race and is trying to align himself as Trump's running mate. It's not my fault; there's no reason to attack me personally.

Write Cruz and advise him to back sounder policy, revolutionize his charisma and lead the message instead of parroting it. Maybe he could come through for you.

Allow me to extend the same invitation to you as to Kosher: tell me the actual policies of Donald Trump that make him the Conservative Messiah. And while you're at it, why don't you tell me which of Cruz's polices are "not sound", or "parroting the message"?

The whole point to this thread was to discuss which candidates we support and why, and so far, all I've heard in favor of Trump is "Listen to how abrasive he is; he MUST be tough and honest!"

Donald Trump on the Issues


I've posted this before on other threads. I'm getting tired of repeating myself.
Seal the border, allow no immigration of low wage or no wage earners until every American who wants a job has a job that pays the living wage. Only allow in those who bring in money or jobs.

Apple currently has over 30 billion in foreign banks that they made legally in foreign countries that they want to bring to America to spend. But if they do so they have to pay 30% in capital gains tAXES which is why they haven't. Trump, Romney, will do a repatriation holiday so companies like Apple can bring that money here to spend here and Trump plan has them pay 10% instead.

Trump mentioned appointing Icahn as ambassador to China. I like that idea. I also like the idea of increasing tariffs on those countries that don't pay an American living wage. Trump wants an even trading field and wants to force China into stopping playing with their money valuation cheating, so to speak, on world trade. I don't care if stuff we import from China becomes more expensive that would incentivize people into making it here instead.

Trump believes our promise to retires should be kept. How he'll do that I don't know.
Trump believes in fixing our VA health problem.
Trump wants to deport all illegals. So do I.
Trump wants to wipe away unnecessary regulations that interfere with people making money running a business. Like them not being able to drill for new oil in the Gulf, ANWR, or other Federal sites the entire time Obama has been in office. WE can become the energy producer of the world if the liberals got out of the way and let those who know how to make money do so.
etc

 

[Cecilie1200]

I can appreciate all of that, but the truth is, I think many of the qualities that have served him so well in business would make him an utter disaster in the areas of politics and diplomacy. I think they kinda already have, and only the fact that the people being polled are so VERY anti-establishment, anti-PC, anti-politician right now is saving him.

Trump is not being saved. The man is dominating the field. While pundits fuel this flame as you have here, claiming that it is his supporter's emotions that are propping him up, perhaps his correctness, rather than political incorrectness is getting him taken seriously by a broader and broader group.

If there's anything fishy about the polling, I predict the head-to-head between Trump and Clinton will prove the most misleading by this time next year.

I'm very sorry if criticizing your hero got your panties in a bunch. Pick them out and stop talking like an Obamabot.

Believe whatever you like about Trump being the "savior" who's adored by the masses for his "honesty" - by which I assume you mean his need to be needlessly confrontational and offensive in order to make headlines. But spare me the emotionalism. I can get that from the leftists.

I'm sure you're upset that your candidate can't win the race and is trying to align himself as Trump's running mate. It's not my fault; there's no reason to attack me personally.

Write Cruz and advise him to back sounder policy, revolutionize his charisma and lead the message instead of parroting it. Maybe he could come through for you.

Allow me to extend the same invitation to you as to Kosher: tell me the actual policies of Donald Trump that make him the Conservative Messiah. And while you're at it, why don't you tell me which of Cruz's polices are "not sound", or "parroting the message"?

The whole point to this thread was to discuss which candidates we support and why, and so far, all I've heard in favor of Trump is "Listen to how abrasive he is; he MUST be tough and honest!"

Donald Trump on the Issues


I've posted this before on other threads. I'm getting tired of repeating myself.
Seal the border, allow no immigration of low wage or no wage earners until every American who wants a job has a job that pays the living wage. Only allow in those who bring in money or jobs.

Apple currently has over 30 billion in foreign banks that they made legally in foreign countries that they want to bring to America to spend. But if they do so they have to pay 30% in capital gains tAXES which is why they haven't. Trump, Romney, will do a repatriation holiday so companies like Apple can bring that money here to spend here and Trump plan has them pay 10% instead.

Trump mentioned appointing Icahn as ambassador to China. I like that idea. I also like the idea of increasing tariffs on those countries that don't pay an American living wage. Trump wants an even trading field and wants to force China into stopping playing with their money valuation cheating, so to speak, on world trade. I don't care if stuff we import from China becomes more expensive that would incentivize people into making it here instead.

Trump believes our promise to retires should be kept. How he'll do that I don't know.
Trump believes in fixing our VA health problem.
Trump wants to deport all illegals. So do I.
Trump wants to wipe away unnecessary regulations that interfere with people making money running a business. Like them not being able to drill for new oil in the Gulf, ANWR, or other Federal sites the entire time Obama has been in office. WE can become the energy producer of the world if the liberals got out of the way and let those who know how to make money do so.
etc

Thank you very much for providing a point-by-point of policy stances you support by Trump. You are the first person who has actually done so.

I am not, however, in any way responsible for anything you may or may not have posted elsewhere. I'm HERE. I'm more than willing to repeat myself as often as needed about Ted Cruz, because I genuinely believe in supporting him. If you genuinely believe in Donald Trump, you should be willing to do the same.

Now, as to your points:

I'm all in favor of sealing the border and revising the current immigration standards. I live an hour from the Mexican border, and what is largely an academic exercise to many people is a fact of daily life to me.

That being said, I tend to find Trump too simplistic and general on this subject. HOW do you seal the border? HOW do you deport illegals? What actual, real-life policies is he going to enact to make this happen?

I am not a particular fan of tariffs or other protectionist policies, so we're definitely going to have to agree to disagree on that one. I also am not a fan of requiring "American living wages" in countries with radically lower costs and standards of living. All that would accomplish is to badly destabilize their economies. I AM a fan of requiring companies to operate clean, safe shops abroad rather than sweat shops, and I am a fan of supporting a decent wage to workers in accordance with the actual cost of living in their country.

Again, I think Trump is very vague and simplistic on HOW he would accomplish his goals regarding China. Ditto fixing the VA, and a whole host of other issues. Even you admit it when you say he wants to keep promises to retirees, but you have no idea what that actually means.

I like solid mission statements, and I don't see much of that from Trump.

 

[Toro]

I also like the idea of increasing tariffs on those countries that don't pay an American living wage.

That's a very left-wing idea, usually promoted by unions and other statists who want government interference in the economy..

Most economists think it's a very bad idea.