Why has the right abandoned small government?

[bripat9643]

Not, “The right”....Republicans...there is a difference.

You mean Republican politicians. They are almost as bad as Democrat politicians.

and yet you keep voting for them!

Odd

I donate to their primary opponents. Who should I vote for, Hillary? That idiot Johnson who isn't a libertarian and had no chance of winning?

 

[S.J.]

Can't make very many cuts. The left has gotten so many people used to "benefits" that an outright cut in most of them would make them all vote Democrat. A spending freeze is more plausible. With increased GDP growth, the budget will gradually come into balance.

 

[2aguy]

It has been clear to me for years the right has abandoned small government. As someone who still believes in the teachings of Milton Friedman I find this disturbing. But after 2 years of Republican control and deficits increasing drastically it is obvious small government has been abandoned. Now they are probably slightly less big government than the democrats, but there is no doubt they are big government. Small government economists do not support tariffs or deficits. And they certainly don't support the kinds of special tax deals like Foxconn that the right now champions.

What we have now is two big government parties who support different social issues. Will a small government party emerge or will we become socialists? I'm curious if there are any other real small government people out there.

We haven't done any such thing....it was between Trump and the criminal, we had one option so we chose Trump. When a small government republican actually runs, we will vote for them.....simple as that.

 

[danielpalos]

Can't make very many cuts. The left has gotten so many people used to "benefits" that an outright cut in most of them would make them all vote Democrat. A spending freeze is more plausible. With increased GDP growth, the budget will gradually come into balance.

abolish our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror. national socialism is worse than a general welfare clause.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Reagan increased the size and scope of government and added a higher percent to the debt than anyone in history, nobody has come close.

Well, one out of three ain't bad. I mean, you getting ANYTHING correct is really unusual. Reagan indeed increase the debt..

I am anti-abortion, always have been.

But basing your vote on that issue has not really worked in lessening the number of abortions in this country.

Best economy in 60 years...

That's a pretty damned good reason.

I know you're hoping the economy will tank, but little chance of it. The DOW will be back above 26,000 this week.

Have a good cry.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Because people vote on social issues, not fiscal ones. This is why we have not had a Conservative POTUS since a guy named Calvin.

To get votes on the "Conservative" side one has to be pro-life...everything is secondary to that.

Yeah, that whole supply side economics thing never happened under Reagan. You sure are smart...

Reagan ballooned the national debt, raised taxes on Social Security, signed off on allowing the federal government to blackmail the states out of their highway funding, signed off on EMTALA, and ratcheted up the failed War on Drugs. Reagan was a social conservative who catered to the religious right, but he was most certainly not a fiscal conservative by any stretch of the imagination.

Reagan revived the economy and revived the defense of the nation, so much so that the democrats beloved USSR fell. If he had had another 8 years, Communist China would be in the shitter as well.

To claim that the supply side programs of Reagan were not fiscally conservative is simply ignorant, even if those programs were largely thwarted by Tip O'Neal and Soviet Agent Jim Wright.

 

[Bleipriester]

It has been clear to me for years the right has abandoned small government. As someone who still believes in the teachings of Milton Friedman I find this disturbing. But after 2 years of Republican control and deficits increasing drastically it is obvious small government has been abandoned. Now they are probably slightly less big government than the democrats, but there is no doubt they are big government. Small government economists do not support tariffs or deficits. And they certainly don't support the kinds of special tax deals like Foxconn that the right now champions.

What we have now is two big government parties who support different social issues. Will a small government party emerge or will we become socialists? I'm curious if there are any other real small government people out there.

Big boy wants big gov - as long as he reigns.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Not, “The right”....Republicans...there is a difference.

You mean Republican politicians. They are almost as bad as Democrat politicians.

and yet you keep voting for them!

Odd

And you keep voting for democrats...

 

[Uncensored2008]

I donate to their primary opponents. Who should I vote for, Hillary? That idiot Johnson who isn't a libertarian and had no chance of winning?

One of my bigger regrets is voting for that doped out moron. I just didn't trust Trump at the time.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Best economy in 60 years...

That's a pretty damned good reason.

I know you're hoping the economy will tank, but little chance of it. The DOW will be back above 26,000 this week.

Have a good cry.

Wow, the DJI will be back to what it was last January, and you think that is worth cheering for.

****, you are a sad little man.

If Trump had not started his stupid trade war we would not have had to endure 13 months of stagnation.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Not, “The right”....Republicans...there is a difference.

You mean Republican politicians. They are almost as bad as Democrat politicians.

and yet you keep voting for them!

Odd

And you keep voting for democrats...

last time was in 1992.

Why do you lie so much?

Are lies all you have left?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Because people vote on social issues, not fiscal ones. This is why we have not had a Conservative POTUS since a guy named Calvin.

To get votes on the "Conservative" side one has to be pro-life...everything is secondary to that.

Yeah, that whole supply side economics thing never happened under Reagan. You sure are smart...

Reagan ballooned the national debt, raised taxes on Social Security, signed off on allowing the federal government to blackmail the states out of their highway funding, signed off on EMTALA, and ratcheted up the failed War on Drugs. Reagan was a social conservative who catered to the religious right, but he was most certainly not a fiscal conservative by any stretch of the imagination.

Reagan revived the economy and revived the defense of the nation, so much so that the democrats beloved USSR fell. If he had had another 8 years, Communist China would be in the shitter as well.

To claim that the supply side programs of Reagan were not fiscally conservative is simply ignorant, even if those programs were largely thwarted by Tip O'Neal and Soviet Agent Jim Wright.

If his programs were fiscally conservative the national debt wouldn't have increased 300% during his tenure. That's a fact, no matter what revisionist history you want to spin.

 

[Uncensored2008]

We haven't done any such thing....it was between Trump and the criminal, we had one option so we chose Trump. When a small government republican actually runs, we will vote for them.....simple as that.

What we didn't realize at the time is that we have a whole government filled with criminals and traitors, particularly in the FBI and DOJ.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Because people vote on social issues, not fiscal ones. This is why we have not had a Conservative POTUS since a guy named Calvin.

To get votes on the "Conservative" side one has to be pro-life...everything is secondary to that.

Yeah, that whole supply side economics thing never happened under Reagan. You sure are smart...

Reagan ballooned the national debt, raised taxes on Social Security, signed off on allowing the federal government to blackmail the states out of their highway funding, signed off on EMTALA, and ratcheted up the failed War on Drugs. Reagan was a social conservative who catered to the religious right, but he was most certainly not a fiscal conservative by any stretch of the imagination.

Reagan revived the economy and revived the defense of the nation, so much so that the democrats beloved USSR fell. If he had had another 8 years, Communist China would be in the shitter as well.

To claim that the supply side programs of Reagan were not fiscally conservative is simply ignorant, even if those programs were largely thwarted by Tip O'Neal and Soviet Agent Jim Wright.

If his programs were fiscally conservative the national debt wouldn't have increased 300% during his tenure. That's a fact, no matter what revisionist history you want to spin.

Programs are irrelevant if you can't implement them.

 

[leftwinger]

Reagan increased the size and scope of government and added a higher percent to the debt than anyone in history, nobody has come close.

Well, one out of three ain't bad. I mean, you getting ANYTHING correct is really unusual. Reagan indeed increase the debt..

I am anti-abortion, always have been.

But basing your vote on that issue has not really worked in lessening the number of abortions in this country.

Best economy in 60 years...

That's a pretty damned good reason.

I know you're hoping the economy will tank, but little chance of it. The DOW will be back above 26,000 this week.

Have a good cry.

A good China deal, a good NK deal, mueller falls flat as already leaked, .....DOW 30K is right there.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Because people vote on social issues, not fiscal ones. This is why we have not had a Conservative POTUS since a guy named Calvin.

To get votes on the "Conservative" side one has to be pro-life...everything is secondary to that.

Yeah, that whole supply side economics thing never happened under Reagan. You sure are smart...

Reagan ballooned the national debt, raised taxes on Social Security, signed off on allowing the federal government to blackmail the states out of their highway funding, signed off on EMTALA, and ratcheted up the failed War on Drugs. Reagan was a social conservative who catered to the religious right, but he was most certainly not a fiscal conservative by any stretch of the imagination.

Reagan revived the economy and revived the defense of the nation, so much so that the democrats beloved USSR fell. If he had had another 8 years, Communist China would be in the shitter as well.

To claim that the supply side programs of Reagan were not fiscally conservative is simply ignorant, even if those programs were largely thwarted by Tip O'Neal and Soviet Agent Jim Wright.

If his programs were fiscally conservative the national debt wouldn't have increased 300% during his tenure. That's a fact, no matter what revisionist history you want to spin.

Programs are irrelevant if you can't implement them.

You aren't fiscally conservative if you're piling on $3 trillion worth of debt

 

[Uncensored2008]

Best economy in 60 years...

That's a pretty damned good reason.

I know you're hoping the economy will tank, but little chance of it. The DOW will be back above 26,000 this week.

Have a good cry.

Wow, the DJI will be back to what it was last January, and you think that is worth cheering for.

****, you are a sad little man.

If Trump had not started his stupid trade war we would not have had to endure 13 months of stagnation.

What a retard.

You are out of your mind with hate and the idea that the DOW is pretty much back into record growth utterly destroys any chance of you getting a democrat in the presidency.

Go have a good cry.

 

[2aguy]

Yeah, that whole supply side economics thing never happened under Reagan. You sure are smart...

Reagan ballooned the national debt, raised taxes on Social Security, signed off on allowing the federal government to blackmail the states out of their highway funding, signed off on EMTALA, and ratcheted up the failed War on Drugs. Reagan was a social conservative who catered to the religious right, but he was most certainly not a fiscal conservative by any stretch of the imagination.

Reagan revived the economy and revived the defense of the nation, so much so that the democrats beloved USSR fell. If he had had another 8 years, Communist China would be in the shitter as well.

To claim that the supply side programs of Reagan were not fiscally conservative is simply ignorant, even if those programs were largely thwarted by Tip O'Neal and Soviet Agent Jim Wright.

If his programs were fiscally conservative the national debt wouldn't have increased 300% during his tenure. That's a fact, no matter what revisionist history you want to spin.

Programs are irrelevant if you can't implement them.

You aren't fiscally conservative if you're piling on $3 trillion worth of debt

No....the problem is we had a choice of two people....Trump and the criminal hilary. I will vote for the candidate who will damage the country the least.....and hope that a really good candidate will one day show up. Allowing the worst of the candidates to win is the worse thing you can do...fight in the primaries to get the small government candidate, then vote to keep the damage to a minimum in the general if the small government guy doesn't make it through to the general election...... I haven't changed, the options just weren't great.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What a retard.

You are out of your mind with hate and the idea that the DOW is pretty much back into record growth utterly destroys any chance of you getting a democrat in the presidency.

Go have a good cry.

I do not give a **** about getting a democrat in the presidency, I have voted for a Dem POTUS once in my life time and that was almost 30 years ago. All I want to see happen is for the Senate and the White House to be under different parties. Do not give a **** which is which.

If you were to pull your lips off Trump's ass and take a breath you would know that 13 months of stagnation is not good, my 401ks and portfolios have suffered because of Trump's trade war.

If the DJI finally gets back to record territory I will be dancing a jig, but still pissed off at a year of lost growth for no ******* good reason. that year's growth cannot be made up, it is just lost.

 

[leftwinger]

Fair trade seems right. Why should SK, China charge $50K tax per US car but dump KIA here at zero? One example. Ever shop HD? Every item i pick up made in China. They know a fair deal may rise all boats.

Dont give me the assembled here hogwash. The good jobs and profits go there.