Look, Mr. Trump is not Ronald Reagan, I said. Reagan served two full terms as the governor of a state so vast that if it were a country it would have been one of the important economies in the world. He was a union president who served seven terms during the most fraught time in Hollywood’s history and emerged respected by all sides. He was no novice.(Peggy Noonan ) .

I have followed this clown for years . He has endorsed policies to the left of Evita Hilary ,and almost to the left of Bolshevik Bernie Sanders . The Republican party in their desperation for a win has endorsed the biggest charlatan representing a complete repudiation to the values they have embraced since Reagan.

Did I read that right? You said the values they embraced since Reagan? Sadly I don't think they have. They don't seem to understand what is important anymore and keep shifting because the left paints them in a bad light. Reagan would not have done so. Was there compromise in the Reagan administration - Yes. But what he have here is beyond the "norm" for conservatives and the Republican Party. It is high time to shake things up. Could the part do better - Sure. But the idiots seem to want to vote Hilary in. That is absolute political suicide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdad

Did I read that right? You said the values they embraced since Reagan? Sadly I don't think they have. They don't seem to understand what is important anymore and keep shifting because the left paints them in a bad light. Reagan would not have done so. Was there compromise in the Reagan administration - Yes. But what he have here is beyond the "norm" for conservatives and the Republican Party. It is high time to shake things up. Could the part do better - Sure. But the idiots seem to want to vote Hilary in. That is absolute political suicide.

---

The low bar theory ;the lesser of 2 evils theory ..... I think both are toxic for the nation .

I get the argument about SCOTUS picks ,and maybe that would be convincing if I believed he'd select principled conservatives to the bench . But his politics tells a different tale. I

find it very disturbing that he is making no serious effort to united the party . Instead he has the quixotic vision of convincing Sanders voters that they should trust him because of his idiotic protectionist rhetoric .

Trump doesn't even have a well-organized campaign. How could we hand our country over to him?

"...values they have endorsed since Reagan?" Rather values they have given lip service to while continuing the same big government agenda as the Progressives across the aisle. In the words of the old Jackson Browne song: "You take Sally, I'll take Sue; there ain't no difference between the two."

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...5e&oe=57EDE78A

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Trump doesn't even have a well-organized campaign. How could we hand our country over to him?

---

And you think that handing our government over to someone so stupid as to not even be able to handle nation secrets is a good idea? Or to the one that appears to take bribes through the back door of a foundation that they created?

Certainly not my cup of tea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The low bar theory ;the lesser of 2 evils theory ..... I think both are toxic for the nation .

I get the argument about SCOTUS picks ,and maybe that would be convincing if I believed he'd select principled conservatives to the bench . But his politics tells a different tale. I

find it very disturbing that he is making no serious effort to united the party . Instead he has the quixotic vision of convincing Sanders voters that they should trust him because of his idiotic protectionist rhetoric .

---

The problem at this time is that this is what we have to deal with. I know he is hoping for the Sanders voters but I don't think that is going to come anytime soon. Those well dippers despise the rich and they don't think Hillary is rich enough. Our only other alternative is to have a multi tier system where we could end up with majority vote and only 10% of the people behind it.

He is correct in wanting to close the boarders but he has a tougher road with the tear up the contracts for trade that he is talking about. There is fluidity to our government and he simply cant do that just because he is President. I'm not sure that either candidate knows how government is suppose to function.

Only Regan was Regan.

At least Trump has been a successful businessman.

What has Hillary ever done that was successful outside of suckering liberals and conning them out of their money?

As a Senator she sucked, as a Secretary of State she was an horrific failure. In fact outside of Politics which is all Lies and Deception... she has really done nothing to be proud of, and nothing in Politics either.

smoothy, you know I love you dearly..
..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

Only Regan was Regan.

---

Reagan, not Regan.

Quote:

---

At least Trump has been a successful businessman.

---

Um, no he hasn't. Much of the wealth he inherited was wasted and lost. Most of his business endeavors crashed and burned.

I'm not terribly fond of Hillary for all sorts of reasons, but f I have to choose between her and Trump, she'll get my vote. And it'll be interesting to see who their running mates turn out to be,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

smoothy, you know I love you dearly..
..

Reagan, not Regan.


Um, no he hasn't. Much of the wealth he inherited was wasted and lost. Most of his business endeavors crashed and burned.

I'm not terribly fond of Hillary for all sorts of reasons, but f I have to choose between her and Trump, she'll get my vote. And it'll be interesting to see who their running mates turn out to be,

---

I blame my spellchecker for that one.

Yes Trump has been successful as a businessman... Its the left that tries to argue those points. Is every stock broker or commodities trader out there failures, because none of them ever made all the right choices 100% of the time, nor has any other business...

Apple has a long list of utter disasters, so does Microsoft, and every other business that been around more than a couple years has too. Yet those are among the biggest highest revenue business on the planet.

Also using that argument... Hillary along with Bill shafted their legal teams at the end of his last term out of Millions, they never got paid back. That makes them both huge losers too just on that one point alone.

A failure at business must imply one started with more than one ended up with... Trump has made far, far more money than he has lost. That is what defines success in business.

You can find many other successful business owners, that have failed on some endeavors before they hit it big, does that make them failures too? I don't believe so.

C'mon. He hasn't hit it big. And he's too big of an egomaniac to do so. He doesn't listen to rational people. Republicans have tried to calm him down and make him sound rational. You notice how well THAT is working. And convention speakers will be his family, Ditka, Christie, and Lyin' Ted Cruz.

He is a very successful business man ,especially in marketing his name .... much like the Kardashian's . Does that make him good Presidential material ? Herbert Hoover was also a very successful businessman. Hoover amassed a great fortune in his early thirties as a successful mining engineer. During the WWI years he saved millions of lives in Belgium ,Armenia ,Russia . But none of his past business expertise prepared him for the Presidency.

Trump like Hoover would opt for big government solutions . His wall, if he ever were to get funding for it (no Mexico would not pay for it ) ,and all the regulatory approvals .....if it survived all the court challenges ,would be a work program the likes we have not seen since Roosevelt's programs. He offers similar solutions to various infrastructure challenges ,and government entitlement programs . He talks about eliminating some government agencies ,but for the most part just promises to be a better manager of the Leviathan . Like Hoover he would choose a path of central government control .

FDR first campaigned against this aggressive intrusion by government, calling it socialistic .Then he copied and expanded upon Hoover's programs in formulating the New Deal.

But the biggest similarity between them would be trade policy. Hoover was complicit in the enacting of protectionists policies that turned a market crash into an outright world wide depression . Trump's 35% tariffs would be the biggest tax increase on American consumers in our lifetime. And his policies would not go without retaliation by other nations further increasing the costs of goods.

He correctly points out problems in our economy in stagnant growth ,stagnant wages ,and low job growth . But these problems are the cause of economic policies in Washington ...not Mexico or Beijing .To his credit ,he has a pretty good tax plan. But his protectionism would harm the economy not help it .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

C'mon. He hasn't hit it big. And he's too big of an egomaniac to do so. He doesn't listen to rational people. Republicans have tried to calm him down and make him sound rational. You notice how well THAT is working. And convention speakers will be his family, Ditka, Christie, and Lyin' Ted Cruz.

---

Cruz was the best choice of the lot after they got rid of Scott Walker . The Repubics will regret this choice .Trump has doomed them to the fate of the Whigs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Cruz was the best choice of the lot after they got rid of Scott Walker . The Repubics will regret this choice .Trump has doomed them to the fate of the Whigs.

---

Dump doesn't only doom the party to that fate he dooms his nation, but his plan to put Dilliary on the throne will succeed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Dump doesn't only doom the party to that fate he dooms his nation, but his plan to put Dilliary on the throne will succeed

---

there are good reasons to believe that theory .

The General that Trump is considering for his VP pick ;retired Lt Gen Mike Flynn is a pro-choice Democrat . Trump isn't even trying to get the Republican voter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_T._Flynn

It seems to be a game to him, he needs someone who will give him sound advice or maybe he's looking for someone who won't even try

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The General that Trump is considering for his VP pick ;retired Lt Gen Mike Flynn is a pro-choice Democrat . Trump isn't even trying to get the Republican voter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_T._Flynn

---

I'm not so sure on the prochoice as you are. Mostly that seems to be a matter of opinion. Since the law allows it I stand by the law. But I don't condone it. Looks like the same case here.

From your Wiki link:


On a July 10, 2016 interview on This Week, when asked by host Martha Raddatz about the issue of abortion, Flynn stated, "women have to be able to choose."^{[SIZE=2][25][/SIZE][SIZE=2][26][/SIZE]} On July 11, 2016, he clarified to Fox News that he is pro-life.^{[SIZE=2][27][/SIZE]}

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdad

I'm not so sure on the prochoice as you are. Mostly that seems to be a matter of opinion. Since the law allows it I stand by the law. But I don't condone it. Looks like the same case here.

From your Wiki link:


On a July 10, 2016 interview on This Week, when asked by host Martha Raddatz about the issue of abortion, Flynn stated, "women have to be able to choose."^{[SIZE=2][25][/SIZE][SIZE=2][26][/SIZE]} On July 11, 2016, he clarified to Fox News that he is pro-life.^{[SIZE=2][27][/SIZE]}

---

A lot has happened since this morning . Now the hot bet is Mike Pence. I would not complain with that selection .

Sounds like a case of round the Mulberry bush