Quote of the Day: Not Everyone’s On Board With Trump Edition

Donald J. Trump (courtesy fusion.net)

“Trump is still a farce and frankly, he is the kind of potential president I own guns for.” – TTAG commentator Anthony O. under our post Trump Tower Las Vegas Is Not a “Gun-Free Zone”

comments

  1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

    Review all my posts, Trump over Hillary. But just about any(R) over Trump. He has not shown us he is the 2A friendly guy he wants us to think. It scares me if he runs as Independent that he will take (R) votes with him.

    1. avatar triple banger says:

      If he runs as an independent it will only be because the GOP did everything in their power, pulled every dirty trick they could to undermine his clear front runner status from the start.

      It’s almost as if they’d rather not win if they can’t win with someone they don’t control…what could that mean?

      1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

        I’m not disagreeing. Both parties do dirty underhanded things to keep power. Maybe the GOP fears Trump will ruin future election for the party for another 8 or even 16 years. Can we all agree that Trump is hot headed and likes to shoot off at the mouth? Imagine him sitting inches from the red nuclear phone.

        1. avatar James69 says:

          Better yet imagine our enemys knowing he’s sitting next to the red phone……. hmmm?

        2. avatar triple banger says:

          Your comment about the nuclear football shows a lack of perception and critical thinking. I guess I take it for granted that I can parse his showmanship for what it is and get to the message underneath, and that message isn’t “I’ll nuke anyone who says something mean about me.”

          He hasn’t succeeded in life by making rash, hasty decisions over personal slights.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Do you even understand that was 90% of the argument against Reagan? It was precisely the reason why Iran released our Embassy hostages on the DAY he was inaugurated? Because he could not be absolutely controlled, guaranteed to be a pansy. And you are bringing that up now, about TRUMP? WTF are you thinking? Have you read ANY history?

        4. avatar Swarf says:

          He hasn’t succeeded in life by making rash, hasty decisions over personal slights.

          He hasn’t succeeded in life at all. He has failed upwards because he was born rich and was financially supported through his repeated bungling and general business ineptitude.

          Trump is a textbook Narcissist personality with sociopathic tendencies, and anyone who thinks those are Presidential qualities needs to rethink their priorities for the country they likely claim to love.

        5. avatar CB says:

          “Do you even understand that was 90% of the argument against Reagan? It was precisely the reason why Iran released our Embassy hostages on the DAY he was inaugurated? Because he could not be absolutely controlled, guaranteed to be a pansy.”

          Actually, the reason that Iran released the hostages on the day that Reagan was inaugurated was because of a backdoor deal Reagan made with the Iranians to prevent them from releasing the hostages while Carter was still in office, at least according to the former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, NSC staffers, the Iranian president at the time, and some of Reagan’s own Whitehouse staff. In return, the Reagan administration would sell them arms for their military. Reagan went on to deal arms to Iran on multiple occasions, including Iran-Contra where he traded arms for hostages.

        6. avatar Wulfric says:

          Swarf, Anyone who manages to turn a $1 million loan into $10 billion is a success, especially when they’re having to negotiate with obstinate government bureaucrats in order to do it. I would invite you to provide evidence to support your claim that he was just carried through life and “failed upwards”

        7. avatar ropingdown says:

          No, we can’t all agree. What Trump does is what he thinks will be effective. He shouts about illegal immigrants, a border fence, trade deals, and the 2nd amendment….because he realized voters were tired of issue-shy politicians. When the context requires calm measured words, Trump has proven fully capable of delivering them.

          Trump’s son Eric is a regular deer hunter. Donald J., himself, carries on occasion.

        8. avatar Stuki Moi says:

          “Do you even understand that was 90% of the argument against Reagan?”

          But, and this is important, 90% of the argument FOR Reagan, was that he had principles. Some semblance of an adherence to something resembling a coherent, political ideology. Not just, 100%, being the most popular guy on some TV show.

      2. avatar tdiinva (Now in Wisconsin) says:

        You need to update your info. The “Establishment” has been backing him of late. And why wouldn’t the RNC not wanT to undermine a Liberal Democrat?

        1. avatar Mike says:

          Lol yeah they’re backing him because they’d rather a Dem win than get Ted Cruz for 8 years! Shouldn’t that tell you something?

        2. avatar tdiinva (now in Wisconsin) says:

          That’s Cruz’s line but face it, Cruz is getting his butt kicked by Trump without the “establishment” having to do anything. The RNC isn’t warning to Trump because they desperately want to stop Cruz. Trump has already done that without their help. They are saying nice things because it is increasingly likely that he is going to win the nomination. Everybody thinks their candidate is a winner but realistically if Cruz can’t win among Republicans, he can’t win the general election. Cruz had a faulty strategy. He thought he could use Trump to knock out his conservative rivals, mainly Scott Walker. Mission accomplished. Unfortunately, Trump didn’t go away and only got stronger. He should have been attacking Trump from day one as a big government liberal Democrat crony capitalist. instead he sucked up to him.

          Everybody wanted the next Reagan but it wasn’t Ted Cruz. It was Scott Walker but Walker is Reagan without the flash so Republicans went for the shiny ponies of Trump and Cruz instead. Walker is battle tested taking the Democratic machine to the woodshed. Boring as he is, he would have run over the Democrats with their Union thugs and MSM propagandists nationwide like he did in Wisconsin. If you are a real conservative Scott Walker should have been your guy. He is everything a conservative chief executive should be. Quiet unassuming and more interested in doing the job instead being a celebrity. America’s problem isn’t the politicians. They are only a reflection of the body politic. If politicians are corrupt is only because they have been selected by a corrupt electorate.

        3. avatar ropingdown says:

          tdinvaniw: Scott Walker demonstrated that he could not break with Wisconsin farmers on the illegal Mexican labor issue. At a closed-door fundraiser Walker raised the possibility of altering his immigration stance. Word quickly leaked out. Walker couldn’t deny it. His campaign was toast within the week. It really is that simple.

        4. avatar int19h says:

          Nothing that you said counters his point that Walker is the most Reagan-like candidate. The simple truth is, Reagan wouldn’t have been elected in today’s climate, either. He’d be dismissed as “RINO”.

        5. avatar tdiinva (now in Wisconsin} says:

          No, Reagan wouldn’t be called a RINO. He would be called a NEOCON because he was the prototypical neo conservative — an anti-Communist liberal who got figured that big government solutions were a failure and switched sides. Now given that in this election cycle you are a conservative if and only if you are anti-immigration even if you support eminent domain or single payer Mr. Conservative himself, Barry Goldwater, would be called a RINO today. However, if your name is MItt Romney you are RINO even though you were an immigration hawk when Donald Trump was flacking for amnesty and supporting Hillary Clinton.

          Here is how a Walker-Cruz debate would go:

          Cruz: I filibustered Obamacare. Walker: Governor Cuccinelli thanks you. I busted the public employee unions.
          Cruz: I railed against government spending. Walker: I balanced the budget and kept government spending in check in Wisconsin
          Cruz: I made of fun of Diane Fenstein on guns: Walker: I signed concealed carry and extended gun fights for Wisconsin residents, oh did I also mention that I gave Wisconsin workers the freedom not join a union?
          Cruz: I went to Harvard Law, you are a college dropout. Walker: Yeah, that’s what we need another smart Harvard man in the White House.

        6. avatar int19h says:

          The crowd that most likes to throw “RINO” around considers most neo-cons RINOs, so…

        7. avatar Joseph Quixote says:

          Cruz: I argued the Heller case at the Supreme Court.

      3. avatar Swarf says:

        See also; the Dems against Bernie Sanders.

        It’s almost as though the two entrenched parties don’t give a tin dog turd what the voters of the country actually want.

      4. avatar Jim Jones says:

        Swarf, those qualities are endemic to EVERY SINGLE POLITICIAN, ever.

      5. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        Trump has fleeting fans, not diehard supporters. He can’t win as a write-in candidate.

        He certainly does not have the foot soldiers to run the required petition drives in each state. He’d never get on the ballot in enough states to have a shot at winning.

        Now, he might be able to personally finance enough petition drives to get on the ballot in enough states that he might win, depriving the GOP of those electoral votes and thus playing spoiler. Spoiler, aka, spectacular loser.

        He’s too vain for that, even vainglorious. If he can’t win, he’ll bow out before losing, then blame everyone else for the aborted effort. The proof? He’s done it before. Repeatedly.

        Trump’s been flirting with running since at least1988. He actually made a campaign trip of sorts to N.H. in 1987 to deliver a speech on foreign policy. In 1999, Trump actually quit the Republican Party, announcing it was a “great possibility” that he would run….on the Reform Party ticket. What happened? He bowed out saying he’d become convinced that the Reform Party couldn’t win.

        He considered runs in 2004 and 2008, decided he couldn’t win, so never entered. He even considered running in 2006 and 2014 for Governor of N.Y., but on the condition that he run unopposed for the GOP nomination. He bowed out when others ran and he wasn’t assured of victory.

        He flirted AGAIN with running for president in 2012, this time spending months “unofficially” campaigning. Again, he bowed out, this time claiming that business, and not politics, was his passion. What? A 60 something year old man didn’t know his life’s passion just a few months before? lol B.S., he found once again that he wasn’t assured of victory, so he bowed out.

        Trump’s is a vanity candidacy. He loves the attention, but not the work, of campaigning. His ideal end game is a coronation, not an inauguration. That’s not how it works, so expect him to bow out once he’s trounced in actual elections, or earlier if his polls collapse.

        1. avatar ropingdown says:

          Vanity candidacy? You blame Trump for accurately assessing whether he could win or not in the circumstance of prior elections?

          Spending very little money Trump has pushed aside well-known politicians with national name recognition. He has repeatedly been outspoken in favor of political positions about which other contenders were either “wrong,” (my view) or ambivalent (which voters hate). He got sentiment on illegal immigrants right. He has made repeated promises to oppose anti-2a legislation. His position on trade negotiations at least heads in the right direction.

        2. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          False premise, my friend. It’s not simply gauging his chances of winning. It’s him establishing certain victory as a precondition for even running. Glass Jaw Donnie can’t go the distance in a fight without bowing out. (He’s up to, what, four corporate bankruptcies now?)

          He wants it his way, or he won’t play. That’s not how leadership works. That’s not how representative democracy works. That’s not even how the business world works. (It only *looks* that way to someone who was handed a 28,000 unit residential real estate empire for free at age 26.)

          You have to work with some people. You have to battle some people. You don’t get to sit on your rear and pick and choose which of life’s challenges and exigencies please you, amuse you, and qualify for your attention; betaking yourself to your country estate if none catches your fancy.  Life shoves itself in your face and you must deal. Trump can’t, so he cuts and runs.

          Trump has spent very little money? Are you kidding me? Trump has spent decades and many millions of his own money, and many more in free media money, building up his name recognition and public persona. In fact, the “Trump brand” is itself an asset. That’s not me talking, that’s Trump. Check out his FEC filings.

          He rakes in millions licensing his name for buildings and resorts, but also business suits (made in China and Mexico!), vodka, even a lame board game back in the day. Of Trump’s self-reported $9 billion or so net worth, less than half consists of hard assets like real estate, cash or marketable securities. His brand is his majority asset, one which has benefited from generations of high priced, professional PR cultivation.

          Meanwhile, nobody had even heard of Ted Cruz four years ago. The few who had only knew him as the nobody who Tx. Lt. Gov. Dewhurst was going to mop the floor with. FIGHTER and UNDERDOG Ted Cruz won three elections to reach the Senate and retire Dewhurst, including overcoming Dewhurst’s $24 million in self-funding. Yet, Cruz and Trump are neck and neck in local Iowa polls. Curious, that.

          Let’s see, what else? Illegal immigration sentiment? Mr. Magoo on a cloudy day could see that. Amnesty bills have failed for years, as have candidates running on that platform. That’s just obvious.

          Trade? OMG. Trump’s running around proposing a 40% tariff on China? That would provoke a trade war that would lead to the Even Greater Depression. Go look up Smoot-Hawley Tariff.

          2A promises? He’s held opposite 2A positions in the past and done nothing substantive since then to demonstrate a sincere transformation. (Where’s Trump’s pro-2A organization to counter Bloomie’s?) All Trump has is “If you like your Second Amendment, you can keep it.” Riiiiight…..’nuff said about that….

          This was fun. You kept from getting personal and I do appreciate that. Have a great weekend. Dump Trump, choose Cruz!

        3. avatar ropingdown says:

          Obviously the money Trump has spent over the years turning his name into a brand that lends value to a building….isn’t campaign spending.

          Bloomberg’s been a politician much longer than Trump, and has much more money. If he chooses to waste it, that’s his business.

          In America today access to the zenith of education, Princeton and Harvard, is probably as much of an advantage as starting with a few millions. As for the 28,000 units, that wasn’t handed to DJT at age 26. The RE was the object of a trust controlled (majority) by his siblings.

          I do get the admiration for Cruz based on his relative underdog status, except that his and his wife’s access to money-center bank credit began almost instantly. I’d personally rather see Cruz as Attorney General.

        4. avatar int19h says:

          >> I’d personally rather see Cruz as Attorney General.

          You literally couldn’t find a worse position for the man.

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2016/01/22/ted-cruz-embraces-the-death-penalty-even-though-he-should-know-better/

    2. avatar Mecha75 says:

      That is why I hope Bloomberg decides to run as an independent. he will leach votes from Sanders (clinton should be facing jail time and should drop out, but that doesn’t mean she will).

    3. avatar Matt says:

      Given demographic changes we aren’t likely to get a lot more Republican Presidents at all, particularly the sort of religious conservatives many seem to want. They simply cannot win the states they need to win to become President. That’s why we see people like Jeb naively trying to court the Hispanic vote even though polling data shows Hispanics vote for whoever is the most socialist.

      At the moment Trump is the only candidate that is ahead of both Clinton and Sanders in Florida. Is he Charlton Heston? Probably not. But Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 82, Anthony Kennedy and Antonin Scalia are 79, and Stephen Breyer is 77. It would be nice if neither Commissar Sanders or the C-Hag are able to appoint replacements.

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        Which is why we need Trump/Real Conservatives to reduce legal immigration, secure the border, deport illegals and en birthright citizenship, if we move fast we can prevent the minting of millions of leftist voters and ensure the court sides with gun rights.

        1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          Those are right wing policies. Trump actually quit the GOP in 2000, claiming it had become too right wing.

          He may or may not believe a little in some of this, but it’s only incidental to whatever advances his own personal ambitions and strokes his ego. There are no bedrock principles in anyone that shallow.

          You’re being fooled by Trump the way milions were fooled by Obama.

        2. avatar Ironhorse says:

          Trump is like a frat boy saying all the sweet things the girl/voters want to hear in order to let him into her pants.

        3. avatar ropingdown says:

          Trump is the closest thing the Republicans have to an electable candidate. He is conservative on immigration (losing no votes any repub could garner) and the 2nd amendment, and somewhat middle-of-the-road on some social issues (which means that, yes, the millions of soccer moms and single moms can consider voting for him).

          Elections are won by parties and candidates who realistically put together coalitions of voters based on known demographics, single-issue groups, and avoidance of third rails. Trump has more social IQ than any of the other candidates except Rubio. Rubio fails on other grounds. Trump is our best bet to beat Hillary/Bernie/Joe. If you aren’t tired of losing while a plurality candidate drags the USA ever more leftward, Hillary’s your man…

    4. avatar Todgerkopf says:

      CLINTON-BUSH 2016 FOR THE WIN!

      1. avatar ropingdown says:

        Laugh.

  2. avatar Clint Patterson says:

    Exactly!!

  3. avatar pwrserge says:

    I’ll take trump over spineless Republicans every day and twice on Sunday. Trump actually has the balls to punch SJWs right in the face rather than pander to therm.

    1. avatar Mr Pierogie says:

      I certainly don’t agree with Trump on everything, but I’ll pick him over all the bought and paid-for Republicans. That includes Cruz, Rubio and pretty much everyone else except Rand Paul.

      They hate Trump because he doesn’t take orders from anybody and doesn’t read from the script he was given the same way those other candidates do. He is also using his own money, which means he’s not going to be doing any favors for anybody, he won’t be in anybody’s pocket. Again, such an independent candidate scares the establishment and it’s the last thing they want. And I’m loving it.

      1. avatar TravisP says:

        Of it could be he craps all over the constitution, if you read past the second A, there is a few more.

      2. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        You know what another word for someone who doesn’t take orders from anyone is? “Dictator.”

        Trump has no concept of governing WITH THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.

        As for just reading what speeches he’s been given, uh, you’re behind on the news. Trump just made a fool of himself at Liberty University, or what he calls “Liberty College.”

        He was there trying to doctor up some last minute pro-Christianity credentials and made a reference to the Bible verse “2 Corinthians”, actually uttering the word “two.” Why? Because that was on the speech provided to him.

        Not only did he not know that the passage is referred to as “Second Corinthians”, he didn’t even know enough to know what he doesn’t know. He just read off the script. The proof? He blamed his speech writer for having written “2 Corinthians.”

        That writer, Tony Perkins, is a well known evangelical activist. He only wrote “2” as a little shorthand. It never occurred to him that Trump the dolt wouldn’t know it’s actually “Second” and would read it as “two.” The knowing audience just laughed at Trump, who then proceeded to blame Perkins as though Perkins had made a mistake. What a buffoon!

        1. avatar ropingdown says:

          J-H, you’re talking yourself out of the one candidate that might advance some of your interests, though not all. You’re worried about DJ Trump’s ability to quote scripture? You do realize that you’ve got a supreme court without a single scripture-quoting evangelical on it, indeed not even a single protestant, but you want to drag Trump down? You may be cutting off your nose to spite your own face.

        2. avatar Stephen Mercer says:

          Trump is far from the idiot some want to portray him as. That said, who cares if he doesn’t know the common shorthand for a spirit based fan fiction book?

  4. avatar James69 says:

    I don’t get that “vibe” from him. I like the idea of Trump, someone not indebted/controled by the faceless masters ($$$) behind the curtain.

    Also I don’t see any difference between D or R. Just two rival gangs of thugs. Might as well call em’ Crips and Bloods. Cause it’s all about money and Ho’s.

    BTW he’s shown here with the current California compliant AR15.

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      “controled by the faceless masters ($$$) behind the curtain.” Even with Trumps money, there is still a lot more out there. If you don’t think Trump has money on the way from back room politics your fooling yourself. Besides Trump’s Ego is his own master.

      1. avatar triple banger says:

        If that’s true, if he’s just another puppet, could you please explain why everyone, and I mean EVERYONE from both sides have done everything they can to take him down? That doesn’t jive with your thesis.

        1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

          I never said Trump is a puppet, yet. I am saying Trump is all about Trump and money buys political favor.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          “jibe”

        3. avatar pg2 says:

          My suspicion is that he may what you call ‘controlled opposition’, meaning his run will guarantee a Hilary win, and at the same his seemingly outrageous antics discredits some the important issues he takes issue with.

        4. avatar Swarf says:

          I jived with my thesis once.

          Got a solid B in that class.

      2. avatar triple banger says:

        “If you don’t think Trump has money on the way from back room politics your fooling yourself. ”

        Sorry if I mistook this quote as an implication that Trump is owned by outside interests.

        1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

          Like I said he isn’t a puppet yet. As soon as he gets what he wants he is going to take advantage of the back room politics that benefit most politician’s wallets. At the very least Trump being president will make the Trump name worth more.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          A guy worth 10 billion is far less likely to do that than *you* are. Or anybody else.

        3. avatar 16V says:

          Trump is not worth $10B, and is very likely not worth more than $4.5B according to reliable sources.

          Everybody lately walks into that office rather poor, and walks out really, really rich. If Trump is the winner, he will continue that trend without any doubt.

      3. avatar Mecha75 says:

        Trump more or less admitted that during the first debate. The only thing I like about Trump is that he has been the one dictating what gets talked about and he has been bringing issues to the forefront that the normal Pols tried to sweep under the carpet.

  5. avatar James says:

    Trump appears to be an opportunist. He say whatever he thinks is populist and drives attention to him. One day, he’s the establishment wrecker, the next he’s the guy that’ll cut deals in Congress. I don’t trust him and I dread the type of justices he’d likely appoint to the Supreme Court. In 2012, his candidacy may have made sense. In 2016, we had and still have many better options.

    1. avatar triple banger says:

      “Trump appears to be an opportunist.”

      Even if true, it’s a pointless criticism because the same can be said of every other candidate running.

      Who do you prefer, and why?

      1. avatar James says:

        My original preference was Bobby Jindal. Mainly due to his reforms pushed in Louisiana regarding education. Much of our battling is trying to de-indoctrinate low information voters. These are folks raised in public schools, can’t name all the freedoms in the First Amendment or name all three branches of government. They don’t know it because our public schools teach more about Inuit transgender union history than American history. Folks that can’t balance a checkbook let alone understand their paycheck deductions.

        Jindal’s campaign could gain traction due to the large number running and his lesser name recognition, but here are positives to other that are or were in the race:
        • Rick Perry – solid fiscal record growing the Texas economy in business friendly matters. Questionable comments recently regarding OC in Texas when that bill was being debated, but an overall 2nd Amendment supporter
        • Scott Walker – government spending reformer, solid 2nd Amendment supporter.
        • Marco Rubio – he is conservative, gang of eight bill aside. Unlike Romney, he speaks the language naturally. Immigration is his blind spot given his parents’ and his life story. It is something we’ll need to watch him on, but the rest of his philosophy is conservative and his Supreme Court appointments would be more like Alito than Souter.
        • Ted Cruz – anyone that doesn’t think he’s conservative isn’t thinking. Errors in tactics like the government shut down is his weakness. It ended up not mattering much in 2014 because the Obamacare FUBAR and other Democrat blunders in 2014. Even though it was an error in tactics, he pushes the conservative position always and challenges the main stream media, only in a wittier, less blunt force way. He’d appoint Thomas/Alito like justices.

        Since it’s essentially down to a three way race, I support Cruz first, Rubio second, Trump third. No candidate is perfect. They all have weaknesses. Given their history and actions, Cruz and Rubio are conservative. Trump’s history is much more mixed, leaning New York Republican at best, 90’s Clinton liberal at worst.

        I look at the whole person, not just they’re words right now. Obama had good words in 2008, while his history was uber liberal. Maybe Trump’s word serve as mental masturbation to make people feel good over the awful state of affairs in Washington DC. If it is Trump v Clinton or Trump v Sanders, I’ll vote for Trump. But I’ll also be the first to say “told you so” when he makes deals with Pelosi and Schumer and McConnell. I’ll take a risk on an unknown versus knowns like Clinton and Sanders. Now I don’t have too with two known elements in Cruz and Rubio.

        1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

          Very well stated. I have hoped if Rubio gets the nod he would pull (D) votes because of his heritage.

        2. avatar Mecha75 says:

          “errors in tactics” Are you serious? what was the outcome of that government shutdown? A gain in both the house and senate!!! how is that an error in tactics? It exposed Obama as a petulant baby tyrant to those same low information voters.

        3. avatar James says:

          Mecha, it was an error in tactics. The shutdown occurred in October 2013. The media did what they always do and framed the debate against the Republicans pounding story after story. Polling at that time showed great disapproval among the general public of the Republicans. Even with new media exposing President Zero’s obvious petulant actions, the main stream media was able to blunt the new media’s impact. President Zero and the Democrats didn’t drop in favorable/unfavorable polling as much as the Republicans did.

          At the same time, the Obamacare exchanges launched or more appropriately, blew up on the pad. The MSM had to cover this massive of a FUBAR, but spent more time on the shutdown while both were active. After the shutdown, all that was left was a massive cluster of the Obamacare exchanges. Now President Zero and the Democrats favorables started dropping below the Republicans. In 2014, with health care a mess, the rise of ISIS, Ebola in Africa, Russia’s annexation of Crimea, the Malaysian flight shot down over Ukraine, and the Boko Haram kidnapping of 276 girls (remember the hashtag bringbackourgirls, still missing BTW), the Democrats tanked and got whipped out in November 2014. A year is an eternity in politics, especially when it goes like 2014 did. Just because the Democrats fudged it up worse after the shutdown, doesn’t mean it was a success. The dems bailed out the other side.

      2. avatar triple banger says:

        James, two things escape you:

        -The label “conservative” means nothing, anymore, and Trump’s popularity is showing that. In 2010 and 2014 the “conservatives” were given historic majorities across the country and they went back on every single promise they made. They are going forward with TPP, increasing H1Bs and not fighting to stem the flow of immigrants. None of these things are very “conservative” and they hurt Americans directly.

        -Rubio’s gang of 8 history and recent comments reaffirming he supports full amnesty should disqualify him in the eyes of anyone that wants to try and salvage this country. That you’d pick him over Trump says volumes about you and nothing about Trump.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Exactly. I’m sitting here watching Fox, right now, Jeb is on. When his mic was turned on, he managed to say the word “conservative” at least 10 times in 2 minutes, with never a hint what he thinks that means. James, you just used it like some kind of club, what do *you* think it means? I would like some kind of *moderate* leadership, emphasis on BOTH words, not a continuing competition on which party can throw away more tax dollars quicker, without any measurable positive result. Cut 100 billion in spending each month, if you see any result decide whether to reinstate or cut MORE, depending on the result. Demagogues will proclaim any action catastrophic, learn to ignore them. Current massive overload of “conservatives are accomplishing NOTHING except making excuses why we need MORE conservatives. The opportunity is disappearing, and Trump will shake things up, guaranteed. If Bush is elected, we may as well leave Obama in office, or elect Hilobama, whichever, the next day will be business as usual.

        2. avatar James says:

          Here’s where your right. The label conservative means nothing anymore. As Trump is proving, emotionalism beats principle.

          Here’s where I disagree. Principle conservatives where not give the largest majority in history, the Republicans were. The Republicans consist of principled conservatives like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Ron Johnson. It also consists of old guard ruling class like John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy and Peter King.

          Whether we like it or not, decades of business as usual and not fighting the fights of today for the fights of tomorrow are mainly why President Zero is unaccountable. Because the old guard assumed a press conference or press release would be covered fairly or covered at all by the MSM, they never took their case to the public outside of election years. This is why they had no leverage against Zero. Their two main leverages are impeachment and government shutdown. The public was blissfully apathetic on much of what Zero was doing and of the Constitution. The only way impeachment; however warranted, and it was, would work is if much of the public hammered the Democrats in the Senate that 13 to 20 would go along with removing the President. Since we dumbed down our civic literacy and refused to take the message to the general public on a daily basis, impeachment couldn’t work. Much the same as the government shutdown. Since the message isn’t wide spread enough and daily, the public turns on the Republicans more than the Democrats thanks to the waning, but still sizable influence of the MSM. Polling at the time of shutdowns confirm it. It happened in the 90’s and it happened in early October 2013. The gains of 2014 mainly rest on the complete mess world events brought in that year, most laid right at President Zero’s feet (ISIS, Russian aggression, health care)

        3. avatar ropingdown says:

          I agree with Triple Banger. As for the meaning of “conservative” and Republican, I have direct personal experience, in Pennsylvania, with the difference between what the party says and what it really pushes for behind the scenes:

          The party, due to its business-owning leadership, wants cheap labor at, ironically, any price. They (see e.g. Jeb Bush) talk about the romance of a Mexican or El Salvadorean coming over the border to help his family. Yet, what they are thinking is “got to find a way to cut factory costs.” It really is that simple. And these same corporate types are quite eager to regulate firearms until they are out of the hands of the no-capital worker. Understandable. They themselves know that they’d shoot somebody who treated them the way they are treating some of their workers.

          We need a fiscally conservative socially moderate pol who understands that better trade policy, limits on immigration, and a clearer path to national debt reduction are required.

          I don’t want Trump in my club, or church, or customer list. I want him doing the President’s job. I like the idea of a president whose speech is a bit clumsy, but whose record of getting things done is quite good. I’m sick of the hot-air balloons who talk a good game but then just double the national debt one more time.

      3. avatar int19h says:

        Not at all. Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul are good examples of politicians who have consistently stuck to the issues that are core to their political ideology, and refuse to bulge even in the face of “but it’s unpopular criticism”.

        Even among those who do bulge, some do so more than others. You see Cruz and Rand flip-flopping way less than Rubio, for example, and even Rubio is rock-solid compared to Trump.

  6. avatar CTstooge says:

    I doubt Trump as president could generate the kind of gun sales we’ve seen over the past 7 years.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Get suppressors dropped from the NFA and allow new full-auto builds and sales will skyrocket…

  7. avatar triple banger says:

    Meh. The contents I read here against Trump are just paraphrased versions of MSM talking points.

    -He’s actually anti-2nd A
    -He’s a buffoon, an idiot, incompetent
    -He’s really a Clinton plant in the race solely to throw it at the last second and assure her the win

    Stop and really think about these accusations. There’s no evidence to back any of them, and in fact plenty of evidence to support the opposite.

    Oh, and RF hates him just because he didn’t give him the time of day. Ha!

    1. avatar Fred Frendly says:

      Well, he WAS anti 2nd amendment as early as the late 90s, when he went on the record supporting the Clinton AWB. And he DID give tons of money to leftists like Reid, Pelosi, and the Clintons.

      But we should only look at Cruz’s background and ignore Trumps.

      1. avatar James69 says:

        So your saying he knows how to get things done in the snakepit we call politics?
        I look at politics like paying your cable bill, ya want cable then pony up the cash to pay the right guy and get it. Grease the wheels and get what you want, Like it or not THIS is how politics works as of today.

        1. avatar Model 31 says:

          Trumps convictions change with the wind and he said he’d make deals with the “snakes” in the pit…really what you want?

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          “Trumps convictions change with the wind and he said he’d make deals with the “snakes” in the pit…really what you want?”

          Compared to what we have now? Yes. Compared to the nothing results of the past 3 elections? Yes. Let’s either start moving away from civil war or get it over with. Demonizing major candidates is not helpful, what Trump says *right now* is what he means *right now*, which is better than any other candidate on either side, who are all lying constantly, trying their best to tell us what we want to hear, without any intention to be bound by their promises.

      2. avatar Mike says:

        Are you kidding? He was anti-2A as recently as a few years ago!

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          There are several GOP candidates who have not convinced me they are not actively anti-2A right NOW. Several others I wouldn’t bet on. But I’m not the one deciding who the candidate will be, and most of the possibles I will vote for if they are the nominee.

      3. avatar triple banger says:

        And he’s no longer for the AWB, and he has clearly stated over and over that the donations to politicians were business. It’s good for business, and he’s a great businessman.

        1. avatar Fred Frendly says:

          Hopefully in a couple years all the Trump people will not be trying to explain away why President Trump suddenly supports “common sense gun control” after another horrendous spree shooting.

          Hopefully in a couple years Trump will not be explaining away why the “Trump Wall” is nowhere near complete, and deportations are not being enforced.

          We KNOW Cruz is rock solid and will not waver. Trump? Who knows?

      4. avatar Mecha75 says:

        I don’t care who Trump gave money to. He is a corporatist and gave to whomever could give him and his business certain advantages and preference in contracts. He played the part of the big money donor to get whatever he wanted.

  8. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    I think it’s f*cking hilarious!

    We elect politicians, who are, in actuality, owned by the rich people and corporations; polictians merely do as they told by their owners… I mean “donors.”

    Imagine, if an uber wealth person, a possible aforementioned owner, were elected. Then we, as a nation, could just keep cutting out the middle man and one day kneel before our wealthy, corporate masters.

    F*ck it, let him win. It’ll be like a gag reel, and later, generations later they will look back at us like the buffoons we, obviously, are.

    Or maybe, we will be able to see Clinton the second, or Bush the third; play a little ping pong monarchism.

    Our national anthem should end with, “…the land of the free, in spite of the stupid.”

    1. avatar James69 says:

      Here’s the rest of the song. We don’t use the extended dance mix anymore. We use the Dub-step version, ya know, ADD and all that.

      On the shore dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
      Where the foe’s haughty host in dread silence reposes,
      What is that which the breeze, o’er the towering steep,
      As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
      Now it catches the gleam of the morning’s first beam,
      In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
      ‘Tis the star-spangled banner, O! long may it wave
      O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

      And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
      That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion,
      A home and a country, should leave us no more?
      Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps’ pollution.
      No refuge could save the hireling and slave
      From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
      And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
      O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

      O thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
      Between their loved homes and the war’s desolation.
      Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the Heav’n rescued land
      Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation!
      Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
      And this be our motto: ‘In God is our trust.’
      And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
      O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave![12]

      Cover of sheet music for “The Star-Spangled Banner”, transcribed for piano by Ch. Voss, Philadelphia: G. Andre & Co., 1862
      Additional Civil War period lyrics[edit]
      In indignation over the start of the American Civil War, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.[13] added a fifth stanza to the song in 1861 which appeared in songbooks of the era.[14]

      When our land is illumined with Liberty’s smile,
      If a foe from within strike a blow at her glory,
      Down, down with the traitor that dares to defile
      The flag of her stars and the page of her story!
      By the millions unchained who our birthright have gained,
      We will keep her bright blazon forever unstained!
      And the Star-Spangled Banner in triumph shall wave
      While the land of the free is the home of the brave.

  9. avatar Fred Frendly says:

    Trump will increase the amount of govt subsidised taxpayer funded ethanol in our gas.

    More of this crap in the gas will ruin more engines creating more work for repair shops.

    Trump will create plenty of work for mechanics.

    (Trump is an outsider.)

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      Well we can change that, we can get a secure border, reduced immigration, and secure the future of gun rights and liberty, same trade off.

  10. avatar Bob321 says:

    The next president will be picking at least two Supreme Court justices. If Hillary or Sanders is our next president, the US is finished. We know that a 3rd party run by Trump will give the election to the Progressives. We know that Trump can pull in the numbers to win. I am not a fan, but it is what we got. We are playing for all the marbles in this election. We have to win regardless of the warts of an imperfect candidate. This is our last chance to use a peaceful mechanism to restore our country back to its founding principles. I promise that whomever gets the GOP nomination will get my 100% support, because I know if we lose this, the Intolerable Acts of the American Revolution will be nothing compared to what will happen to We The People in the “utopia” the Progressives plan for us.

    1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

      I have no faith that Trump’s SCOTUS picks would be any better than HRC’s.

  11. avatar Wade says:

    Ladies and gents love Trump or hate Trump he may be he only choice you have on the conservative side of the aisle. Personally I do not much care for politicians. I have found them all to be dishonest and self serving. In fact I can sum up politicians easily for you with one fact. While trying Bill Clinton for lying under oath about having an adulterous affair Newt Gingrich was indeed having an adulterous affair himself. Both Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich were well loved figures with in their political parties. All that being said Trump has not come up in the world of politics. He is a business man and last I checked he is a pretty damn good one. This country has a fiscal problem that is out of control and frankly I do not know if it can be fixed; but if we have any hope of fixing it we will need someone who understands money. I do not believe we will find that in someone who has been a career politician and never held a real job. That is why Trump gets my vote. If we let things continue to fail financially we will not have much of anything left to protect with the constitution. I just hope that Trump does not get bought and sold like the rest of them. Perhaps this may finally be that “hope and change” stuff we are looking for.

    1. avatar Duke says:

      He’s not conservative. Never has been conservative. Has helped fund campaigns for the most liberal of candidates out there. He invited them to his wedding.

      “He’s the best chance conservatives got!!!!” …yeah at shooting themselves in the foot.

      1. avatar triple banger says:

        What does “conservative” mean anymore? Where have “conservative” candidates gotten us?

      2. avatar Former Water Walker says:

        Ah no-he PAID them to show up at his wedding. BTW who are you Trump apologists suddenly showing up on TTAG? Can I get some of that action? Ted Cruz didn’t offer me a paid gig…btw the donald is OWNED by bankers especially seein’ he’s done 4 BK’s.

        1. avatar Mike says:

          Seriously? A guy has an investment account with assets, borrows against those assets, and that makes him “owned” by the bank who manages that investment account for him?

          It’s not like he went out and got billions of dollars in direct loans on projects that went bankrupt… naw, that guy is definitely not benefiting from his relationships with big banks anywhere near as much as Ted Cruz!

          (edited to add–this was a response to somebody saying Ted Cruz was owned by the banks, but either the comment disappeared or I misread it…)

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Mike, ya gotta lay off the sauce, mate! You were responding to a claim that *Donald Trump* is owned by the banks (not Ted Cruz, who *you* claim is owned by the banks!), directly above your post!

        3. avatar Former Water Walker says:

          Thanks Larry-I guess. I’ll repeat my post… Who the hell are all they trump-ites?

    2. avatar James69 says:

      Well put! Huzzah!

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      “While trying Bill Clinton for lying under oath about having an adulterous affair Newt Gingrich was indeed having an adulterous affair himself”

      Are we STILL doing this? WTF is your point? The trial was for the CRIME (felony!) of lying under oath, had nothing to do with adultery, which IS NOT ILLEGAL! So, WTF is your POINT?

      1. avatar 16V says:

        Adultery is not illegal?

        http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/11/is-adultery-illegal-map

        You might want to look at that. Especially where Newt and Cain were…

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I am astonished. I read it, and I still don’t believe it. Makes one ask, is this the vaunted “conservative values” we are supposedly seeking in our politicians? Cursing the Donald because he is not conservative enough? Is this what Bush and Cruz are planning if elected, to assure their memories as “true conservatives”? Proclaiming their personal control of each of our reproductive systems and threatening us with fines and prison if our dicks get loose and run wild in the streets? Because that threatens to send me to vote for Hillary. Are there also still laws forbidding a white man from marrying a black woman? Is that “conservative”?

          My “conservative” will stop spending my damn MONEY trying to enforce truly ludicrous laws. Like these. Thanks for the link, I would never have guessed, and I am thoroughly stunned, as well as ashamed to be a citizen of a country with such asinine laws still on the books, with people who support them. I do not wish to belong to a party which even considers the opinions of such backward trash, much less panders to them.

        2. avatar Mike says:

          Tell me how many people have been prosecuted for adultery in recent history and then I will care. The books across our country are full of antiquated laws like this that have never been address but are never enforced.

        3. avatar 16V says:

          Larry, I have no idea which one to support and to be honest, the more I learn, the less I like any of them – and I didn’t like any to begin with. I know I’ll never support Hillary, beyond that, it’s the least offensive of these turds.

          They are all puppets, maybe in charge of the bully pulpit, at most generous.

          Mike, These statues can, and do, get used. At the least expected times, especially since few even know they still exist.

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62581-2004Sep4.html

        4. avatar Ironhorse says:

          There’s a difference between something being “illegal” and something “unenforceable, but still on the books”. Anyone charged under an anti-adultery law will challenge the constitutionality of it, if it hasn’t been done already.

        5. avatar 16V says:

          ironhorse, My link actually spoke to the very issue of Constitutionality. He may have actually gone, but if he lost, he was looking at time -so they cut him a huge break for his dropping it. You may very well have the pockets and intestinal fortitude to mount such a campaign, The average person just isn’t up for it.

  12. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

    I don’t know what he really thinks or what he wants, but I suppose that is true of most anyone. Not sure if his campaign is brilliantly conceived or luckily stumbled upon either. I’ll do my best to get along no matter who is elected though,

  13. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    I won’t vote for Trump. Not even over Hitlery. At least if it’s her we still have 2020. If it’s Trump we’re stuck until 2024.

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      There is someone running in the primaries named “Deez Nutz” he had 9% in his home state. Maybe you could cast your vote for him.

      1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        Or Limberbutt McCubbins. I’ll either find a third party of write in one of those two.

        1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

          Limberbutt is a cat. My guess is that Homer Simpson write ins will be at an all time high this year.

    2. avatar Charles Pickard says:

      That’s how we lost the last election. Romney wasn’t conservative enough, and not enough people went out to vote because they thought that he wasn’t conservative enough. If it’s Trump vs. Hilary, just vote for Trump. Nobody running right now is worse than Hillary. We just have to bite the bullet.

      1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

        I agree that Hillary would be the worst for us, she is running a campaign against the 2A. Having already stated she wants “Australian style gun” confiscation.

        1. avatar James69 says:

          “Austrian style gun” confiscation – fixed it.

      2. avatar Parnell says:

        I have to agree with you. This could be another “lesser of the two evils” election. I’ll give Trump credit for raising issues no one else wanted to discuss but I really haven’t seen any real solutions or plans from him. However, the plans and solutions I’ve seen from the Democrat/Socialists scare the hell out of me.

      3. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        Romney was Barry Goldwater compared to Trump, and I was happy to vote for him in ’12.

        With a little luck Hillary will be impeached. At least 4 years of a really bad presidsnt is better than 8. Maybe if he can convince me of HOW he’s going to get Mexico go pay for the border fence (for instance) I’ll reconsider my position. Otherwise he’s no different than O’Bama, convincing fools that he’ll fix all there problems without a clue how.

        1. avatar Randy Taylor says:

          So 4 more on top of the last 8 doesn’t matter?

        2. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          No matter how crappy the last 8 years have been, 4 more is still less than 8 more.

        3. avatar jwm says:

          What if she gets 8 more?

        4. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          It’s very difficult for a party to hang on to the White House for 16 years. And if Trump wins the choice in 2020 will be between more Trump or another Dem. Bear in mind that up until 3 months ago Trump was a huge supporter of HRC and shared all of her political positions. It’s lose, lose with Trump.

        5. avatar Jason says:

          4 years under Hillary? Seriously? Rather than Trump? You people are scary-as-hell delusional if you think that a complete Statist and 2A hater like Hildabeast is “better” than Trump who is on record many many times over the past couple of years saying he is pro-2A. Trump’s kids are CCW holders, hunters and own ARs. I don’t think that you have nearly as much to worry about vis-a-vis 2nd Amendment issues with Trump as you do with Hillary.

          Trump scares you? Voters like you who would rather let Hillary win than tuck your tail between your legs and vote for Trump because Cruz or Rubio didn’t get the nomination scare the hell out of ME.

        6. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          First Jason, it’s Hilldebeest not Hildabeast. There is no such animal as a wildabeast, it’s wildebeest. And Hillary has 2 Ls.

          Second, I’m not a one issue voter, although being pro 2nd Amendment is a prerequisite.

          Third, Trump spent his entire life supporting Democrats including Hilldebeest, and now all of a sudden I’m supposed to believe he’s a conservative. Most of his liberal positions he still held just a few months ago. The only reason he’s running as a Republican is that he didn’t think he could beat Hillary in the Democratic primaries.

          Fourth, if Trump wins the electorate will take out their disillusion with Trump on the Republicans in congress in 2018. If Hillary is elected the Republicans keep the House and Senate. Come to think of it, you Trumpies are starting to convince me I should vote for Hillary over Trump, but I’ll probably still vote Limberbutt.

          Fifth, Trump is the only Republican candidate I’m seriously considering declining to vote for in the general election.

          Sixth, if Hillary comes after my guns… well, let’s just say we’ll all be winners. Molon Labe!

      4. avatar TXGal says:

        Any one but Clinton or Sanders!!!
        If you sit on your hands on Election Day, you are irresponsible and a dolt because you gave the future Supreme Court away, along with the 2nd Amendment

        1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

          Once again I have no confidence that Trump’s SCOTUS picks would be any better than Hillary’s. I guarantee they will be pro abortion and anti 2nd Amendment. Besides, the 2 that will be replaced are already faf left, so the only way the court changes is if a conservative like Cruz gets in.

    3. How many SCOTUS seats could hilly replace in four years? Maybe two? It could become a flipped SCOTUS. Tell me again about 2020?

      1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        As I mentioned above, I have no confidence that Trump’s SCOTUS picks would be any better than Hillary’s.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        2-3 million armed citizens could arrange to replace all 9 at once, if necessary. For example, if “conservative justices” decided that the pope must be the ultimate law of the land, like the ayatollas in Iran. Just as an example. Moderation is a good thing.

    4. avatar ropingdown says:

      Gov, why not make it easy on yourself. Just turn in your guns. Get it over with. You’re so eager to volunteer. You won’t vote for Trump, even if it means Hillary is elected? Yet Trump has repeatedly and bluntly promised to support the 2nd Am, while Hillary has openly spoken against it, both of these in the current election cycle. You want to hold down Republican turnout? Again? Is this just going to be another “the social conservatives stay home” election? How f’g sad.

      1. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        And if Hillary suddenly declared she was pro 2nd Amendment you’d believe her? What’s beyond my is how anyone can believe Trump. He’s supposedly completely changed his whole political philosophy in the last few months and he has legions of followers that take everything he says as gospel. They won’t even dare to question how he thinks he’s going to get anything done, they just believe. The Trumpies are starting to remind me of the idiots who thought Barack Obama was going to take care of their mortgages and car payments. Personally I’m skeptical.

        1. avatar ropingdown says:

          Gov: You voted for Romney last election. I note that he was a recent convert to a pro-2A position. Your doubts about Trump’s likely SCOTUS picks are based on what? As for the emminent domain issue, the court already has spoken on the issue in a well-reasoned opinion.

          In the 2012 election it was quite clear which candidate, from the 2A and fiscal points of view, was the lesser of two evils. Nonetheless social conservatives stayed home in large numbers and Obama won again. Such petulant behavior by the various single-issue social conservative groups imposes a high cost on the “we almost won” Republicans + Independents base. It has consequences and will eventually redefine the coalition known as Republican if it happens again.

        2. avatar int19h says:

          >> Nonetheless social conservatives stayed home in large numbers and Obama won again.

          It wasn’t social conservatives who stayed home. Here’s a map that captures the difference in turnout between 2008 and 2012 (blue = lower turnout):

          http://www.realclearpolitics.com/images/wysiwyg_images/Turnout6-20.gif

          Notice that the more solidly social conservative southern states did just fine.

  14. avatar Tex300BLK says:

    Is he my favorite? No, but I will vote for him if the choice is between him or the Rancor (Hillary for those who miss the Star Wars reference)

  15. avatar jans says:

    Do Emotions Trump Facts?
    By Thomas Sowell (excerpt)
    “Those of us who like to believe that human beings are rational can sometimes have a hard time trying to explain what is going on in politics.

    It is still a puzzle to me how millions of patriotic Americans could have voted in 2008 for a man who for 20 years — TWENTY YEARS — was a follower of a preacher who poured out his hatred for America in the most gross gutter terms.”

    Today’s big puzzle is how so many otherwise rational people have become enamored of Donald Trump, projecting onto him virtues and principles that he clearly does not have, and ignoring gross defects that are all too blatant. There was a time when someone who publicly mocked a handicapped man would have told us all we needed to know about his character, and his political fling would have been over. But that was before we became a society where common decency is optional.

    Yet there are even a few people with strong conservative principles who have lined up with this man, whose history has demonstrated no principles at all, other than an ability to make self-serving deals, and who has shown what Thorstein Veblen once called “a versatility of convictions.””
    http://www.ammoland.com/2016/01/do-emotions-trump-facts/

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      I read that as well and I agree with it. I also blame in part Obama and the GOP. Obama for creating a divisive mood within the country. We have a new radicalism we have not seen since the 60s. I blame the GOP for making promises of which they have kept none of them. Obama and the GOP have created not only Trump but Sanders.

    2. avatar triple banger says:

      Yes, NRO played all their cards and showed that they are nothing but an establishment mouthpiece afraid of losing their relevance.

      1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

        +1

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Please describe “strong conservative principles”, since it seems every definition is different. For example, is “minding your own business” involved anywhere? I remember that being said to me hundreds of times in my youth.

    4. avatar ropingdown says:

      Thorsten Veblen’s “Theory of the Leisure Class” was one of the first serious books I ever read. But the answer to Sowell is, of course, that he has enjoyed the Leisure of the Theory Class. He (and most of the other NRO current-issue contributors) has not put himself on the line to occupy a position in which one either wins or loses, and in which one is subject non-stop to the criticism of worms and slugs with bylines.

      As for Sowell’s comment attributing Trumps gestures to an effort to imitate a handicapped person, I wasn’t there. I did, however, read the journalist’s piece. In an earlier era one who had contributed so little to the economy would never have written with such arrogance, would not have felt that his handicap gave him carte blanche to take part in character assassination expecting no consequence.

  16. avatar Don Nelson says:

    Even Clinton is more conservative than Trump. Cruz then Rubio are the most conservative Constitutional candidates. I’ll vote for the most conservative (classic definition) candidate regardless of party, even if I have to hold my nose while doing it.

    1. avatar TravisP says:

      Rand is the most Constitutional canidate. The other two are conservative sure, but not the most constitutional.

    2. avatar ropingdown says:

      Clinton is more conservative than Trump? Now I’ve heard it all. On this site Trump is up against a big pile of envy. Astounding. Trump comes out openly against gun control legislation. Hillary comes out for it. You, though, think Hillary is more conservative?

  17. avatar Dev says:

    Trump will not be the Republican candidate and he’s going to turn this year and a half of publicity he’s got into a bunch of media and business deals that is going to net him another billion.

  18. avatar Shoe Guy says:

    Unlike a lot of wealthy, rich parents, Trump’s children appeared to be well adjusted, productive members of society.

    http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/trump-kids-no-kardashians/?utm_source=outbrain&utm_medium=desktop

    That tells me there’s a lot more to The Donald than meets the eye.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Thanks for the link…

  19. avatar Mk10108 says:

    Whatever it takes. Keep your eyes on the prize. Defeating Hillary and Democrats

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261557/hillary-too-paranoid-be-president-daniel-greenfield

  20. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    People talk about conservatism having never read Russell Kirk. You aren’t a conservative, if you don’t embrace the 6 cannons, and most “conservatives” today don’t even know what the hell they are.

    Not that it matters, because it’s not about R vs. D or conservatism vs. liberalism. Its Nationalist vs. Globalist.

    Every presidential candidate R or D, is a globalist besides one, Trump.

    The only choice that is left to be made is embrace Nationalism now, or deal with Ultra Nationalism later. If any of the globalists win, there will be war.

    1. avatar triple banger says:

      That’s very well-stated and helped codify what I’ve been feeling but haven’t been able to express. I hope everyone here reads that and thinks deeply about it.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I am not familiar with precisely what magic you are describing, but just FYI, a “cannon” is a really big gun. Might you be advocating some manner of “canons”, like, principles, largely religious in origin?

      Is Russell related to “Captain” Kirk?

  21. avatar John says:

    http://theweek.com/articles/599577/how-obscure-adviser-pat-buchanan-predicted-wild-trump-campaign-1996

    What have the “conservatives” managed to conserve other than our gun rights? And they only did that because the NRA and other rights group basically had to hold their feet to the fire and bribe them.

    Our country is going down the damn drain and both sides are importing hordes of cheap labor and new left-wing voters to dispossess middle America.

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      And you left out cucks on the right who fear being called “racists” by people that hate them, hate their nation, culture, values, and will rob them of their Liberty and future if they are not prevented from coming into this nation and out voting them.

  22. Some people will find and use any candidate fault as a reason to take their vote and stay home. If you’re looking for a candidate who shares 100% of your political ideology, I suggest you step up and run for office yourself!

  23. avatar PeterK says:

    I loathe trump. I think I’ve even said that in comments before. What is his deal? As far as I can tell it’s pretty much just “immoral rich scumbag.” No different than Hillary. If it came down to Trump vs Sanders I might actually vote Sanders and make certain the congress keeps him as impotent as possible. I mean you could say do that with Trump except he’ll leverage that presidency for his own personal gain one way or the other. I actually don’t think Sanders would. I mean obviously Clinton would, though. Crap I don’t know who I’d vote for there. Please let a different republican take the candidacy, sigh…

    1. avatar Model 31 says:

      Wouldn’t matter, mitch mcconnell would do everything he could to surrender to Clinton or Sanders.

      1. avatar PeterK says:

        Yeah, that’s a fair point. SIGH.

    2. avatar ropingdown says:

      If you vote for Sanders and he wins, you’ll find yet again that the veto power the President holds is, baring a 2/3rds republican majority, an absolute block for most legislation you might want. Peel away 10 or 15 Republicans from an evenly split senate, and Sanders could push through some truly hideous legislation.

      If we lose more of our freedom in this country, it will flow from the fact that so many ostensibly conservative voters seem to think an election choice is mainly a measure of their own principles, rather than a process leading to the election of one of two possible office-holders. Elections are practical matters, and they have consequences.

  24. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    Everyone does remember that ALL politicians suck, right? None of them are to be trusted, none of them think they work for us, all of them think themselves better than us.

    Each of them is evil in their own time and in their own way. Which of them is the least evil, or which of them most closely aligns with what you want. None of them will have everything you want, which one comes closest. The flip-side is that lesser of two evils thing… which one sucks the least.

  25. avatar Ben says:

    First time im voting at age 30.

    Voting for Trump.

    1. avatar Ironhorse says:

      I’ll bet you’ll feel the same as I did after voting for Dubya.

    2. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      Welcome to the party, 12 years late. Now please vote in every election even minor one’s as it is your vote that may make a difference.

  26. avatar Wiregrass says:

    I see a lot of people getting behind Trump simply because, well, they don’t know what he’s going to do. And they don’t. He hasn’t outlined how he’s going to accomplish anything, other than, “Trust me, it’s going to be great!” I don’t know what that is supposed to mean, but I’m sure following constitutional authority is the least of his concerns. And that is very important because once you start down that path, the rest of it goes straight to hell from now on. Yes we know Hillary is going to be a disaster, so there is that. I can support one of the Cubans, preferably Cruz, but if it comes down to Trump vs. Hillary, the only lever I’m likely to be pulling is the one on my reloading press.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      “He hasn’t outlined how he’s going to accomplish anything, other than, “Trust me, it’s going to be great!”

      That goes equally for every candidate on either side of the aisle. Claiming “I am going to do such-and-such about taxes!” is just ridiculous, we are not electing a king. Electing someone who shows the ability to persuade people to think about his proposals rather than rejecting them out of hand, should be the goal. So far, that leaves Trump, and only Trump. On either side.

      1. avatar ropingdown says:

        I agree. I would also say that Trump has defined relative clear outlines of his tax, 2A, immigration (legal-yes, illegal? No.) policies.

  27. avatar Model 31 says:

    In head to head, Trump loses to HC and BS…loses more to BS. Trump is in the same place McCain and Romney were at this point…media darlings during the primaries. After the primaries, the media will turn on Trump too. The media will discuss at length, 40+ years of liberal Trump donations to liberal candidates and causes which will suppress conservative vote turnout.
    Lets say HC is indicted and BS gets the nomination or the rules change and Biden gets in…
    Think Trump + anybody can beat Biden/Warren or Sanders/Warren?
    Its going to take every conservative voter to push the Republican over the top and Trump ain’t going to do it.

    “Well we couldn’t build the wall so we can’t protect against imported terrorists’ shooting rampages so the only thing left is to turn in the guns. The peace will be yuge.” –Donald J. Trump, 2019

    1. avatar triple banger says:

      “After the primaries, the media will turn on Trump too”

      I don’t think you’ve been paying attention. They’ve been trying to take him down since the beginning. Try to keep up.

      1. avatar Model 31 says:

        For the past few months, I’d agree with that. Now that the GOP establishment has decided to go in with Trump, the news coverage has changed, and will change again after the primaries. If Trump can change his mind on core values after 60 years, I’d think media types could change their’s about a man after six months.

  28. avatar James69 says:

    As far as I can tell it’s pretty much just “immoral rich scumbag.” No different than Hillary.

    Yeah, he had 1,000 dollar investments pay 100,000 – HE EARNED every dollar he made, nobody handed him a big bag of cash unlike ALL than the rest of the clown car club crooks.

    1. avatar 16V says:

      Donald graduated college with a net worth of about $1.5MM in constant dollars. He got something north of $200MM from his dad when he died, plus his share of the real estate. He’s basically kept even on a swelling market, and if it goes tango uniform again, he’ll be selling like mad to keep from going broke, just like last time.

      Fred, his dad, was a bit more self-made…

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        See if I have this straight. 200 million equals 10 billion. Is that right? Trump enterprises employs the same number of people it did 40 years ago, is that what you’re saying? What *are* you saying?

    2. avatar Ironhorse says:

      Yep, all of his money was hard-earned… by his dad.

      1. avatar ropingdown says:

        Frankly, if you compare what Donald has done with his inheritance, versus what his siblings have done, you have to admit Donald has done good. It is true that his siblings had to once bail him out, short term, but he more than made good on that load.

        I have to laugh. Bush 43 made almost all of his money jumping on board the Houston baseball bus. The guys that hired him, that cut him into the deal, have public said they though they were paying to get influence over Bush 41. But that money’s fine, and DJ Trump’s is somehow tainted? Sure.

  29. avatar Nedd Ludd says:


    Way back in July, I posted a comment supporting Trump on Sultan Knish that was pulled for some reason. (You can draw your own conclusions.)
    I posted it again in December and now Dan Greenfield has decided to let it run.
    Here it is again, as nothing has changed except that Trump has continued to rise in the polls:

    Trump’s message is pretty simple:
    He’s running as a nationalist, not a globalist.

    He wants to take control of our Southern border and to build an Israeli style fence on it.
    His message recognizes that uncontrolled, illegal, peasant immigration from Mexico and Central America is a very bad idea for the US.[and of course now he’s added Muslim ‘refugees’ to that list]

    No other Republican will say this. (and certainly no other Republican will do this.)

    Trump also opposes the globalist trade pacts.
    After the betrayal by McConnell & Boehner, joining with Obama to pass TPP, against the wishes of their own constituents, how can any conservative support the ‘mainstream’ Republican establishment?

    Once nominated, I have no doubt, that every other Republican candidate will become the captive of the big donors – The US Chamber of Commerce and the other corporate members of the cheap labor lobby.

    The Donald has already cost himself millions by running this campaign.
    All the other candidates are hoping to make millions for themselves.
    Trump is the only one who is actually sacrificing something to run.

    I live in NH.
    I’ve seen up close and personal, the endless stream of nonentities the Republicans manage to cough up every four years – Dole, McCain, Bush, Romney, etc.

    In this year’s NH primary, for a change, I won’t have to chose between an assortment of RINOs. Trump is certainly not my optimal candidate, but an optimal candidate isn’t running.

    Trump is a chance for conservatives to poke their collective thumb in the eye of the entire repellent PC Republican establishment.

    Do I think Trump will win the election? Most likely not.
    But if Jeb, or Christie, win the nomination, exactly what would be the point of even bothering to vote?

    Trump’s good on guns, immigration and trade – I’ll take that, comb-over and all.

    The above was written on July 7th 2015 – The only thing I’d change now is that I think that Trump has a better than even chance to beat Hillary in the general election.
    25/12/15

    http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2015/12/trump-dictatorship-and-competing-with.html#comment-form

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      Unless we win the immigration battle, none of the other battles can possibly be won.

      1. avatar Nedd Ludd says:

        That is exactly right.

    2. avatar Mike says:

      Trump supporters need to wake from their state of hypnosis and realize that Ted Cruz is everything they like about Trump without all Trump’s negatives. Just ignore what Trump says about Cruz and go check him out for yourself and you’ll realize what you’ve been missing.

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        Ted cruz would not reduce legal immigration nor ban Islamic immigration.

        1. avatar Mike says:

          Cruz is on record for years taking a very strong stand on border security and illegal immigration–he’s just much more likely to get it done than Trump because he knows how to do it in a legal and constitutional way. He is also on record actually submitting legislation against bringing refugees here and against immigration from a long list of muslim countries.

        2. avatar Mack Bolan says:

          @ Mike

          If Cruz was so strong on securing the border he would have led a task force of ICE agents to arrest illegal border jumpers instead of handing them soccer balls and teddy bears.

        3. avatar Mike says:

          So showing compassion to suffering people already inside this country illegally while they are being processed is incompatible with being strong on border security?

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Yes.

  30. avatar James69 says:

    Also just for fun let’s think about all the jobs he created during HIS lifetime. I wonder what the Donald’s payroll to people working for him has has been over the last 20-30 years. More than his “net worth” I’ll bet. I think he might know a thing or two that this country needs.

    1. avatar Model 31 says:

      This is a gun site. Trump has a CCL, says he carries. That’s good for him. What has Trump done for the gun rights for everyone else?…besides funnel millions to gun grabbing democrats?

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-donation-history-shows-democratic-favoritism/2011/04/25/AFDUddtE_story.html
      “Recipients include Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), former Pennsylvania governor Edward G. Rendell, and Rahm Emanuel, a former aide to President Obama who received $50,000 from Trump during his recent run to become Chicago’s mayor, records show. Many of the contributions have been concentrated in New York, Florida and other states where Trump has substantial real estate and casino interests.
      ….
      The Democratic recipients of Trump’s donations make up what looks like a Republican enemies list, including former senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), Rep. Charles B. Rangel (N.Y.), Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and the late liberal lion Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.).

      The biggest recipient of all has been the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee of New York, which has taken in more than $125,000 from Trump and his companies. Overall, Trump has given nearly $600,000 to New York state campaigns, with more than two-thirds going to Democrats.”

      This question is for all pro gun Trump supporters:
      What has he done for your gun rights?

      1. avatar Lyle says:

        You’re worrying about what Trump has or has not done in the past…maybe you SHOULD worry about what Hilary or Bernie will do in the future to our gun rights because that is what counts NOW and going forward.

        1. avatar Model 31 says:

          I can acknowledge the past and still be concerned about the future. Past behavior is a indicator of future behavior. I’m plenty concerned about the prospects of a HC/BS administration.

          Cruz may seem like a late comer to the 2nd Amendment just as millions of Americans have woke up to it since 2012, but Cruz has not given millions to candidates supporting anti-gun initiatives nor has he ever been in support of a AWB.
          “In the landmark case of District of Columbia v. Heller, Cruz drafted the amicus brief signed by the attorneys general of 31 states, which said that the D.C. handgun ban should be struck down as infringing upon the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.[54][57] Cruz also presented oral argument for the amici states in the companion case to Heller before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.[54][58]”

          Trump says he’s flipped on guns and that is great. Lets see him work as hard in support of gun rights for everyone as Bloomberg has worked against regular folk’s gun rights. Lets see Trump do that for 8 or 10 years and I’ll be convinced.

        2. avatar Lyle says:

          There you go! As long as you can be open-minded, you’re good. Personally, I’d rather have Cruz or Rubio, but Trump can do if that is what it comes to.

      2. avatar Former Water Walker says:

        Model 31> BEST comment of the day. And to quote Quatto from Total Recall: “You are what you do”.

  31. avatar ACP_arms says:

    Before we even talk about who to vote for, we, as a nation need to trash-can the Electoral College. Bush and Obama both won the office not by popular vote, but by the Electoral College. At this point in time the EC is no longer needed and should be discontinued.

    1. avatar Model 31 says:

      Both won in the electoral college – twice.
      “Bush and Obama both won the office not by popular vote”
      citation please.

      1. avatar ACP_arms says:

        Sorry about that, I am wrong. Obama won 2012 and 2008 with popular and EC, Bush on the other hand in 2000 won with EC votes and Gore had the popular vote.

        I should probably look it up again, but the EC should be discontinued as it’s no longer needed and is past it’s usefulness.

        1. avatar DerryM says:

          You are now correct. Dumping the EC requires a Constitutional Amendment, just as dumping the Second Amendment…neither likely to happen,

        2. avatar Ironhorse says:

          Three words: Single Transferable Vote.

        3. avatar int19h says:

          Dumping electoral college alone won’t do much.

          What’s really needed is some form of transferable voting like instant runoff, so that you can vote for the candidate of your choice, but designate the fallback (or better yet, fallbacks).

          So e.g. you’re a libertarian, but you really don’t want Hillary to win. In an instant runoff system, you designate Rand as your candidate of choice, followed by other candidates that you would prefer to win, in order. Then all candidates are ranked by vote; if Rand comes last, he is removed from the list, and your vote is transferred to the next preferred candidate for the next round. Repeat until just one guy is left, and that’s the winner.

          This way, voting your conscience is not “throwing your vote away” – you can clearly designate your ideological preference, while also engaging in strategic voting to deny any advantage to the opposition.

          Because of this, it encourages candidates that actually have meaningful ideas, instead of a catch-all “vote for me if you don’t want the other guy to win” like typical mainstream Democrat and Republican candidates today.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Int, please explain how that differs in effect from the primary system we have now. You vote for this guy, contribute to that guy, until finally there are only 2, and you select between them. In Nov 2016, there are not going to be 15 GOP candidates on the ballot. I hope that’s not a surprise!

        5. avatar int19h says:

          It differs because in the primaries system, there’s only a single step that goes from N candidates to 2 candidates, and those N candidates are artificially divided by party affiliation in the first place. So you have to account for considerations such as “we need to elect someone in primaries who is electable in the general” etc, which still encourages you to vote against your ideals and for a compromise candidate.

          Basically, you cannot express “I would prefer Rand, but if he doesn’t get the nomination, then Cruz, and if he doesn’t get it, then Rubio – but definitely not Trump” in the primaries. It’s still winner-takes-all, just within a party.

          Also, you can’t specify preferences across party boundaries, even though some people want to. For example, another comment here said that if it comes to Sanders vs Trump, they might prefer to vote Sanders (but would vote Trump over Hillary). IRV would let you do just that – assign your vote to all Republican candidates but Trump (in whatever is your order of preference), then designate Sanders, then Trump, then Hillary last.

  32. avatar Mister Fleas says:

    If Trump becomes the nominee, I’ll vote for him. This Mark Steyn article explains why:

    http://www.steynonline.com/7432/the-world-they-made

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I read, this guy’s a conservative, that guy’s not a conservative, on and on, when is somebody going to tell us what that means? This article describes well why nobody trusts Republicans any more, they are doing exactly the same things as Democrats. If one of them would just go one step farther than Rubio, and proclaim that before he goes to bed on the evening of his inauguration, he will repeal every single executive action of Obama, then later in the week consider whether any should be reinstated, I could be in love. But every single one, besides Trump, has to take a poll and discuss the results with a dozen campaign advisors before he can tell you whether the sky is blue. Conservative, my ass, I want a man as president, not a committee (yes, a woman would be fine).

      1. avatar Model 31 says:

        http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/01/exclusive-ted-cruz-my-first-act-as-president-will-be-to-undo-obamas-unconstitutional-executive-orders/

        “In January 2017, we will have a new president and if I am elected president, the very first thing I intend to do on the first day is rescind every single unconstitutional or illegal executive action from President Obama.” –Ted Cruz

  33. avatar IL-annoyed says:

    He was able to obtain a concealed carry permit in a state/city that is highly restrictive, and thats NOT celebrated on this blog…rather he gets criticised as being wishy-washy on 2A.
    All humans can change their opinion on topics…this blog seeks to do that on guns, and Trump has changed his opinion in favor of expanded gun rights. Why isn’t THAT celebrated?
    His business is on American soil and cannot be outsourced like other industries…so if America fails, his business suffers…why would he dump on the USA when his lively hood has benefited from it?
    If he really screwed over other people in business dealings (saying he is narcissistic) why aren’t we hearing from them?

    Ted Cruz is a Naturalized citizen and cannot be President per the Constitution…just ask Ann Coulter

    http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2016-01-13.html

    1. avatar Model 31 says:

      Somebody asked Trump about Cruz. Before he went birther on Cruz, Trump said it was no problem.
      https://videos.files.wordpress.com/bOIEnRG6/when-trump-said-cruz-was-eligible_dvd.mp4

    2. avatar Mike says:

      Ann Coulter is a fool who sold her soul in exchange for one issue.

      The fact that Trump managed to get a concealed carry license in NYC only tells us he’s part of the NY elite. It says nothing about whether we can trust him on gun issues.

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        The issue of immigration if very important and if it not reduced it will insure we are out voted in our nation, do you want to have the some level of infringements nation wide that CA or NY has?

        NO?

        Then build a wall, start deportations, strip the lower courts of their power on immigration and reduce legal immigration.

    3. avatar Fred Frendly says:

      Ann Coulter, LOL! Which is getting bigger on that guy, his nose or his/her adams apple? Real expert on such matters. Try Mark Levin if you want an actual informed Constitutional opinion. Cruz is a helluva lot more naturalized than Obama, who hasnt let his phony BC bother him for 8 years. The courts would never touch the issue so all the nuances guys like Coulter are blathering on about are moot.

      Ask Trump this: with his impossible to get NYC carry permit, why he hasnt been more vocal in the RKBA in NY for the last 10 or 15 years? Ask Trump why he only got interested in pro RKBA in the last year?

      Ted Cruz has always been pro RKBA. And unlike the effete Donald, Cruz has enjoyed hunting and shooting for a lifetime.

      1. avatar Mack Bolan says:

        Mark Levin? He’s a joke who all but flushed his own credibility in the last 48 hours along with Dana Loesch, Megyn Kelly, the National Review and the rest of the cuckservative pukes.

        They should all head to the border and hand out teddy bears to the criminal border jumpers with Cruz and Glenn Beck…oh that’s right some of them did.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          You should explain to the gentlemen here what “cuckservative” is. You’re throwing this word around all the time, but I don’t think that many people know that it actually means “against white identity politics”.

        2. avatar int19h says:

          Ah, I was hoping you’d give a link to Return of Kings. Let me give some more choice references to the same, just so that people here would understand what the people who invented the term “cuckservative” actually think.

          http://www.returnofkings.com/10535/the-strong-do-what-they-can-and-the-weak-suffer-what-they-must

          http://www.returnofkings.com/62590/slavery-practices-throughout-history

          http://www.returnofkings.com/50215/all-public-rape-allegations-are-false

          So yeah, if you read all of the above and think that it sounds good, by all means, vote Trump, he’s definitely your candidate.

          If any of that makes you uncomfortable, though, ask yourself why people promoting these ideas are actively pitching for Trump. And understand that when they call you “cuckservative”, what they mean is that you disagree with them on these issues.

    4. avatar nobody says:

      >He was able to obtain a concealed carry permit in a state/city that is highly restrictive, and thats NOT celebrated on this blog…rather he gets criticised as being wishy-washy on 2A.

      Dianne Feinstein had a concealed carry permit in San Francisco, having money and connections to get a concealed carry permit in an area with particularly strict laws doesn’t make one pro-gun.

      >All humans can change their opinion on topics…this blog seeks to do that on guns, and Trump has changed his opinion in favor of expanded gun rights. Why isn’t THAT celebrated?

      You mean how as of last month he’s in favor of banning people on the terror watch list from being able to own a gun? Please tell me how being in favor of denying someone the ability to own a gun without due process is being pro-gun. I have absolutely no confidence in Trump’s pro-gun stance and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if he changed it after the election, just like Wendy Davis did in Texas.

  34. avatar DetroitMan says:

    I agree with Trump on guns, but little else. A lot of his plans to accomplish his goals are too outlandish (i.e. getting Mexico to pay for a border fence). I’ll vote for Trump over any Democrat, but I won’t vote for him in the primary.

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      How so? The cost of a wall is a one time cost of about 10 Billion, we tax goods and withhold aid to Mexico until the balance is paid off.

  35. avatar jwm says:

    If it’s Trump or the hildabeast. Trump it is.

  36. avatar Bob312 says:

    If my candidate doesn’t get picked, I will vote for Hillary, and that will show them.

    Wow, what part of “if Hillary/Sanders pick the next Supreme Court Justice, the 2nd amendment is lost forever” do people not understand?

  37. avatar DerryM says:

    I’ll vote for whoever is “Not-Hilary” or “Not-Bernie” or “Not-Democrat” that has an actual chance of winning, so likely whomever the Republicans nominate. I will Vote. If for no other rationale than to spit in the face of the “Legacy of Barack Hussein Obama”…

  38. avatar Skyler says:

    He is admired for insulting people and ignoring what others say. I guess that’s all well and good until he decides he doesn’t like what you have to say.

  39. avatar Ralph says:

    I saw the same kind of temper tantrum thrown by Democrats and Republicans when Barry Goldwater ran in ’63-’64. “He’s crazy! He’s a raaaaacist! He’s going to blow up the world!”

    It was utter nonsense of course. Still, the sheep elected Lyndon Johnson, the ultimate power-mad douchebag. The country ended up in an enormous war with a mountain of dead American soldiers sent home in cardboard coffins. America got exactly what it elected.

    And now it’s happening all over again. “Dump Trump! He’s mean! He’s a raaaaacist!”

    Americans are so easily led over the edge of a cliff by “calm” and “reasonable” voices.

    H.L. Mencken was right: “No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.”

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      And gave us the Immigration Act of 1965 which has been importing poverty, crime, terrorism and millions of leftist voters ever sense and the Gun Control Act of 1968, how has that worked out for us?

      Goldwater would have been better by lightyears.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        Henry, Goldwater was too honest and direct for the US in the aftermath of JFK’s assassination. Barry was just what we needed but to our everlasting shame, not what most Americans wanted.

        We wanted Johnson to lie to us. He was more than happy to oblige.

        ,

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          I supported Goldwater at the tender age of 8. Republican parents thought I was a radical. LBJ just sucked.

    2. avatar int19h says:

      Goldwater supported states rights in an era where that specifically meant the rights of states to discriminate by race. It’s exactly why the only states that voted for him were the ones still angry over desegregation, repeal of votes that blocked blacks from voting etc. That’s racism by proxy.

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        Yeah because they are sooo much better now with section 8, crappy school and mass immigration, right? Stop cucking.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          Why don’t you just say that you’re a pro-segregationist white supremacist openly instead of dropping thinly veiled references like “cucking”? What, are you shy to admit that you’re pro-white?

        2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          The Great Society was not so great and we did lose the War On Poverty.
          We lost the War On Drugs as well.

        3. avatar Mack Bolan says:

          int19h the grand experiment in multiculturalism and diversity has failed. Your side lost. You can stop your virtue signaling.

          Besides when your ilk is calling for “black only” spaces at colleges all across America, you views on desegregation seem positively antiquated.

        4. avatar int19h says:

          People calling for “black only spaces” are not my ilk. There’s more than two sides here.

          As for who lost, we’ll see at the polls. I wonder if you truly understand, though, that the loss in this election is the ultimate loss for the side that you represent. There won’t be a resurgence.

  40. avatar carl says:

    It is Farago’s board, so I guess he gets the ultimate Troll pass.

  41. avatar Jimmyjames says:

    I dont think Trump really matters. I dont think any republican candidate matters as long as they toe the same party line as the republican candidate of almost 8 years ago. The the same “majority” that voted in Obama want the same things they did 8 years ago and Hillary is going to promise those things. I am a registered republican and I may not even vote in the primaries.

    1. avatar ropingdown says:

      That would make you a RIRO, a Republican in registration only.

      Please vote in the primary.

  42. avatar Bud Harton says:

    I have closely researched all of the candidates from both parties so that i can make an informed decision.

    And that decision is………..(drum roll)?

    I have decided to buy a LOT more ammo because no matter which one of these morons are elected, we are in deep trouble.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      There you go, something I can actually *DO*!!! I have 2 guns on order, time to buy some dang AMMO!

  43. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    At Mike, one again mass LEGAL immigration also a problem.

  44. avatar Teufel Hunde says:

    I like Trump. A lot. My choice was between Trump and Cruz, and of course anybody but a Democrat. I believe he’s sincere when he says the Second Amendment is a right, not a privilege, and he’s the only declared candidate in either party who isn’t a career politician; I believe our country needs a President, right now, who is not a political animal.
    On top of that, I’ve agreed with everything he’s said and noticed he was the only one with the guts to say it.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I’m with you. I do have to say that if Cruz is the candidate, I won’t be crying about it as I vote for him, as I might if it were Bush. But Trump would put a smile on my face.

      1. avatar ropingdown says:

        My view exactly.

  45. avatar Ironhorse says:

    Trump will be the final death of the Constitution and any concept of “small government”.

    1. avatar vlad says:

      trumps gonna win sorry libtardtarian, the minorities other candidates cater to don’t want small gov,

      so it’s either a big gov friendly to rights or a big gov that is unfriendly to rights and only exist to give welfare

      1. avatar int19h says:

        “a big gov friendly to rights of white rich Christian males”.

        Fixed that for you.

      2. avatar Ironhorse says:

        > big gov friendly to rights

        An oxymoron. Enjoy destroying everything our founders and veterans worked to achieve. May your chains rest lightly on your neck.

  46. avatar vlad says:

    why are you boomer cucks so anti trump, trump is 20 times better than flip-floper Goldman Sachs boy rafel “ted” cruz and 80 times better than any dem candidate.

    1. avatar Mack Bolan says:

      There is some truth there.

      Boomers will not break with the establishment because boomers are the establishment.

      Why would they support Trump and give up a system that has lavished them with entitlements and looked the other way while they have raped their children and grandchildrens futures.

      That generation can not make its way to the grave soon enough. They will go down in history as the blob that ate America.

      1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        That and the “greatest generation”…Greatest only at voting democratic.

      2. avatar jwm says:

        Got news for you, slick. We all die. Including you mewling whiney pups that blame it all on others. Don’t like the way things are going? Quit sucking your thumb hoping for your mother and father and others to die and actually get out of their basement and do something.

        1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

          WE are, we are going to elect Trump and solid Conservatives to Congress to repair the damage those before us created.

  47. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    More of a Cruz and Paul fan. Trump flops like a fish in the boat.
    Trump will probably win the Republican Primary.
    Hitlery will win the Donkeycrap Primary.
    Trump will probably be the next POTUS.
    A sea urchin would be better than Hitlery or Obonzo.

  48. avatar Mark Chamberlain says:

    No votes have been cast yet.

  49. avatar Tony says:

    This country is screwed no matter who you vote for, we are in the late stages of our country’s life cycle.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email