Previous Post
Next Post

For gun rights voters, Republican Presidential candidate Donald J. Trump seems to have one minor flaw: his previous support for an assault weapons ban. Since Mr. Trump entered the race, the real estate mogul has reversed his position. He’s now against any new gun control laws and “gun free zones.” He’s for national reciprocity. So what’s not to love? To answer that question, listen to what Mr. Trump said at the last debate when confronted by the military establishment’s rejection of his plan to torture terrorists and kill their families . . .

“I’m a leader. I’m a leader. I’ve always been a leader. And I’ve never had any problem leading people. If I say do it, they’re going to do it. That’s what leadership’s all about.”

Mr. Trump retracted his statement the next morning, pledging loyalty to the rule of law: “I will be bound by laws just like all Americans.” I don’t buy it. I don’t believe Mr. Trump misspoke. I believe he meant it when he said “If I say do it, they’re going to do it.” And that’s not what leadership’s all about. That’s what dictatorship is all about. And dictators always disarm citizens.

To understand the threat, you have to resist the temptation to see Mr. Trump’s candidacy as a spin-off of The Art of the Deal. While Mr. Trump has positioned himself as the ultimate “dealmaker” — bedeviling conservatives who cling to their guns and their bibles and frustrating journalists looking for intellectual consistency — Trump’s voters are not supporting their man as the “Dealmaker-in-Chief.” They’re voting for the guy in The Apprentice.

“You’re fired.” Those two words are the key to Donald Trump’s success in his bid for the White House. Voters want to fire the politicians taxing their income, allowing illegal immigrants in and putting their country in danger. The President and the Congress. All of them. And they want Donald J. Trump to do it. They want Donald J. Trump to be the boss. The guy in charge. Of everything.

Why wouldn’t they? The Donald they know from The Apprentice is nothing less than the God of the Old Testament. An all-powerful being who dispenses justice with an iron fist. No political correctness — as Mr. Trump himself has pointed out time and time again. No mercy — as his comments about torturing terrorists and killing their families indicates. A being who descend from on high (Trump Tower, Trump branded helicopters and jets) and is never, ever wrong.

There’s your teflon Trump. Because even when God appears wrong, he’s right. You don’t just understand. He is, after all, The Man in Charge. The media can bitch and moan about Trump’s policy flip-flops but his supporters couldn’t give a damn. They believe Mr. Trump is better than they are. They believe in my father’s endlessly aggravating saying “if you’re so smart, how come you’re not rich?”

Yes, but — where’s the evidence that The Donald would go from flexible deal maker and self-avowed gun rights supporter to fascist dictator and gun grabber? Setting aside the remarks which inspired this post, leaving out Mr. Trump’s obvious, mean-spirited arrogance and egomania, please revisit our post Donald Trump: No Guns for Americans on the Terrorist Watch List.

And then ask yourself if President Trump could resist the urge to place his enemies on the government’s secret, unaccountable Terrorist Watch List. And maybe even move to confiscate their firearms by executive order. But gun owners are Donald Trump’s friends! He wouldn’t put them on the Terrorist Watch List! Yes, they are his supporters. Right until they’re not.

Gun rights advocates cherish all their Constitutional rights. If they end up defending the “wrong” right in a Trump administration — remembering that Mr. Trump has already indicated his willingness to modify the First Amendment — they will end up in his crosshairs. And Trump will retaliate. What makes you think he wouldn’t?

Donald Trump may have the skills needed to “make America great again.” He certainly knows how to make a profit. But, as The New Testament warns, “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” Words that Trump supporters — whether gun owners or not — would do well to consider.

Previous Post
Next Post

228 COMMENTS

  1. Make no mistake, this election boils down to whether America commits cultural suicide by electing a Globalist, or America remains a free and sovereign nation.

    Trump is the answer to that most pressing question.

    • Until America abolishes the Federal Reserve, which is neither Federal (gov’t), nor has any reserves, we will never be free or sovereign.

      When private banks control the printing of currency and the interest rate associated with the printing of currency, it make the people using said currency and paying said interest effectively debt slaves.

    • Right. So Mr. Globalist is going to keep America free? He is just a tad better than Hillary. No choice for freedom lovers on either one.

  2. Here’s the thing.

    Of all candidates left standing in all parties, I think Trump is the most likely to be impeached for a given overstep, because he will always be seen as an outsider. More generally, I think Congress would be most politically willing to rein in an increasingly imperial Presidency with him in the chair.

    Hillary, in contrast, would be the least impeachable and in-check because she’d be our first female president, and nobody would want to be seen as “that guy” by those who write history. And I see no hesitation to her playing that card.

    So I’m hoping for The Donald. Sigh. But I simply see him as being the most likely to be damage-limited across the board.

    • Sadly, the Republican party will focus more on picking each other apart, and end up failing to stand against hillary in solidarity.

      1000 cuts will kill, I say.

    • There is ONE truth to this whole spectacle we have witnessed this election cycle , from the moment Ted Cruz announced his intentions to run for the presidency , everything we have witnessed has been about preventing him from getting his message to the American people and becoming the President .
      The GOP and DEM progressives have played nearly all their cards .’
      All the GOP entries into the field .
      The Trumpster as the outsider .
      The media deluge on the Trumpster .
      The attacks on Cruz’s moral character .
      The lack of media coverage on Cruz .
      The calls to the underlings , Rubio , gov. K. , and Carson from the old progressive elites , McCain , Dole , Carter , Graham , McConnell etc. to stay in the race .
      Now the media is repeating over and over and over again that the elites are trying everything they can to keep Trump from the nomination knowing full well that this will just increase his support from the disenfranchised , and in fact it is CRUZ they are most frightened of . Cruz is their true nemesis , not the trumpster .
      Cruz is the actual real outsider . Trump is the biggest player to run for president we may have ever seen get this far and the media has flipped the tale . The American public is being hoodwinked once again .
      Fox is run by the progressive right and MSNBC and MSM is generally progressive left and CNN is progressive middle and people are being led to believe that Trumpster is the outsider .
      Cruz or over , in my opinion .

  3. While its obvious Robert you don’t care for Trump. Im probably with you as I prefer Cruz for his insistence on following the Constitution as written, But since Trump is more then likely the devil we know and will be the Republican of choice. Constantly pointing out his change of mind and denigrating him does us no good as the other choice whoever it will be for the Dims. Is going to be far worse.

    • Cruz is a sociopathic liar who, like Glenn Beck, espouses a fantasy fairy tale Disney version of the constitution and founders. They’ve turned it into a quasi-religion and twisted American history so badly to suit their narrative that it makes me sick. MLK was not an American hero. Crispus Attucks wasn’t important. Furthermore, the GOPe set up the primaries the way they were to intentionally stop Ted Cruz. Donald Trump blew that all up. However, now the Dominionist sociopath whose father believes he was anointed king to ‘steal the riches’ from the wicked stands a decent chance of winning the Republican nomination.

      http://mpcdot.com/forums/topic/8799-lying-ted-the-gope-splitter-strategy-and-going-full-mississippi/

      • LOLWUT? “MLK was not an American hero.”

        Yeah anyone who would say, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character” sucks, right? Seek help.

        • Except he didn’t actually believe that. He was a communist, a philanderer, and a reverend who didn’t even believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. If that sounds familiar it’s because there’s a big pattern of it, from MLK to Jesse Jackson to Al Sharpton. Get a grip.

        • John ,
          God will of coarse forgive you for blurting out garbage from your rather twisted soul , just like he would forgive Trump for his wicked ways , but I fear you , just as Trump has said , do not feel a need to ask God to forgive you for anything .
          I do hope I’m wrong or if I am right that you will reassess your position .
          MLK , was a human of coarse and a hero , and Glenn Beck and people who have actually read and studied the actual words of our founders and those people of their day are correct and you my dear American brethren are misinformed and perhaps indoctrinated into the lies perpetuated over the last century and a half .
          My opinion .
          God bless .
          I actually believe Rafael Cruz may be correct , God will always send his people a messenger before the fire and brimstone and a boat before the flood , we must be in a position to see it though .

        • John is right, MLK was a degenerate unfit for a leadership role. The civil rights act was wrong because it had to be forced upon us at gunpoint. The National guard was sent in to forcibly integrate the negroes. No successful relationship begins with violent coercion, and the civil rights act, despite its “good intentions”, is no exception.

        • Let me guess Rusty , Trump supporter , Right ?
          Sounds like you’re ready to do some head bashing , Right ?
          O.K. , I get it .
          Trouble looms , folks .


  4. Gun rights advocates cherish all their Constitutional rights. If they end up defending the “wrong” right in a Trump administration — remembering that Mr. Trump has already indicated his willingness to modify the First Amendment — they will end up in his crosshairs. And Trump will retaliate. What makes you think he wouldn’t?

    Another way of asking the question:
    What makes you think any of that is worse than, or even as bad as, whatever Hillary’s Justice Department will do to me?

      • Not necessarily, since there’s a strong likelihood that the Congress will remain in Republican hands, and those Republicans will at least put up some resistance to Hillary’s efforts. But they would likely roll over for an imperial Republican presidency, and let him run wild (much like the rubber-stamp and blank check they gave to G. W. Bush), which doesn’t seem like it will end well for the country or the Constitution.

        • We’d like to think they’d put up a fight. Recent history has indicated otherwise, especially when it comes to statist insanity like “Patriot”, wire tapping, monitoring the web and such.

        • 16V, don’t your examples kind of prove my point? All of the surveillance-state stuff you describe started when the Republicans in Congress decided to let Bush run roughshod over the Constitution. They make a lot of noise about Obama’s abuses now, but when Bush was doing the very same things, there wasn’t a peep of protest from that side of the aisle.

          The same thing would happen with Trump. There’s at least the possibility of resistance to Hillary’s agenda. I don’t expect anyone in Washington to act out of principle, but this would be a case of self-preservation. Any compromise with Hillary would virtually guarantee that a Republican up for re-election in 2018 would face a primary challenger who would paint him as Hillary’s best friend.

        • stinkeye, Pretty sure we’re in agreement. My point was merely that while they may let an R pres run wild, I don’t know that they would guaranteed offer substantive push-back to a D pres.

        • “and those Republicans will at least put up some resistance to Hillary’s efforts. ”

          Yeah, just like they have resisted OBAMA’S!!!

          /they haven’t.

          /at all…

          And if she wins she will drag in some Dem. Senators.
          And then flood he country with millions of DEMmigrants.

          AND FILL THE COURT WITH MARXIST GUN GRABBERS.

          /feel better now about not voting fr the R candidate?

      • Let me make an analogy that I made on another story today that is fitting here .
        First let me say that I am one who will not vote for Trump if he is the nominee . I actually prefer Bernie Sanders over Hillary and both over Trump .
        I trust that Bernie would attempt to make some changes to our gun rights , I trust that Hillary would attempt to completely over ride our 2nd Amendment rights and
        I DON”T TRUST TRUMP AT ALL !
        I have raised chickens for 30 plus years and I know , like most readers here will have awareness of , that a fox will slip up in the dark of night , while we sleep and dig a small hole under the wire of the run and if the coop is open , it will carry off a hen or two . It may come back the next night for a few more , until , left unaddressed , it will carry off all your chickens eventually .
        A raccoon will slip in one night and take it’s cute little fingers and unlatch the door of the coop , go inside , and brutally murder all your hens at once so when you go out in the morning to let them out to range , there won’t be a single chicken alive , the coon will have killed everyone of them seemingly for the hell of it .
        You all know that a deer will get in your garden and nibble a little corn , eat some beans and bean flowers , nibble a few squash flowers and the tender tops a your tomato plants but a raccoon will pick one night to invite all their relatives and have a destroy the garden party , ride every cornstalk to the ground , and make you think a mini tornado blew through while you slept .
        Bernie is a deer , Hillary is a fox , and Trump is a white eyed raccoon , in my humble opinion .
        I hunt deer with no qualms here in WV , I’ll trap a fox and release if I have a trouble maker and I leave the raccoons for my dogs to teach a lesson that any survivors can tell their friends and families about . I hate raccoons and coyotes .

    • Simply put, either Clinton or Trump will eventually result in damage to the 2nd Amendment. He has stated that he would have no problem putting his sister, who is a raging leftist, on the Supreme Court. (of course, he has now said he would not, so, guess you can pick which Donald was telling the truth.)

      The way I see it, I know what I get if Clinton is President and I never thought there could be anything worse, until the Republicans came up with Trump of course. Hillary would be a rabid leftist who at least would encounter push-back by whatever opposition the supposed opposition party can muster. Trump, on the other hand will have no opposition to his doings by the Democrats as he works to enact the things Democrats could only dream of under Obama. And the Republicans would go along with him and also offer no opposition. Trump in this case is the far more dangerous person.

      I will vote for Ted Cruz, even If I have to write it in.

      • Well said, friend. That’s the main problem I see with Trump; he’s a Democrat masquerading as a Republican for the sake of convenience and vanity. Hillary would be an atom bomb for The 2nd, but I can’t trust Trump not to do the same. Do you really want the ‘You’re Fired’ guy as the figurehead of the US, or with his finger on The Button? Me neither.
        The more I dig in to Trump, the more I see a white Kim Jong hiding under that toupee…

      • You need to grow up.

        You know Hildebeast will appoint 3-4 SCOTUS judges that will gut the 2ndA and other rights for a generation or more.

        With Trump you at least have a hope that he won’t do that.

    • >> What makes you think any of that is worse than, or even as bad as, whatever Hillary’s Justice Department will do to me?

      I don’t know – did Hillary say that she’d like to torture terrorists because it’s fun and satisfying?

      (And I’d like to remind you that many militia, patriot, 3% etc groups are already classified as “domestic terrorists” in various government databases.)

  5. And if the only choices in November that have the slightest chance of winning are Hillary or Donald…..then what?

    • I’m writing in Limberbutt McCubbins.

      Then the question is do you want another 4 years of a Democratic president or another 8, 12 or maybe even 16. If Hildebeest is elected we have a chance in 2020 to elect a pro-2nd Amendment conservative, but if it’s Presdent Combover, that chance won’t come until at least 2024. And then, if Trump is reelected that country will be sick of Republicans and you’re likely to get a liberal gun grabber. So even if he’s marginally better than Clinton, letting Clinton get elected will be better for the cause in the long run. Trump will only tarnish the only brand we’ve got.

      • … except for the fact that a Democrat President will be appointing as many as three justices to the United States Supreme Court.

        No, we cannot have a Democrat take the office of President of the United States in 2017.

        • This is the one thing Trump can do to get my vote – give me a vote for Scalia’s replacement. If he selects his nominee before the election and he or she is someone who believes in the constitution as written I’ll vote for Trump. But that’s not going to happen and I honestly don’t trust Trump any more than Clinton when it comes to SCOTUS nominations. Trump might even be worse because the Republican senate will be reluctant to oppose his nominees.

        • As someone who would’ve preferred Rand Paul, let me say that I totally get the idea of tactical voting. I won’t make the perfect the enemy of the good.

          But I feel that argument totally breaks down around Trump. Who the hell knows his thoughts on SCOTUS nominations? I mean, seriously.

        • The president can nominate all they want, but it still requires confirmation in Congress.

        • “This is the one thing Trump can do to get my vote – give me a vote for Scalia’s replacement. If he selects his nominee before the election and he or she is someone who believes in the constitution as written I’ll vote for Trump.”
          Seeing as he floated his progressive-minded sister, for freak’s sake, I’d say the answer is patently obvious.

        • DMZ says:
          “Who the hell knows his thoughts on SCOTUS nominations? I mean, seriously.”

          I have serious doubts that Trump knows; I’m fairly certain no one else does. The only thing that is obvious is that whomever he chooses it will be whomever seems expedient to bolstering his ego and feeding his narcissism at the time.

  6. Trump may or may not be rock solid on gun rights. Doesn’t matter as we know for sure that hildabeast is coming for our guns. And there’s a scotus slot open. If hildabeast gets in we may see a permanent awb as a starter.

    I would prefer cruz but if he’s not up to beating Trump then he’s not the man for the job.

    Hate to sound like the NRA with hand out but this is likely the most important election of our lifetime.

    • I agree. I think this is THE most important election that we will witness. I would prefer Mr. Cruz to be the nominee on the R side, but if it’s Mr. Trump? I’ll vote for him over “free stuff for everyone” or the “Teflon queen”.

  7. I don’t trust Trump.

    I know exactly what Clinton will do – it’s not a question of trust, we know this woman is a tyrant and an enemy of the constitution and liberty.

    Trump is a wildcard, I do not trust this man but I also admit I do not know what he really believes when it comes to the constitution and liberty.

    If the choice is Clinton or Trump, this is a terrible choice, but an easy one to make.

    Good gravy, 300 million people and these are the two we have to choose from? That right there is a clust3rf*ck. But it is what it is.

    • What Donald believes in? Polls…

      Whatever furthers the greater self-interests of the Trump brand. If that means that as Trump the President·· has to sell The Constitution (not authored by Trump) short, so be it. As long as his minions will follow his twitter feed when they aren’t watching Kardashians, he’s cool with it.

      I am amused by him, he has facilitated some very un-pc conversations that need to continue, but when your main focus in a debate is not even pretending to answer policy questions, but instead to allude to dick size of your opponents, c’mon. It is really challenging to take him even semi-seriously, despite his continued candidacy being a stick poke in the eye of the machine.

      • Your attribution of the dick size bit to Trump is silly. Rubio brought it up, saying “Trump has small hands, and you know what they say about people with small hands…(giggle)…” Then Rubio pretended, convincing no one, that he was implying something else.

        Trump simply came back to point out Rubio’s error.

        • Perhaps my memory is fading, perhaps my timelines are mixed up – wasting space in my brain with all the nonsense is taxing…

          I thought that prior to the last debate Trump referred to Rubio as “little man” on several occasions. My understanding was that was a Trumpian reference to Marco’s ‘stature’ of the type not on your driver’s license.
          Or it could be a poke at Rubio’s status deep in the closet. The photos of the ‘foam parties’ from his youth, are pretty much a guarantee of which team he’s playing for. He’s got the Jesus thing and a beard with kids, so I would imagine there’s no rent boy gonna pop-up. But, eventually, when he tires of politics, and needs the money, there will be an autobiography…

        • Next week’s headline: Trump rapes Rubio at campaign event in demonstration of dominance

    • Your last paragraph is proof that the system has failed. Only billion dollar bullies can play, and we can see the “quality” of candidate that leaves us with.

      • Very true. I don’t know if you’re old enough to remember Ross Perot, who was a much different kind of billionaire who ran back before the general populace was quite as sick of the government.

        I do wonder if he would fare better today. He was certainly right about the “giant sucking sound” of all those jobs leaving the country…

      • Sanders is hardly a billionaire, and he has already demonstrated that it is entirely possible to run a very large-scale, successful campaign solely off small private donations.

    • Amen, Mr .308, honestly if this is the best our country can provide then we deserve either one of them. Hillary would be a disaster. I’m not convinced that Donald would be any better.

    • “These are the only two…”
      Stop only looking at Drudge and the news media, and realize that Cruz is running an incredibly competitive campaign that has been deliberately hidden from you for the entire election cycle. He’s less than 80 delegates behind Trump, and looks to beat him in several more winner-take-all closed (meaning; no ex-Democrats allowed) primaries. Competitive enough to warrant supporting a man who’s a heck of a lot more predictable in ways you agree with than someone who is transparently disloyal to those who help him to power.

  8. I do not trust the Donald. Voted for Cruz because he has the track record of supporting the 2nd Amendment that Trump only recently started supporting with rhetoric.

    My 2¢ may not match all his billions, but collectively we may be able to limit the damage he can and will cause.

  9. With the way all the media are covering everyone but Ted Cruz, I strongly support Ted Cruz. Pay attention not only to what the media tells us, but what they are silent about. When it’s Trump in 1st, Cruz in 2nd and Rubio in a distant 3rd yet the entire story is run on multiple media outlets without ever mentioning Cruz, we are being manipulated.
    Push comes to shove I’ll vote for Trump over Hildabeast. But make no mistake we are being manipulated into voting for Trump.

    • The establishment, both Republican and Media, hate Cruz more than Trump. Trump they think they can work with and the media know they’ll get some entertainment. Cruz they know is going to be an unreasonable constitutionalist. Which, in my view, makes him an excellent choice.

      • Keep an eye on Drudge for a few days; hardly any stories about Cruz that aren’t a list of rankings.

        The ‘narrative’ is Trump Vs Establishment, with no alternative –even though there is a compelling and competitive one

        The ‘narrative’ is it’s either Trump or Hillary –even though he’s the only one who loses to her in the general election polls consistently (and has for months)

        I honestly think a lot of Republican rabble-rousers out there are channeling the old-school race hustlers and trying to sabotage their own movement to protect their position rousing the rabble, with no expectations of success

  10. ‘He certainly knows how to make a profit.’

    Not really. If you add up all his profits and subtract his losses I’d bet he’d be in the red. Trump does however know how to stick his losses to unsuspecting investors and creditors through multiple bankruptcies while pocketing the profits for himself. He is a master at making himself rich at the expense of others. Most billionaires made themselves rich by creating jobs and opportunities for others, creating products that enrich the lives of others. Trump is a charlatan. He’s a snake oil salesman. I think it was Rubio that said, ‘if you weren’t born rich you’d be selling watches in Times Square.’

      • I’m assuming you mean Bain Capital. Bain is a salvage yard for failing businesses. Just like cars, some can be rebuilt, some can be scrapped for parts and others are sent to the crusher. It’s not the junk yard operator’s fault you’ve got 300,000 miles on your car.

        A little different than fleecing your investors.

        • Gov, you clearly know zilch about the leveraged buyout business. If the companies were scrap, they’d never get bought.

          The “leverage” in the name is the essence of the thing: LBO operators look for companies which have enough credit quality and cash/assets to justify the operator borrowing very large amounts of cash from banks and other investors. They buy the company. Then they mortgage every asset the company owns, max out their lines of credit, and pay the result out to the LBO boys as a “special dividend.” Only THEN is the company a scrap yard item. It (and its remaining employees) can struggle for life. Maybe they’ll survive. Maybe, like Colt, the politics will allow a reorganization, but only if the carcass pays out another fat check to the LBO gang that wrecked the place.

          Bain Capital was an LBO outfit, not by any means a rescue specialist (of which there are many).

        • You’re right. That’s why I had to bury that old car in my back yard because no one would take it. Scrap being synonymous with worthless. Too bad too, last week I needed a new printer and I went to where Staples would be, but there was no Staples because Bain sent it to the crusher so they could take in obscene profits putting people out of work. Got it.

        • More like a mushroom that decomposes corporations after they’ve already died (or nearly so)

  11. Right, Farago! But we shouldn’t worry about Obama coming after our guns, also right? I wanted Perry; would prefer Cruz, but will unconditionally support Trump. I would in fact vote for the World Weekly New’s Space Alien over Hillary. Hell, Farago, I’d vote for YOU over Hillary!

    Michael B

      • A lot of us were wrong about Obama, mainly because the gun banners went on silent running after the 94 AWB sunsetted. Sandy Hook was the blood in the water that brought all the sharks to the surface for what they thought would be an easy meal.

        Looking back, the White House and the media began talking up American guns being used by the cartels in Mexico about the time Fast and Furious was getting under way. He was always planning to go for a gun ban. If F&F hadn’t blown up in their faces, calls for new gun control would have come sooner. As it was, he vastly underestimated how much the gun culture had grown since the 94 AWB and how many gun owners there were to fight him on any new gun control legislation.

  12. I usually side with RF and with the gun thing I get his point. A president doesn’t run the country, Congress does. Trump spent a total of seven months stepping into political area so retracts happen. For me the issue is the RNC splitter vote strategy conceived four years ago to install their pick in the WH. Their choices are falling away and within two weeks, two non establishment candidates remain while whispers of a brokered convention loom.

    Both men have exposed the manipulation of the RNC and media, used the RNC splitter strategy against them, and both suffer attacks by the very organization that put them there. What I fear most after voting Republican all my life, is a brokered convention, which is code for stealing the will of the people. If the RNC takes that then the Constitution isn’t worth the parchment it’s written on.

    It’s not about the gun.

    • Point of fact, the Constitution is only binding to the federal government, not the parties. The Democrats are free to have their super-delegates and the Republicans are free to have their brokered convention. If you don’t like it you’re free to form your own third party. The danger for Republicans isn’t the brokered convention in itself, but who they broker into the nomination. For instance if Cruz finishes second and Rubio third and between the two they have more delegates than Trump and Cruz offers the VP spot to Rubio in exchange for his delegates that’s how it’s supposed to work. Trump will pout and go home, but he’s free to make the same offer. If, on the other hand, they nominate a Jeb Bush the party is over. Both the Cruz and the Trump people stay home in November, Hildebeest is elected president and the Republican party loses all credibility.

      • If you don’t like it you’re free to form your own third party.
        Having worked for the Libertarian Party, that is just not very easy and the Republocrats will make it hard as possible.

        • The problem with libertarians are they can’t accept they are only 10% of the population. You just can’t break the 2 party system with 10%.

        • You also can’t break the two-party system when those two parties have colluded for more than a century to set up election rules, voting districts, and federal and state laws to assure it’s virtually impossible for a third party to develop enough to challenge their stranglehold on power.

        • >> You just can’t break the 2 party system with 10%.

          You can, if the system provides for proportional representation rather than per-district/state winner-takes-all.

          If, say, Libertarians had those 10% of the popular vote translate to 10% of seats in the House, they would be able to showcase their politics, and who knows? If they show more competence than Republicans (not exactly hard at this point), next election they might take in 15%, and then 20% etc.

          But the way it is set up right now, the only way you can “break” the system in a single stroke is if you can actually gather more votes than one of the major two parties, and that it is a certainty in advance. Otherwise even people who support you will overwhelmingly not vote for you because they’d be “wasting their vote” – because they assume that everyone else will vote for one of the big two.

        • int, short of rewriting the Constitution, libertarians can be a force in the Republican party, You’re not going to get your way much in either our system or a parliamentary system. Many countries have 5 or 6 major parties and nothing gets done without different parties forming alliances. Here they’re just condensed into two, but the effect is the same. One way or another you’ll never get anywhere without a coalition. This is what I find frustrating about a lot of libertarians, if they can’t have it all they’ll take nothing. For instance they’ll shun a candidate from the social conservative sector of the GOP, even though they share 90% politically.

          Unless you’re a weed libertarian who isn’t really libertarian at all, but just wants pot legalized, there is no place for libertarians in the Democratic party. The Dems are all about government control over every aspect of your life, so although they may throw the pot heads a bone, libertarianism is the antithesis of everything they stand for.

        • First, I am not a libertarian. I am, however, sympathetic to their plight, because the same issue with third parties exists on the left.

          Now, regarding this:

          >> Many countries have 5 or 6 major parties and nothing gets done without different parties forming alliances. Here they’re just condensed into two, but the effect is the same. One way or another you’ll never get anywhere without a coalition.

          Exactly – nothing gets done without forming alliances. And it’s a good thing, because alliances are dynamic, and configurations can easily change. It means that things aren’t set in stone, and it means that small third parties can still extract concessions from the big players in exchange for lending them their support on some other issue.

          The two party system is not the same, because it artificially draws a large line that defines what kinds of coalitions can or cannot be created. Furthermore, as time goes by, the groups on either side of that line grow further and further apart, and, consequently, within each party, partisan groupthink begins to dominate, and voters become more and more anti-something than they are pro-something.

          Here, just look at this – does this look like a healthy progression to you? What do you think is the endgame?

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/04/23/a-stunning-visualization-of-our-divided-congress/

        • >> This is what I find frustrating about a lot of libertarians, if they can’t have it all they’ll take nothing. For instance they’ll shun a candidate from the social conservative sector of the GOP, even though they share 90% politically.

          Why do you believe that social conservatives share 90% politically with libertarians? You are making a rather arbitrary assertion here, that GOP economic policies are the “90%” (and that’s even being generous and assuming that they’re actually libertarian, which in practice is not t he case), and everything else is “10%”. But for many libertarians it is simply not true, and they don’t consider GOP as a “small government” party in anything but slogans, simply based on actual experience when Republicans were in control.

        • Wait, why is a parliamentary system that facilitates alliances to form to “get things done” preferable to our system of checks and balances designed to hamper government action? Do you know of any of these parliamentary systems that have greater RTBA for it’s citizens than ours? I can name plenty that have less of those rights than ours, and it’s hard to imagine the 2A even existing today if the government wouldn’t have been so hampered by it’s designed inefficiency after say, Sandy Hook.

          The federal government being an inefficient cluster F actually works in our favor most of the time, as it’s designed.

        • It’s not preferable – they are two completely orthogonal things.

          Checks and balances in this sense is necessary in any system to prevent tyranny of the majority and populism running wild.

          Proportional representation would allow people to actually vote their conscience and see it reflected in policy, as opposed to arbitrary meaningless bundling of issues and partisanship over them.

          Speaking of RKBA in particular, imagine if all the pro-gun Democrats (and to remind, 1 out of 3 Democrats have a positive opinion of NRA) had their own party that would be liberal in all ways, but pro-gun. How would that affect RKBA?

      • I’ve said it before, and I’ll say again – delegates are under no legal obligation to vote for who won their respective contest. This is true for the party congress, more importantly, it also holds true for the electoral college. This assumption that the candidate has “won” delegates, is just an assumption until the delegates actually, you know, vote.

        It is very simply, whoever the machine and the people will into the position at that time. Nothing more.

        I’m not saying it will happen, or that it’s even slightly likely, but with Trump lasting more than 10 seconds in this race, all things really are possible. And it’s possible and more importantly legally allowed that Trump could win the general election by a wide margin, and the electoral college selects Ted Cruz as president. There is no federal law requiring electors to merely go and rubber stamp the popular vote. (Yes there are some states with laws, but not all, nor most.)

        • I believe you’re right on the electoral college, but the in first vote at the Republican convention the delegates are required to vote in the proportions determined by the primaries and caucuses. There were a few states that used to be free to vote contrary, but I believe they’ve all been changed. After the first vote though, if no one gets to 1237 all bets are off.

        • If Trump accumulates the *magic number* of delegates for the nomination, expect the RNC to change the convention rules before it convenes.

          At that point, break out the popcorn and hard liquor…

        • Since the Republicans vote on the rules at the beginning of each convention, that’s not a stretch.

      • The republican party lost all its credibility the moment it let Mitt speak without a party rebuttal to his slanders.

        • I honestly think they were testing the waters, to see the reaction.

          There has been talk, especially lately, about (for some reason, the guy’s unelectable) dumping Mittens into the middle of the convention as an alternative to Trump. I think that balloon popped very close to the ground.

      • Cruz and Rubio are beating Clinton in most of the polls, Trump is losing to her. Your choice.

        • Trump is only about 80 delegates ahead of Cruz, and there’s a very good chance that neither get to 1237. Cruz will need to pick Rubio for VP to get his delegates at the convention. Odds are it will come down to Rubio to pick between Cruz and Trump. I’d wager he picks Cruz.

  13. The way Trump speaks off the cuff is his greatest strength and his greatest weakness. Strength because people see him as “genuine” and willing to tell it like it is. Weakness because he often says very foolish things.

    Yet if you read his position papers, they are by and large excellent. (We can quibble about his trade policies.) So which Trump are we going to get? The brash loudmouth from New York who changes his mind every few years on key issues, or the calm, reasoned executive in those position papers?

    Honestly, I think President Trump would be a figurehead. He’d hire the best people he could to actually craft policy, and if it’s the same people writing his papers then we’re going to be in good shape.

    I also don’t think gutting the 2A would be at the top of his agenda, even if that’s what he secretly wanted to do.

    Even so, last night I sent Ted Cruz a check for $25. I suggest anyone who’s worried about Trump do the same.

  14. Since Paul was unacceptable, Cruz was chosen,
    Since Cruz was unacceptable, Trump was chosen.
    Since Trump was unacceptable, Romney was chosen.
    Since Romney was unacceptable, Clinton was chosen.

    • Perhaps. Since we’re on the path deconstructing the Constitution, might as well hand her the key to accelerate our demise.

      • With all of the Executive Orders flying out of Obonzo’s butt and the whim of SCOTUS creating legislation from thin air, I think we already have arrived.

    • Hard for a Republican to find enough acceptance when there’s a ton of ‘first time’ former Democrat voters pouring into your open primary because their party’s contest is a foregone conclusion (and therefore not as entertaining)

  15. I have to sleep at night… There will be no vote for Trump in any election. Clinton and Trump are essentially the same politician. Trump is just hiding it under a cloak of right-wing nationalism. The R next to his name will guarantee a congress that will pass his nonsense, the D next to hers will guarantee a congress that blocks her similar nonsense… I’d rather have a do nothing Democrat than a quasi-dictator RINO. Hopefully, the Libertarians nominate someone decent.

    • A conservative (Republican) who does not vote is voting for Hillary! If you are in a state that routinely goes blue regardless how you vote, sit it out, you will not make a difference, but if you are in a purple or red state, please vote, no matter how much you dislike the Republican candidate.

      • No matter what state you’re in, if there’s a candidate that is likely to be a pro-2d Amendment stalwart, show up and at least vote for him/her. Local elections often matter far more when the rubber hits the road than federal ones.

  16. You know, when literally ALL forms of media, from left and right news orgs, social media, fake news websites, and even blogs, are in an absolute panic over the prospect of one man being president, I can’t help but support the guy. The more the media panics, the stronger he gets. All media from here to the BBC is terrified. And I love it.

    • I completely understand your sentiment and yanks in this election cycle but I regret to inform you and a great deal of America , you are being hoodwinked and conned once again . The Left , the media , the establishment progressives , both GOP and DEM’s have finally woke up and realized exactly what you just said and you said it very succinctly by the way , is what most Americans are feeling and saying and they are playing you completely by making you think that Trump is their nemesis , when all along it is Cruz that they fear the most and the one who would inflict the most damage to their 100 + years of government growth and rewriting of the history books to fit the progressive agendas which is primarily an effort ( agenda ) to replace God with government , all over the world .

  17. I would have loved to see Paul or Cruz win the nomination, but I just do not see that happening. I would take Trump over Mittens. Neither are a prize. Hitlery will rank with Obonzo, Slick Weiner, and Jimmied Crapter as the worst things to have happened to the USA.

  18. Briefly, my Theory of Trump is this: the only way for him to get elected is to beat the left/right establishment; once elected, the only way for him to govern with any hope of reelection will be to regularly appeal over the head of Congress to the people who elected him. That will put enormous pressure on him to fulfill or defend his campaign agenda. We’ve already seen an example of how this works. In the last debate he attempted to “moderate” his position on H1-B visas–and then had to IMMEDIATELY walk that back. He does not and will not as president enjoy the type of blind support that other presidents of the left/right establishment have enjoyed.

    • “Go around congress to the American people” –hey, that sounds like what Obama plays at, with his weepy TV appearances on CNN! Screw these pesky checks & balances, mob rule is far more efficient!

  19. My wife and I drove to the University of Central Florida in Orlando yesterday to hear Mr. Trump. We were unable to get into the arena as it only holds 10,000 people and 20,000+ tickets were subscribed online. Fortunately for us, Donald’s speech was broadcast to the crowd outside.

    Mr. Trump made a strong defense of the Second Amendment. Lots of Millennials supporting him.

    I find myself asking:
    Who stands with him, and why do they?
    Who stands against him, and why do they?

    Those whose minds have been corrupted by any or all of the following HATE Mr. Trump.

    Marxism
    Cultural Marxism
    The Frankfurt School
    Critical Theory

      • Commie, it’s a shame Sen. Joseph McCarthy was prevented by the GOPe /RINos and Democrats from exposing and eradicating “your kind” sixty (60) years ago, you’re a parasitical infestation destroying your “host” (our nation). Now head on back and lick four-eyed Georgie Will’s shoes at National Review.

        Vote Trump!

        • ^ This guy. Sheesh. Is it hard getting your white hood down over your tri-cornered hat? I’m curious.

          Here’s a free bit of advice: You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

          It’s people like you that make me want to rethink my position of holding my nose and voting for Trump if he’s the nominee. Your obnoxious scorched earth policy of character assassination is repellent.

  20. I don’t trust Trump. I have no confidence in him adhering to the constitution. I support Ted Cruz. I will vote for Trump if he is the nominee against Clinton or Sanders, but he is not my first choice.

  21. Can this guy just drop out already? He’s going to cost us the election to HILLARY FRIGGIN CLINTON! He’s the ONLY candidate that loses to Hillary in nearly every single poll, whilst the other candidates win by comfortable margins.

    If you’re voting for Trump you’re costing us America.

  22. Trumps popularity may be pointing to a new day. Maybe a break with the dems and the repubs. Could be that if trump is pres and the repubs maintain control of house and senate americans will get a good dose of life under republican rule. If hillary wins and the dems take the senate progressives will be happy and everyone else will not be. All the candidates are idiots and I would rather not see any of them walking around the white house with his or her thumb on the nuclear trigger. Maybe, just maybe, we are rolling down the road to the emergence of an third and even fourth viable party. That will be a good day for the republic. BTW I heard a rumor that Barnum and Bailey want to take the republican party on the road next year. Big sticking point is they don’t have enough clown cars to hold all of them.

    • There is usually a swing of the pendulum after a presidential election. The overall trend is for the opposition party to take or strengthen their control of Congress when the White House “football” changes hands.
      If the Democrats keep the Presidency in 2016, the Republicans keep Congress. If the Republicans win, then the Democrats are likely to dominate the 2018 elections in the House, the Senate, or both… regardless of who the candidates are.

      • Especially when they get elected on impossible promises then fail to deliver. Even if construction starts on day one of a Trump administration (it won’t), the wall won’t be done in two years (try at least ten, assuming it doesn’t go all quagmire long before then), and there damn sure won’t be a significant effect on migration by then (apart from the now-absent Obama administration’s advertising of our open borders to South America). Even if mass deportations begin on day one (they won’t) they won’t make a dent in the migrant population within two years (assuming illegals don’t simply get better at evading deportation in the meantime, instead of holing up in easy-to-find ghettoes and hanging out at Home Depots for work)

  23. 3 million more have voted in the Republican primaries and caucuses than in the Democrat’s. Math. I watched Hillary’s speech last night and listened to the forced and muted cheers from the crowd that was never shown. Her “security review” is starting to wear her down.

    • The math the RNC figured with the splitter strategy was the base. They were shocked the Don brought at the volume of new voters to replace the base and tapped into what the people see vs. what they’re told.

      Jackson built defensive works to save New Orleans. Trump will build a wall to save the country.

      • Figures a Trump supporter would somehow find a way to say nice things about Jackson (one of the most shit-bag human beings to ever occupy the White House). Rose to power promising free shit to mobs of onlookers with no regard to consequences, same as Trump is promising with his wall.

    • Why, it’s almost as though a bunch of Democrats are electing a Republican candidate. Wow! Suddenly all his bizzare reversals on very basic conservative principles and progressive background aren’t the kind of detriment they used to be! He gets a coalition of some pandered-to Republicans (‘The Wall’) and pandered-to Democrats (‘Free Wall, Free jobs for all!’) that almost rivals the remainder on both sides with a clue, if not unity.

      This is why you have closed primaries; so when the leeches in the Democrat party finally finish burning their own house down (ie Hillary and Sanders are all you have to offer) they can’t immediately start to infect your own for a cycle or two. Turns out political parties (and their attendant establishment corruption) actually do serve as an effective check/balance in our nation; they function to protect the public from the rapid rise of a populist candidate with fascist ambitions & allegiance to no one –a danger far more likely/immediate at any given time than the slow progression of a party toward destructive policies

      • The Republican candidate can’t win without pulling Democrat votes. It was the Reagan Democrats who put Ronnie in the White House, as the most obvious example. As of a couple of years ago, Independents were at an all-time high of about 46%, Republicans were at an all-time low of about 26%, and Dems were around 29%. The three factors for most people this fall are distrust of Trump, fear of Cruz, and loathing of Clinton.
        Right now, Republicans hold the Senate but not by much. We have 54 Senate seats, with 34 up for re-election (10 Dems, 24 GOP). There are 11 races that could go either way. If Clinton wins, the Dems win the Senate, too, and look for another Sotomayor on the Court. Then watch Heller evaporate like spit on a hot sidewalk.
        I believe Trump will be the Republican nominee. Whether it’s Trump, Cruz, or Rubio, in November the choice will be between a candidate who will disarm the public and a candidate who may NOT disarm the public.

  24. >If I say do it, they’re going to do it. That’s what leadership’s all about.

    That is NOT leadership. Leadership is about vision, and inspiring others to achieve great things. Trump’s mode of operation is “do what I say, or I’ll fire you” which is going to be a complete failure when dealing with people whose support he needs as President but who he can’t fire, like Congress and the voters.

    This is turning into a “Mrs. Robinson” election:

    Laugh about it, shout about it, when you’ve got to choose
    Every way you look at this you lose.

    • It’ll be a real whiz-gigger if he DOES try to pull his “you’re fired” crap, too. We thought the various executive agencies were politicized and weaponized against the president’s enemies now…no, Donald’s not a vengeful sort at all…

  25. The only Republican candidate who exhibits a permanent grasp of reality is Kasich and he is the least effective campaigner remaining. Meanwhile the Democrats support a liar over a socialist. Hang on boys it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

  26. I am a Ted Cruz guy-but I will vote the donald over ANY dumbocrat. I don’t trust him but I don’t worship ANY politician(or non-pol running for freakin’ president). And being older I am used to being disappointed. Sorry Nancy Reagan passed away…

  27. If someone can watch that creepy Cruz Christmas video, with his brain-washed children and wife participating, and still vote for that crazy, then I say go for it.

  28. Rubio and Cruz are puppets and the establishment loves them. Rubio is much easier to control so he’s their first choice, but Cruz isn’t far behind. He loves to pretend he’s libertarian, but he’s not. His wife is a Goldman Sachs executive. The same Goldman Sachs that is in bed with Hillary, too. And, unlike Trump, they are all warmongers who will no doubt bring about a major conflict that could cost millions of lives. Any one of these three is much preferred by the establishment than Trump, whom they hate because they can’t control. The last Fox News debate proved it. They set up a trap for Trump, claiming that they dropped support for Rubio. They wanted to make sure that Trump shows up. They led him to a slaughter. Rubio is still their first pick, mainly because how stupid and easy to control he is. I’m not saying Trump is this wonderful candidate. But the fact that even conservative pundits are being told to attack him with the #NeverTrump should tell you all you need to know. They are very afraid of Trump’s popularity, because he threatens their position of power. The lifetime career politicians, the heads of various powerful agencies, departments and their cronies have finally met their match.

  29. It’s really great that The Truth About Guns (and The Truth About Cars) is staying neutral in their opinions about the candidates /

    • Call it a public service that he’s calling out Trump on his anti-freedom bullshit. Make no mistake, he’ll backpedal on gun freedom same as everything else he has before long.

  30. “And dictators always disarm citizens.”

    Then we’ll shoot him the same as anybody else that gives that order.

    Make absolutely no mistake, there is NO salvation in this election. Crash is happening. Dollar will become toilet paper some time in the next ten years, whoever is sitting in the Oval Office.

    Trump is the only person is this that makes leftists shriek. he’s the only one that has SJWs googling about moving to Canada. He’s the only person that makes the writers for Huffington Post run to their safe spaces and cry. So he’s the only one worth putting in.

    Sending Donald Trump to Washington, DC is an alternative to sending bullets. Personally I don’t see why anyone is bothering, but at least it will be entertaining. If we’re really lucky he’ll start mass round-ups for illegals and maybe even throw a few leftists outa helicopters in a tribute to Augusto Pinochet, the right wing dictator that saved Chile’s economy by brutally murdering his countries communists.

    We tried being nice, we tried Ron Paul and look where that got us. So now it’s time to not be nice.

    • “f we’re really lucky he’ll start mass round-ups for illegals and maybe even throw a few leftists outa helicopters in a tribute to Augusto Pinochet, the right wing dictator that saved Chile’s economy by brutally murdering his countries communists.”

      And there you have it, laid out by a Trump supporter. They want a dictator. They just want one that will imprison and kill their political opponents.

      • And the more bodies he drops the better. Trump is not an end to himself. He’s a weapon. An opening salvo. Ron Paul was the last olive branch. From here on things get progressively uglier until the actually shooting people starts, one way or another, top down or bottom up. However it happens this country needs the r-selected lefty rabbit people gone if we’re ever going to get anywhere.

        The right wing, the religious, the libertarians, and other k-selects can sit down and have an honest debate about the nature of government once the r-selects have been either driven out or are simply dead. Until then we’re stuck dealing with Black Lives Matter, the BLM, safe spaces, “The Patriarcy” and other total horse manure and can get NOWHERE.

        The leftists are what’s keeping us in these problems, so get rid of them.

        • So what you’re saying is that you want to physically cull the “disagreeables”, and then go back to democracy, which will be safe since everyone will vote the way you want them to.

          Nice reference to r- and K-strategies, as well. For those curious what this is all about, read this:
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
          So now we’re also talking about eugenics.

          Hm… perhaps I should get another crate of ammo.

        • Spoken like a goddam Bolshevik.

          BURN IT ALL! WORKERS’ PARADISE! PROSPERITY FOR ALL! WE WILL MAKE THE NATION GREAT AGAIN! PURGE THE OPPOSITION! KILL THE WEALTHY TYRANTS (except our own)! NO TRIALS! EXPROPRIATE THEIR FAMILIES!

        • “Bolsheviks”? You got us ALL wrong, like Franco in Spain we’re “Nationalists”, patriotic Americans, and we WILL hold those that seek to weaken and destroy OUR nation accountable.

          Vote Trump!

        • >> like Franco in Spain

          Holy fuck.

          So, already, we’ve had Trump supporters to say that he is like (or will/should pay tribute to):

          – Augusto Pinochet
          – Francisco Franco

          How much will it take for rest of you guys here, who plan to “hold your nose” and vote for him in the general, to admit that Trump’s voter base is openly, unabashedly fascist, and (since he’s a populist who says and does what his voters want) so will be his policies?

          Actually, let’s see if we can get some more names right here. Twat, what would you say about these guys:

          – António Salazar
          – Park Chung-hee
          – Rafael Trujillo
          – Miklós Horthy
          – Getúlio Vargas
          – Philippe Pétain
          – Anastasio Somoza
          – Ion Antonescu
          – Suharto
          – Ante Pavelić
          – Greek “Regime of the Colonels”

        • Int19h, look, it’s a list of the best post-war ‘Little Hitlers’ all in one fabulous collection! Anyone who sees a hair of difference between fascist and socialist tyranny is either a moron or pure evil. We won’t let you murder any of our fellow countrymen for your own sick amusement.

        • barnbwt:

          What are YOU worrying about, it’s not we aren’t going to have “public” trials. Of course to insure “justice” is served the juries will be comprised of OUR “peers”.

          It’s about time “the Left” as an “institution” one which dominates the media, entertainment, politics, academia, medicine, the literary world, industry (Facebook’s Zoiker-BOIG/Twitter’s Jack Dorsey & the “renewable” ie. solar/wind energy conglomerates as an example among others) were held to account for 120 years of their crimes against us, our culture, and our nation.

          The fact remains had Sen. Joseph McCarthy and those that came before him (prior House & Senate Committees) not been stymied in their efforts, vilified, and “sold out” by their own in addition to the obstructionism and perjury of those they sought to expose we wouldn’t be in the predicament we find ourselves today.

        • Finally some Trump supporter truth .
          Now can some of you folks see my references to 1931 Germany and the .analogies for what they were intended for ?
          Nationalism is rearing it’s ugly head , the Obama pendulum has swung and is reaching the apex of our next great ride and I don’t think the tracks are finished at the bottom .
          Constitutionalism is being pushed aside so people can get what they believe is theirs , what they deserve , what is owed them . American pride in what ? ……… If it isn’t based on strong moral principles and God endowed character then all that’s left is greed and lust and the dark dreary days that will lay wasted ahead .
          If America chooses Trump over Cruz we will be crying aloud to God that we do not need his favor and choose to go at it alone and the days of Katrina will be in memory before God and a sign for all to see and one we should have heeded .

        • Mark, at this point, you sound like you’re firmly convinced that Trump would be a disaster. But you seem to believe that Cruz is the answer that would mitigate that – if everyone chooses wisely. Here’s a question for you, then.

          Clearly, the present wave of discontent that is propping up Trump is not really about him. He was just the first politician sleazy and unprincipled enough to tap into it to its full extent, saying and doing all that needed to be said and done to blow that anger up and feed it.

          If Trump doesn’t get elected – regardless of how this happens, whether it’s losing in the convention, or losing in the general – his supporters will be mad, and they won’t go away. And for all the bigotry and hatred that is coming from that crowd, the foundation of that anger is the very real problems that their facing – and at the root of its all is economy. Simply put, the country has let its blue collar middle class down big time, and now they’ve ran out of patience; so whoever comes and tells them that X and Y is to blame for their woes, and promises to deal with X and Y in no uncertain terms, gets the vote.

          Now, if you look at the origin of that let-down, it begins in the 70s, but it really went into high gear under Reagan, when his tax-cutting policies resulted in a significant change to how the produced wealth is distributed. I’m sure you’ve seen this graph before, but I’ll repost it for convenience:

          http://online.wsj.com/media/EPI_productivity_compensation.png

          So, basically, American workers have been producing more wealth per hour spent, but all of that extra wealth does not translate to higher wages for them – it goes to the companies that hire them, and, ultimately, to people who own the companies. Here’s another graph that clearly shows where that money went:

          http://www.motherjones.com/files/images/change-since-1979-600.gif

          Meanwhile, real (i.e. in inflation-adjusted dollars) wages remain stagnant. In fact, for some categories, real wages went down, and many people simply lost their jobs outright, due to free trade policies resulting in massive outsourcing to developing countries, where labor is cheaper.

          And if you look at the demographics of Trump supporters, these people do indeed make the core.

          Now, the conservative Republican dogma on economy since Reagan has been that low taxes, low regulation and free trade is good for economy and the jobs. Trump is the first guy to seriously challenge that, and he gets massive support to a large extent because a lot of Republican electorate had simply stopped believing in those things – and, in all fairness, why should they, given that they know from experience it’s not good for them personally?

          So whoever the next president is, if they pursue the same Republican economic dogmas, they’re not going to do anything for those people to make their lives better. For example, looking at Cruz and Rubio, both propose further massive tax cuts which are mostly concentrated at the top brackets of income tax, and various other taxes (corporate income, capital gains, inheritance) that are primarily of the concern to the richest segment of society. They propose further deregulation and more free trade, as well (yes, I know that Cruz has flip-flopped on it somewhat, but given his long past track record, I doubt it’s genuine).

          All this will inevitably translate to the gap on the first graph going greater. And this means that all these angry people supporting Trump in this cycle, will still be angry in 4 years.

          So, electing someone who cannot or doesn’t want to fix the underlying issue (or doesn’t believe that it is an issue), means that the reckoning is merely postponed by 4 (or 8) years. And it may be much worse by then, because there will be even more angry workers who feel cheated out of their fair share of the wealth that they produce. And then Trump – or someone else of a similar mind and disposition – will use them to prop themselves into power, and abuse it in all the ways you have already explored.

          Given all that, why do you believe that Cruz, or, really, any Republican candidate, is the answer this time? Or, to phrase it alternatively, how do you think Cruz (or someone else) will be able to make those angry voters not angry, or at least less angry, in 4 or 8 years?

  31. The sky is once again falling.

    Even if Trump is the great gun rights evil Farago thinks he is- and that’s a big if -you have to assume he’s going to somehow get more traction with his efforts than Obama did… Which was none. And the moment he tried, it’s proven political suicide. Do I trust Trump? Not really, but I trust his ego not to damage his rep so overtly.

    So can we go back to the evil law enforcement trope now?

    • Sure, tell us you and everyone else wasn’t scared one bit when Obama was making his gun grab noises and all the news and social media were singing along. You were so unafraid you trippled the price of guns, ammo, and mags surely just in jest, no?

      • And once again,you have to buy into the certainty that Trump is a lock for some form of weapons ban.

        Moreover, if Farago wants to be the politics police, he should dig a bit into Cruz’s connections with Goldman Sachs, Citibank and the Bush 41 presidency, then publish those fun facts… But I guess it’s just Trump that’s the imminent threat of our time, not the guy that would take his place if he was suddenly edged out of the running.

        Point is everybody has an agenda. Even Farago.

        I trust Trump to be Trump. For the most part, you get what’s on the tin. He’ll run the presidency like he runs his brand, and his brand is important to him. I expect his ego to keep him in check in terms of campaign promises, if only because it will damage that brand to go back on them. Frankly, it comes down to the fact that I know what I’m getting with him, versus the murky waters of his competition. The evil you know, unfortunately. For now, the fact that he isn’t beholden to the party that got us here is enough for me.

        I wish there was better, but I don’t see Washington, Jefferson or Roosevelt on the horizon.

    • I thought Romney was supposed to be more dangerous than Obama for gun rights since, as a Republican, he could give his party poltiical cover to pursue an antigun agenda at his direction? I thought this was the primary danger of so-called RINOs in the first place? Now you say that Donald Trump as a RINO is not dangerous, presumably because he is Donald Trump?

      Bosh.

  32. I recently saw an interview with Donald Trump, where he said that he would bring in rules against the press and that you couldn’t say or write anything that is harmful to somebody. That would infringe the first amendment. So why should you Americans trust him? If he wishes to infringe one thing from the constitution why wouldn’t he infringe another?