If you're a Reagan Republican and a Trump supporter ...

[Correll]

Of course you did. Allow me to quote you:

"Trump keeps pounding his anti-capitalist message. He's a lot more threat to actually do the crap he's proposing than Hillary is. I doubt she's going to follow through with reducing free trade"

I said he's more likely to do what he's threatening to do. Which is true. That isn't synonymous with the crap you said. Don't help me, quote what I actually said

Hillary wil have the power to do what she wants after she stacks the SC with bootlicking leftwing goons.

And decades of Republican dominated courts have gotten us what exactly?

Some rollback on Affirmative Action (quotas for example).

Wow, the tiniest bit. Sandra Day O'Conner (Republican appointee) found 25 years of discrimination in favor of blacks is in the Constitution. I still can't find that part

Yes, she was a massive disappointment.

Too many conservatives have failed to realize what the fuck is going on, that we are up against an ideological enemy that hates us, and is willing to destroy this nation in order to achieve their ends.

Trump's appointees will have the chance of being complete failures.


Hillary's appointees will be members of an organized ideological movement that is tearing this nation down with every ruling.

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM.


ONE HUNDRED PERCENT CHANCE OF ONE HUNDRED PERCENT OF THEM.

 

[Correll]

I'm a small government libertarian. Government is the worst solution to any problem, so it should be the solution only when it is the only solution.

Yeah, which makes you a believer in the state. (statist)

The naivety of your beliefs always gives me a jolly ol' laugh. Believing that you can maintain transparent, honest, and accountable government on any scale and keep it from expanding in power is being openly ignorant.

Like I said earlier, you believe in the same state that has squeezed the life out of you. That makes you a sycophant.

There can be only one military, one police department, only one manager of limited resources (e.g., water).

In other words, there needs to be one soulless machine with a monopoly of force.

What are the boundaries of this one government? Over the world? Over the country? Over the region? How about over the individual?

We need to be able to resolve differences between citizens (i.e., criminal and civilian courts).

In addition to maintaining the slave state, you also support the existence of second class "citizens," constituting those that reject conforming to the established law.

So WTF are you talking about I want "appointed rulers?"

The rulers that are at the head of that established government of yours. Whether you are authorizing or enabling them with powers, society has now been conceptualized into a series of rulers and slaves.

Screw you, you're talking out of your ass

You need to chill out.

Why does every discussion have to be so hostile with you?

Dude. do you realize how hostile you are being?


Anarchy is a fun game to play when you are in your teens and early twenties. But it will never have a single influence on a single policy.


While you are having fun being so rad, real issues are being decided that will fuck up your life and the lives of your descendants.

 

[Correll]

The "working class" are not the ones who work, Darlene. They're the ones who work as little as possible. Here's how you know that isn't what I said. I didn't say that. What is wrong with you? Seriously?

Obviously you did not comphrehend my post, because I did not accuse you of saying that.

You did call him leftist for attacking the working class (or so you perceived), and upholding the working class has long been a communist tenant.

Left wing is not anti-worker. It is a lot of other things, but not that.

Hillary is pushing the same trade policy as Reagan. She is the darling of the 1%. She is not pro-worker, no matter what she says.

Bull crap. Reagan was a free trader

Agreed, as is Hillary.

Ironically, the GOP managed to win on the one policy that is not working out as we hoped.

 

[Correll]

1. Every nation does not have tactical ballistic missiles.

Obviously disregarding the really small ones.

An arsenal of launchable missiles is essential to a well rounded military. Iran happens to have a very large one with advanced technology usually found in nuclear armed nations.

2. If you think that the Soviets would not have massively pursued the Atomic Bomb if we had not used it, you are sadly mistaken.

Prove me wrong.

History shows that the Soviets were put into shock after the nuclear bombing, and scuttled fast as hell with a nuclear program of their own. History does not lie.

3. No, bombing Japan did not hurt us diplomatically or geopolitically.

Yes, there actually were, and the only reason the protests were so quiet is because it was WW2, a conflict that had taken the lives of 70 million people, and they were already used to crimes against humanity at this point.

4. NOpe. Russian isn't launching over Iran.

They will start screwing with the geopolitical peace. You clearly have not the slightest clue of how volatile things are in Eastern Europe.

Russia flies intimidation missions in the Baltic, makes threats of attacking NATO for interfering in politics close to its borders, and constantly talks about bombing the missile facilities in Poland.

We had enough cold war close calls with the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008 and the nuclear tests that came after their seizure of Crimea (which were an obvious political scare tactic)

1. Yes, I am disregarding the small ones that can't hurt US. Iran is a threat to it's regional neighbors.

2. History lies all the time. Like when someone takes a page from it, like you just did, and uses it to claim that the Soviets would not have pursued a massively powerful military technology regardless.

3. No one was unhappy about US nuking Japan. No one would have been unhappy if we had nuked Nazi Germany.

4. Yeah, you keep moving the goal post back and forth from Cold War to WWIII.

 

[Correll]

I imagine most Reaganites will be voting for Hillary Clinton or a 3rd party--Gary Johnson more liberal than Darell Castle (not sure if Castle is on all 50 state ballots) but that's probably who Utah is going to favor. Honestly I don't know much about either of these candidates but have heard that Castle is more conservative than Johnson.

But clearly the most qualified candidate is Hillary Clinton, and Republicans are endorsing her like crazy. Bush Sr. told his daughter that he will be voting for her, but refused to admit it publicly. You can bet G.W. & Jeb will be voting for her, and I imagine most Republican Senators and House members will also be voting for her. Every ballot is a "secret ballot."

We recommend Hillary Clinton for president | Editorials | Dallas News
ANOTHER Major Republican Endorses Hillary...Trump Is LIVID, Fears Campaign Is OVER
Trump sends unprecedented numbers of GOP fleeing to Clinton
Republicans for Hillary? - CNNPolitics.com

And there's a reason for that. Many Republicans have praised Hillary Clinton in the past, and like her, "when they're not campaigning against her." So it's no surprise they're kicking this ASS CLOWN Trump to the curb to endorse and vote for her.
Republicans Have Praised Hillary Clinton’s Secretary Of State Tenure
Hillary's secret weapon? GOP praise

And this is the silver bullet that was shot into the ass of the Chimpanzee nominee.

A reaganite vote for Hillary? You must be joking. That's like saying Stalin would have voted for Calvin Coolidge.

I just gave you several links to show you that is exactly what's happening. Reaganites will be voting for Hillary Clinton or a 3rd party. You have nominated a man with NO honor, NO respect, NO dignity, and the only loyalty he has ever shown anyone is to himself & Russia. The most incompetent, unqualified, dangerous candidate in this nation's history, your chimpanzee nominee Donald Trump.
Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy

Reaganites are pragmatic (can see through the bullshit.) They're intelligent. They are solely focused on fiscal conservatism, a smaller more effective government. They aren't swayed by the Reich wing nutcase, book of dummie's conspiracy theories. They have respect and honor and they're sure not going to support someone who stated in his book "My personal Vietnam was sleeping with married women."
Donald Trump Calls Sleeping Around His ‘Personal Vietnam’

Nor would they support any candidate (that claimed to be a Republican) that just proposed another entitlement program--"child care subsidies."
Donald Trump Proposes Child-Care Subsidies

Unfortunately for you and all the others from the nutcase Reich wing, Reaganites are the majority of the Republican party whom you have been attacking for the last several years and calling them "rino's, establishment", etc. And they have no LOYALTY to this new party of Trump. That is stuffed full of ignorance, anger, fear, bigotry, misogyny and extremism. They decided long ago, (after Trump won the nomination) that there was no way in HELL that they were going to support or vote for Donald Trump. Their 2016 platform suits them well. Full of oppression, bigotry, extremism and division.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/opinion/the-most-extreme-republican-platform-in-memory.html?_r=1

And when you can't get the RED-EST of the RED to support the Republican nominee this race was LOST the very second that Trump was declared the nominee of this party.
In the reddest part of Colorado, some Republicans rethink their loyalty
Open Letter To Donald Trump From a #NeverTrumper

And here's another add made by REAGANITES FOR CLINTON.

That post is nothing but partisan blather. There is nothing in there to respond to.

No you're nothing but blather. You have been given more than enough links to show that moderate Republicans aka Reaganites are moving into Hillary Clinton's column. And it makes sense because for the first time in 60 YEARS Republicans are losing white educated voters.
Trump May Become The First Republican In 60 Years To Lose White College Graduates

So that leaves one group that will be casting a vote for Donald Trump.

...

Which Trump actually said--LOL
Donald Trump loves the 'poorly educated' — and they love him

A flip of 10 or 12 points among a group is a lot. That is not a majority of a group.

Your claim that moderates or that Reagan Republicans are the ones leaving is unsupported. lt is just as likely that the trend is driven by hard core Partisans following their leadership, or an age thing driven as more brainwashed white youth voting the way they have been indoctrinated.

 

[Correll]

You're very confused.

-Reagan believed America is great, he was right
-Trump believes Trump is great, but he'll make America great ... if we elect him

-Reagan was all about optimism that our business is the best open the economic borders and we'll kick ass, he was right
-Trump is all about fear we can't compete so those feriners are going to steal our jobs

-Reagan was about wanting to lower taxes and regulations and our companies will want to be here, he was right
-Trump is about punishing them if they try to leave

If you're a Reagan Republican and support Trump, you believe light is dark, up is down and government can best decide who we can do business with.

Johnson's not perfect for sure, but he's far more like Reagan than Trump is, and Trump isn't nearly different enough from Hillary for it to matter.

The last, desperate argument of the Republicans is the Supreme Court. Well, we've had decades of courts with Republican nominated majorities. At one point it was 7-2. We got shit for it. And John Roberts ignoring even the argument of the Obama administration and just declaring it a "tax" was the final nail in the coffin.

Healthcare exchanges, government deciding what policies need to include and all the rest of the Obamacare regulations are a "tax?" He's full of shit. And what Supreme Court ever told a side here's what you should have argued, and I'm going to pretend you did and rule for you?

Then there's this crap Trump is a capitalist, he only wants "fair" trade deals. Even if you believe someone who says he's for free trade keeps saying he isn't, his proposals go way beyond that. Punitive taxes on American businesses trying to escape our oppressive taxes and regulations isn't about trade and it's not capitalist, which is what made us so rich to start with.

That Trump thinks America isn't great, but he personally can make it great is frankly scary. But that he's anti-free trade and anti-Capitalist is unacceptable.

If you're a Reagan Republican ... vote for Johnson ...

So if Ronald Reagan were alive he would vote for Hillary, or worse that fucking dolt Johnson? Lol.

Where did I ever say to vote for Hillary, dolt?

And where did I ever say at all whom Reagan would vote for.

You suffering from the onset of early dementia?

Trump is " The Republican nominee." Deal with it. Reagan would be campaigning for him right now. Reagan and John Wayne were friends and Trump has lots of Duke in him.

My questions:

1) When did Reagan ever say that America is not great?

2) When did Reagan ever say America would be great, but only if we elect him and he makes it great?

3) When did Reagan ever want to punish companies for leaving because the US government has become belligerent to our own industry?

4) When did Reagan ever say we can't compete so we need to put up barriers to protect our businesses ... who don't want it because we think we compete fine?

In fact, Susan, we're the best. Go find your penis, it's in a jar somewhere. Maybe on Hillary's mantle with Bill's junk ...

40 years of failure has shown that we cannot compete. At least not as the playing field is now.

 

[Correll]

You're very confused.

-Reagan believed America is great, he was right
-Trump believes Trump is great, but he'll make America great ... if we elect him

-Reagan was all about optimism that our business is the best open the economic borders and we'll kick ass, he was right
-Trump is all about fear we can't compete so those feriners are going to steal our jobs

-Reagan was about wanting to lower taxes and regulations and our companies will want to be here, he was right
-Trump is about punishing them if they try to leave

If you're a Reagan Republican and support Trump, you believe light is dark, up is down and government can best decide who we can do business with.

Johnson's not perfect for sure, but he's far more like Reagan than Trump is, and Trump isn't nearly different enough from Hillary for it to matter.

The last, desperate argument of the Republicans is the Supreme Court. Well, we've had decades of courts with Republican nominated majorities. At one point it was 7-2. We got shit for it. And John Roberts ignoring even the argument of the Obama administration and just declaring it a "tax" was the final nail in the coffin.

Healthcare exchanges, government deciding what policies need to include and all the rest of the Obamacare regulations are a "tax?" He's full of shit. And what Supreme Court ever told a side here's what you should have argued, and I'm going to pretend you did and rule for you?

Then there's this crap Trump is a capitalist, he only wants "fair" trade deals. Even if you believe someone who says he's for free trade keeps saying he isn't, his proposals go way beyond that. Punitive taxes on American businesses trying to escape our oppressive taxes and regulations isn't about trade and it's not capitalist, which is what made us so rich to start with.

That Trump thinks America isn't great, but he personally can make it great is frankly scary. But that he's anti-free trade and anti-Capitalist is unacceptable.

If you're a Reagan Republican ... vote for Johnson ...

Reagan's economy was based on defense spending of $$$ that we didn't have. Taking tax payer $$$ and handing it over to defense contractors is not capitalism.

Are you Reagan fluffers willfully ignorant or just clueless?

Oh yeah, his Admin had 32 criminal convictions as well

If deficit spending was all that it was, then why has Obama's economy been such shit?

 

[kaz]

I'm a small government libertarian. Government is the worst solution to any problem, so it should be the solution only when it is the only solution.

Yeah, which makes you a believer in the state. (statist)

The naivety of your beliefs always gives me a jolly ol' laugh. Believing that you can maintain transparent, honest, and accountable government on any scale and keep it from expanding in power is being openly ignorant.

Like I said earlier, you believe in the same state that has squeezed the life out of you. That makes you a sycophant.

There can be only one military, one police department, only one manager of limited resources (e.g., water).

In other words, there needs to be one soulless machine with a monopoly of force.

What are the boundaries of this one government? Over the world? Over the country? Over the region? How about over the individual?

We need to be able to resolve differences between citizens (i.e., criminal and civilian courts).

In addition to maintaining the slave state, you also support the existence of second class "citizens," constituting those that reject conforming to the established law.

So WTF are you talking about I want "appointed rulers?"

The rulers that are at the head of that established government of yours. Whether you are authorizing or enabling them with powers, society has now been conceptualized into a series of rulers and slaves.

Screw you, you're talking out of your ass

You need to chill out.

Why does every discussion have to be so hostile with you?

Dude. do you realize how hostile you are being?


Anarchy is a fun game to play when you are in your teens and early twenties. But it will never have a single influence on a single policy.


While you are having fun being so rad, real issues are being decided that will fuck up your life and the lives of your descendants.

He's also asking other posters why they can't engage in civil discussion while he calls me ignorant and a sycophant ...

 

[kaz]

The "working class" are not the ones who work, Darlene. They're the ones who work as little as possible. Here's how you know that isn't what I said. I didn't say that. What is wrong with you? Seriously?

Obviously you did not comphrehend my post, because I did not accuse you of saying that.

You did call him leftist for attacking the working class (or so you perceived), and upholding the working class has long been a communist tenant.

Left wing is not anti-worker. It is a lot of other things, but not that.

Hillary is pushing the same trade policy as Reagan. She is the darling of the 1%. She is not pro-worker, no matter what she says.

Bull crap. Reagan was a free trader

Agreed, as is Hillary.

Ironically, the GOP managed to win on the one policy that is not working out as we hoped.

Hillary is a free trader? You're not watching her advertisements, are you?

 

[kaz]

You're very confused.

-Reagan believed America is great, he was right
-Trump believes Trump is great, but he'll make America great ... if we elect him

-Reagan was all about optimism that our business is the best open the economic borders and we'll kick ass, he was right
-Trump is all about fear we can't compete so those feriners are going to steal our jobs

-Reagan was about wanting to lower taxes and regulations and our companies will want to be here, he was right
-Trump is about punishing them if they try to leave

If you're a Reagan Republican and support Trump, you believe light is dark, up is down and government can best decide who we can do business with.

Johnson's not perfect for sure, but he's far more like Reagan than Trump is, and Trump isn't nearly different enough from Hillary for it to matter.

The last, desperate argument of the Republicans is the Supreme Court. Well, we've had decades of courts with Republican nominated majorities. At one point it was 7-2. We got shit for it. And John Roberts ignoring even the argument of the Obama administration and just declaring it a "tax" was the final nail in the coffin.

Healthcare exchanges, government deciding what policies need to include and all the rest of the Obamacare regulations are a "tax?" He's full of shit. And what Supreme Court ever told a side here's what you should have argued, and I'm going to pretend you did and rule for you?

Then there's this crap Trump is a capitalist, he only wants "fair" trade deals. Even if you believe someone who says he's for free trade keeps saying he isn't, his proposals go way beyond that. Punitive taxes on American businesses trying to escape our oppressive taxes and regulations isn't about trade and it's not capitalist, which is what made us so rich to start with.

That Trump thinks America isn't great, but he personally can make it great is frankly scary. But that he's anti-free trade and anti-Capitalist is unacceptable.

If you're a Reagan Republican ... vote for Johnson ...

So if Ronald Reagan were alive he would vote for Hillary, or worse that fucking dolt Johnson? Lol.

Where did I ever say to vote for Hillary, dolt?

And where did I ever say at all whom Reagan would vote for.

You suffering from the onset of early dementia?

Trump is " The Republican nominee." Deal with it. Reagan would be campaigning for him right now. Reagan and John Wayne were friends and Trump has lots of Duke in him.

My questions:

1) When did Reagan ever say that America is not great?

2) When did Reagan ever say America would be great, but only if we elect him and he makes it great?

3) When did Reagan ever want to punish companies for leaving because the US government has become belligerent to our own industry?

4) When did Reagan ever say we can't compete so we need to put up barriers to protect our businesses ... who don't want it because we think we compete fine?

In fact, Susan, we're the best. Go find your penis, it's in a jar somewhere. Maybe on Hillary's mantle with Bill's junk ...

40 years of failure has shown that we cannot compete. At least not as the playing field is now.

The more government regulates and the worse it gets, the more you want government to fix it with more regulation. What's not logical about that, Correll?

Damn, I had too much to drink last night. I'm going to make a Martini now to fix that ...

 

[Correll]

The "working class" are not the ones who work, Darlene. They're the ones who work as little as possible. Here's how you know that isn't what I said. I didn't say that. What is wrong with you? Seriously?

Obviously you did not comphrehend my post, because I did not accuse you of saying that.

You did call him leftist for attacking the working class (or so you perceived), and upholding the working class has long been a communist tenant.

Left wing is not anti-worker. It is a lot of other things, but not that.

Hillary is pushing the same trade policy as Reagan. She is the darling of the 1%. She is not pro-worker, no matter what she says.

Bull crap. Reagan was a free trader

Agreed, as is Hillary.

Ironically, the GOP managed to win on the one policy that is not working out as we hoped.

Hillary is a free trader? You're not watching her advertisements, are you?

Actually, no, but if she is promising now, to seriously address this problem I do not believe her.

 

[Correll]

So if Ronald Reagan were alive he would vote for Hillary, or worse that fucking dolt Johnson? Lol.

Where did I ever say to vote for Hillary, dolt?

And where did I ever say at all whom Reagan would vote for.

You suffering from the onset of early dementia?

Trump is " The Republican nominee." Deal with it. Reagan would be campaigning for him right now. Reagan and John Wayne were friends and Trump has lots of Duke in him.

My questions:

1) When did Reagan ever say that America is not great?

2) When did Reagan ever say America would be great, but only if we elect him and he makes it great?

3) When did Reagan ever want to punish companies for leaving because the US government has become belligerent to our own industry?

4) When did Reagan ever say we can't compete so we need to put up barriers to protect our businesses ... who don't want it because we think we compete fine?

In fact, Susan, we're the best. Go find your penis, it's in a jar somewhere. Maybe on Hillary's mantle with Bill's junk ...

40 years of failure has shown that we cannot compete. At least not as the playing field is now.

The more government regulates and the worse it gets, the more you want government to fix it with more regulation. What's not logical about that, Correll?

Damn, I had too much to drink last night. I'm going to make a Martini now to fix that ...

The nafta treaty is over 1,700 pages. And lord knows what little tricks are not on those pages but are found elsewhere in Mexican or Canadian trade policy designed to fuck US.

This is not about more or less regulation. This is about not playing a game designed for US to lose.

 

[oreo]

I imagine most Reaganites will be voting for Hillary Clinton or a 3rd party--Gary Johnson more liberal than Darell Castle (not sure if Castle is on all 50 state ballots) but that's probably who Utah is going to favor. Honestly I don't know much about either of these candidates but have heard that Castle is more conservative than Johnson.

But clearly the most qualified candidate is Hillary Clinton, and Republicans are endorsing her like crazy. Bush Sr. told his daughter that he will be voting for her, but refused to admit it publicly. You can bet G.W. & Jeb will be voting for her, and I imagine most Republican Senators and House members will also be voting for her. Every ballot is a "secret ballot."

We recommend Hillary Clinton for president | Editorials | Dallas News
ANOTHER Major Republican Endorses Hillary...Trump Is LIVID, Fears Campaign Is OVER
Trump sends unprecedented numbers of GOP fleeing to Clinton
Republicans for Hillary? - CNNPolitics.com

And there's a reason for that. Many Republicans have praised Hillary Clinton in the past, and like her, "when they're not campaigning against her." So it's no surprise they're kicking this ASS CLOWN Trump to the curb to endorse and vote for her.
Republicans Have Praised Hillary Clinton’s Secretary Of State Tenure
Hillary's secret weapon? GOP praise

And this is the silver bullet that was shot into the ass of the Chimpanzee nominee.

A reaganite vote for Hillary? You must be joking. That's like saying Stalin would have voted for Calvin Coolidge.

I just gave you several links to show you that is exactly what's happening. Reaganites will be voting for Hillary Clinton or a 3rd party. You have nominated a man with NO honor, NO respect, NO dignity, and the only loyalty he has ever shown anyone is to himself & Russia. The most incompetent, unqualified, dangerous candidate in this nation's history, your chimpanzee nominee Donald Trump.
Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy

Reaganites are pragmatic (can see through the bullshit.) They're intelligent. They are solely focused on fiscal conservatism, a smaller more effective government. They aren't swayed by the Reich wing nutcase, book of dummie's conspiracy theories. They have respect and honor and they're sure not going to support someone who stated in his book "My personal Vietnam was sleeping with married women."
Donald Trump Calls Sleeping Around His ‘Personal Vietnam’

Nor would they support any candidate (that claimed to be a Republican) that just proposed another entitlement program--"child care subsidies."
Donald Trump Proposes Child-Care Subsidies

Unfortunately for you and all the others from the nutcase Reich wing, Reaganites are the majority of the Republican party whom you have been attacking for the last several years and calling them "rino's, establishment", etc. And they have no LOYALTY to this new party of Trump. That is stuffed full of ignorance, anger, fear, bigotry, misogyny and extremism. They decided long ago, (after Trump won the nomination) that there was no way in HELL that they were going to support or vote for Donald Trump. Their 2016 platform suits them well. Full of oppression, bigotry, extremism and division.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/19/opinion/the-most-extreme-republican-platform-in-memory.html?_r=1

And when you can't get the RED-EST of the RED to support the Republican nominee this race was LOST the very second that Trump was declared the nominee of this party.
In the reddest part of Colorado, some Republicans rethink their loyalty
Open Letter To Donald Trump From a #NeverTrumper

And here's another add made by REAGANITES FOR CLINTON.

That post is nothing but partisan blather. There is nothing in there to respond to.

No you're nothing but blather. You have been given more than enough links to show that moderate Republicans aka Reaganites are moving into Hillary Clinton's column. And it makes sense because for the first time in 60 YEARS Republicans are losing white educated voters.
Trump May Become The First Republican In 60 Years To Lose White College Graduates

So that leaves one group that will be casting a vote for Donald Trump.

...

Which Trump actually said--LOL
Donald Trump loves the 'poorly educated' — and they love him

A flip of 10 or 12 points among a group is a lot. That is not a majority of a group.

Your claim that moderates or that Reagan Republicans are the ones leaving is unsupported. lt is just as likely that the trend is driven by hard core Partisans following their leadership, or an age thing driven as more brainwashed white youth voting the way they have been indoctrinated.

I have given you about 20 links now to support my claim (that a Reaganite & a Trump supporter DO NOT co-exist). I am on several boards, not just this one. You're not going to convince any Reaganite that Donald Trump is the new Reagan. You're not going to convince a Reaganite that Donald Trump is even a Republican. They are in fact the majority of the Republican party, aka moderates. YOU are the minority of the party, not them.

54% of the Republican party voted for other candidates. While Trump has touted he won the most votes ever, he also won the award for the most votes ever cast against him. In these open primary states there was a lot of operation Trump voting going on by Democrats (knowing Hillary Clinton was a shoe-in) in order to get the weakest candidate for her to beat in the general election, and they got it.
Trump got the most GOP votes ever — both for and against him — and other fun facts

Trump is nothing more than the accidental nominee:
Donald Trump the ACCIDENTAL nominee

 

[Dot Com]

No self-respecting Trump- supporter would EVER consider being a crony capiatalist (Reagan) supporter. Not to mention the 32 criminal convictions his Admin rec'd.

See how that works?

 

[bripat9643]

The "working class" are not the ones who work, Darlene. They're the ones who work as little as possible. Here's how you know that isn't what I said. I didn't say that. What is wrong with you? Seriously?

Obviously you did not comphrehend my post, because I did not accuse you of saying that.

You did call him leftist for attacking the working class (or so you perceived), and upholding the working class has long been a communist tenant.

Left wing is not anti-worker. It is a lot of other things, but not that.

Hillary is pushing the same trade policy as Reagan. She is the darling of the 1%. She is not pro-worker, no matter what she says.

Bull crap. Reagan was a free trader

Agreed, as is Hillary.

Ironically, the GOP managed to win on the one policy that is not working out as we hoped.

Hillary is a free trader? You're not watching her advertisements, are you?

So what's your beef with Trump on the trade issue then?

 

[bripat9643]

No self-respecting Trump- supporter would EVER consider being a crony capiatalist (Reagan) supporter. Not to mention the 32 criminal convictions his Admin rec'd.

See how that works?

You haven't got a clue what Trump supporters or Reagan believe.

 

[kaz]

Obviously you did not comphrehend my post, because I did not accuse you of saying that.

You did call him leftist for attacking the working class (or so you perceived), and upholding the working class has long been a communist tenant.

Left wing is not anti-worker. It is a lot of other things, but not that.

Hillary is pushing the same trade policy as Reagan. She is the darling of the 1%. She is not pro-worker, no matter what she says.

Bull crap. Reagan was a free trader

Agreed, as is Hillary.

Ironically, the GOP managed to win on the one policy that is not working out as we hoped.

Hillary is a free trader? You're not watching her advertisements, are you?

So what's your beef with Trump on the trade issue then?

I'm not voting for either of them because they are both anti-free traders. Are you arguing that somehow since Hillary's not free trade that excuses Trump for being anti free trade?

 

[bripat9643]

Hillary is pushing the same trade policy as Reagan. She is the darling of the 1%. She is not pro-worker, no matter what she says.

Bull crap. Reagan was a free trader

Agreed, as is Hillary.

Ironically, the GOP managed to win on the one policy that is not working out as we hoped.

Hillary is a free trader? You're not watching her advertisements, are you?

So what's your beef with Trump on the trade issue then?

I'm not voting for either of them because they are both anti-free traders. Are you arguing that somehow since Hillary's not free trade that excuses Trump for being anti free trade?

It makes him no worse than Hillary, and in fact, Hillary is much worse since she supports TPP which will destroy American sovereignty and allow corporations to import millions of foreign workers.

 

[Onyx]

It makes him no worse than Hillary, and in fact, Hillary is much worse since she supports TPP which will destroy American sovereignty and allow corporations to import millions of foreign workers.

Importing workers? Why is that a bad thing? They do not collect on welfare.

How is American sovereignty infringed upon? If anything, the United States sovereignty, and as an anarchist you should not believe in a conceptualized state. You should be for the American people, which the United States does not represent.

You should be all for ridding the world of 20,000 tariffs, since they choke independent manufacturing and consumers. Their non-existence also opens up new job opportunities since the market is more open and competitive.

 

[bripat9643]

It makes him no worse than Hillary, and in fact, Hillary is much worse since she supports TPP which will destroy American sovereignty and allow corporations to import millions of foreign workers.

Importing workers? Why is that a bad thing? They do not collect on welfare.

Because that means Americans won't get those jobs. The workers they want to import will work for much lower wages than Americans. The net result is that importing foreign workers drives down the wages of American workers. That point has been made time after time in this forum. Have you been sleeping?

How is American sovereignty infringed upon? If anything, the United States sovereignty, and as an anarchist you should not believe in a conceptualized state. You should be for the American people, which the United States does not represent.

If the American government doesn't represent the people, then why do you want to allow it to bind us to an even bigger globalist state? The TPP has international bodies for resolving disputes. by signing the treaty, America places itself under the jurisdiction of these bodies. None of them have the interests of the United States on their agenda.

The Social Contract - The Sovereignty-Busting Trans-Pacific Partnership - What's so bad about it?

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/...ignty-separation-of-powers-and-democracy.html

The secretive sovereignty-subverting Trans-Pacific Partnership | CAIRCO - Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform | illegal aliens crime immigrants

You should be all for ridding the world of 20,000 tariffs, since they choke independent manufacturing and consumers. Their non-existence also opens up new job opportunities since the market is more open and competitive.

The TPP creates more government, not less. It creates an entire new layer of government along with thousands of pages of regulations. It allows globalist corporations to import low wage foreign workers to take jobs from Americans.

American can end tariffs without signing on to this globalist big-government monstrosity.