Welcome to the Make America Great Again pinglist, baysider!
Posted on 02/15/2016 8:47:24 PM PST by Helicondelta
Good luck to you, too. The sooner November arrives, the better. I’m ready for this madness to be over, one way or another.
This may shock you, but many of us who support Trump fully realize he will not be a perfect president. But if he is nominated, I have no qualms about voting for him. I know he will be better than Hillary or Bernie. I really don’t expect perfection. This is a fallen world, and I know there is no salvation in politics.
You need to see someone about that roiling jealousy and hatred.
Trump is a hypocrite and a liar.
Ok-I may be new here but I need to respond to the “illegals out of the shadows” comment that everyone keeps talking about. Ive seen the 7 minute video on “out of the shadows.” I actually watched the entire 2 hour committee meeting and that 7 minute video is BS. If you watch the entire 2 hours, you will see that there was more to that comment than showed on that video. Sessions even back Cruz up on this one. He backed him up as recently as last night when he was on Levin’s show.
Cruz also gave two specific names that he would nominate in the CNN debate:
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2015/09/16/cnn-reagan-library-debate-later-debate-full-transcript/
CRUZ: And, you know, we're frustrated as conservatives. We keep winning elections, and then we don't get the outcome we want. And, let me focus on two moments in time.
Number one, in 1990, in one room was David Souter, and in another room was Edith Jones, the rock ribbed (ph) conservative on the fifth circuit court of appeals. George Herbert Walker Bush appointed David Souter.
And then in 2005, in one room was John Roberts, in another room was my former boss, Mike Luttig, the rock ribbed (ph) conservative on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals...
...
If, instead, the President Bush had appointed Edith Jones, and Mike Luttig, which is who I would have appointed, Obamacare would have been struck down three years ago, and the marriage laws of all 50 states would be on the books. These matter, and I fought to defend the constitution my whole life...
I didn’t throw anything you idiot!!
Well, you and I can agree on that. I, too, will enthusiastically vote for Donald Trump if he is the Republican Nominee. The same is true of any of the Republicans currently running for President, or of Jack the Ripper, Attilla the Hun, or an over-ripe cantelope. If being better than Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders is the bar, just about anybody can clear.
But that is not the issue we are dealing with today. Today we are talking about the merits of Donald Trump compared to some pretty good Republican prospects. I am not saying that Ted Cruz is perfect, but I can say things I like about him other than "He's better than Hillary Clinton".
Add me to the pinglist !
You do not get to make up the rules and definitions of Articles and Sections in our US Constitution.
Objectively evaluating his life's work as a liberal Democrat? Yes, I objectively evaluated that. Which is exactly why I do not support him. You see, I happen to be a Conservative. And Trump's positions - on raising taxes, touchback amnesty, using federal tax dollars to directly pay healthcare costs of 25% of Americans, and his praise of using eminent domain to take property from one person and give it to a person with more influence - all of these run contrary to my Conservative leanings.
And these aren't old positions either. These are all positions he has stated since announcing his run for President last June. So yes, I have objectively evaluated his work as well as his positions on how he would lead this nation. And through that evaluation, I have concluded that there is no way in hell I could support someone who is to the left of Mitt Romney on every single issue.
So how can you?
Even worse, he is a liberal.
His polling should drop to 0% after that PP thing. It should but it won't.
-— Trump is a hypocrite and a liar.
Even worse, he is a liberal. -—
“Who cares! He’s going to make America great again!”
“How?”
“Who cares! You can’t stop him! Hahahaha!!!”
The joke will be on them, and they will have no one to blame but themselves.
As for "touchback amnesty", that is another meaningless talking point foisted by the media during a contentious campaign season that you seem overly eager to take at face value -- because it is true? No, because it fits your prejudiced assumptions about a candidate you don't like on emotional grounds.
When he has said that illegals can come back legally, at no time did he offer an immediate "touchback". His plan is that no criminals would be allowed back, and that anyone who had worked and stayed out of trouble here would have to get in line and reapply, something that normally takes a minimum of five years -- knowing full well that only a small minority of those here illegally could or would qualify. As you may be aware, some are here illegally due to being brought here by their parents when they were small children, and are not legally guilty of intent to commit the crime of illegal entry.
But beyond that, my scolding towards you was that your post was harshly (and without facts) condemnatory of his supporters, and I called you out on that. Unable to rationalize your uncivil slander of your fellow freepers, you tried to change the subject with this post; but I'm not buying it. This post reveals just how superficial is your understanding is of these issues, and how willing you are to sling mud without really grasping the facts of the situation.
Vote for whomever you want; no one is stopping you. But when you slander the judgment of other freepers for supporting Trump, try learning more about the truth of your accusations if yiou want to avoid being called out and flamed for it.
Totally irrelevant. The issue is not Trump's experience with eminent domain. The issue is his philosophical belief on property. Trump has stated that he 100% supports the Kelo decision, which at the time would have separated himself from every single member of FreeRepublic. When that decision came out, one could not find a single poster here that agreed with it. Not a one.
If you could see the one location as I have, the lady who held out absolutely did it for crank reasons and ended up forfeiting for her heirs what would have been . . .
Again, totally irrelevant. And do you know why? BECAUSE IT WAS HER PROPERTY! SHE OWNED IT! IT BELONGED TO HER AND HER ALONE!
As for "touchback amnesty", that is another meaningless talking point foisted by the media during a contentious campaign season that you seem overly eager to take at face value -- because it is true?
Because it is what Donald Trump said he would do. He even used the term 'expedite' in reference to the process of bringing them back. Emotion has nothing to do with it. It has everything to do with what Trump actually said.
anyone who had worked and stayed out of trouble here would have to get in line and reapply, something that normally takes a minimum of five years
Nope, Trump said they would be expedited back in. So the 'normal' process is not in play here. Again, it is what Trump said.
Keep on backing a pure conservative and lose in November, then. You’ll enjoy your burka.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.