Trump: 'I identify with some things as a Democrat'

Donald Trump, a 2016 Republican presidential candidate, said Friday he sometimes identifies more as a Democrat when pressed to explain previous statements that the economy generally does better under Democrats than Republicans.

"I identify with some things as a Democrat," Trump said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" when pressed about the comments from 2004, adding that "generally speaking" he was "never a Bush fan."

"When the economy crashed so horribly under George Bush because of mistakes they made having to do with banking and lots of other things, I don't think the Democrats would have done that," Trump said.

"Now, I see it both ways, but I hated what I was watching in the last two years of George Bush, because it was a bubble that was waiting to explode," he added. "What they were doing was a death wish, and I saw that."

"I have seen things done by Republicans that are not good and are not smart, and I would not do that," he said.

The celebrity real estate developer skyrocketed to the top of many polls following the launch of his GOP White House bid in mid-June, amid weeks of criticism and media attention to his controversial comments on Mexican immigrants.

Trump made waves this week after he threatened during an interview with The Hill to run as a third-party candidate. He played down that possibility Thursday, saying, "I want to run as a Republican. I think I'll get the nomination."

"Over the years as a businessman, I've always helped everybody," Trump said Friday on MSNBC, further explaining his past support for both Democrats and Republicans.

"I'm a conservative, I want to run as a Republican, I'm leading every poll," he said. "I do not want to do independent at all. Now, if I'm treated poorly, that's one thing. If I'm treated well and with great respect and don't win, I would not do that."

Trump had suggested to The Hill on Wednesday that the Republican National Committee "has not been very supportive." He said Friday that the RNC has been "very, very nice over the last few days.”

From the start, Bush embraced a governing philosophy of deregulation. That trickled down to federal oversight agencies, which in turn eased off on banks and mortgage brokers. Bush did push early on for tighter controls over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but he failed to move Congress. After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act. But SEC head William Donaldson tried to boost regulation of mutual and hedge funds, he was blocked by Bush’s advisers at the White House as well as other powerful Republicans and quit.

“I expect Trump’s support, although broad, is also probably shallow. Trump is all over the place on policy issues. The more he talks the more inconsistent he demonstrates himself to be. That’s going to hurt him in the long run. Right now, my fear is that the GOPe will make a martyr out of him, and drive him to a 3rd party run.”

That is the best analysis I have read of the Trump phenomena yet. Well Said!

"I heard the same phone call. It did seem for a while that the caller was a democratic plant. But after he made a few points, Rush did shrug and say that Trump would have to explain all these different positions. I don’t think Rush is supporting Trump - I think he admires his gutsiness and lack of shame over his own words."

The other day Rush said we have our "entertainment" right now, and after it's over, there are a couple of solid conservatives in the race. That made me think he sees things as they really are.

But his attitude yesterday turned me off. I guess part of is that Trump's his golfing buddy.

> “I’m alarmed by the realization that some conservatives are as prone as liberals to cult-like worship of a politician, no matter how many times they hear the truth about the person. If it happens once, it can happen again with another public figure.”

When you write “prone ... to cult-like worship” I take it to mean cheerleading and quips like “Go Trump!”, “Go the Donald!”, etc.

Is there ever a time when voters don’t do these things?

I mean “Go X!” and “Vote for X!”, etc. It seems your argument can be transferred to any public figure that voters enthusiatically support, ergo all voters usually gravitate to “cult-like worship”. Your alternative it seems (and which I support) would be that voters be serious, somber, aware and keep a watchful suspicious eye on any public figure that aspires to be a political leader; no cheerleading allowed. I’m all for that. But then I’m for rain on Mondays, sunbreaks on Tuesdays and sunny days on Saturdays and Sundays in my ordered Universe. The problem is reality gets in my way by trying to teach me that I don’t have control. So as an adaptive human being, I keep an umbrella handy. Should we accept that voters are going to be emotional no matter who the candidate is? What’s the alternative?

On the surface I don’t like it. But neither do I think Bush handled it like a true conservative. Trump’s statement that the Democrats would not have done what Bush did is just plain wrong unless he means (and it does not sound like it) they would have done something even worse.

Bush was a big government big spender. He talked conservative talk but he walked a liberal walk, at least economically. I think he also joined the massive political deceivers wing on the social issues. He said one thing. He often did another.

"When you write “prone ... to cult-like worship” I take it to mean cheerleading and quips like “Go Trump!”, “Go the Donald!”, etc."

Not at all. That's common for just about any candidate.

I'm referring to things I've seen such as Trump is Reagan/Churchill/the savior of the country/a superhero (and yes, I've really seen that).

Nah, I think most people here can separate two aspects regarding Trump. His policies and views are, to me, out of step. That is why I will not vote for him. His refusal to bow to the media and take insults from the elite laying down is refreshing. It is effective and, hopefully, contagious. That is what, I think, endears him to many on FR. I know I am tired of the outrage/shame police shutting down the debate and relegating us to the (for now) virtual gulags.

This Trump circus sideshow is the same as Bachmann (what we allowed them to do to her was ridiculous to watch) or Herman Cain ...or howard dean. Happens every election.

Yup, mostly agree.

I would just say it's probably not fair to lump Bachmann in with this group of fakes and frauds. She actually had won elections on the local and congressional district level. She had already proven she could win general election campaigns, had a pretty clear track record, etc. I don't consider Bachmann a manipulative snake oil peddler the way Trump and Cain were.

I never said I’d vote third party. But I might. This crap of “vote for a rino or you might as well vote for a democrat” is BS. Voting for a rino IS voting for a democrat! What is it going to take to open peoples’ eyes. W introduced Obama. McCain gave us Obama. Romney helped us keep Obama.

If a decent third party had been started in 2008 it would be a force to be reckoned with today. But nooooo. Doing that would have helped elect a democrat. /s So a third party wasn’t formed and what happened? Obama happened! Twice!

And what is said about a third party today? “A third party will only help elect a democrat. Let’s keep doing what we’re doing.”

Now I’ll sit back and wait for the personal insults.

Great post. Walker doesn’t have charisma either. Like it or not - obana had charisma and the voters went for it. Romney was a stick-in-the-mud, and boring. I think he would have been a better president that obama, but, lacked charisma and personality. We have to remember that people vote for charm and personality - not so much platforms or ideas. We are in the age of the LIV, and reality stars - sadly. I also got to thinking about what Trump said about identifying with some of the DEM positions, economy, etc. He is going after the DEM vote - pure and simple. Sure, he might believe some of their points, but, I also think he would surround himself with excellent advisers.

“Gee wiz Donald, you econ genius, all of that crash happened precisely because of what “Democrats would have done’ and what they DID...”

I agree. GWB made some dumb decisions too, but the structure for the bubble and crash was rooted in laws passed by Democrats.

That is why I’m not a Trumpster. I’d vote for him against a Democrat in the general election. But I think it has been obvious at least since Bill Clinton that Democrats, as a rule, loathe what made America great and have no clue whatsoever about how the real world operates. They have no clue how their “fairness” policies CREATE bigger problems than the ones the are supposed to solve (but don’t).

“... the ability to become personally wealthy, while a damned good ability,hasn’t got anything to do necessarily with understanding the macro economy.”

More true words. Stuff going on under Obama with housing is setting up huge problems for us 10-20 years from now. If someone cannot understand that, they won’t understand how to head them off. If Trump couldn’t figure out in 2000 what problems were being created, then he won’t be much help now.

Bachmann’s supporters (I was one of them) ditched her after the first debate for no good reason. If I recall correctly, she made some 100% accurate 10th amendment pro-states rights comments and the rest of the RINO candidates (with the help of the media) acted like what she had said was completely incorrect (when it wasn’t as far as I know) and that she was living on Mars or something. Everyone fell for the ruse and ditched her. It was a sad day for the Republican Party.

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.