Posted on 01/27/2016 1:21:16 PM PST by Kaslin
They’re not conservatives. That’s the point. They’re Repube-icans, as Mark Levin would say.
you’re joking around, of course, right?
she is going to give up ALL her ideologies for trump and a parade.
no problem with tax cuts, no problem with backing state abortion limitations.
no problem with sending illegals back home.
whatever you’ve having, send me a bottle or two :)
we can’t get what we want when we have the house senate and presidency, like in the 2000s.
i hope he gives her irrelevant concessions that make her happy.
i’d like to see it first. I’m Thomas that way.
Trump is the wrench to throw into the wheels of The Cheap Labor Express
Just a richer Obama with the same tyrannical inclinations. Voters imbued “Hope and Change” to mean what they wanted it to mean. They’re doing the same with “Make America Great Again.”
Interesting point. I will think about it.
Nope.
If he backs off his stated immigration plan he goes down and I think he knows that is what is propelling him to the White House.
Americans are sick of having their country overrun.
Sometimes, the enemy of my enemy is just the enemy of my enemy.
I know and I agree, but I was just telling you what Dole said.
Better look very closely at the man and any information available now to discern the likelihood that he will follow through on what he says.
IMO there are red flags all over the place.
You said it. There is absolutely noting conservative about him.
It worked on us
The republicans could have taken a stand against Obama, instead they rubber stamped everything he wanted, we got the irrelevant concessions
So why can’t it work in reverse?
Why do we take on “batter wife syndrome”
We need to think like winners
Take your silly parade and get out, losers....
Phil Gramm was a particularly egregious example. Trent Lott is another example, but you couldn't throw a rock in Washington without hitting one of them.
The current wisdom is that just about anybody who's anybody in DC is Establishment and not truly conservative, but through them all out and the replacements will eventually end up the same way.
I'm not counseling cynicism or despair, just a recognition that policies that are presented as conservative and supported by elected conservatives aren't necessarily the best for the country.
You can certainly argue that open borders isn't really a conservative policy, but so many elected officials with an R after their name and so many conservative think-tankers and opiners have supported such policies that by this point the argument has to be about whether open borders are good for the country and not over whether you can label such policies as "conservative."
not sure what the last line means?
the gay pride parade?
who are the loers? the dems?
cause i know FReepers wouldn’t attack other FReepers with that word because they back different candidates.
Is he even really anti-Establishment though? His past conduct belies his words, and THAT is the best predictor of future behavior. We all want him to break things when he goes to Washington. Yet there is nothing but his campaign rhetoric to indicate he will not simply embrace the Establishment as he always has. I fear that we are finally getting rid of one egotistical, self-absorbed, bombastic leftist to put in another egotistical, self-absorbed, bombastic leftist.
Look, we all know that Washington is Perk City. It is now designed stroke egos and perpetuate big government. That corrupting influence can only be resisted by a consistently principled ideologue, and Trump is none of those things. We want somebody to break the Republicrat Establishment, but Trump has only displayed the kind of character that will break our hearts and ruin this nation even more.
Only one candidate has actually stood up to the Establishment— note they hate him, and are embracing Trump now. There’s a reason.
Finally, if Trump’s ego or fear is such that he cannot stand up to Megan Kelly questioning his bona fide conservative values tonight, then how can anyone in their right mind believe he will stand up to anyone in Congress, much less Iran, Russia, etc., and push a conservative agenda?
Let no one say they weren’t warned not be naive about this man.
Pajama boy Ben, good little Salem Radio and Conservative Review soldier, still beating his drum against Trump.
What will all of these self-important pundits do if their worst nightmare happens, and the great unwashed mass of nativist xenophobe voters elect Trump?
“I am sure if he came out for amnesty tomorrow, saying it was a one-time thing to get our system back in line, they would flock to the internet to tell everyone how”
Not me. I remember being fed that very same line by the lying GOPe scum when the Reagan amnesty passed in 1986. Fool me once, and all that.
+1
Yes, the losers are the dems
And they would be, when Trump is elected president
“For example, Neocons are / were pro-interventionist. Fine. That has nothing to do with border security and trade.”
I beg to differ. I used to subscribe to Commentary back during the Reagan days, and if nothing else Commentary was the flagship of the neocons. An almost religious enthusiasm for mass immigration has always been a neocon hallmark. You can still hear it if you listen to Dennis Prager or Michael Medved. For a lot of neocons the opposition to mass immigration, legal or illegal, makes you nearly a nazi. And I’m not exaggerating for effect.
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.