Why would any conservative support Donald Trump?

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Yep, so? Doesn't seem to stop plenty of you lot across the pond making assertions about the political machinations that go on over here does it?

Why would a Brit place so much thought into who the President of the USA will be? I highly doubt anybody from the USA sits around worrying about the "Royal Family." I couldn't care less, myself.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Why would a Brit place so much thought into who the President of the USA will be? I highly doubt anybody from the USA sits around worrying about the "Royal Family." I couldn't care less, myself.

Some of you do and I could care less about the royal family over here myself...

 

[Arthur Brain]

You sure like to pretend you know this man.

He's not one to keep his light under a bushel GM. Folk in Scotland will tell you that...

 

[Nihilo]

But you're not giving any explicit definitions of what would constitute good or bad.

Well yes I did, in my introductory post ITT. I'm American, republican, conservative, pro-life, pro-RKBA. I like the bet.

Do you know what a bet is? I don't know anybody else who's saying they like a candidate because it's a good bet. There's inherent risk, ambiguity and uncertainty in a bet. I can't answer everything.

How about you voice specific opinions on what you perceive as good policies and bad ones, else what does 'make America great' even mean?

:AMR: I'm American republican. I think our republic is the best in the world and in all history. Our policies are already very good. Getting rid of, or fixing bad policies, takes a long time. Decades sometimes. Prohibition wasn't that long, but even still, that was a disaster of a policy that should have been repealed in months or a year tops. Every day people died because of that policy.

If there is a policy that is of that level of importance, where people are dying every single day; I guess it would be that I'd like to see tiny firearms (whether pistols or revolvers) banned temporarily, similarly to how quote-unquote assault weapons were banned temporarily before that stupid Clinton policy was permitted to die on the vine by President Bush. Ban "mouse guns." For eight years. The problem is that there are so many of them out there, that if we are going to confiscate/ban them, we need to know for a near certainty that we are doing the right thing, and we can't know that without carefully collecting and analyzing data, somehow determining whether "mouse guns" are very significant to us, and dangerous, or just dangerous.

"Mouse guns" are not Constitutional, so there's no Second Amendment issue here.

What do you think about immigration, welfare, healthcare, economic proposals etc etc?

"Trump's wall isn't the worst idea I've ever heard."
the Vatican.
'Cause the Vatican's got a wall. For similar reasons.

Welfare is only an issue when demand for employment is too low. Focus on raising demand for employment.

Healthcare, not sure if we have enough data yet to either confirm or deny that quote-unquote [President] Obamacare is better or worse than what we had.

Government should help small and medium enterprises (SME) to compete with gigantic organizations who are competitors, specifically in the realm of having independent (i.e., not government, not police) assistance paid for in regard to meeting minimum regulatory requirements in order to permit C-level staff to operate free of unreasonable bureaucratic distractions, which is the real reason why SMEs don't succeed more frequently---the success of SMEs is probably the biggest factor in the demand for employment.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Some of you do and I could care less about the royal family over here myself...

Then, why worry about who will be the next President here? How will the outcome affect you personally?

 

[Nihilo]

In answer to the question as to why conservatives would support Trump, you offered a list of reasons, including



It seems logical that you like it because he's saying it, and because you believe he can make it happen. Why else would you have it in a list of reasons to vote for him?

Yet when I ask you what would make America great again, you don't know, but you know Trump personifies it.

The Trump trope is "make America great again."

"It seems logical?" That's not at all what I think. America is going to make America great again. Not Trump. But I believe of all the candidates that he is a good bet. Very little risk, and a lot of upside. I weight bets like this heavier than other bets that are more conservative. It's not proportional. The upside of America operating like America in the 1950s and 1960s economically (sustained high demand for employment) is . . .

Yuge. And all the other candidates are known quantities and Trump is an unknown quantity and there's only one candidate who's on the Forbes 400, and there's only one who's mentioned by name in the Trailer Park Boys Xmas Special.

I like the bet. Very little downside. 'Lot of upside.

With all due respect, I don't think that's a good enough reason to vote for him.

Well I appreciate you, and your respect.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I'm not but I'd sooner give my support to a fridge magnet than vote for Donald Chump if I were...

Well, you have no say in the outcome anyway.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Well yes I did, in my introductory post ITT. I'm American, republican, conservative, pro-life, pro-RKBA. I like the bet.

Do you know what a bet is? I don't know anybody else who's saying they like a candidate because it's a good bet. There's inherent risk, ambiguity and uncertainty in a bet. I can't answer everything.
:AMR: I'm American republican. I think our republic is the best in the world and in all history. Our policies are already very good. Getting rid of, or fixing bad policies, takes a long time. Decades sometimes. Prohibition wasn't that long, but even still, that was a disaster of a policy that should have been repealed in months or a year tops. Every day people died because of that policy.

If there is a policy that is of that level of importance, where people are dying every single day; I guess it would be that I'd like to see tiny firearms (whether pistols or revolvers) banned temporarily, similarly to how quote-unquote assault weapons were banned temporarily before that stupid Clinton policy was permitted to die on the vine by President Bush. Ban "mouse guns." For eight years. The problem is that there are so many of them out there, that if we are going to confiscate/ban them, we need to know for a near certainty that we are doing the right thing, and we can't know that without carefully collecting and analyzing data, somehow determining whether "mouse guns" are very significant to us, and dangerous, or just dangerous.

"Mouse guns" are not Constitutional, so there's no Second Amendment issue here.
"Trump's wall isn't the worst idea I've ever heard."
the Vatican.
'Cause the Vatican's got a wall. For similar reasons.

Welfare is only an issue when demand for employment is too low. Focus on raising demand for employment.

Healthcare, not sure if we have enough data yet to either confirm or deny that quote-unquote [President] Obamacare is better or worse than what we had.

Government should help small and medium enterprises (SME) to compete with gigantic organizations who are competitors, specifically in the realm of having independent (i.e., not government, not police) assistance paid for in regard to meeting minimum regulatory requirements in order to operate free of unreasonable bureaucratic distractions.

Okay, I hear certain specifics here but still amid a lot of hazy rhetoric. Prohibition was obviously a bad idea as history demonstrates but that's not coming back so let's get to the present. You think banning 'tiny firearms' is a good idea in the temporary, so why specifically? Why just temporarily at that?

Why is 'Trumps Wall' a good idea? (Heck, if he does get in that's what he'll likely call the thing with a huge plaque saying the same). Why do you personally think it will work and how is it going to work and likely to be funded etc?

How do you think Trump is going to raise the demand for employment and how? How is he going to create a market for jobs in your opinion? Be specific. Why is he better for the 'job' of doing this than Cruz or anyone else?

What do you mean by 'we haven't got enough data' in regards to present health care legislation? If you're not sure whether it's good or bad then what difference would it make who's in power?

'Unreasonable bureaucratic distractions'? What does that even mean Nihilo? You're sounding like a veritable politician yourself with all of this vague and non specific morass...

 

[Arthur Brain]

Well, you have no say in the outcome anyway.

True enough but I can still voice an opinion on the ego driven prat.

:e4e:

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

True enough but I can still voice an opinion on the ego driven prat.

:e4e:

Well, I'm sure Trump is shaking in his boots. If he only knew you didn't approve of him, he'd probably drop out of the race?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Then, why worry about who will be the next President here? How will the outcome affect you personally?

I don't 'worry' about it GM. I do happen to be concerned with politics and how it affects others believe it or not.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Well, I'm sure Trump is shaking in his boots. If he only knew you didn't approve of him, he'd probably drop out of the race?

He could care less whether you approved or disapproved of him GM, let alone me. That's the part that's missing you unfortunately.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

True enough but I can still voice an opinion on the ego driven prat.

:e4e:

Hopefully, he's not a William Henry Prat?

 

[Nihilo]

You think banning 'tiny firearms' is a good idea in the temporary, so why specifically?

Because there's an apparent inverse relationship between the size of the firearm, and the decision to intentionally shoot yourself in the head with it. Plus there are accidents with the smallest handguns that are less likely with larger handguns. And some criminals prefer them during crimes due to their easy, invisible concealabilty, and this same feature may, or may not, suggestively influence the decision to commit a crime in the first place, much like how it influences the decision to commit suicide.

Why just temporarily at that?

Because I don't know if it's a good idea.

Why is 'Trumps Wall' a good idea?

Mexico is full of brutal drug lords with machine guns. And we don't have any, because of Reagan.

Why do you personally think it will work and how is it going to work and likely to be funded etc?

It'd be a wall. Funded publicly, unless there's a toll also. A toll is probably not a good idea. The wall is about where we don't want people crossing the border. We want them to funnel towards where we want them to cross, not just anywhere. I don't know how a wall would be or will be built, that's not my bailiwick. But Trump has nothing but construction experience.

How do you think Trump is going to raise the demand for employment and how? How is he going to create a market for jobs in your opinion? Be specific.

I don't know. I like the bet. And I don't think that any other candidate or President has had any good way of doing this, beyond President Bush's advice to Americans to just spend money and buy things.

What do you mean by 'we haven't got enough data' in regards to present health care legislation?

We don't know whether we like Obamacare better than what we had before yet. We very well may, but we couldn't confirm it with a super majority in Congress right now.

If you're not sure whether it's good or bad then what difference would it make who's in power?

Because who's in power is going to be involved in the determination of whether any policy is "good or bad." I don't want someone who's already made up their mind, and Trump seems to me flexible enough to handle new data and information with a level head.

'Unreasonable bureaucratic distractions'? What does that even mean Nihilo? You're sounding like a veritable politician yourself with all of this vague and non specific morass...

Bureaucratic distractions are not always bad. The C-level staff at Enron should have been bureaucratically distracted from operating Enron, and they were. But SMEs are hassled by regulations, simply because there's a certain amount of work required in order to play in any given market, table stakes, implemented and enforced by governments and by non-government organizations that exercise regulatory power over markets. This requirement does vary with size in many ways, but the practical fact is that most SME executives must devote more of their time on bureaucratic work than executives from much larger businesses or corporations do.

Alternate to this idea would be subsidizing professional independent business consultancy for all SMEs.

Basically, my position is that it shouldn't be a competitive advantage to be able to easily meet all regulatory requirements just because you're a huge business or organization. Nor should being able to hire professional consultants. It's adding insult to injury, and it's not right. Every C-level executive should be able to easily not be unreasonably bureaucratically distracted. Enron was reasonably bureaucratically distracted.

 

[rexlunae]

It'd be a wall. Funded publicly, unless there's a toll also. A toll is probably not a good idea. The wall is about where we don't want people crossing the border. We want them to funnel towards where we want them to cross, not just anywhere. I don't know how a wall would be or will be built, that's not my bailiwick. But Trump has nothing but construction experience.

I think he described it as a "big, beautiful wall". Does it bother you at all that there's more detail in your post here trying to imagine the wall than there is in any of his descriptions of it? He's awfully big on hand-waving...

Also, how was it that El Chapo escaped again? It seems like there were some walls around him.

 

[journey]

Head to head Cruz beats Hillary. Yet Donald loses to Hilary.

Actually that's one of the things Donald attacks Cruz on.... Trump says Cruz is too uncompromising and wont be able to work with congress.

You're right. Cruz has difficulty getting support from his own party because he tries to remain a Constitutional Conservative. He evidently doesn't play the games with donors and special interest groups that most of the Republican establishment does. This is good as far as I'm concerned. The Republican establishment needs to learn how to be true Republicans again, and Cruz just might be the man for the job.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Because there's an apparent inverse relationship between the size of the firearm, and the decision to intentionally shoot yourself in the head with it. Plus there are accidents with the smallest handguns that are less likely with larger handguns. And some criminals prefer them during crimes due to their easy, invisible concealabilty, and this same feature may, or may not, suggestively influence the decision to commit a crime in the first place, much like how it influences the decision to commit suicide.

Um, I doubt the first consideration of most people buying a firearm is how proportional it is to blowing one's head off with it...however, I can see some reasoning going on there in regards to the conceal aspect that are approaching logic so fair enough.

Because I don't know if it's a good idea.

Why? You surely lean in the direction of it being a good one so why so hesitant?

Mexico is full of brutal drug lords with machine guns. And we don't have any, because of Reagan.

Okay, maybe your hesitancy to accept ownership of an idea is now well placed. This is just a dumb statement to make. Mexico - like your own country - is full of people of all stripes, including drug 'lords', cartels and the like.

It'd be a wall. Funded publicly, unless there's a toll also. A toll is probably not a good idea. The wall is about where we don't want people crossing the border. We want them to funnel towards where we want them to cross, not just anywhere. I don't know how a wall would be or will be built, that's not my bailiwick. But Trump has nothing but construction experience.

Okay then, Trump would be good at building a wall, well, getting hired constructors to do that at any rate...well, not at any rate, very cheap rates I would imagine...

I don't know. I like the bet. And I don't think that any other candidate or President has had any good way of doing this, beyond President Bush's advice to Americans to just spend money and buy things.
We don't know whether we like Obamacare better than what we had before yet. We very well may, but we couldn't confirm it with a super majority in Congress right now.

That's like placing a bet on a horse you happen to like the name of without knowing whether it's still got four legs or even what race it might happen to be running in anyway...

Because who's in power is going to be involved in the determination of whether any policy is "good or bad." I don't want someone who's already made up their mind, and Trump seems to me flexible enough to handle new data and information with a level head.

Oh, so you need someone in power to determine whether a policy is 'good or bad'? You don't have any ideas on what constitutes either yourself? Say I think it's a good idea to exterminate the crippled because they're a tax burden on the economy. Good or bad idea in your opinion?

Bureaucratic distractions are not always bad. The C-level staff at Enron should have been bureaucratically distracted from operating Enron, and they were. But SMEs are hassled by regulations, simply because there's a certain amount of work required in order to play in any given market, table stakes, implemented and enforced by governments and by non-government organizations that exercise regulatory power over markets. This requirement does vary with size in many ways, but the practical fact is that most SME executives must devote more of their time on bureaucratic work than executives from much larger businesses or corporations do.

Alternate to this idea would be subsidizing professional independent business consultancy for all SMEs.

Basically, my position is that it shouldn't be a competitive advantage to be able to easily meet all regulatory requirements just because you're a huge business or organization. Nor should being able to hire professional consultants. It's adding insult to injury, and it's not right. Every C-level executive should be able to easily not be unreasonably bureaucratically distracted. Enron was reasonably bureaucratically distracted.

That's a whole load of non specific guff any back bench politician would shy away from spouting dude. Specifics...

 

[journey]

Destroying political correctness is something that only Trump is willing to do. Everyone else is funded by others, has people whispering in their ears telling them what to say, and clings so hard to whatever side they are on that they can't even fx what is relatively easy without somehow offending some bias of their ilk.

Trump is an unorthodox conservative, and that's what conservatives need whether they want to cry about it or accept it, because right now your rigidness is your folly

I actually think that Trump is a liberal Democrat posing as a Republican. I also think that Trump might be playing a game just for the fun of it. Trump does and says things that are out of control at times, especially with his language. Trump is really a mystery to many folks who can't figure out what he will do next, and I'm one of them. The polls do claim that Trump can't beat Clinton, but Cruz can. I think we need to get behind Cruz and get him nominated. If you're a Christian Conservative, Cruz is a better choice than Trump. I know that Cruz won't provide as much entertainment, but we're looking for a good, solid President - not an entertainer.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I actually think that Trump is a liberal Democrat posing as a Republican. I also think that Trump might be playing a game just for the fun of it. Trump does and says things that are out of control at times, especially with his language. Trump is really a mystery to many folks who can't figure out what he will do next, and I'm one of them. The polls do claim that Trump can't beat Clinton, but Cruz can. I think we need to get behind Cruz and get him nominated. If you're a Christian Conservative, Cruz is a better choice than Trump. I know that Cruz won't provide as much entertainment, but we're looking for a good, solid President - not an entertainer.

Trump isn't a mystery to anyone apart from those who wear shades or something to blank out the blatant transparency of the man. He's a self serving egomaniac who doesn't give a 'hoot' about anything apart from fulfilling his latest 'look at me' project.

And boy is it working...

:doh:

 

[journey]

:think: Reagan always presented himself as an intelligent gentleman. Trump comes across ... well the opposite of Reagan.

I think that you're right. Trump isn't close to being like Ronald Reagan. For one thing, Reagan didn't lose control and curse.