Leaving the Conservative movement after decades....

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Blueracer


A partial jest. If it doesn't apply to you, personally, then there's no need to feel insulted....unless you deny that legalizing pot isn't a major factor in that party's support. If that is a major concern with all that's going on in this country....well, they're doing too much and too often.

My real disagreement with Libertarian views is the contradiction between a Lassie Faire attitude towards individual freedoms and somehow assume a pit-bull mentality towards the Constitution in protecting those individual freedoms. Not bloody likely.

Bottom line is the Libertarian philosophy hasn't met with traction with the general population.

I support libertarianism 100%. I'd like to say Ron Paul ran an election too early and he'd gain traction in this anti government environment but I don't believe that. You got a lot of Rand die hards here but the apple fell far from that tree. I just think we would be better off with state regulation on most laws. Gay marriage I'm for, if you want to be sad like straight couples...... Go ahead. Abortions, gun etc. I'm pro all of it. There's always going to be fighting. If a state or even more so a store wants to say no to the gays just move. It'll bring more business to the more open minded states and everyone is happy. No reason to force people federally and cause resentment

a reply to: EightTF3

Thanks for the 'clarification' on your position.

Here a RNC committee member admits the primaries are just a circus and that the establishment chooses the candidate

a reply to: nwtrucker

Not disagreeing with you on the pot thing being a major reason for the support. I don't want, like or care about that. I'm just stating I fully agree with the idea of people being able to choose on a more local level.

originally posted by: khnum
Here a RNC committee member admits the primaries are just a circus and that the establishment chooses the candidate

We'll have to see come the convention. They can do what they want. They had him sign a loyalty pledge. The party has clearly broken from it. They only give the election to Hillary by breakink it. That just shows they'd prefer status quo from either party to Trump

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: yuppa
Trump is a populist,and thats ok.

I suppose Reagan was , as well....

yeah, but so was jimmy carter.

someone bucking the system and status quo isn't automatically a savior.

As far as the overall point of this topic, good...all parties need to be dismantled now and then. once the establishment on any side becomes comfortable, corruption becomes rampant..it becomes the norm.

I probably dont agree with you on much, but I totally agree on the idea of new party formations, if only to re-evaluate the new reality of the day. free trade would be great amongst equal nations, but it typically means legal slavery for corporations without consequence when allowing in that mix poor nations.

originally posted by: EightTF3
a reply to: nwtrucker

Not disagreeing with you on the pot thing being a major reason for the support. I don't want, like or care about that. I'm just stating I fully agree with the idea of people being able to choose on a more local level.

One would have thought that what the tenth was for. Both wings are intrusive. I suppose the left is a bit worse. But that's really isn't germane. Both are guilty as charged.

a reply to: EightTF3

The RNC just signed their own death warrant. IMO. The only 'out' I see for them is false backing of Trump and do him in politically during his Presidency and point to the 'massive failure of third party/independent Presidencies.


Unless Trump can beat them at their game, that is.....he has so far.

a reply to: nwtrucker

The only way the RNC, the GOP can survive is to adapt.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nwtrucker

The only way the RNC, the GOP can survive is to adapt.

Agreed. Else they go they way of the Whigs. The party they replaced.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Mr. Trump doesn't ' Play Ball " with these so called " Establishment Guys " , so naturally they want him GONE . Simple as that .

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: nwtrucker

Mr. Trump doesn't ' Play Ball " with these so called " Establishment Guys " , so naturally they want him GONE . Simple as that .

I see Trump has pointed a finger at George Soros in an ad. So obvious a target yet none of the other 'Republican' candidates have even gone there. Another nail in the coffin for the Republican Party.

More has come to light, largely due to Trump ruffling the feathers of those, oh so comfortable, leaders of both parties, in the last few months that it is impossible to ignore just how arrogant and myopic these people are.

They are unequivocally exposed.

Time for 'we the people' to act. Otherwise we will deserve everything we get.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Kasich got a donation from Soros.

Cruz is probably funded by the Koch brothers.

a reply to: ketsuko

Trump is either the real deal or this is the best play ever being put on globally.

I have been thinking about this.

Trump is not an ideologue. At least in the political sense.

He does have an angle. Which is anyone's guess.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nwtrucker

About the only thing the conservative movement and I agree on are taxes and Obamacare.

Conservatives getting worked up over gay marriage, abortion, legalizing pot need to just accept the fact that times change and individuals are and should be free to do what they want, when they want to, with whom they want to do it with.

Eh, you might be surprised over a conservative's stance on gay marriage. We agree people should do what they want, but we also think making something legal to the point where those who disagree are forced to participate is wrong mainly because for many marriage is not merely a civil thing, but a religious one.

On abortion, we believe that there is a human being with its own right to life inside the mother at some point and that should be recognized by everyone and given its legal due. Now many want to only account for the mother as a human which is wrong. And public on this has been shifting back to our favor with the advent of sonograms and the knowledge that they can feel pain and are aware quite early in pregnancy. Plus, we don't feel our tax dollars should pay for other women's poor reproductive choices to that extent which is inherently conservative.

On pot, I don't think most of us care all that much ... right up until you ask us to subsidize people who are freely using and not contributing to society in any meaningful way. I don't think I ought to be paying for their booze and cigs, either. The biggest danger I see to legal pot is that we don't have the cultural framework for legal usage that we do for cigs and booze, and the advocates go all hog wild telling us it's so harmless we ought to have our infants smoking to get them sleep at night (yes, an exaggeration but it sometimes feels that way with all the positive propaganda that gets spewed out of the pro lobby). Nothing is that good without its drawbacks.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: nwtrucker

Kasich got a donation from Soros.

Cruz is probably funded by the Koch brothers.

Actually, last I heard, the Kochs have mostly sat this one out.

a reply to: nwtrucker

The only thing I don't understand, is your support of Trump.

If Trump was against free trade and the outsourcing of American jobs, why does he have his "Trump" line of apparel produced in China & Mexico?

Do you honestly believe that he can't make a profit producing $60 neck ties with American labor?

Why does he utilize the foreign worker visa program to find employees for his businesses?

Why does he even willing to go to the point of hiring illegal immigrants on his construction sites?

In establishment politics, you have those who are bought out and those who buy them.

IMO, Trump is a buyer who has never looked out for anyone other than Trump. That's why he thinks it's perfectly fine to utilize Imminent Domain to enhance his private business and profit margins.

Did I mention the fact that you would be hard pressed to find a bigger narcissistic, egotist personality than Donald Trump.

For me, the questions are, which candidate is not bought out by special interest money?

Which candidate is not a special interest buyer?

Which candidate is not preaching one business philosophy while practicing another?

Which candidate does not go on the special interest speaking circuit?

Answer; Bernie Sanders!

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: nwtrucker

Now I'm in Trump's camp. Don't even know what to call it. The none of the above party?? The middle finger salute group?? Trumpettes? Trumpeters?

Trump calls himself a Common Sense Conservative. I like that. Sounds better than "the middle finger salute group".

i like that too

a reply to: neo96

Anyone's guess is accurate. It 'could' be as he says, however....

After all, he has 'money', he surely doesn't need the vitriol attendant to this running for President.

I can see no reasonable argument that would justify the shill label or plant, for that matter. Maybe I'm naïve, but the only explanation that jives is he thinks he can do better than the current lot. And that isn't even ego. Any of us could probably do better than what's been done now.

a reply to: Flatfish

Trump is a businessman. A successful one. In order to succeed, you have to play by the current rules of the environment which means using all the openings in the game like the ones you mentioned.

That doesn't mean you have to like them, but if you are going to succeed and be successful to the tune of any of the larger business entities, it does mean you have to use those openings.

Just like if you are going to be successful in business these days, you cannot make political enemies which is why you donate evenly all around because you need high powered allies in DC.

Again, it doesn't mean you have to like it, in fact, I'll bet many don't because it's a pain in the butt to have to fork over all that money to special interests, lobbying efforts, and political campaigns. But if you don't and someone proposes something that's bad for you, then you have no ears willing to listen when you explain just exactly why that would put you out of business.

This is cronyism, but to stay in business, it's the rule. You either pay to play or you fail. But it doesn't mean you like it. Heck, Bill Gates and Microsoft didn't ever lobby until they started passing laws against Microsoft in DC, and guess what? They got into the lobbying right quick!

Whether or not he's serious about anything? I don't know, but knocking him for succeeding in an environment that demands what he's done in order to survive and thrive is a bit like bagging on a shark for eating a seal.