If I could only trust Donald trump, maybe I could vote for him. He says a lot of the right things, but then his previous actions show that his ideology is, shall we say, highly flexible.
Another problem is that he intends to add about a trillion dollars per year to the debt according to multiple analyses, which is more than Obama added last year. He vaguely promises to pay for his military buildup by finding the magical "waste" that every candidate since Wilson has promised to find, and not one has done anything about. Instead of "Voodoo Economics", he is dealing in "Harry Potter Economics", where he will wave a magic wand and deficits will disappear. I'm not buying it.
He also intends to start a trade war with most of our most important partners, calling for tariffs up to 45%. While that might play in Poughkeepsie, it is by every economist of every stripe the exact opposite of what we should do. He also intends to devalue the dollar to increase exports, a failed policy of despots and communists that causes turmoil in every corner of the marketplace and winds up causing hardship to retirees and main street alike. Bottom line, I give him a "D-" on economic policy.
How about the constitution? Well he thinks he can bar people from entering this country based upon their religion, and can limit first, fourth, and fifth amendment rights. He is pro 2 though, and that is likely just for show as he has supported bans on "assault weapons" in the past with his buddy Bloomberg, another constitutional scholar. /sarcasm. "C" at best.
Foreign policy is another "bright spot" for our champion. he intends to "make America Great" again by following the great neocons of the past. Even Hillary is less gung-ho than he is and she makes W look like a piker. Bomb them all, send in the troops, and let God sort it out because that has worked so well for us since WWII. "F" no doubt about it.
Oh, but he is the Republican nominee and we can't let Hillary win because she will allow abortions on every street corner and we will be paying for it and she will nominate Barbara Boxer to the Supreme Court and she will run up the debt by $1 trillion per year. Well, maybe yes and maybe no, most of the social stuff is outside the powers of a President and the Senate must approve a nominee. So what is the real alternative? Like Penn Gillette said, "If Trump wins the nomination I will slap a Hillary sticker on my f%$&ing car" I probably won't go that far, but don't push me.
Enabling, adj. To make unreasonable accommodations for the harmful conduct of another and shielding that person from the consequences of their actions, thus allowing the harmful activity to continue beyond it's natural termination.
It is time for some consequences. I will not vote for a person just because they have an "R" behind their name. I would think that some of the great Republicans of the past and perhaps the present would be leaving the party should a man like Trump be the standard bearer. Is this really the party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, Goldwater, and Reagan? Trump doesn't even belong on the same page with those men, let alone the same list.
Gary Johnson is a smart man, a strong originalist, and a fiscal conservative with a proven record. He opposes the Patriot Act, he supported the war in Afghanistan but not Iraq believing the evidence that Iraq supported terrorism to be lacking. He believes that we should strengthen our homeland defenses, but he would not commit ground troops abroad or continue drone strikes in their present form. He would continue to support the Kurds in Iraq but not the current government unless they step up. He is for school choice. He's for continuing medicare and Social Security for those over 50 but privatizing it for those under 50. He believes that we must stop illegal immigration and reform legal immigration. He is for a path to work visas, but not citizenship for those currently here, only after we strengthen the borders. He also supports "one strike and you are out" for illegals, as well as stiff sanctions against those who employ illegal workers. He believes that government doesn't belong in the bedroom, he also believes that a woman has a right to an abortion, but not late term, and he thinks that the government should not pay for abortion services or contraceptives. He says that religeous organizations and closely held businesses should be left free to practice their beliefs without government intervention.
I am considering his candidacy as a real alternative to the two idiots of equal terror put up by the major parties.
