Conservatives: This is It

Those are supply side.

The term trickle down is designed to offend.

We do not call your concept trickle up.

Take the case of the new house.

Our explanation clears that up.

Your explanation the way I get it is if you flood the market with cash, earned or not, the houses magically happen.

During the New Deal, FDR tried to flood the market with cash. But the question has to be so why did it fail to work?

That must be your idea of trickle up. It was extremely slow.

War cured the depression.

Obama has such problems today because he thinks like you think.

So, going off your comments

you have trickle down or trickle up

Me, I prefer supply side. Had you used that term to start with I would have understood it.

 

He said "repeal and replace" just as every other Republican on the house has done the last six years.

Are you saying THEY ARE in favor of a national healthcare?

Hey! Trump wants you to judge him on what he says TODAY. I do. You may not like that judgement but, hey, you're voting for him, not me.

 

So what?

Nope, and that is my point. None of the other conservative Republicans want national healthcare like Trump does, which is a big problem for your argument that "Trump hits on every conservative theme".

Thanks for confirming that you couldn't find any other conservative Republican who wanted to establish universal healthcare, the way Trump does. Really destroys your laughable argument that Trump "hits every conservative theme."

 

Your party doesn't include minorities in anything. That's why the party of scared, old white men is going lose big.

 

People are idiots. Politics has become a game of taking sides. Actual values are things of the past.

 

Well, the black intellectuals joined our party.

As to the vote in November, one thinks you are bluffing.

http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/african-american-republicans-influential-2015/2015/02/18/id/625445/

 

I beg to differ. Trump is no conservative. Even his supporters admit that. Trump supporters call him a populist. It was the conservative faction of the GOP that launched the anti or never Trump movements. It is conservatives who went for Cruz during the primaries, not for Trump. It is the conservatives who keep trying to find a candidate to challenge Trump in the general election. Trump's lifelong held views are far more in tune with the Democrats than the Republican Party. Sure, he change a couple to run as a Republican, but I am sure if he was ever elected, he would go with his lifelong liberal political philosophy while president. In fact Trump has been a registered Democrat three times. It is also true he has been a Republican three times, since 2012 this time. Throw in the three times Trump was an independent and the one time he belonged to the Reform Party, it just shows that Trump goes with whatever party the wind is blowing more favorably on. During the times the wind is still, he is an independent.

Trump is an opportunist who took advantage of some very angry Republicans and won the nomination with 40% of the vote. A conservative he is not, that is why you see around 20% of all Republicans not supporting him and stating they would never vote for him. Trump may be many things, but a conservative is not one of them.

 

I don't respond to inline quotes or read the posts. The technique is for taking a statement or word out of context and arguing that rather than the ideas expressed.

 

Oh yes the GOP, the most diverse party ever.

 

What is your percentages of blacks?

How long do you think Democrats will keep believing the Democrats are there to help them?

http://townhall.com/columnists/john...o_few_black_americans_in_the_republican_party

 

You are arguing semantics not substance. If you didn't know that trickle down economics is supply side economics then you have been asleep since 1984.

 

You've been responding to inline quotes throughout this thread. What a coincidence that you suddenly took issue with them right when your argument could no longer be defended.

 

The GOP base is fractured. The only thing they seem to agree on is that they don't like the Democrats.

Its possible that a winning GOP candidate would need to be as bland as possible, refrain from making concrete commitments, and focus hard on frustration with the Democrats.

Of course, that would still leave the problem of what to do once in power so as not to anger the base. A lot of the GOP base feel that the party has swindled them before.

The Democratic base isn't exactly thrilled with their own establishment, of course, but seem to agree on more and remain more unified.

 

If they're sucking at Trump's teat, they're not pure. They're deaf, dumb and blind.

 

No, I stopped when it became evident that you use the method dishonestly to take quotes out of context and argue words rather than ideas.

 

Tell yourself whatever you need to. We both know why you can't continue

 

Your command of the language is lacking. "Won't" does not equal "can't." See? I respond to even your most meaningless posts when properly formed.

 

Only because you need to get the last word in - in order to feel like you haven't lost the argument. However, you have failed to prove how Trump "hits every conservative theme" after I pointed out his many non-conservative positions. You simply have no answer for it, so you would rather (suddenly) take issue with "inline posts" that somehow took your poorly formed argument "out of context", even though you offer no explanations for that either.

 

Gave you the answers. Showed your the proofs. Even did the math for you.

You can lead a pig to water but you can't make him a silk purse.

 

You did no such thing. Explain how Trump is hitting a "conservative theme" when he pushes for nationalized healthcare. Ready, set? Go!

 

May I make a point for the two of you to discuss if you want to?

Obama care is not some gift to the public from Government.

They robbed peter to pay paul for part of it. They robbed 800 million dollars from Medicare and shifted it to a different group.

That essentially is a no change since the money simply got diverted. Similar as taking Army funds and handing them to the Navy to spend.

Then you have the majority who have company paid for coverage. That is no gift from Government.

All ACA did is add some who could not get coverage prior to the insured rolls and a few did get paid for by government, but not very many.

Ergo it is not national, it is a shift of funds scam and it is ruining the insurance market. So many insurance companies want no further part in this.

 

"Repeal and Replace" which is what Trump pushes is not pushing for "nationalized healthcare." That is, of course, unless every Republican in Congress is also pushing for "nationalized healthcare."

Ready...Set...DOH!

 

If you can’t take care of your sick in the country, forget it, it’s all over. ... I believe in universal healthcare," Trump told CNN’s Larry King in October 1999.

• "I would put forth a comprehensive health care program and fund it with an increase in corporate taxes, " Trump told The Advocate right before he dropped out of the race in February 2000.

• "The Canadian plan also helps Canadians live longer and healthier than America. … We need, as a nation, to reexamine the single-payer plan, as many individual states are doing," Trump writes in his 2000 book The America We Deserve.



Feel free to show some other "conservatives" who have said this very same thing. Stop dodging and produce.

 

All I can conclude by your claims is you like trickle up.

It would be nice if that worked, but sadly it does not.

 

Why is there never a call for liberal 'moderates'...You know, folk who do not worship Marx or belong to the cult of Global Warming...Even as recently as the Clinton years we had dem moderates but, alas, they have been purged. Now its all neo Marxism or nothing. We have 'moderates' in the GOP through today. Who do you think is whining so loudly and are so joyfully quoted in dem propaganda? The difference is, republican moderates run the party, though they haven't reflected the wishes of the vast majority of the GOP in a decade. Moderate dems have been out of party leadership for decades.

The bottom line, why should a philosophy that is only supported by a minority of its voters continue to run things. Are we not tired of losing national elections after those same leaders tell the base over and over again that the reason we lose is because our 'moderate' candidates are not moderate enough. You never see that from the left. They are proud of their extremists.