Trump

[shock]

The worst thing about the attitude of "I don't like authoritarian big government, although I guess it is ok if it is my guy in the position of power" is that it further entrenches big government for the future. To say that Trump might strong-arm in a few decent policies is to miss the bigger point. Just like Federal Spending never goes away (budget cuts are near impossible to achieve), once you introduce power, it never gets reduced. I want nothing of Trump, even in his rare instances of good policy, because he brings a new acceptance to "centralized power is good, so long as my guy has the power" to the remaining portions of the electorate who have generally tried to fight such power grabs. Any good that an individual Trump policy might bring in the short term would be vastly overshadowed by the deathblow it would deliver to the limited government wing of the country (whatever is left of it anyway). Stopping Trump is vital to the cause of maintaining a movement for small government. Hillary's side (the left) has been big government for generations. At least if she wins, the limited government right will be energized to fight her. With Trump as President, I fear we would enter an era (not just 4 or 8 years, but decades) where our choices were big government liberals and big government nationalists. Some would say we are there already, but I think Trump would clearly extinguish any significant resistance to big government that currently remains and any hope that it might once again have a role in national politics.

#NeverTrump

Its not that i am changing how i believe government should run, but I am dead set against Billary.

It has been interesting to watch the expansion of executive power over the last decade-plus.

GWB and Obama have both been very aggressive in this respect. Most Republicans didn't give a **** when it was accomplishing what they wanted between 2002-2006 (while Democrats were screaming bloody murder), and then predictably the script flipped completely when Obama continued the trend on a straight line over his eight years - Republicans couldn't scream loud enough that this was an unacceptable power grab, while Democrats could not care less because the executive orders have favored their policies during that period.

A few on both sides have recognized the hilarious hypocrisy involved, but most sincerely have no clue how dumb it looks when they complain about it from a "principled" standpoint only to break out the bullhorns and streamers when the same tactics favor their viewpoints. It is not really surprising though in a culture where so many on both sides legitimately believe the opposing group wants to "destroy America" or something similarly nefarious.

The last 16 years has been undeniably bad for supporters of limited government power. The last really significant check we had on executive power was the invalidation of the line-item veto, which ironically was probably the one tool that may have empowered Trump to have some level of effectiveness from a budget standpoint (the case was absolutely correctly decided, however).

The slide has been happening for a while, but we are about to enter the warp speed phase I am afraid.

I agree. The one potential saving grace is that as a businessman Trump has seen how big government hurts business. While he wants to grow tarrifs i hope he wants to simplify them. I think i saw there were over 70,000 individual tarrifs in place. Thats ridiculous. Im hoping that he will simplify everything.

I am not #NeverTrump because I am not going to bury my head in the sand and hope this passes. We are left with Trump vs Billary/Bernie. Bernie is the fast track to Greece, Hillary was the devil on bills shoulder in the 90's. Just... No. In this case, Trump is not worse than those two, and i think he will make an ernest effort to correct everything done post-88 in his first 100 days. I am totally on board with his first 100 days. Its what happens in 2018 that I am worried about. What happens when he encounters gridlock? Will we see King Trump? Maybe. But im more willing to toss the dice with King Trump then to live in a country I hate.

[Play Angry]

Its not that i am changing how i believe government should run, but I am dead set against Billary.

I agree. The one potential saving grace is that as a businessman Trump has seen how big government hurts business. While he wants to grow tarrifs i hope he wants to simplify them. I think i saw there were over 70,000 individual tarrifs in place. Thats ridiculous. Im hoping that he will simplify everything.

I am not #NeverTrump because I am not going to bury my head in the sand and hope this passes. We are left with Trump vs Billary/Bernie. Bernie is the fast track to Greece, Hillary was the devil on bills shoulder in the 90's. Just... No. In this case, Trump is not worse than those two, and i think he will make an ernest effort to correct everything done post-88 in his first 100 days. I am totally on board with his first 100 days. Its what happens in 2018 that I am worried about. What happens when he encounters gridlock? Will we see King Trump? Maybe. But im more willing to toss the dice with King Trump then to live in a country I hate.

Although I can sort of understand the choosing between the lesser of two evils approach (despite strongly disagreeing with it), I think you are projecting an enormous amount of false hope on a blank canvas here. This requires placing total faith in the tidbits of his policy proposals that line up with this agenda while completely ignoring the greater body of evidence.

Trump says government involvement is the solution, not the problem. A more empowered government will not roll back the damage done post-88 -it will only make it worse in the long term.

The current election (from a standpoint of supporters of small government) offers options comparable to asking a pro-lifer to choose their favorite type of abortion - "neither" seems like the best answer available.

[shocka khan]

If Bernie doesn't make the final ballot, it will be ridiculously low. I have a feeling that the 18-30 year olds will just not vote this cycle. BHO really pulled the young vote the last two cycles, and if it is Hil vs Trump, that isn't attractive to a lot of the younger generation imo.

I'm not sure that this is true, statistics points out to us that the 18-30 y.o. group is actually pretty fickle when it comes to showing up at the ballot box.

Now me, I'm one of those blue hairs, so I vote in every election I possibly can.

My theory is that many of the older folks (like me) who supported Bernie will now support Trump. His angle is totally different, but he's saying the same things as Bernie as it applies to trade deals and outsourcing. Both these issues resonate with me. Both are issues I can't trust Her Royal Highness (HRH) on.

My problems with Hillary are multiple. First of all, she is owned by the one percent (she refused to release transcripts of her Goldman speeches), her judgement isn't all that hot (didn't she set up an unauthorized server and wasn't there a State department advisory issued just after she took a trip to the far east regarding email security?), she is at least as sexist (towards men) as Trump is (towards women) and she has told us that she would be the third administration of Obama (which really turns me off).

I don't like what Trump is saying about immigrants, but I don't think Hillary is trustworthy as scandal is a hallmark of any Clinton administration.

Hillary's negatives outweigh Trump's negatives (IMO) so at this point, I'm voting for Trump and hoping for the best. That is all subject to change if Trump commits a ginormous screw up.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

As a resident of Kansas, there is zero chance your vote affects the outcome. Not 0.000001%. ZERO.

If Trump wins the White House, he will have won battleground states. States like Kansas will not have been close.
If Kansas is neck and neck, and your vote is about to be the deciding vote, it means Trump got killed in Ohio, Florida, etc., and winning Kansas will only reduce Hillary's winning margin.

In neither case does a Kansas voter affect the White House.

It does not matter if you think Hillary is worse than Trump. Ask yourself if Trump is worthy of your vote. There is no reason to vote for him while holding your nose. As a Kansan, vote for someone you actually support. Make a statement about who you actually wanted to see. Don't give Trump support unless you actually like him as a candidate. Your vote is going to be symbolic no matter what.

[im4wsu]

As a resident of Kansas, there is zero chance your vote affects the outcome. Not 0.000001%. ZERO.

If Trump wins the White House, he will have won battleground states. States like Kansas will not have been close.
If Kansas is neck and neck, and your vote is about to be the deciding vote, it means Trump got killed in Ohio, Florida, etc., and winning Kansas will only reduce Hillary's winning margin.

In neither case does a Kansas voter affect the White House.

It does not matter if you think Hillary is worse than Trump. Ask yourself if Trump is worthy of your vote. There is no reason to vote for him while holding your nose. As a Kansan, vote for someone you actually support. Make a statement about who you actually wanted to see. Don't give Trump support unless you actually like him as a candidate. Your vote is going to be symbolic no matter what.

So you're suggesting Mickey Mouse?

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

So you're suggesting Mickey Mouse?

I'm a Rubio fan, although I'm nervous about reports I've heard that he is becoming more favorable toward Trump. I'm planning to write him in, assuming he keeps his distance from supporting Trump. I can respect a vague refusal to outright state he will not vote for Trump, but if he endorses, Rubio is off my good list.

[shocka khan]

The worst thing about the attitude of "I don't like authoritarian big government, although I guess it is ok if it is my guy in the position of power" is that it further entrenches big government for the future. To say that Trump might strong-arm in a few decent policies is to miss the bigger point. Just like Federal Spending never goes away (budget cuts are near impossible to achieve), once you introduce power, it never gets reduced. I want nothing of Trump, even in his rare instances of good policy, because he brings a new acceptance to "centralized power is good, so long as my guy has the power" to the remaining portions of the electorate who have generally tried to fight such power grabs. Any good that an individual Trump policy might bring in the short term would be vastly overshadowed by the deathblow it would deliver to the limited government wing of the country (whatever is left of it anyway). Stopping Trump is vital to the cause of maintaining a movement for small government. Hillary's side (the left) has been big government for generations. At least if she wins, the limited government right will be energized to fight her. With Trump as President, I fear we would enter an era (not just 4 or 8 years, but decades) where our choices were big government liberals and big government nationalists. Some would say we are there already, but I think Trump would clearly extinguish any significant resistance to big government that currently remains and any hope that it might once again have a role in national politics.

#NeverTrump

Libertarianism in its extreme form, is an unworkable form of government. Here are a couple of arguments as to why:
* - Some amount of regulation of business is needed. Business, by its own efforts, will not design safe products, will not protect your investments and savings and will not act in the best interests of society. Business acts in its own best interest, which sometimes screws business partners and consumers.
* - Libertarianism is unable to react to emerging risks to the population as a whole. For instance, 5 years ago, a libertarian would probably argue that the government doesn't need to be in the cybersecurity business, as it is not a core function of government. Then the Chinese start stealing all our intellectual property and breaking into government servers (including DOD and State). While I would not call the current state of affairs as ideal (congress can't seem to get their act together to pass a sweeping cybersecurity bill), in a libertarian environment, the debate would not be around what we should be doing, but whether we should be doing anything about it at all.

I would prefer that our taxes be fair and our elected representatives be judicious about how they spend our money. Of course, neither party does that right now, but this is a reason our political system does not represent the 'common citizen' anymore.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I see a vast chasm between extreme libertarianism and what we have offered before us in Trump vs Clinton. I'm somewhere in that chasm.

[pinstripers]

The distance between Clinton and extreme liberalism is far from vast.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

The distance between Clinton and extreme liberalism is far from vast.

I'm confused. This comment seems to have come out of left field. Based on my post right before it, was it directed at my comments? I said libertarianism, not liberalism.

What am I missing?

[SB Shock]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/

The Democratic primary will technically march on, but Hillary Clinton is almost certainly going to be her party’s nominee. Same with Donald Trump. And voters don’t appear thrilled at the prospect: Clinton and Trump are both more strongly disliked than any nominee at this point in the past 10 presidential cycles.

[shock]

@Play Angry:, I'm not looking at it as the lesser of two evils. I'm looking at doing what I think is the best way at the present time to keep Clinton/Sanders out of the WH. If that is Trump, then I look for the positives in him being president. I know for sure two things about Trump:
1. A good businessman hires people that add to their abilities. For instance (very very basic), if someone makes tshirts and they are really good at cutting out the pattern, but can't sew worth ****, they don't hire another really good cutter, they hire a seamstress.
For this reason, I know there will be good people at each cabinet positions. There will be no valarie jarretts or Hillary Clintons, in reference to their relationship with Obama. Instead, it will likely be a mixed bag of politicians and civilians.

2. Trump is unpredictable.

Both are why I will vote for him. I know that HillBern will set fire to this country. There is a chance trump could do the same. There is also a chance he won't. The chance that he won't is enough for me.

[1972Shocker]

President Barack Hussein Obama is the most arrogant political person of my lifetime.

I believe he has been Trumped.

[1972Shocker]

I will not vote for Trump or Clinton. That said I don't think that, being from Kansas, my vote is of any particular significance in the this race. I can't see Hillary winning Kansas regardless how crazy The Donald and his cult followers get. In any case, I doubt that Hillary is counting on needing our whopping 6 electoral college votes. I don't expect either candidate to give Kansas and its voters much, if any, thought.

Hopefully, if enough folks vote 3rd party or abstain we can at least show whoever does prevail that they do not have a mandate.

[WuShock16]

I will not vote for Trump or Clinton. That said I don't think that, being from Kansas, my vote is of any particular significance in the this race. I can't see Hillary winning Kansas regardless how crazy The Donald and his cult followers get. In any case, I doubt that Hillary is counting on needing our whopping 6 electoral college votes. I don't expect either candidate to give Kansas and its voters much, if any, thought.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/02/republicans-have-a-massive-electoral-map-problem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump/

Your comment made me think of this article. We hear a lot about national poling numbers. However, national polling numbers really don't matter. The Electoral College does...right, wrong, or indifferent. There are 19 states that have gone blue for the past six elections. If those hold serve, only 28 more electoral votes are needed for Hillary to win. To combat this, Trump must either clean house elsewhere (Ohio and Florida being HUGE) or somehow flip one of those previously mentioned 19 states. I suppose that New York theoretically could flip, as it is Trump's home state. I have also heard that Pennsylvania has potential to be up in the air as the coal miners hate Hillary.

But yeah...Kansas will be very inconsquential to this.