Patterico's Pontifications

8/20/2015

The True Conservative Choice is Ted Cruz, not Donald Trump, Part 2: Eminent Domain Abuse

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:42 am



The Donald does not care about your property rights:

For more than 30 years Vera Coking lived in a three-story house just off the Boardwalk in Atlantic City. Donald Trump built his 22-story Trump Plaza next door. In the mid-1990s Trump wanted to build a limousine parking lot for the hotel, so he bought several nearby properties. But three owners, including the by then elderly and widowed Ms Coking, refused to sell.

As his daughter Ivanka said in introducing him at his campaign announcement, Donald Trump doesn’t take no for an answer.

Trump turned to a government agency – the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (CRDA) – to take Coking’s property. CRDA offered her $250,000 for the property – one-fourth of what another hotel builder had offered her a decade earlier. When she turned that down, the agency went into court to claim her property under eminent domain so that Trump could pave it and put up a parking lot.

Peter Banin and his brother owned another building on the block. A few months after they paid $500,000 to purchase the building for a pawn shop, CRDA offered them $174,000 and told them to leave the property. A Russian immigrant, Banin said: “I knew they could do this in Russia, but not here. I would understand if they needed it for an airport runway, but for a casino?”

P.S. “I knew they could do this in Russia, but not here” is an increasingly common phrase these days in the Russian community here in the U.S.

152 Responses to “The True Conservative Choice is Ted Cruz, not Donald Trump, Part 2: Eminent Domain Abuse”

  1. We have the spectacle of a crony capitalist campaigning against crony capitalism.

    kishnevi (80558c)

  2. People are doing a lot of retrospectives about Hurricane Katrina, which has its tenth anniversary approaching. People don’t seem to remember that among the stories Katrina obliterated from discussion was the Kelo vs. New London SCOTUS ruling that a city could use eminent domain for the purposes of generating tax revenue from redevelopment.

    I remember.

    L.N. Smithee (880b3e)

  3. Extra-disturbing: ready utilization of Kelo no doubt played a significant role in the reshaping of New Orleans (and the profiteering from the reshaping of New Orleans) after the flood.

    Kelo is scary.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  4. I agree with Ted on selling off Federal owned land in the western states. Logging, mining and drilling, oh my!!

    mg (31009b)

  5. I would like Ted to be bold and decree that only American built, manned, flagged merchant ships can drop off goods in our ports. Rebuilding the merchant marine would stimulate the iron industry, give us a greater capacity to build military ships, shipyards are huge employers of good jobs. we are talking 1 million jobs paying 50K plus to high school educated citizens

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  6. “I knew they could do this in Russia, but not here. I would understand if they needed it for an airport runway, but for a casino?”

    Kelo aside, another huge factor is that Atlantic City is the scuzziest city in America. It’s perfect for The Donald.

    JVW (ba78f9)

  7. Only American… what a load of anti-free market, anti-Conservative hogwash.

    John Hitchcock (5b2181)

  8. I would like Ted to be bold and decree that only American-born, tanned, flag-waving merchants can work in our economy. We would be talking over 1,000,000 jobs to our citizens.

    John?

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  9. epwj, what a marvelous idea. U. S. exports are basically commodities: timber, wheat, apples, petroleum, alfalfa packed into empty containers to feed dairy cows in China, and so on. Our imports are finished goods. So we force U. S. trade to be carried in ships that are shoddy, poorly built, overpriced, and over-manned by hopelessly overpaid crew. Which side of the trade do you suppose will bear the burden of the excessive costs of your idea? Who will pay this cost?

    Puerto Rico is a hint. They are forced to comply with the Jones Act which makes their commerce with the U. S. hopelessly overpriced compared to their island neighbors. They have gone bankrupt.

    bobathome (4a2679)

  10. thumbs-up, EPWJ.

    mg (31009b)

  11. EPWJ wants a self-imposed trade embargo against ourselves. Because that’s what his idea would cause. That, and inflation and unemployment.

    John Hitchcock (5b2181)

  12. Show the illegals the exit door and unemployment is a moot point.
    40 – 60 million I reckon.

    mg (31009b)

  13. Whether or not we embrace free trade, we need to do something about China.

    DRJ (76a58a)

  14. Ted Cruz is the only candidate for conservatives. Trump is an amusing FU to the GOP establishment, a novelty really, but he’s no conservative candidate.

    CrustyB (69f730)

  15. John

    Yes that’s exactly right, when it comes to America first, that’s where I stand. Since the Civil War our Navy is the first line of defense. Countrys selling goods to us will still benefit, and the abuse and poor treatment of foreign crews would have shipping companies rethink their policies. Note that outgoing goods exports can be picked up by foreign flags.

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  16. This is yuuuuuuuuge

    Colonel Haiku (9e91a2)

  17. bobathome shipping companies, ship builders, are for profit industries, they have been waiting for this for years

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  18. Note that trucking companies don’t like to drive cross country with an empty trailer because that would be stoopid. How much more stoopid would it be for maritime vessels to travel across the ocean while empty?

    John Hitchcock (5b2181)

  19. John, bobathome,

    More shipbuilding, means more steel, which means more mining, shipbuilding will also benefit all the companies using steel by lowering costs, its bigger than people think.

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  20. Try the free market, EPWJ, before throwing Conservatism away.

    John Hitchcock (5b2181)

  21. John

    Note imports are greater than exports by several factors, oil tankers, what do they pickup, car carriers, what do they leave with? VLCC, bring 5K of containers they leave with maybe a fifth.

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  22. John,

    When other countries stop subsidizing their industry, or tax companies and individuals at the same rate with the same rules as America, then its a “free market”

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  23. @EPJW: It’s like you’ve read every chapter of “Economics in One Lesson” and posted every fallacy once.

    How can you forget that every American is a consumer as well as a producer? You want to tax everyone and put the proceeds in the pockets of a select few industries. Why can’t we ALL have that deal?

    You are on the right track. You reject abstract theories and have little regard for abundance and low prices. You concern yourselves mainly with the fate of the producer. You wish to free him from foreign competition, that is, to reserve the domestic market for domestic industry.
    We come to offer you a wonderful opportunity for your — what shall we call it? Your theory? No, nothing is more deceptive than theory. Your doctrine? Your system? Your principle? But you dislike doctrines, you have a horror of systems, as for principles, you deny that there are any in political economy; therefore we shall call it your practice — your practice without theory and without principle.

    We are suffering from the ruinous competition of a rival who apparently works under conditions so far superior to our own for the production of light that he is flooding the domestic market with it at an incredibly low price; for the moment he appears, our sales cease, all the consumers turn to him, and a branch of French industry whose ramifications are innumerable is all at once reduced to complete stagnation. This rival, which is none other than the sun, is waging war on us so mercilessly we suspect he is being stirred up against us by perfidious Albion (excellent diplomacy nowadays!), particularly because he has for that haughty island a respect that he does not show for us [1].

    We ask you to be so good as to pass a law requiring the closing of all windows, dormers, skylights, inside and outside shutters, curtains, casements, bull’s-eyes, deadlights, and blinds — in short, all openings, holes, chinks, and fissures through which the light of the sun is wont to enter houses, to the detriment of the fair industries with which, we are proud to say, we have endowed the country, a country that cannot, without betraying ingratitude, abandon us today to so unequal a combat.

    Be good enough, honourable deputies, to take our request seriously, and do not reject it without at least hearing the reasons that we have to advance in its support.

    First, if you shut off as much as possible all access to natural light, and thereby create a need for artificial light, what industry in France will not ultimately be encouraged?

    If France consumes more tallow, there will have to be more cattle and sheep, and, consequently, we shall see an increase in cleared fields, meat, wool, leather, and especially manure, the basis of all agricultural wealth.

    If France consumes more oil, we shall see an expansion in the cultivation of the poppy, the olive, and rapeseed. These rich yet soil-exhausting plants will come at just the right time to enable us to put to profitable use the increased fertility that the breeding of cattle will impart to the land.

    Our moors will be covered with resinous trees. Numerous swarms of bees will gather from our mountains the perfumed treasures that today waste their fragrance, like the flowers from which they emanate. Thus, there is not one branch of agriculture that would not undergo a great expansion.

    The same holds true of shipping. Thousands of vessels will engage in whaling, and in a short time we shall have a fleet capable of upholding the honour of France and of gratifying the patriotic aspirations of the undersigned petitioners, chandlers, etc.

    But what shall we say of the specialities of Parisian manufacture? Henceforth you will behold gilding, bronze, and crystal in candlesticks, in lamps, in chandeliers, in candelabra sparkling in spacious emporia compared with which those of today are but stalls.

    There is no needy resin-collector on the heights of his sand dunes, no poor miner in the depths of his black pit, who will not receive higher wages and enjoy increased prosperity.

    It needs but a little reflection, gentlemen, to be convinced that there is perhaps not one Frenchman, from the wealthy stockholder of the Anzin Company to the humblest vendor of matches, whose condition would not be improved by the success of our petition.

    We anticipate your objections, gentlemen; but there is not a single one of them that you have not picked up from the musty old books of the advocates of free trade. We defy you to utter a word against us that will not instantly rebound against yourselves and the principle behind all your policy.

    Will you tell us that, though we may gain by this protection, France will not gain at all, because the consumer will bear the expense?

    We have our answer ready:

    You no longer have the right to invoke the interests of the consumer. You have sacrificed him whenever you have found his interests opposed to those of the producer. You have done so in order to encourage industry and to increase employment. For the same reason you ought to do so this time too.

    Indeed, you yourselves have anticipated this objection. When told that the consumer has a stake in the free entry of iron, coal, sesame, wheat, and textiles, “Yes,” you reply, “but the producer has a stake in their exclusion.” Very well, surely if consumers have a stake in the admission of natural light, producers have a stake in its interdiction.

    “But,” you may still say, “the producer and the consumer are one and the same person. If the manufacturer profits by protection, he will make the farmer prosperous. Contrariwise, if agriculture is prosperous, it will open markets for manufactured goods.” Very well, If you grant us a monopoly over the production of lighting during the day, first of all we shall buy large amounts of tallow, charcoal, oil, resin, wax, alcohol, silver, iron, bronze, and crystal, to supply our industry; and, moreover, we and our numerous suppliers, having become rich, will consume a great deal and spread prosperity into all areas of domestic industry.

    Will you say that the light of the sun is a gratuitous gift of Nature, and that to reject such gifts would be to reject wealth itself under the pretext of encouraging the means of acquiring it?

    But if you take this position, you strike a mortal blow at your own policy; remember that up to now you have always excluded foreign goods because and in proportion as they approximate gratuitous gifts. You have only half as good a reason for complying with the demands of other monopolists as you have for granting our petition, which is in complete accord with your established policy; and to reject our demands precisely because they are better founded than anyone else’s would be tantamount to accepting the equation: + x + = -; in other words, it would be to heap absurdity upon absurdity.

    Labour and Nature collaborate in varying proportions, depending upon the country and the climate, in the production of a commodity. The part that Nature contributes is always free of charge; it is the part contributed by human labour that constitutes value and is paid for.

    If an orange from Lisbon sells for half the price of an orange from Paris, it is because the natural heat of the sun, which is, of course, free of charge, does for the former what the latter owes to artificial heating, which necessarily has to be paid for in the market.

    Thus, when an orange reaches us from Portugal, one can say that it is given to us half free of charge, or, in other words, at half price as compared with those from Paris.

    Now, it is precisely on the basis of its being semigratuitous (pardon the word) that you maintain it should be barred. You ask: “How can French labour withstand the competition of foreign labour when the former has to do all the work, whereas the latter has to do only half, the sun taking care of the rest?” But if the fact that a product is half free of charge leads you to exclude it from competition, how can its being totally free of charge induce you to admit it into competition? Either you are not consistent, or you should, after excluding what is half free of charge as harmful to our domestic industry, exclude what is totally gratuitous with all the more reason and with twice the zeal.

    To take another example: When a product — coal, iron, wheat, or textiles — comes to us from abroad, and when we can acquire it for less labour than if we produced it ourselves, the difference is a gratuitous gift that is conferred up on us. The size of this gift is proportionate to the extent of this difference. It is a quarter, a half, or three-quarters of the value of the product if the foreigner asks of us only three-quarters, one-half, or one-quarter as high a price. It is as complete as it can be when the donor, like the sun in providing us with light, asks nothing from us. The question, and we pose it formally, is whether what you desire for France is the benefit of consumption free of charge or the alleged advantages of onerous production. Make your choice, but be logical; for as long as you ban, as you do, foreign coal, iron, wheat, and textiles, in proportion as their price approaches zero, how inconsistent it would be to admit the light of the sun, whose price is zero all day long!

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  24. I must admit the story is a little confuzzling, now it’s arguable that the Casino Redevelopment Agency is the villain here,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  25. “Try the free market, EPWJ, before throwing Conservatism away.”

    – John Hitchcock

    With shipping, anyway. Just not with agricultural labor, or construction, or long-haul trucking.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  26. P.S. “I knew they could do this in Russia, but not here” is an increasingly common phrase these days in the Russian community here in the U.S.

    That’s true. One of my dearest neighbors were a Russian emigre couple — both now deceased — who expressed that same concern. I was shocked when I was visiting and the wife said something like that as an Obama press conference interrupted regular programming.

    L.N. Smithee (e750c1)

  27. epwj, your ideas about what constitutes a “free market” seem rather parochial. If the U. S. is shooting itself in the foot with its taxation policies, then everyone else must shoot themselves in the foot?

    One would prefer to base trade on comparative advantage, but given that the U. S. seems to prefer feckless folly, then trade based on comparative stupidity will have to do.

    bobathome (4a2679)

  28. Gabriel Hanna

    We are just picking up the imports, shipping is a small part of the price of the goods, that far outweigh the cost to national defense and the influx of well paying jobs. Ships today have 40% of the crews of cargo ships of the 50’s and 60’s and carry several factors in weight of cargo.

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  29. Listening to Donald Trump last night at his press conference and at his Townhall meeting in Derry, New Hampshire, what I heard him say was fully consistent with the conservative tradition. To claim Trump isn’t a conservative is to discount his current opinions and policy statements in favor of his past pronouncements made while he was engaged not in national politics but in real estate and construction activities.

    In fact, Trump is proudly taking positions so conservative his competitors and detractors often sound like squishy GOP establishment Pollyannas.

    Now, I’m not claiming that The Donald is the second coming of Ronaldus Magnus, not yet anyway, but I do think we need someone as bold, brash, independent, and fearless as Trump to tame the insatiable Washington Leviathan, fight Islamic terrorism, rid our nation of illegal aliens, build our economy, put Americans back to work, and jail Obama and his co-conspirators.

    It’s a tall order and Trump is the guy who can cut the mustard. Besides, Ted Cruz is waiting in the wings.

    ropelight (6dce3e)

  30. @EPJW: Why is every other industry not equally deserving of this “help”? I don’t care what fraction of the price of imports it is–you want to pick everyone’s pockets to put the money into the hands of a few. You say they will spend the money and thus benefit everyone–but if that’s true the money could just left in the pockets you want to pick it from and people could decide for themselves how to spend it, instead of having their import prices raised.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  31. @EPJW: Let’s make a law that requires all semi-trucks to carry only half-loaded trailers.

    1) The number of truck drivers would necessarily double, creating millions of jobs,
    2) stimulating the truck building industry,
    3) and diesel production since two trucks pulling half-loads are going to need more diesel,
    4) causing more wear on the roads and thus more road construction jobs,
    5) and then they will spend the money and stimulate the economy,
    6) while only adding pennies to the price of goods shipped by truck.

    What’s wrong with that? Why do only shipping companies get your deal? Let’s use the legal system to make everything half as efficient, thus doubling the time and expense of everything and making us all twice as rich?

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  32. @ropelight:Listening to Donald Trump last night at his press conference and at his Townhall meeting in Derry, New Hampshire, what I heard him say was fully consistent with the conservative tradition.

    Yes, he has learned how to tell you what you want to hear. No mere salesman could have that skill, he must be an incipient statement.

    . To claim Trump isn’t a conservative is to discount his current opinions and policy statements in favor of his past pronouncements made while he was engaged not in national politics but in real estate and construction activities.

    Character is what you do when you aren’t running for office. Let’s give him a mulligan on his first 70 years and assume he will do the opposite of everything that made him famous in the first place.

    Hillary was only doing shady business deals when she was a Secretary of State and married to a governor, no doubt as President she will be transparent and honest. Why she even says so herself.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  33. epjw, if you are suggesting the Cruz advocate the repeal of the Jones Act, and any other form of legal coercion regarding the manning and manufacture of U. S. ships, then I’m with you. But if we just roll all the restrictions of the Jones Act onto all the shipping serving our country, then we will be the world’s greatest fools. And the cartel controlling the longshoremen needs to be broken as well. But that is another matter.

    bobathome (4a2679)

  34. Gabriel Hanna

    Tankers of all kinds
    Milk Trucks
    Grain Carriers
    Logging Trucks
    Lumber Trucks
    Car Carriers
    And many many more

    Even dry carriers John would know the backhaul stats – but I would be really surprised if it was much over 50%

    Shipping internally, giving your logic – we don’t allow French, thai, Chinese big rigs, airlines, rail companies to operate within the unites states borders – so does about every other country. You don’t see Emirates or Qatar Air lines flying between US Cities.

    I don’t see the problem with putting great paying jobs into the economy and bolster national security

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  35. We have the spectacle of a crony capitalist campaigning against crony capitalism.

    kishnevi (80558c) — 8/20/2015 @ 8:16 am

    Reminiscing the Presidency of Chester Arthur, a Stalwart beneficiary of the civil service patronage system who none the less passed and vigorously enforced the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act.
    Government jobs should be awarded on the basis of merit instead of political affiliation.
    (Lois Lerner personifying the argument against)

    The big criticism against Arthur was he failed to alleviate the federal budget surplus, which had been accumulating since the end of the Civil War.

    HOLY MOLY – There was such a time in American history (after a long string of consecutive Republican Presidents) where the main gripe was too large a federal budget surplus!

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  36. bobathome

    Cruz is smarter than I, if he wants to win the union vote, he wants to build the economy sure he can modify my simple paper napkin policy, but since it generated a lot of talk here imagine the narrative it would explode.

    He has to take the initiative or he has wasted everyone’s time, waiting for trump to fail is silly, an unserious poll in texas but touted today on the front pages in almost every texas city has trump crushing Cruz.

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  37. Papertiger: Strange that Chester Arthur pops up in a conversation about Trumptroversies. He was the first person who became President that many suspected was not born in the United States (Canada).

    L.N. Smithee (e750c1)

  38. EPWJ – Trump throws half-baked concepts out to the electorate while serious candidates have to patiently wait for the oven timer to ring.

    L.N. Smithee (e750c1)

  39. LN

    I’m worried that these polls are acting like unofficial primaries, this ranking of candidates is focusing on them as some sort of official, verifiable, where the candidates stand without the actual task of voting.

    Trump opposing a jobs first plan would fracture his persona IMO

    Look Cruz can convince people I have first hand seen him do it, even negative publicity means publicity. Touting jobs Americans once did until overregulated out of existence by the Democrat 30 years war on industry. Time to regain what was once ours

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  40. Says on his bio Chester Arthur was born in Fairfield, Vermont. Pretty close to the border I guess, but it isn’t horseshoes. Chester’s great grandfather, Uriah Stone, fought in the Continental Army during the American Revolution.
    My grandfather was born in Windsor, Canada.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  41. @EPJW:I don’t see the problem with putting great paying jobs into the economy and bolster national security

    Because for every job you use the government to shove into the shipping industry, you take away one from another industry. That’s because for every dollar you put into the shipping industry by fiat, you take away a dollar from other industries by fiat. This is not a dollar of added value; your premise assumes that foreign shipping already does the job cheaper (otherwise American vessels already carry the shipping). If the government doesn’t intervene I get my imported stuff plus one dollar to spend to add value to my industry; but you propose to take away that dollar and give it to the shipping industry to spend to add value to itself. At most this transaction has net zero economic benefit, in practice the benefit is negative because you are causing misallocation by distorting prices.

    We can’t get rich by picking each other’s pockets. We get rich by getting maximum value for our effort. If other countries can do stuff cheaper than we can do it ourselves, then we have savings of effort available to expand or create other industries that make different stuff.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  42. Look at the bright side. I imagine some of the push back against a fence on the border is due to individual property owners objections.
    Trump wouldn’t hesitate to seize property for border security, whereas others might feel the squeems, if in fact they cared to enforce the border at all.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  43. Gabriel,

    No, your premise IMO is completely wrong, the relaxing or eliminating of overregulation is what caused a great part of the maritime demise, which ran like smallpox through the enormous chain supply that serves the country. Other countries are not us, and never ever will be

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  44. The California legislature is pushing to make it legal to euthanize old people, where state appointed doctors are allowed to administer poison pills for patients in the condition of, for instance, former President Jimmy Carter.

    At least they aren’t advocating brain surgery performed with a rock. Next best thing though.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  45. With shipping, anyway. Just not with agricultural labor, or construction, or long-haul trucking.
    Leviticus (f9a067) — 8/20/2015 @ 10:40 am

    What are you yammering on about now? If you’re suggesting we have to allow illegals to work in the US for a free market, you’re — I don’t know why, but some important people respect you so I won’t say. But in regard to free market agriculture, I drive a truck with a refrigerated trailer. And I pull megatons of agriculture to all over the US that came in from Mexico. And Mexicans and Canadians are legally doing long-haul in the US now. So your passive-aggressive snark fails the truth test.

    John Hitchcock (3cddd2)

  46. Papertiger, property owners on the border don’t want to be invaded by the Mexican drug cartels, like they are being invaded now. They’ll be pleased as punch to have that border fence.

    John Hitchcock (3cddd2)

  47. No, your premise IMO is completely wrong,

    Gabriel’s premise is completely correct, EPWJ. In economics it’s referred to as the unseen consequences. When the government forces us to spend money on X we can no longer spend it on Y. Right now the government forces us to support Planned Parenthood to the tune of a over a half billion a year. How may other things could each of us spend our percentage of that money which would be better for us as consumers, the companies as suppliers, the nation as a whole and the babies as victims? What would you spend that part which is yours on? That EPWJ is what free trade is.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  48. “If you’re suggesting we have to allow illegals to work in the US for a free market, you’re — I don’t know why, but some important people respect you so I won’t say.”

    – John Hitchcock

    Say whatever you want.

    Most of the candidates talking about border security right now are openly acknowledging a protectionist motivation – particularly ironic for Trump, who has probably employed thousands and thousands of undocumented immigrants through his various enterprises over the years.

    If you believe in a globally integrated free market in labor, what is the justification for denying Mexican workers access to US labor markets? It’s government interference that will skew supply and demand for labor, artificially inflating wages. But conservatives are as good as anyone at abandoning free market principles when it comes time to throw red meat at their base.

    But who can blame them? Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, and whatnot.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  49. With all due respect govt forces us to spend money in almost every home, every day. This is about rolling back 30 years of war on business

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  50. If you believe in a globally integrated free market in labor, what is the justification for denying Mexican workers access to US labor markets?

    Actually as a conservative I do not believe in a globally integrated free market in labor. A individual nation just like an individual company must protect and promote itself first and foremost in the market. Furthermore, unless and until there are no more socialist/communist countries who do not operate under free market ideals the whole premise is absurd. And the justification for denying Mexicans or anyone else access to US labor markets is that we are a sovereign country and our businesses and employers are under no obligation to offer or supply jobs to foreign nationals. They can if they wish as long as they go about it legally but no one is required.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  51. 51.With all due respect govt forces us to spend money in almost every home, every day. This is about rolling back 30 years of war on business

    So your answer is to have government force us to spend even more money? On even more things I many don’t want to spend it on? How American!

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  52. Hoagie

    No government dollars would be spent, right now Emirates, Qatar airways weekly petition the FAA to allow them intercity flights, their fuel would be free, are we oppressed, or are we protected?

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  53. We are just picking up the imports, shipping is a small part of the price of the goods, that far outweigh the cost to national defense and the influx of well paying jobs. Ships today have 40% of the crews of cargo ships of the 50’s and 60’s and carry several factors in weight of cargo.

    No no, EPJW. That 10.00 widget you’re holding? cost was maybe 1.50 to make at max. Shipping from wherever it was made? Another 1.50. Shipping makes up a YUUUUUUGE portion of the final cost. Your plan, as patriotic as it sounds, would double that cost. Part of a free market is companies are going to find the cheapest, most efficient way to get goods to market. Restricting inbound shipping would cause prices to rise like you don’t want to due to an artificial restriction and shortages. And it wouldn’t be restricted to your 10.00 widget.

    And that several factors of weight in cargo? I think that has something to do with the market itself growing by several factors since 1969.

    Bill H (2a858c)

  54. @EPJW: No government dollars would be spent

    No one said they would be! What we said is that the government would force US to spend OUR dollars in a way we don’t HAVE to and we don’t WANT to. But government dollars are OUR dollars anyway, taken from us by force, and so the point is moot.

    Forcing us to pay more for things than we need to makes us poorer by any meaningful definition of “poor”.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  55. Bill H

    Sea Shipping is a nominal cost, the interior distribution is where many companies succeed or fail

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  56. EPJW’s plan is to make us twice as rich by forcing us to spend twice as much time, money, and labor as we do.

    Or he may dispute the “twice as much” part, but the fallacy is the same: using the government to force an inefficiency of X% will not make us X% richer. It will make us X% poorer.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  57. @EPJW:Sea Shipping is a nominal cost

    Jesus wept! Money is fungible. Extra money spent on shipping, unnecessarily, is money not available for other things, doesn’t matter if it’s a dime or C-note. Of course the shipping industry is for it, but why should the rest of us be if we don’t a similar deal for own industries? And if we all get that deal, then all we did was pick each other’s pockets! No new value was added to anything!

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  58. I am fascinated – really – by the desire of so many conservatives to be both staunch nationalists and free market hardliners. The two identities converge on mutual exclusivity at the border.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  59. Leviticus,

    Yep

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  60. Shipping internally, giving your logic – we don’t allow French, thai, Chinese big rigs, airlines, rail companies to operate within the unites states borders – so does about every other country. You don’t see Emirates or Qatar Air lines flying between US Cities.

    I don’t see the problem with putting great paying jobs into the economy and bolster national security

    EPWJ (ac6e0d) — 8/20/2015 @ 11:15 am

    C’mon now, I should call the police for that poor strawman you’re beating holy hell out of. Of course none of that operates within our borders. It isn’t logical and we both know it.

    Bill H (2a858c)

  61. No government dollars would be spent, …..

    Are we actually having this discussion with someone who would make that statement? On a conservative site? We are the government, EPJW, it’s our taxes and it’s our money!

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  62. Gabriel

    Then would you allow oil rich countries to run the American Airlines out of business due to the fact that they can land planes with free fuel and take over major routes in the US?

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  63. Hoagie

    I apologize for not explaining my thoughts, I just think that the competitive spirit of American business, unshackled from the over regulations passed by decades of democrats would be a solid platform, it would establish Cruz as more than just a orator and would not be as unappealing to everyone except a handful of purist

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  64. @EPJW:Then would you allow oil rich countries to run the American Airlines out of business due to the fact that they can land planes with free fuel and take over major routes in the US?

    The scenario you described has never actually happened in the history of trade. People like you always allege that foreign competition will lose money to destroy one of our industries and then jack up the price once they have a monopoly.

    The worst that would happen is that some domestic air carriers would go out of business entirely, some would lose market share, some would gain market share by finding some other advantage that domestic airlines have and exploiting it–and everyone would benefit from cheaper air carriage. And that money that EVERYONE saves would be used on goods and services, which would result in expanded or new industries, and the country would be richer.

    Meanwhile the hypothetical Gulf emirate would be wasting an incredible amount of money subsidizing our richer lifestyles.

    Trade barriers are exactly analogous to me swallowing poison to make you sick. And demanding that we take as much poison as other countries are taking, or otherwise we’re somehow being taken advantage of, is completely insane.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  65. Gabriel,

    Oh the dumping of Chinese, Japanese Steel wrecked the steel industry, I have the flu so I cannot tell you the all the places you and I can show specifics for each side of the argument, but many economists left and right, have pointed to the steel industry and its massive decline, as when the industrial edge America had fell, restarting that would have as big or bigger effect as the shale oil boom.

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  66. I am fascinated – really – by the desire of so many conservatives to be both staunch nationalists and free market hardliners. The two identities converge on mutual exclusivity at the border.

    Can you elaborate?

    If I understand you, I would respond by quoting Milton Friedman:

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  67. @Leviticus: I am fascinated – really – by the desire of so many conservatives to be both staunch nationalists and free market hardliners. The two identities converge on mutual exclusivity at the border.

    Libertarianism in one country. National borders have other functions besides efficiency of markets.

    I don’t argue that free trade maximizes national security. Obviously it doesn’t. We would not want all of our warships, for example, made by people we might need to go to war with, and the argument against opening the borders for labor purposes is not based on economics. If we import 15 million Klingons as cheap labor, we may find that our culture moves in a non-free-market direction in short order.

    What I am arguing against is that trade barriers can somehow improve our domestic economy. They don’t and never have, and it is not possible that they can. But improving our economy is not the be-all and end-all of everything our government does.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  68. @EPJW:dumping of Chinese, Japanese Steel wrecked the steel industry

    and subsidized the increased wealth of every American who consumed steel. And that increased wealth was spent on other goods and services that use steel. And there are still steel producers in America to this day, even though some of them had to go find other jobs.

    During the period 1974 to 1999, the steel industry had drastically reduced employment all around the world. In USA, it was down from 521,000 to 153,000. In Japan, it was down from 459,000 to 208,000. In Germany, it was down from 232,000 to 78,000. In UK, it was down from 197,000 to 31,000. In Brazil, it was down from 118,000 to 59,000. In South Africa, it was down from 100,000 to 54,000. South Korea already had a low figure. It was only 58,000 in 1999. The steel industry had reduced its employment around the world by more than 1,500,000 in 25 years.

    Looks like the “dumpers” lost jobs too, becausse steel production overall got more productive. And yet somehow there is more and cheaper steel than ever. You want to reverse all of those gains in wealth and productivity that resulted from doing things more efficiently, basically for nostalgia.

    Well sir, finance your steel romance out of your own pocket and kindly do not use the government to pick mine.

    Gabriel Hanna (64d4e1)

  69. Sea Shipping is a nominal cost, the interior distribution is where many companies succeed or fail

    EPWJ (ac6e0d) — 8/20/2015 @ 12:51 pm

    The cost of shipping is only one factor that determines the final cost of an item, hence whether or not that item sells in its designated market. Whether or not it sells and returns a profit is the measure of a success or failure of a business. The cost of shipping factors in where determining a price point is.

    And no- I didn’t go to school for this. But it’s pretty basic stuff, even for a car electrician.

    Bill H (2a858c)

  70. Patterico,

    To elaborate, I would say that many conservatives – or at least many Republican politicians – like to present themselves as 100% pro-American and 100% in support of free market capitalism. There is significant tension between those two identities when it comes to issues like border security, and it takes a nuanced thinker (like Friedman) to reconcile the value of secure borders with the idea of a free market in labor.

    Friedman’s answer (the danger of open borders to a welfare state) is a reasonable one, and in keeping with his free market principles. I would hazard a guess, though, that Friedman’s preference would be the elimination of the welfare state, and that upon its elimination he would not argue for (and would likely argue against) the value of secure borders.

    When people like Trump start arguing that the importance of secure borders is in securing jobs for Americans, it gives us a sense of how little they (or their supporters) actually believe in free markets.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  71. Shorter version: if you were to ask Friedman if he believed that America should engage in protectionism for the benefit of American workers, he would say no. A lot of Republican politicians would not offer a straight answer to this question.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  72. Friedman’s answer (the danger of open borders to a welfare state) is a reasonable one, and in keeping with his free market principles. I would hazard a guess, though, that Friedman’s preference would be the elimination of the welfare state, and that upon its elimination he would not argue for (and would likely argue against) the value of secure borders.

    I generally agree — although we still need to control for disease and criminals. But once those issues are addressed, I lean towards the idea that I would let in anyone who could economically contribute. And, by definition, if they are existing here and not sucking up welfare, they are contributing, because that’s how they stay alive.

    I have a little bit of a concern about overpopulation, but I think the market would largely take care of that on its own.

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  73. When people like Trump start arguing that the importance of secure borders is in securing jobs for Americans, it gives us a sense of how little they (or their supporters) actually believe in free markets.

    Right. That’s protectionism and it’s B.S. Like Gabriel’s (overly lengthy — next time give us a link and shorter quote) quotation of Bastiat’s Petition of the Candlemakers, protectionism never helps economically. Ever.

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  74. But it’s populism and gets you some cheap applause.

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  75. I have a little bit of a concern about overpopulation, ….

    You have no concern about terrorism? None about changing the racial makeup, culture and social norms of our country? No concern at all about what masses of moslems may do to our law and culture? There is no concern that millions of South American and Mexican immigrants coming from socialist countries won’t start making us look like the places they came from?

    Oddly, I do. I believe as the people who founded this country I’d like it to remain as it is. After all, the way we made it is the exact reason all these people want in here now isn’t it? Yet none of those mentioned above want to keep it as it is. Seems they all have demands for change. Then let them stay where they are.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  76. You’re seriously telling people that they should be concerned about changing “the racial makeup of our country”?

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  77. A lot of things have changed since my hero Friedman made that video. Tempus fugit.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  78. No, I’m suggesting that among other things. Why? Have we no right to determine our social makeup? Or is that too un PC?

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  79. You have no concern about terrorism?

    I said I have concern about letting in criminals. Those likely to commit terrorist acts would fall under that umbrella. But no, I would not put up a “no Muslims allowed” sign. Or a “no Hispanics” sign.

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  80. I think Milton Friedman would say to ask him what he would do about open borders after you dismantle the welfare state… which will never happen.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  81. I find it utterly amazing that people can take motes in the eyes of candidates that threaten Trump (e.g. Fiorina doesn’t hate Muslims) and damn them entirely, yet ignore the many beams in Trump’s eye and elsewhere.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  82. Milton Friedman once advocated a Guaranteed Annual Income. To replace targeted welfare programs, of course, as if you wouldn’t end up with both.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  83. Trump’s hotels probably employ thousands of illegals with a wink and a nod, just like many others.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  84. Milton Friedman once advocated a Guaranteed Annual Income. To replace targeted welfare programs, of course, as if you wouldn’t end up with both.

    Yeah, that was stupid. He also believed in the wonderful ability of the Federal Reserve to manage interest rates and our economy. He wasn’t perfect, but he was generally pretty solid on explaining why we should not regulate everything to death.

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  85. Trump’s hotels probably employ thousands of illegals with a wink and a nod, just like many others.

    Yeah, that’s where the media should be looking. That story is going to come out at some point, for sure.

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  86. Well, he felt that instead of giving people government cheese, you might give them the money instead and if they wanted to buy Cheetos instead, that was their business.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  87. I guess the story has already been done.

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  88. That story is going to come out at some point, for sure.

    I figure October 2016.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  89. Patterico, let me know when it gets to NBC Nightly News.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  90. Back in the day, we let in anyone who got here, with a few medical exceptions/quarantines. The flip side, of course was that if you couldn’t find a way to get food, you starved, problem solved. If you committed crimes, you went to prison and/or died. Problem solved again.

    Now, of course, you can come in without leave, drive drunk 6 times and never get deported.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  91. People don’t care if Trump is a hypocrite. McConnell, Boehner, Reid, Pelosi, the Clintons and Obamas, and most of DC are hypocrites. Why should Trump have to be better than they are?

    DRJ (1dff03)

  92. I said I have concern about letting in criminals. Those likely to commit terrorist acts would fall under that umbrella.

    I disagree, Patterico. That’s the same mistake made by our PC leftist elite. Criminals rob banks. Terrorists blow them and whoever is inside up.

    But no, I would not put up a “no Muslims allowed” sign.

    The vast majority of moslems like the vast majority of criminals we are told, are not terrorists. However the vast amount of terrorists are moslems. Funny though, not necessarily criminals.

    Or a “no Hispanics” sign.

    I am not suggesting in the least we put up a “no Hispanics” sign. But why should they be permitted a disproportionate immigration policy? What’s so great about Hispanics they should be admitted by the millions. Why do you believe we need 12-20 million Hispanic immigrants? Maybe 20 million more? Why not 20 million Australians? Or Englishmen? And exactly who do you believe all these wonderful, non criminal, healthy, Hispanic immigrants are going to vote for? Because if you believe they will vote for Constitutional Republicans I got a bridge for ya. If you want Perry (doom) for President then maybe. But they ain’t voting for Friedman, guaranteed.

    Just as you have a right, responsibility to determine who you allow in your home, you have the same duty when it comes to all our Home; America. That should be our policy. “America! A great country but sorry, everybody can’t come.”

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  93. BTW, I believe Levedicus is dying to call me a racist. I don’t want to see America turn into England or Franc with bad immigration policies. So what you may perceive as racism is what I think is patriotism. Perhaps even survivalist.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  94. People don’t care if Trump is a hypocrite. McConnell, Boehner, Reid, Pelosi, the Clintons and Obamas, and most of DC are hypocrites. Why should Trump have to be better than they are?

    Everyone is hypocritical about something.

    My problem is being harangued by someone on a topic that they are hypocritical about, such as Eliot Spitzer going after men who frequent hookers, when their targets might not be hypocritical about it at all.

    Another problem is apologists who ignore the most blatant faults of their candidate, yet loudly pick nits with all the others. Intellectually bankrupt, at best.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  95. Not that I frequent hookers. I guess that was ambiguous.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  96. I believe that Cruz is sincere. I agree with him on some things, not on others. But I am sure that he is sincere. If elected, there are clear guides to what he would do in office.

    Cannot ay any of that about Trump. For all I know he’s a Moby.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  97. We went through with whitman, you can’t verify employment, that is the point.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  98. Papertiger, property owners on the border don’t want to be invaded by the Mexican drug cartels, like they are being invaded now. They’ll be pleased as punch to have that border fence.

    John Hitchcock (3cddd2) — 8/20/2015 @ 12:15 pm

    I’d be very surprised if there aren’t people who own property on the border just to be the outlet for drug smugglers who kick down some money just for the access.
    Those people would be against a fence, and government easement across their land. They’d be importing endangered critters to impede construction. Environmental impacts, and a thousand obscure reasons to keep border security off their lawn.
    Their place would miraculously be the only natural home for the rainbow spotted Gila lizard, West of the Pecos.
    Oh yeah there are plenty of people like that.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  99. Why should Trump have to be better than they are?

    He doesn’t DRJ, but it would be nice if he was at last a damn Republican.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  100. At *least* a damn Republican. My keys have been sticking.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  101. At *least* a damn Republican. My keys have been sticking.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27) — 8/20/2015 @ 4:56 pm

    Curiously enough, in Trump’s case it works either way.

    Bill H (2a858c)

  102. The “true conservative” whiners need to get themselves a new box of crayons. It ain’t gonna happen, and a vote for anyone other than an Establishment raider like Trump, or Cruz (if he gets serious), will result in Hillary or Jeb! That’s their plan, and only if Hillary survives Obama’s drip, drip, drip of discrediting leaks. The oligarchy plays to win, and they are delighted by your “or else” ignorance (again), but are devastated by Trump’s success and ever-growing support.

    Define “true conservative” however you like and if you must, but read Time to Get Tough, and reconsider. How easily we forget, and romanticize Ronaldus Magnus. He would not pass the current silly muster, if he was fresh on the scene. And it’s Democrats who have ideological litmus tests?

    Please.

    Martin (769f76)

  103. “True conservative”:

    Qualification 1: Someone who has not been an outspoken flaming liberal within recent memory.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  104. Trump is even trashier than Hillary and that’s kind of special

    happyfeet (7488ba)

  105. Trump supposedly has 30,000 to 50,000 supporters rallying today in mobile the largest political event in some time, if this is true Cruz may have waited too long

    EPWJ (ac6e0d)

  106. 106.Trump is even trashier than Hillary and that’s kind of special

    No he’s not, happyfeet. Unless by trashy you mean he doesn’t walk around with his nose in the air. Hillary! is condescending toward everyone, even her constituents. Hell, even the law.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  107. omg just those eurotrash hookers he keeps marrying alone make him trashier than Hillary

    happyfeet (7488ba)

  108. this is obvious to anyone who is willing to do the analysis

    happyfeet (7488ba)

  109. There are already well over 30,000 ticket holders with many more expected for Trump’s 6:30pm EST Mobile Alabama Townhall. Response was so strong the meeting had to be moved to a football stadium (University of South Alabama). However, thunderstorms are predicted from 7 to 9pm tonight. It could get interesting.

    ropelight (61d9bf)

  110. Eurotrash hookers? Are you having your own War on Women? Or just something against hot blond babes? I understand if they’re not your type but name calling? You’re better than that feets.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  111. No he’s not.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  112. Trump’s rally has been delayed, his plane just landed in Mobile after circling the football stadium 3 times to the delight of early arrivals. Impending thunderstorms are reducing turnout.

    ropelight (61d9bf)

  113. Just plain trash hookers.

    nk (dbc370)

  114. It’s not just about ideological purity, it’s about competence and capability.

    Trump kicks ass.

    Finally, a Leader Who Gets Things Done (f9e702)

  115. trump does NOT kick ass that is a complete fabrication about what it is that trump does

    happyfeet (831175)

  116. i warned you peoples Mr. Hoagie that food stamp had dangerously lowered the bar for the presidency

    you saw that with the whole run sarah run thing last time

    and now you see Team R offering up a slew of no-account one term senate losers and this semi-literate manhattantrash floppy shoe wearing clown

    and he’s a floppy shoe wearing clown what imports euro-tarts for companionship cause real american women look at this douchebag and go no thanks

    he’s same same just like George Soros with the exotic hookers

    happyfeet (831175)

  117. google it

    happyfeet (831175)

  118. Trump supposedly has 30,000 to 50,000 supporters rallying today in mobile the largest political event in some time, if this is true Cruz may have waited too long

    What, to start his own Apprentice show? To write a best-selling business book and then some? To make billions?

    Sure, he waited too long.

    Finally, a Leader Who Gets Things Done (f9e702)

  119. it’s time to start thinking about who you want to own the failmerican trainwreck

    and this is mostly a question of aesthetics in terms of how you want the flushing of america down the toilet to be recorded by historians

    your choices so far seem to be the geriatric booby lady to whom the law doesn’t really apply or the manhattantrash clownshow featuring exotic eurotrash hookers

    which isn’t really a for reals choice

    but fortunately we’ll have megyn the fox news propaganda slut to help us choose

    she draws the fine distinctions, that one

    happyfeet (831175)

  120. ivanka better choices not all these eurotrash hookers

    happyfeet (831175)

  121. TIL, Trump is 69 years old. Which multiplies the ridiculousness of his conceits by about that many times. Also explains his seeming dementia. It’s not seeming.

    nk (dbc370)

  122. See what I mean, now mittens did his best chip Dillard act, and he ended up much like Kevin bacon’s character in that film.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  123. why do people still talk about mitt romney

    that’s like talking about that fat-ass south korean dude what did the horsey dance

    happyfeet (831175)

  124. And this is why luna federation rebelled in 2076.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  125. *sigh*

    happyfeet (831175)

  126. Trump is even trashier than Hillary and that’s kind of special

    happyfeet, that confirms it. You’re more liberal or certainly squish-squish than you want to admit or you care to easily let on. But given your take on issues like abortion and homosexuality, I’m not too surprised.

    Mark (e187ae)

  127. it’s true

    happyfeet (831175)

  128. If Happyfascist is agin it, I can think of no better reason to be for it. Trump gave money to Tahmooressi to help re-start his life. Secretly. He also flew a kid across the country in his 757 for a vital operation. Again, on the QT. TFG did nothing for that Sargent, not even a phone call. 42000 people there tonight and when the Van Halen song Jump was played, the whole crowd yelled Trump instead.
    Pendulums gotta swing.

    Gazzer (feaf20)

  129. i’m not against trump per se i just think if you want a trashy president you should pick hillary instead cause she’s just flat-out better trash-president material

    her husband has venereal disease and PLUS she’s got a freaky lesbo handmaiden married to the dick in a tweet dude

    all trump has is rent a babes from soviet union places nobody can spell

    happyfeet (831175)

  130. BTW, I believe Levedicus is dying to call me a racist. I don’t want to see America turn into England or Franc with bad immigration policies. So what you may perceive as racism is what I think is patriotism. Perhaps even survivalist.

    I find liberals like Leviticus to be quite irritating and very disingenuous because in too many instances, a high portion of such people will claim to be very tolerant and permissive about demographics — about socioeconomic diversity — yet will die on the vine if they had to pick up and move their big butts to a typical squalid crime-ridden town in Mexico or one of the typical depressed dives throughout urban America.

    Simply put, I’m referring to folks like Michelle and Barack Obama, who will make damn sure their own precious children don’t attend schools where most of the student body will look like Barack’s son if he had a son, or where most of the students will reflect academic achievement rates associated with a high percentage of Latino America.

    Liberals and liberalism: Phony baloney.

    Mark (e187ae)

  131. phony baloney is a tautology

    are you drunk

    happyfeet (831175)

  132. it’s true

    Happyfeet, homosexuality, for various reasons, does tend to make people lean left.

    Mark (e187ae)

  133. so how do you explain putin

    happyfeet (831175)

  134. Trump gave money to Tahmooressi to help re-start his life. Secretly. He also flew a kid across the country in his 757 for a vital operation. Again, on the QT.

    How do you know all this secret stuff?

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  135. Pat, this stuff mostly comes from Great Van Susteren. Certainly, the Sgt T story came from Greta Wire.

    http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/video/video-yes-donald-trump-helped-sgt-tahmooressi/

    Here’s the other story,

    http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/airline-couldnt-help-sick-child-so-donald-trump-came-to-the-rescue/

    Sorry, I should have provided links before.

    Gazzer (feaf20)

  136. scientologists know stuff

    it’s so true

    seriously if you’re ever in doubt even a little about whether you should pick trump or hillary, talk to a scientologist

    then go hug your mom

    happyfeet (831175)

  137. Gazzer, I was making a more tongue in cheek point, by wondering how all these “secret” Good Acts made their way into the media.

    Patterico (3cc0c1)

  138. I felt a bit like I was called into the Principal’s office. It says a lot about the man, though. Or it says something, at least.

    Gazzer (feaf20)

  139. Win, lose, or draw, the one thing I think we can say about Trump is he’s not business as usual. And things are going kind of crap right now, so that could be a good thing.

    Or not, of course, but I tend to give it a shot. Besides, Cruz or Carson would make fine VPs/Presidents in waiting. Both are, to their credit, maintaining respectful ties with The Donald and vice/versa.

    Frankly, I think Trump really does respect them, including Cruz, I concede. Too bad Jeff Sessions is unlikely to end up on the ticket, though, since he rocks.

    Finally, a Leader Who Gets Things Done (f9e702)

  140. It says a lot about the man, though. Or it says something, at least.

    A great thing to do, of course, but not a secret thing.

    However, he did make the decisions very quickly, and that’s something important that can be said about Donald Trump. He can act.

    Finally, a Leader Who Gets Things Done (f9e702)

  141. Anyone who says they would vote for Hillary! over Trump is insane, yes Happy fascist I am talking to you. The man has a proven record of getting it done. He has an ego that will not allow him to mess up America’s recovery. Google Wollman rink to see how he gets it done.
    This runaway train has left the station. We are getting Trump because of TFG and broken Repub promises. Kelli Ward in Az is beating Juan by 9 points. I will send her money.
    Hillary is married to a serial rapist who made several trips to Pedo Isalnd and she is still in contention. The Plane he flew there on is named Air F*ck One. This has to end somehow and President Trump might be the guy. He sure knows how to delegate to get things done. And this is from someone who hated him when I lived in NYC back in the day.. Desperate times, etc…

    Gazzer (feaf20)

  142. I think Cruz on the ticket makes sense. trump would prolly only do one term, but even if it is two, Ted would be very nicely positioned if they don’t screw up.

    Gazzer (feaf20)

  143. I think if you want to choose a President, it might be important to choose someone who respects the Constitution, understands capitalism and realizes how one depends on the other.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  144. To Hillary! it would just be a giant slush fund. I believe that Trump is very opportunistic but that might be what we need right now. We don’t need no stinking establishment, that’s for sure. Bush/Hillary! is effectively the same death spiral we are on now. Christ, imagine if Trump wins without any fund raising whatsoever. What a re-setting of the bar.

    Gazzer (feaf20)

  145. Trump told Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business Friday morning he would fight China, Japan, and any country that devalued their currency with tariffs. Apparently he is not only ignorant of NAFTA, but also WTO, and the effects of trade wars on economies.

    Cruz is certainly conservative, as are the other well-known candidates, although some are certainly more pure to the doctrine than others. Even Pataki took the most conservative course he could get away with in New York. And there aren’t many Governors who can match the conservative achievements of Jeb Bush, Perry, Walker, and even Kasich – in modern history.

    Trump has even been to the left of Christie on gun control. Many who support him say they know he isn’t conservative, that they are “sending a message to the establishment.” Silly, their only message is “Unite behind Jeb, he’s the only one with the cash to last since the others cannot get their message out over our Kardashian sideshow.” It’s as if they think he will suddenly disappear and some more conservative candidate will win out of nowhere once “the establishment” is properly chastised.

    As Mencken observed of a Barnum exhibit, “No one ever went broke by underestimating the intelligence of the American public.” Four decades of federal control of education at all levels make that truer than ever.

    Estragon (ada867)

  146. Anyone who says they would vote for Hillary! over Trump is insane, yes Happy fascist I am talking to you.

    Another regular to this message board also said the same thing, but included in the mix Republican candidates beyond Trump. However, I had a hunch about the inclinations of that person since I could tell he leaned left more than he’d readily admit to.

    Mark (e187ae)

  147. Silly, their only message is “Unite behind Jeb

    Who’s saying that? Perhaps a small handful of inside-the-beltway, goody-two-shoe Republicans who are the type to say, “shhhh, don’t be too candid about ideology — yours, mines and theirs — and various socio-political issues, particularly those involving race and immigration, because that’s rude and unbecoming!”

    Mark (e187ae)

  148. I like that Trump says, nah Ima keep saying anchor babies. You’re done!

    Gazzer (feaf20)

  149. for reals?

    we celebrate that this is what failmerica is reduced to?

    happyfeet (831175)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2990 secs.