Quote:Haliburton and their no bid contracts should be enough to debunk any belief that any politician is above using the monopoly of force to get rich while in power. I mean come on let's just stay out of fantasyland and be honest with ourselves. 

 

Well in the interest of living in realville it should be pointed out that the only president to significantly intervene on behalf of haliburton was Bill Clinton.  I am not exactly sure how well that fits into your narrative.   


 

We must be listening to different trumps, in his campaign he's openly talked about going to war in the middle east, bombing oil fields, hell just on Fox news the other night he was passively talking about engaging the Russians head on as if it was just something to say off the cuff. Trump isn't a non-interventionist, he talks about going and confiscating oil fields lol. Trump is laughably uninformed in regards to foreign policy, his typical response when pressed is I would make them do it. Well how Mr. Trump, I would just make them! I will be Great! 

 

There's a few acres of space between being a full on nation builder and being an isolationist.  Whether we like it or not there are forces amassing in the middle east with the sole purpose of spreading a political caliphate and taking over the world.  there is going to have to be some form of a response to this threat.  He has talked about bombing the oil feeds to choke off ISIS means of finance and allowing our allies in the region plus russia to bomb the heck out of them.  The idea that we are going to just sit back and wait for ISIS to attack us is a little suicidal.  


 

Outside of that his main guiding principle has been stability.  He wasn't for the removal of Hussein because of how it would destabilize the region, you could argue that he has a point.  He has been against the forced removal of Assad for the same reason. He's not talking about willy nilly nation building.  He's spoken specifically about strengthening our military to respond to specific threats.   


 

Again you pointed out to another problem I have with him, he ignores the reality that social security is a ponzi scheme that only works when you have more workers than retirees a notion that will be completely on its head in a few years. 

 

So if he talks too conservative hes just playing to the base, if he espoused a moderate position then he's just an idiot?  lol.  True, Social security was a ponzi scheme.  That being said the last time a president tried to do anything about it his own party abandoned him.  Obviously i am in favor of abolishing the system (1.) not for those who are coming up on retirement in the next 15-20 years) because in reality we don't need the government to mismanage our money for us.  


 

That being said, i would much rather have someone who is going to be focused on increasing revenues through diversification (repatriated capital) and simplification of the tax code to spur growth than someone who is just going to advocate a hike in payroll/self employment taxes.  


 

Also, I am sure that he recognizes the nature of the system, just as he recognizes the political reality.  


 

Yes I have a problem when a man who openly brags about his Billions uses the laws (which are a bigger problem in the first place) as a buffer for crap investments, instead of paying his debts he dumps it on the public in the form of bankruptcy laws. I don't care that everyone else does it, it [BAD WORD REMOVED] me off that they get away with it as well, and I wouldn't support any of them either.

 

Well if the choice comes down to Him and Hillary you are looking at the woman who's husband gave birth to the incestuous relationships (Mega Banks and insurance companies) that caused the financial meltdown.  She's underwritten by these same bad actors, and those guys are 20 times worse than Trump ever thought of being.  


 

Screw trump he's the only Republican that'll have me voting democrat in hopes of just going all in on a full collapse. Trump wins the nomination bring on the apocalypse I've given up.  

 

That's a tad bit dramatic right?

 

So the fact that he made a lot of money in the private sector bothers you.  Okay, let's think about that.  Hillary Clinton has raised hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign countries during her time as Secratary of state.  Among things that could be considered quid pro quo she approved the sale of unranium mines in this country to Russia and those materials are bing shipped outside the country to who knows where.  So you're comfortable with an avowed leftist who is openly selling influence to the highest foreign bidder WHILE IN OFFICE but a guy with a big business is a problem?  Are you jealous of the hair?

---