Treetop wrote:We are watching different trumps.
We're watching the same Trump, but I'm not buying many of his current positions which contradict his last several decades of activity and stances.
Treetop wrote:He wants to take the party away from big government more then any republican since Ive been watching. Cutting regulations and spending.
He says that, but what regulations and what spending? He offers no specifics, just empty rhetoric. Every GOP candidate I've watched in every debate in the last three cycles has talked about cutting regulations and cutting spending.
Treetop wrote:Hes mentioned supporting the assault weapons ban in the past but flipped on it and has been firm ever since, even if he did it for political reasons.
If "by the past" you mean just over a year ago, when he mentioned an assault weapons ban on his original campaign website. He flipped and has been firm, for all of twelve months of campaigning. He called for banning all semi-automatic weapons in his book in 2000. He called for longer waiting periods and other measures a few years ago. Trump, like other politicians, knows HE will always have armed guards to protect him no matter what the laws are, so his position is whatever is most politically advantageous at the moment.
Treetop wrote:Would have to agree on healthcare.
That's another one that he has done a 180 on since he started running. His original campaign website absolutely called for a single-payer healthcare system. Now he has adopted the platform of reform and deregulation to some extent. Again a paper-thin disguise.
Treetop wrote:He wants religious groups to be able to speak their mind politically citing the first amendment so more religious freedom. It isnt against religious freedom to block immigration from nations that 20-30% of the immigrants openly admit they want to hurt us.
He originally talked about banning Muslims from coming into the country, period. His staffers massaged that into banning certain high-risk categories (single Muslim men of certain ages) from specific countries. There's a fine line to walk here. Trump is not good at nuance.
Treetop wrote:He is the same as the bulk of republicans and democrats on privacy, but not moving it further in the wrong direction, hes just not taking it in a better one as rand paul might.
Trump demanded that Apple build a backdoor for the FBI. He supports the Patriot Act and the NSA. He says the government should have the ability to censor and shut down the internet. He suggested that Edward Snowden should be executed. The other candidates (except Rand) did not have particularly good stances on privacy, but Trump is at the extreme on all of them.
Treetop wrote:Not sure why you say this about corporatism, his stance on trade deals shows he is eons better for the corporatism issue then even gary johnson who is A-ok with such trade deals, and gives meaningless speeches otherwise with no substance.
Because Trump is a corporatist and has been leveraging big government to the advantage of his businesses for 40+ years. TPP is one area I don't agree with Johnson on, but I do think the TPP gets blown out of proportion. Trump's stance on trade is to put huge tariffs on imports from China, making everything more expensive. I don't
like that so much stuff is made in China, but his trade policy would crush the lower and middle class, who would be paying 50% - 100% more for consumables. Not to mention it's decidedly anti-free-market. Trump supported TARP and the bank bailouts (of course he did, he's received his own bailouts). Trump now supports a big hike in the federal minimum wage, which he opposed at the beginning (he wants $10 where Hillary wants $12). His campaign has also started to make proposals to fix the non-existent "wage gap" to look more like Hillary.
Treetop wrote:He wants to lower taxes which I think is great not sure why you think thats the wrong direction.
His tax proposal was to vastly increase the number of people paying $0 in taxes at the bottom end, and jack taxes way up on the wealthy. He referred to his own tax policy as "more progressive." That may also have been tweaked since the early debates.
Treetop wrote:I see a bigger difference between the two then ever before. Dems AND reps have long both been imperialistic globalist building nonsense and he wants to take us away from that and rebuild industry. This is the first time I saw ANY major difference outside of rhetoric from the two main parties. This is the first time since I could vote that a major party wasnt offering two sides of the same imo failed mindset that is bleeding ut our middle class. We have a chance at a future now, instead of only oppression as we bleed ourselves out at the altar of globalism and no borders.
Nah, I see the most polarizing characters with the least substantive policy differences in my lifetime. Take away immigration (where Trump is making outlandish promises he knows he can't keep), free college (where Hillary is making outlandish promises she knows she can't keep), and foreign policy (where Trump currently sounds better but has a past much closer to Hillary's current stance), and there isn't all that much different. Trump is moving the GOP closer to the dems. If he manages to beat Hillary (I still doubt it will happen), we'll have 4-8 years of the conservative party getting less and less conservative.
Treetop wrote:60% do not feel supported by either party atm. Highest ever. (I believe) Im not sure we will end the two party paradigm soon though, but one or the other could easily fail soon by my take on things.
I believe it. I read that only 9% of eligible voters picked Trump and Hillary in the primaries. 91% of eligible voters didn't vote or wanted somebody else. Pretty sad state of affairs.