How to Support Trump without Mentioning Hillary
In a previous article I outlined several reasons why people, particularly libertarians, should support Donald Trump. Said arguments ranged from strategic, to ideological, to practical. Some were that Trump was the lesser evil, or our best realistic chance, or showed why the game is rigged so that third parties don’t have a chance. Others discussed his policies based on their own merits, while debunking various claims about his character.
This time around, I want to give you a list of nothing but stand-alone reasons you can use the next time your friends and family come at you with, “Give me a reason to support Trump that doesn’t mention Hillary.” So no mention of Hillary in this article. Starting now.
1. His Tax Plan
Trump wants to reduce or eliminate various taxes, not just on the rich, but on everyone. Got that, liberals? You’re getting a break, too. Not just the evil 1%. That means more of your hard-earned money directly in your pocket so you don’t have to ask, “Who will care for the poor?” The poor, and everyone else, will be in a better position to care for themselves, and have others care for them through voluntary means, such as charity or raises or creating jobs because they’ll have more money to do so, instead of flushing it down the toilet of bureaucracy.
All conservatives and Republicans (of which Trump’s not a real one of either) claim to want to reduce taxes. However, the Donald’s plan goes far beyond just income taxes. He also wants to outright abolish estate tax. As he put it, that money was meant for your families, not the government.
And no, liberals, this plan doesn’t just help the rich. It helps the poor, too! For those in the lowest earning bracket, you’ll pay no income taxes at all.
Trump also wants to reduce corporate taxes from some of the highest in the world, to some of the lowest, which will encourage job creation in this county. High taxes are among the main reasons companies move offshore, or store assets in the Caymans. Remember when Burger King wanted to move its headquarters to Canada to avoid high taxes? Well, I’m sure you’d move elsewhere to avoid paying taxes if you could afford it, so why hate on them for doing the same?
But I thought you said if I didn’t like it here, I should leave?
At this point, I can hear the leftists in the audience saying, “But trickle-down economics doesn’t create jobs, which is why we tax corporations!” Wrong!
Corporate taxes affect small businesses, too, siphoning money that could have been used to grow, or reduce costs, or hire more people. It’s just that they don’t have the sort of capital that Burger King does to move overseas or hire cheap labor. Thus, corporate taxes, like all government regulations, are a form of protectionism and lead to greater consolidation and more barriers to entry for smaller competitors. Why do you think the middle class is all but extinct?
Now, if you’re a libertarian, this plan should be a big deal for you. All of you at “taxation is theft” station should be getting on board the Trump Train. Sure, Donald Trump is by no means a libertarian, and he’s not looking to abolish income taxes and end the State, but his plan still aligns with our goals in bringing us a step closer to liberty by reducing the amount of theft being promulgated.
If you wanna be petty and say, “Well, he’s still taxing people and legitimizing theft,” then I’m sorry, but you’re just not being realistic. The choice before you in this election is more taxes or less, not less taxes or none. Not even Gary Johnson and Rand Paul are advocating that. Adam Kokesh is, but he’s not running until 2020. So, again, best get on board. The train’s leaving.
Baby steps towards liberty. It’s been our strategy since the ‘70s.
Reducing taxes is something the economic left has a hard time with because they think only the government (which runs on taxes) can solve the problems of poverty, even though it’s had fifty years to do so and has utterly failed.
If the government were a business, it would have gone bankrupt by now. Which brings us to the next reason you should support Trump …
2. He Will Reduce the National Debt
Democrats love pointing out how Bill Clinton was the only president in recent memory to create a surplus. Well, to their point, going from a deficit to a surplus is the first step towards tackling the national debt, and there are only two ways to do that: raise revenue, or cut spending. As per my first argument, Trump’s obviously not looking to raise revenue by increasing taxes; and that’s actually okay, since raising revenue just gives a higher credit limit to the shopaholic that is the U.S. government.
As the folks over at Learn Liberty have pointed out, raising taxes doesn’t solve the problem. In fact, it only makes things worse. Reducing taxes and simplifying the tax code (aka Trump’s plan) helps grow the economic pie quickly, thereby giving government a bigger slice of revenue.
Okay, so Trump’s plan can get us more money, but the real problem is spending.
Not to worry, Trump can and will take care of that too. We know this because it’s actually something he has a great deal of experience in already and it plays to his strengths as a businessman.
“But Donald Trump’s not as rich as he claims, and he’s had so many failures!” That doesn’t matter. He’s had far more wins than losses and he’s probably got boat loads more money than you or I, which means he must be doing something right.
“It’s about this big.”
Let’s say that, of the roughly 500 businesses he’s been an executive of… Wait, what’s that? You didn’t know it was 500? You were only thinking of the ones that had his name attached to them? So happy to burst your bubble.
Anyways, as I was saying, of the 500 businesses he’s been a part of, let’s suppose fifty have been total flops. That’s 10%, which would give him a 90% success rating. For comparison’s sake, that’s about how many businesses fail in their first year. Heck, to be a world renowned baseball player, you only need a batting average of around 30%, and Trump is at least ninety-percent, making him ten times better than the average, which is pretty good objectively.
So, when people say he’s not a business success, they’ve likely never run a business, or even know much about business beyond what the media and the government tell them, and they certainly don’t know statistics.
“But he got to where he is with his daddy’s money,” I hear you say. To which I reply: “And not everyone who wins the lottery becomes Donald Trump.” Besides, it was mostly illiquid assets in his father’s company that he received, which means he still had to know how to run a successful business to be able to make use of them.
What does all this have to do with the national debt? Well, it shows that, contrary to popular belief, Trump actually is capable of balancing budgets and growing businesses. Remember that 90% of failed businesses stat? Why do you think that’s a thing that exists? Because most people don’t know how to handle money even when they’ve got it. Remember Trump’s 90% success rate that we discussed? That shows he knows how to handle money. It’s that same record he’ll bring to Washington and apply to the national debt.
People say “You can’t run the government like you run a business,” but it’s that same mentality that results in a $20 trillion debt and $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities, for what has frankly been really shitty service. Now, it’s true that the government is different from a business in certain key ways. For one thing, a business can’t just print money and have its shareholders lend it an air of legitimacy for the sake of brand loyalty.
The government also doesn’t produce anything of real value to consumers or constituents. Everything it has is taken by force. So, the key to making it successful (and more moral) lies in the reduction of spending.
What exactly should we cut, though? It’s a complex question. Fortunately, Trump is smart enough and humble enough to know he doesn’t have all the answers, which is why he has stated that, upon entering office, he will direct the heads of each department to provide a list of items to be triaged in an effort to reduce waste.
His stated plan to make Mexico pay for the wall – which, yes, he actually has a plan in place – and to make NATO pull its own weight, will also go a long way towards reducing the deficit, and thus the debt. His plans to reduce interstate trade restrictions on health insurance will make healthcare more affordable, thereby reducing the need for government welfare. His stance on the legalization of marijuana means less resources spent on the failed War on Drugs. And let’s not forget that simplifying the tax code means a lot fewer resources going towards pushing paper.
Even though, as a libertarian, I’m disappointed that he wants to “fix” the military and entitlements, rather than abolish them, I can at least get behind his stated goals of making them more efficient and cost-effective, which means fewer resources wasted, lower taxes, and thus greater liberty and morality.
I’m also not the biggest fan of Mike Pence for socially liberal reasons. However, say what you will about the man, it’s clear Trump chose Pence for his economic track record above all other considerations, which is an issue that affects all Americans, not just those of a particular demographic.
You liberal arts majors have no idea how good you’ll have it under a Trump Administration.
Pence balanced the budget and lowered taxes in Indiana while managing to increase spending on things most people consider good and necessary – like education and infrastructure – and it’s likely he’ll do the same as VP. So, even if Trump doesn’t have direct executive experience running a State, his right-hand man certainly does, and that’s just as good, since he can advise Trump on policy matters.
Still not convinced? How about the time Donald Trump helped Chris Christie pay off his campaign finance debt, which he did through voluntary means, without the use of State power or coercion? Or how about the Wollman skating rink in New York where he came in ahead of schedule and under budget, showing the free market gets far better results than the government?
Still not convinced? Okay, well, hold that thought as we segue into my next point …
3. He’s a Man of the People (Yes, Really!)
For all our talk about wanting to get money out of politics, Trump appears to be the only one actually doing it. Even Bernie Sanders has some hypocritical stains on his name, and on his $600,000 lake house that he bought on a politician’s salary.
Technically, I still haven’t mentioned she-who-must-not-be-named yet.
Trump has made a big deal of the fact that no lobbyists own him – that he is strictly beholden to the American people, and rightly so. People claim he’s being arrogant, but it’s not arrogant if you really are that good. They claim he’s narcissistic, but he has a lot to be proud of making it this far having never done it before; and so what if he is self-aggrandizing, so long as he actually makes America great again? Steve Jobs was regarded as a psychopath by many who knew him, but as I sit here typing this up on my Mac Book, I honestly couldn’t give two shits about the man’s character flaws, because people need things.
And yes, liberals, that’s the same sort of selfishness you display as well when you bring your corporate-made iPhones to an Occupy Wall Street rally. It’s no less greedy to want handouts when you’re poor as when you’re rich, and it’s no less bribery to accept them in exchange for political support.
In recent weeks, Trump has actually taken demonstrable steps towards humbling himself, even apologizing for the things he said that some people found to be hurtful. He’s gone from being the great fear-monger to being the great uniter.
People complain about his tone. That he’s just a hateful clown version of Adolf Hitler. However, if you watch in full his foreign policy speech, his economic policy speech, his law and order speech, his radical Islam speech, his Orlando speech, or his immigration speech, you’ll see Trump is more than capable of being somber and serious. Does he still get loud and angry at times? Sure, but it’s not unjustified, given the severity of the topics he’s discussing. No one seemed to mind when Bernie or Obama got angry about the stuff they talked about.
In fact, in many ways, he’s already acting as though he won. He’s doing many of the things a President should do, and making Obama and others look bad for not doing them. Things like speaking out against special interests, meeting with the President of Mexico to discuss immigration reform, doing charity work for the Louisiana flood victims, and giving a voice to the families of those killed by terrorists and illegal immigrants.
It’s hard to imagine that a man born with a silver spoon in his mouth could relate to the average person, but he genuinely seems to know what the people care about; and so long as America is improved in the process, does it really matter whether he himself actually believes any of it? Should we not judge people by the fruits of their labor, rather than on their mere words?
To date, Trump claims to have spent about $80 million of his own money funding his campaign, relying mostly on his charisma, social media, spectacle, and name-recognition to carry him. In other words, he’s competing for support based on the merits of his ideas and skills; and not only is he winning tremendously, but he’s done it for far less cost than any of his competitors, with better polling numbers among minority groups than any Republican in recent memory.
A cynic might say that he could still turn hypocrite once elected, and that’s certainly a possibility. In fact, it’s one of my biggest fears, since I watched it happen with Obama in 2008.
And with worse race-relations, and twice the national debt.
However, the fact that Trump isn’t being bought off by anyone makes him the most likely candidate to actually do what he says he will do.
Cynics will also claim that Trump is only running to bolster his brand, but beyond the $80 million he’s put up (which is money that can’t be used in any of his business ventures), his brand itself has also been suffering, like how Macy’s dropped him from their line in response to some of the things he’s said. How many potential consumers of his products have also been turned off by his rhetoric? I personally know someone who brags about only going to Trump’s golf course every year to take a huge piss on it. You think he’d ever buy a Trump steak with a bottle of Trump Vodka?
Donald Trump doesn’t need money or power. He’s got both in spades already. That’s not why he’s doing this. I don’t claim to know exactly why he’s doing it, other than he claims to love America and wants to make it great again, which sounds legitimate, given all he’s sacrificed so far. Or does anyone think he actually enjoys getting death threats, or having envelops of white powder sent to his family?
While we’re talking about the relationship between money and power in politics, let’s take a moment to examine the other side of that coin.
4. He’s a Threat to the Powers That Be
A lot of fuss has been made about the fact that, as a private businessman, Trump has given money to politicians of both parties. In a sense, you could say he doesn’t work for lobbyists because he is himself a lobbyist pushing his own agenda and people are afraid because they’re not quite sure what that means for them.
This actually came up during the Republican primaries, and Trump handled it very well. He pointed out that, as a businessman working in a cronyist system, everyone was doing this, and he’d be a sucker not to, since it meant he would have been unable to compete, and thus would not have had the funding necessary to now run the type of campaign he’s running. Of course, he’s the only one being chided for it.
Rand Paul was among Donald’s most ardent opponents in this, to which Trump retorted that he didn’t recall the Senator complaining when he donated to his campaign. As a libertarian, I like Rand a lot, and if Trump weren’t in this race, I would have wanted him to be the Republican nominee. That said, it’s one of the few times I’ve ever seen Rand rightly shot down for something he’s said.
Another issue that came up during the debates, which I think speaks volumes as to why Trump has decided to personally get involved, is how utterly disenfranchised he was at the poor results of his contributions. If you’re in the free market and you pay a lot of money for something, you expect it to do what you want, and when it doesn’t, you stop paying for it. Trump has tapped into the sentiment that many of us feel – and which I think he personally feels – that we are trapped in a system that is no longer serving us and it’s time for a radical overthrow of the establishment.
I know I myself have felt this way. When I first became interested in politics, I was lulled by Obama’s siren song of “Hope and Change.” That turned out to be a disappointment, so I went with Romney four years later, moved by his notion that the role of government was to obey the Constitution. Say what you want about the man, he was dead-on with that speech.
Romney lost that race, and we had four more years of Obama. For a while, it seemed like it would be more of the same until Donald Trump surprised everyone and actually became a serious player, out-competing seventeen opponents, all with far more political experience than him – which, ironically, their status as career politicians was their weakness and his strength.
I’m compelled to remind America how close it came to its third strike when Jeb Bush was still the front runner for the Republicans.
Despite having contributed to both parties, Trump’s entire campaign has resulted in dismantling them both and rebuilding them anew under his banner, even drawing a lot of Sanders supporters to his side.
After taking down the likes of Bush, Christie, Rubio, Cruz, and Rand, many prominent Republicans have since fallen in line behind Trump; and those that haven’t, like Cruz or the Bushes, we honestly don’t want, since they represent everything that is wrong with the system anyway. Trump wears their scorn like the badge of honor that it is. “Out with the old, in with the new” has become his rallying cry and we have every reason to think he’s something we haven’t seen before.
Trump speaks the truth that most are unable or unwilling to speak, whether because it’s politically incorrect to say it, or because the facts get drowned out by the media-political machine – which still tries, and fails, to take him down anyway they can. This above all is the reason for his success because, as I said, he’s competing at an ideological and policy-based level. His strength lies in his message and his ability to leverage his own power to even the playing field. Something those who got to where they are by deception or coercion find to be an intolerable, existential threat.
Obviously, I’m not a mind-reader. I can’t know what’s really in the man’s heart, and can only judge by what I see and hear, and on his own actions, which to me seem thus far consistent with his rhetoric. However, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, since what’s been tried is no longer working. The devil we know is no longer sufficient.
Speaking of exorcising demons …
5. He’s Right about Illegal Immigration
If there’s any crown jewel to Trump’s presidential policies, it would have to be his stance on immigration, particularly that of the illegal variety. That is, after all, what started this whole thing, and I’m compelled to remind America that this is the context by which it should filter all of Trump’s statements about immigrants and immigration – that he’s not anti-immigrant, he’s anti-illegal. The fact that I even have to say that at this point vexes me greatly.
Unless you’re a criminal, a terrorist, a lobbyist, or a traitor, it’s more likely that Trump will greet you with a warm bear hug and a dopey smile than to speak an unkind word about you, because that’s just the sort of man he appears to be.
Now, we libertarians should know from the immortal words of Milton Friedman, that we can’t have open borders with a welfare state, and we all know the reasons why. It perverts incentives, legitimizes theft, and bankrupts the nation, both financially and morally.
The solution we generally prefer is to end the welfare state and keep the borders open. However, we also know the welfare state isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. It’s also not the only issue surrounding immigration, nor are economics the only issue Trump is criticized for when talking about it.
Donald Trump often gets called a racist, sexist, xenophobe, Islamophobe, literally Hitler, etc. He’s really none of these things. How do I know? Because no one made a big deal of any of it until he started to run for president; and I suspect that, had he been a status quo politician like the rest and just towed the line, he wouldn’t be facing these kinds of attacks. This is because the media is essentially a priestly class of manipulators for the powers that be.
Hard to imagine what new label you’d have to invent to insult Trump after all the things he’s been called.
At this point, it’s something of an intelligence test as to whether or not you think Trump is any of the things the media-political complex makes him out to be. Case in point, you can go look up his full speeches that I linked to before and get the full context straight from the horse’s mouth.
I can’t tell you the number of times someone has tried to convince me that Trump thinks all Mexicans are rapists; and when I ask for proof, they always show me the same video, which conveniently cuts off before revealing the full statement. At this point, anyone that still uses that video or ones like it is being manipulated, or is trying to manipulate you into believing a false and hateful narrative.
If you still think Trump is any of those things, then if nothing else, it tells me you haven’t yet seen this very important video. If you still think he believes all Mexicans are rapists, watch the video. If you still think he hates women, watch the video. If you still think the media isn’t deliberately trying to destroy him with these petty strawmen, watch the video!
And then watch this one, which delves into more minute detail about minority support, racism, his failed businesses, David Duke, his tax records, and much, much more.
If you’re skeptical about his claim that Mexico encourages illegal immigration, have a look at this. If you’re still bothered by his bankruptcies, then watch this one. Still bothered about the xenophobia and racism of his immigration? Here’s something for you.
“But I don’t have time to watch an hour-long video.” Make time. It’s important.
I’m sure you can find time to listen during your daily drive to work, or while you’re waiting for your laundry to finish, or waiting in line at the DMV. You don’t even have to watch them all in one sitting, either. Fifteen minutes here and there isn’t much to ask for an issue you feel so strongly about, and which carries such tremendous consequences, right?
“But those are all from the same source,” I hear you say. Yes, and that’s not an argument. Do you have a rebuttal to anything that was actually said in those videos? If so, then by all means, let’s hear it. If not, then what that tells me is (assuming you even watched any of them) you are not processing information in a critical, rational way, but instead are invoking laziness or some other emotion to obfuscate a desire to get at the truth. Feel free to disagree and make a proper rebuttal and prove me wrong, but just as political correctness is destroying this country, so too are lazy emotional appeals.
That said, I do have a few other sources to help corroborate the case. Particularly when it comes to how …
6. He’s Right about Radical Islam
I’m a huge supporter of the idea that American interventionism has caused a great deal of problems in the world, going all the way back to our decision to enter WWI. I fully embrace the idea that our playing world police muddies the waters between what is reaction to our faults versus what are inherent cultural and ideological problems. I think withdrawing from the Middle East and supporting a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine would go a long way towards bringing peace and stability to the region.
To some extent (though certainly not all) Trump believes this as well when he talks about opposing globalism, ending nation-building, and getting NATO to pull its own weight. He has said that he supports Israel, but also that he would appoint himself as arbiter of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and negotiate it fairly. Marco Rubio joked that “it’s not a real estate deal, Donald,” but the irony is it kind of is. It’s probably the biggest and most controversial real estate deal in the history of the entire world, and frankly, I can’t think of anyone more qualified to mediate it.
Now, I’ve studied comparative world religions, including some fringe ones you’ve probably never even heard of before, like panentheism or theosophy. As a result of that study, which I have done for far longer than I have studied economics or politics, I have come to believe there is a shared core of love, truth, peace, and unity at the heart of every religion. This naturally includes Islam.
However, more recently, I have come to have a different understanding about Islam in particular. Namely, I believe that there are in fact two Islams – one inherently peaceful, the other inherently belligerent. This video was what first got me thinking about it, and this one was what first catalyzed my understanding that Islam was something to take seriously as not just a religion of peace, but potentially an ideology of war and conquest as well. The latter variant is incompatible not just with our Western values, but of even moderate, peaceful Islam as well.
Seeing what’s been going on in Germany, France, Sweden, and other parts of Europe only further confirms it. Perhaps most damning of all is how political correctness has allowed the creation of radical terror cells in British prisons and the rape of 1400 children in Rotherham, all over a fear of being called racist. Something Donald Trump is clearly and thoroughly immune to, by this point, because everyone cried wolf for the last year.
And I know this is the least important aspect of the whole thing, but it infuriates me to no end that people continuously use this term because Islam is not a race! Frankly, it’s just another intelligence test.
But remember, we’re told it’s Trump supporters that are stupid.
Now, maybe this is something that can be said of all religions, not just Islam (referring to the schism in interpretation), but that’s beyond the scope of this article, since we’re talking politics at the moment. Like it or not, there is a significant population that claims to follow fundamentalist teachings of Islam that are not only antithetical to Western values, but which legitimize the use of violence against non-believers, including fellow Muslims.
As a libertarian, I believe strongly in the rights of presumption of innocence, due process, and freedom of religion; but the thing about freedom of religion is it must be peaceful and not infringe the rights of others. You don’t get to hide behind religion to justify rape and murder, for instance, and the Muslims should know this best of all, since it’s written in the Qu’ran that, “If anyone slew a person – unless it be in retaliation for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew all mankind; and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all humanity.”
Now, Trump has since softened his position regarding the handling of radical Islam, downgrading from a ban of all Muslims to the more rational method of “extreme vetting” of migrants from countries known to be particularly hostile to America. However, even that doesn’t appear to be good enough for some people who believe the U.S. should have open borders and shouldn’t limit the migration of people who’ve done nothing wrong. They claim that you have as much of a right to change countries as you do to change cities.
Let’s be clear about something here. We’re indeed a nation of immigrants, but not unconditionally so. We have no obligation to take the entire world into our fold, nor is the limiting of immigration by nation or ideology without precedent either. We did it during WWII and the Cold War and most people accept that it was a reasonable thing, given the circumstances of who our enemy was.
Today, that enemy is radical Islam, but because religion is caught up in the mix, it makes us feel uncomfortable to take a stand against the rotten portion of it and cut out the tumor to save the body.
Immigration is not a right for much the same reason that I can’t just go into your house whenever I want. The right to private property is a result of personal autonomy and scarcity of resources. Nationalism is the same concept applied to a group of people, and is not inconsistent with libertarian notions of freedom, either. If we cannot tell good from bad, the prudent thing to do is to not let someone in until we can properly vet them on our terms to ensure they follow our rules, which is exactly what Trump’s policy is. That is not radical or racist or xenophobic or bigoted or whatever else you wanna call it. It’s just common sense.
Don’t think so? You’re free to disagree, of course, since this is a free country. Just let me know how many Syrian refugees I can put you down for that you’ll be personally taking into your home and supporting. Ya know, since it’s the right thing to do. What’s that? You say you have enough problems in terms of finances and security and won’t take them? You racist, you!
But no, seriously, the real problem here is hypocrisy. If you wanna take people into your home on a voluntary, individual basis, then more power to you. However, many people don’t and you have no right to force them to; and even if you personally take them in, if you seek to force others to do the same, you are violating their right to freedom of association. And if you wish to offload the risks and costs to society of bringing mass numbers of potentially dangerous people here, then you bear the full responsibility for the consequences.
Now, we could extrapolate this chain of logic to other religions like Catholicism, which was probably incompatible with Western values in its Crusader-era incarnation – back when Christianity burned witches at the stake and tortured heretics – but it has since become fairly docile in all but a fringe minority.
The problem is with timing. A religion like Islam is simply not as mature as a religion like Christianity. I mean, as a whole (individual results may vary). Islam is six-hundred years younger than Christianity, and about 2000 years younger than Judaism. It hasn’t gone through the same phases that other, older ideologies have. For instance, I think Islam is about at a point where it’s due for its own Protestant Reformation. Only, instead of ousting corruption and idolatry, it would shed the stigma and practice of its darker, more violent side.
Until such a time, however, I cannot see how anyone claiming to be a lover of liberty would think it an enhancement of liberty to import en mass a group of people who believe the law of the land should extend to legitimize slavery, killing of gays, the subjugation of women, and death for apostasy. That is a spit in the eye of the social progress we’ve made in the last century.
Many Muslims, perhaps even most, reject such beliefs, of course; but enough embrace them to pose an existential threat to everything that makes America great, and that’s the heart of the matter. I get that people look to history and see the detention of the Japanese under FDR or the Stars of David worn by Jews just before being led to Nazi concentration camps … I get that people see that and are worried about the same thing happening here under Trump. I’d be lying if I didn’t hold it as a possibility, but I think it’s a remote one, given everything else that’s going on.
Your fear is not unjustified, and if Trump gets in, I hope the people hold him under a magnifying glass of such scrutiny that he never gets to that point, but that is yet another reason why I think it’s a remote possibility, because we would hold a man like Trump to such a standard, and he knows it. I predict that, if Trump wins and does all he says he will do, the media will descend upon him like a pack of ravenous wolves the instant the first immigrant child dies trying to come into this country.
And if you shed crocodile tears for this person you never met, and hate on Trump for it, then it’s proof you’re just engaged in moral posturing, since where was all the outrage before towards the government when it was killing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children in the Middle East and elsewhere by not doing the very thing Trump wants America to do: mind its own business and get its own affairs in order?
I could go on, but this article’s already 6000 words long, with tons of video and links as is.
Suffice to say, government has become what it is because we the people have not held it to the high standards we laid out for it in the Constitution, and Trump is the result of that. He’s not the fascist dictator. He’s the last candidate before the fascist dictator.
He is the result of our collective will seeking a course correction back from the edge of the cliff before we slip into full on totalitarianism. And, unlike during the Cold War, or WWII, or any other such conflict, it will be the U.S. that is the hegemonic empire this time, and there will be no America to flee to, no America to come in and break it up. There is only us, and Trump may well be our last best chance at making America great again.
So there you have it. A solid case for why you should support Trump, without a single mention of Hillary. Crap! Okay, that last one doesn’t count.
Latest posts by Being Libertarian (see all)
- Tariffs: Minimizing Winners and Maximizing Losers - March 16, 2018
- Colton Haab vs CNN: Cutting Through The Media Dishonesty - March 15, 2018
- The New Democratic Slogan: “Never Waste a Good Tragedy” - March 8, 2018