Perhaps so. Read this and judge for yourself.
The article is from 12 Apr and does not take into account the new info on Scott Walker I mention below. It’s not implausible that Trump could be the best candidate on issues that cut against the grain of the Establishment consensus – immigration, foreign policy, and trade. (He’s clearly most likely to be useful on trade.) Trump can afford to be his own man and therefore may have less need to follow the money.
Advertisements
An “Oligarch of the people”?………………….Like the Ukraine……….But has that not been the norm since Jimmy Carter?
LikeLike
” Trump can afford to be his own man and therefore may have less need to follow the money.”
Sounds like a good reason to gamble on him 🙂
LikeLike
Good one, LOL! So the best candidate for “immigration patriots” (read people opposed to immigration) is the oligarch who has married not one, but two immigrants. I guess that puts him ahead of Jeb Bush, an oligarch who has married only one. I’m pretty much indifferent to immigration as an issue and I’m as opposed to Trump as I am to everyone else who has either declared or been widely mentioned as a presidential candidate in 2016. On a personal level, I’m pro-immigration as I have many immigrant friends. But so far no immigrant wives, so I guess I fall short of being a patriot.
LikeLike
Identity wise, Trump’s spectacle would be a disaster, and best to support Walker Version 4.23.15 and shred his foreign policy, by supporting Rand. On the otherhand, Nigel Farrage, the womanizing hard drinking UKIP leader, is exactly what the US requires, to put as much distance as possible between the GOP and the Religious GOP.
I am game either way. Kirt, like most Southern Cons, doesn’t really get involved anyway, so the battle is in the Midwest and Northeast, to decide the fate of the country in the short term.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What about the Democrats?
LikeLike
Well, what about them? I have suggested getting involved in D politics down South, and I here nothing but the same old defeatism. Go support Webb, or even just O’Malley in an anybody but Clinton coalition. Do a facebook page for your state–spend 10 minutes a day posting on the relevant pages about neocon Hillary, immigration, and TPP, and direct traffic to such a page. Productive Internet Work.
LikeLike
Kirk, what matters to me is what policies a candidate supports and will actually follow through on and not waffle when in office. Trump marrying 2 immigrants doesn’t concern me regarding what policies he promotes. It does give me some pause about how sincere he is.
LikeLike
Trump’s wives are European-descended. Jeb Bush’s wife is not.
The situation is entirely different.
LikeLike
Weavercht,
Yes, indeed. The problem with immigration generally is not that they’re immigrants, but from where do they come? When we stop accepting the tauroscatological effluvium about the USA’s being a “proposition nation” and unapologetically aver our European, Christian roots, then perhaps we can thwart the invaders.
LikeLike
I believe you’re correct for the 1990s, but today I fear the Steve Sailer “citizenism” and NumbersUSA raceless approach is best. And “secularism” reigns supreme.
We can at some point hopefully use greed and other arguments to encourage Americans to oppose immigration. I realise government dependence makes secession less likely and oppression more likely, but I’d rather more socialism than immigration.
LikeLike
With the US imposing it’s will against the Eastern Ukraine, on it’s efforts to secede, what chance does a US state have?
LikeLike