Yes. And when I’ve done stuff in the past for you that’s time consuming you dismiss it all with a word or something. It’s a waste of time. I said I can make an argument for Trump being the least conservative in the field and I gave reasons why. I’m familiar with many of the common positions that GOP front runners were running with at the time although I’m not sure specifics from every person in every area. Part of the reason I’m more familiar with Trump’s is how counter they were to most of what the other people and Republican Party on the whole at the time were.
Did you just completely miss the primary or what? You said you doubted he was the least conservative but don’t even attempt to explain why. Expand yourself past your usual 1-15 word post for once.
I explained why I thought what I did, explained how some principled conservatives wouldn’t support him, etc. You’re welcome to counter with why you doubt it any day. Perhaps you can go for a full three sentences even. Really stretch out.
But how many of them were thrice divorced with multiple sexual abuse allegations? How many were obviously using “Christianity” as a prop? How many had obvious corruption and scams throughout their career? How many (after 8 years of hand wringing about the debt) said the debt doesn’t matter we print our own money. How many advocated for universal healthcare?
True. But Republicans said they were conservative during the Obama years and that social and fiscal conservative would be the path forward for the party. Then they ran Trump who you apparently think is more conservative than the people he ran against but won’t say why. You have issues with my explanation but won’t make an explanation for why you think that.
And this is exactly why discussion is pointless with you. You don’t even say who or why you think that. You demand stuff from others but don’t even remotely attempt to explain any of your thinking. It’s just usually one sentence snark. I should know better than to attempt engagement but that’s my own issue.
Guessing we just disagree on what conservative means. You have sloth who wouldn’t vote for Trump because of his character (among other issues) and Nick who wonders why anyone would care since it’s a government employee.
Same guy who tried to argue paying off a country for political dirt is a good move for a President.
I didn’t make the claim. You did. I don’t feel the need to explain my claim that there was at least one, more conservative candidate, to you, because you have already claimed that Trump was the LEAST(that means you don’t disagree with what I said there) conservative candidate.
I also do not ascribe to the conservatism=small state school of thinking, I think there are things the state does that it should not, but the size isn’t necessarily what draws my ire.
In the US I think you would be very hard pressed to find many people who say I’m fiscally conservative and when asking them to describe a bit about that say the national debt doesn’t matter. That’s about the least fiscally conservative statement one can make. Even Democrats talk about how to pay for things.
No doubt. But it’s a fact of politics that the ‘fiscally conservative/ socially liberal’ grouping is over represented in Washington and makes up an enormous group of special advisors, and a very small percentage of the public.
Fiscally liberal and socially conservative, on the other hand, is a far larger group.
You’re right. I was really hoping we weren’t all this dumb though. I was hoping for better (my mistake).
SAD!!
We don’t live in a world where character and leadership are independent. Even if morals weren’t actually important (and they are essential), nobody compartmentalizes those personal areas entirely and culture is still a thing. And if you DID compartmentalize 100% I’d be more concerned about your psychology.
Yes I disagree. I think Trump was the most conservative. Please list out a full legislative history and personal life of the 2016 primary candidates and how you have came to the conclusion that any of them are more conservative.