BAIT & SWITCH

Strange, the idea of supporting the Libertarian Ticket elicits little negative feedback from Democrats. Maybe they’re just unaware of the Libertarian Party or they don’t realize that they take about an equal amount of votes from them. Not so from Republicans. Beyond the “but Hillary is worse” nonsense, they point to Trump’s  policies presented in scripted and teleprompter supported major speeches. On Taxes, energy, healthcare, foreign policy and supreme court justices he appears to be  reasonably inline with longstanding conservative ideas. Even if you have to hold your nose over his numerous disqualifications,if you support these you’ve got to vote for him. We suggest they look a little closer. In every case they reflect well known conservative thinking, just regurgitated by Trump. By taking Steve Moore’s  and Larry Kudlow’s  ideas on taxes,he  gains both credibility and their active support. Same with John Bolton on foreign policy and the Heritage Foundation on the Supreme Court justices. He takes your ideas and you’re flattered and align with him. The bait is set and you and those who believe in you are hooked. Didn’t anyone notice in each area, he later left himself an out to go in entirely different direction? “I’m for lowering taxes but I may raise them, just an opening bid to negotiate with foreign powers, and I may add people to my list of judges later.” He can just change direction when he perceives it to be in his interest or go where he really wanted in the first place. Just wait for the Switch.

For instance,let’s take a realistic look his supporters main pillar,Trump and the Supreme Court.   Trumpsters support their position with the mantra, “Hillary wins and the court will be ultra liberal for decades.”  They may have to toss their principles on everything else but at least they’ll have prevented runaway government. Really? When has Donald Trump ever done anything that wasn’t in his own interest? He changes positions to align with his interests of the moment, even  changing in an amazingly short time. Given his expressed positions, why would he appoint Antonin Scalia type  justices? You can’t get past the 1st amendment without grave apprehension on where Trump would go. He wants to greatly expand the libel laws to prevent  press criticism, threatened the owner of the Washington Post with anti-trust and would impose a religious test on who could enter the US. We’ve seen his lack of respect for the separation of powers when went after the judge in his Trump University fraud cases and mentioned he would be president when the case went to trial. He’s for greatly expanding eminent domain. Sounds like he would appoint judges favoring an expanded view of government and his presidency. Why would he appoint judges that would rule against him? The Trumsters are kidding themselves.

Continue reading