Donald Trump Neo-statists Statism

TRUMP IN ’86 DEEMED RONALD REAGAN’S TAX CUTS AS “CATASTROPHE, COUNTRY IN DEPRESSION”…..

The man is not a conservative, let alone a Republican, but a Dem-In-Drag…..

The chumpster

So what we have here are three Democrats and one constitutional conservative running for the nomination of their party for president. Like I said earlier, Trump would have run as a Democrat if the Clintons didn’t own the Dem machine, lock stock and barrel. The Dem primary system is in fact rigged, and barn burning Trump knows that, and chose to run a ”Republican” because running as 3rd party candidate is a road to nowhere.

 People are welcome to believe that Trump has claimed the Reagan mantle (even as he misstates 1980 polling lessons) and would govern as a reliable conservative.  But that leap requires a blind faith that ignores his long history of liberalism on virtually every major issue.  Remember, if Trump had gotten his way, Reagan would never have been president in the first place — so those “catastrophic” tax cuts wouldn’t have been instituted. Anyway, there’s your frontrunner, Republicans.

Of Course: Trump Trashed Reagan Tax Cuts as Democrat-Called ‘Expert’ Witness

Guy Benson | Apr 19, 2016

It’s not especially remarkable that House Democrats once summoned fellow liberal Donald Trump to Capitol Hill to testify about the alleged adverse effects of Ronald Reagan’s 1986 tax reforms. What issomewhat remarkable is that this clip wasn’t dug up by a conservative opposition research team, but rather by Trump’s own campaign — which proceeded to blast it out into the public bloodstream as evidence that “Mr. Trump” is an all-caps EXPERT on economic matters. And what conclusion did his “expertise” produce? I’ll let Trump answer that question in his own words. Again, this comes via Trump’s social media director, who — ta da! — can’t vote for his boss today because he’s not a Republican:

More here.

One Response

  1. 1986? What has Hillary said even last week? They have to go back to 1986? Why not 1905?
    or 1850? Give me a break. Thats pretty thin dirt.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *