Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since when is ann coulter, pat buchanan and many others criticizing him over syria intervention alt right? I doubt a microscopic , infinitesimal number of trump voters went to rallies and voted for trump were passionate about middle east nation building, we voted for border security,deporting illegals, ending outsourcing of jobs, better trade deals,helping the middle and working class and repairing a decaying american infrastructure. A Nationalist and America First candidate.
Nationalism and populism are movements that are rising all over the west and the world but the republican party isnt a party that really embodies any of those , the republicans have always been open border and globalist and interventionist as much as democrats.
The last republican president , the George W. Bush administration legacy was trillions of dollars invasion of Iraq over "weapons of mass destruction" that should have never happened, a terrible economy, Hurricane Katrina fiasco, a massive growth of government spending in the 2000s, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, housing bubble, the largest terrorist attack on american soil, a credit tsunami, etc.
When Clinton left office in 2001, he left America with a projected $1.9 trillion surplus. When the Bush term ended in 2009 the Congressional Budget Office projected $1.2 trillion in debt, we were left with this terrible recession, long term stagnation of wages and a massive expansion of government, massive illegal immigration and one of the worst presidencies in history.
If trump is really looking to do away with bannon and get kushner and ivanka and become a more mainstream interventionist republican than we are all in trouble, nothing good comes from intervening in the middle east, nothing.
All these leftists who wanted russia and america at each others throats are going to have it, not to mention what a war in the korean peninsula should do to the world economy and stability around the globe.
When have liberals ever been pro-war? We want to decrease the overbloated military and stay out of conflicts, while Republicans always want to escalate them.
74.6% of all Liberals the past 27 days have called (the supposed) Russian rat f*cking of the last Presidential election an "Act of War".
The "liberals" keep poking the bear (& the bear eats beta males breakfast).
(& I'm a "conservative" and I also want to decrease the military & (try) to stay out of conflicts. I think that you're confusing conservative with neo-cons...which are two terms I understand. I still don't get "alt right"....and p*ssy hats)
Liberals have this knee jerk reaction into thinking that conservatives/republicans vote for people rather than the constitution.
Justice Gorsuch was confirmed and we are at odds with Russia and Syria.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Yeah sure that's what they voted for. They were all emotionally pumped, screaming and cheering at rallies for the 'Constitution'.
That campaign was pure cult of personality, not cult of the Constitution. Half of the people at those rallies have no idea what is in the Constitution.
For that matter, Trump demonstrated quite clearly during the campaign that he had no idea what was in the Constitution, either.
It was all emotion and personality, not cool calm methodological Constitutionalism.
And, btw, that bumper sticker quote about liberalism has already been discarded by those in middle school.
If you want to insult an entire group of people, please try to be at least more original.
If you are comparing Bush 1 & Bush 2 as similar Presidents. (with similar Wars) They weren't.
- The wars they fought: Kuwait was a strategic success, & an example of how to wage a war and have an end game. Iraq was a war based on a false premise. (WMD) Had no end game. (We're still d*cking around there) Two completely different engagements.
- Their philosophy on economics: Bush 1 was a pragmatist, a moderate and had his eye on the budget. (It actually cost him an election). Bush 2 was an idiot who was the second biggest spender of all time.
- Their advisors: Bush 1 had James Baker. Bush 2 did not have James Baker.
- Their life: Bush 1 was a war hero, collegiate baseball player, a business owner, a congressman, chairman of the RNC, Director of the CIA, Ambassador to China & the VP. Bush 2 was a cheerleader, & had some ceremonial position with the Texas Rangers & a puppet for Cheney.
Bush 1 was great man and a good president. Bush 2 was an OK guy and the third worst president in the last 100 years. Do people even read history books or engage in critical thinking any more??
Cogent analysis--and no, most don't..and the way many chose to get their information is the enemy of critical thinking..most would rather cheerlead..and post links that are cherry-picked to reflect their distorted world views.
When have liberals ever been pro-war? We want to decrease the overbloated military and stay out of conflicts, while Republicans always want to escalate them.
74.6% of all Liberals the past 27 days have called (the supposed) Russian rat f*cking of the last Presidential election an "Act of War".
The "liberals" keep poking the bear (& the bear eats beta males breakfast).
That's quite a stretch to say investigating possible Russian election interference (which has been suspected in many countries, not just ours) equates to starting a war with them.
All that will be left are "paid Russian posters" Not very bright
Oh? How so?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.