Trump picks Ohio Sen. JD Vance for vice president

[libertybele]

I don’t want anyone to think that I am of the belief that the GOP embraced free market and sound fiscal and economic policy the last 20 years. They’ve been trending away from both. The “too big to fail” was what the final straw. So it wasn’t like the GOP was doing a stand up job until Trump came along. It would be nice to see the GOP starting to trend  in the right direction, but I guess we’ll have to wait for that, if ever

Trump and Vance are the finale of a downward trend in the GOP. Not the cause. It’s like having chest pains for years until one day you get a full cardiac arrest.

One thing for sure. The new GOP has lost the moral high ground in criticism of Gavin Newsome on economic and fiscal matters

One thing for sure.... IF we don't get the invasion that we are experiencing by Islamic terrorists, Chinese nationalists, militants, BLM, Antifa, etc., we won't have a need to worry about fiscal matters.  Our country will be gone.  We'll be fighting in our own back yards. Keep in mind that right now we are supporting them.

[libertybele]

Here's a news flash: you don't need to have "served" for decades in Congress or even been a governor to be qualified to be president. Every one of us is qualified, as long as we were born here - and I suspect most of us would have done a better job than quite a few of the presidents since at least 1963.

Amen.

[LMAO]

One thing for sure.... IF we don't get the invasion that we are experiencing by Islamic terrorists, Chinese nationalists, militants, BLM, Antifa, etc., we won't have a need to worry about fiscal matters.  Our country will be gone.  We'll be fighting in our own back yards. Keep in mind that right now we are supporting them.

We can protect our border without adopting AOC economic policies. And BLM and ANTIFA are American citizens

[Hoodat]

We can protect our border without adopting AOC economic policies. And BLM and ANTIFA are American citizens

Balance the budget and enforce the laws already on the books, and we won't have to protect our border.  It is unfathomable to me that we are printing up $2 trillion a year (i.e. stealing $2 trillion in value from American citizens) just so we can entice illegals to enter the country with free shit.

[libertybele]

We can protect our border without adopting AOC economic policies. And BLM and ANTIFA are American citizens

There are those crossing over our borders that have joined BLM and Antifa.

Building a wall and mass deportation IS being fiscally responsible.  We cannot economically sustain this invasion.

AOC policies aside which you are predicting will be implemented by Trump/Vance, what I am saying is unless we get our border under control and do some serious deportations, we're not going to have to worry about fiscal matters, our country will be gone.

[libertybele]

Balance the budget and enforce the laws already on the books, and we won't have to protect our border.  It is unfathomable to me that we are printing up $2 trillion a year (i.e. stealing $2 trillion in value from American citizens) just so we can entice illegals to enter the country with free shit.

I would have agreed years ago, but building a wall and mass deportations I feel are now absolutely necessary in order to protect our borders.  We cannot continue to let radical terrorists and militants to remain in our country. Nor can we continue to support the ILLEGALS that our already here.

Cutting off the 'freebies' is just the beginning.

[Hoodat]

I would have agreed years ago, but building a wall and mass deportations I feel are now absolutely necessary in order to protect our borders.

Enforce the law first.  Then deport them.  Mass prosecutions and prison sentences should be a precursor to deportation.

[libertybele]

Enforce the law first.  Then deport them.  Mass prosecutions and prison sentences should be a precursor to deportation.

Enforce the law?  They are here ILLEGALLY which constitutes reason enough to deport them. IF they weren't allowed in to begin with there would be no need to spend the money to prosecute and sentence them -- get them  the heck out of our country.  It would be feasible to keep a database of who they are and where they came from.

I fail to see anyone's reluctance, hesitation or reasoning not to build a very solid wall that is well guarded and manned.

That then takes out the financial element of having to support those that enter illegally and need housing and food assistance, etc.

Even using that money to start paying down the debt would be a small beginning.

[DB]

If we went back to making it against the law (and enforce it) to employ someone here illegally, to rent an apartment to, own a home, etc. along with no government benefits they would self deport. Make the penalties for employing an illegal expensive.

[Hoodat]

Enforce the law?  They are here ILLEGALLY which constitutes reason enough to deport them.

It is reason enough to prosecute them for illegal entry - 6 months for first time offenders, and 2 years for repeat offenders.  Let them do some time in prison first before deporting so that they can know what to expect the next time they try it.  Simple deportations (without prison) clearly do not work.

As for cost, putting them in prison is cheaper than having them re-enter within weeks of deportation.  Enforce the law.  Prosecute and sentence.  Then deport.

[Hoodat]

If we went back to making it against the law (and enforce it) to employ someone here illegally, to rent an apartment to, own a home, etc. along with no government benefits they would self deport. Make the penalties for employing an illegal expensive.

Ditto.  It is 100% our fault that illegals come here, just as it is 100% our fault that drugs come here.

[corbe]

   That would go up against the Chamber of Commerce, deeply embedded in both our political party's AND with Organized Religion making $$$ off it. 

   It's hard to beat that Juggernaut.

[libertybele]

It is reason enough to prosecute them for illegal entry - 6 months for first time offenders, and 2 years for repeat offenders.  Let them do some time in prison first before deporting so that they can know what to expect the next time they try it.  Simple deportations (without prison) clearly do not work.

As for cost, putting them in prison is cheaper than having them re-enter within weeks of deportation.  Enforce the law.  Prosecute and sentence.  Then deport.

??? No chance to re-enter if they're not allowed to enter in the first place.

BUILD A WALL and DEPORT THEM ALL!!

[libertybele]

Enforce the law first.  Then deport them.  Mass prosecutions and prison sentences should be a precursor to deportation.

If a border wall was built and they weren't allowed to enter in the first place, there wouldn't be the need to spend the money to prosecute nor deport. 

[roamer_1]

I agree! Where are we most likely to get that result? Is it the Democrat (read Communist) Party? I think not!

I've got news for you... It ain't gonna be found with Tumpy and the Republicans either.
*NOT* going to happen.

[Hoodat]

??? No chance to re-enter if they're not allowed to enter in the first place.

BUILD A WALL and DEPORT THEM ALL!!

Better yet, take away their incentive to come.  What part of 'enforce the law' do you have a problem with?  These people broke the law.  They should be penalized.  Do that, and you remove their biggest incentive - freedom.

If I crossed illegally into Mexico, and the Mexican government prosecuted me and put me in prison for six months before deporting me, I can guarantee you I would never try that again.  But if I simply got deported, I would be back there within weeks.

[Hoodat]

If a border wall was built and they weren't allowed to enter in the first place, there wouldn't be the need to spend the money to prosecute nor deport.

If people weren't allowed to commit murder, then there wouldn't be the need to spend money to prosecute people for murder.

[roamer_1]

Just watching the change in the man and his selection of JD Vance gives me confidence that he will do a better job keeping the Establishment Loyalists outside his inner circle.

Oh, brother! 

I also love the thinking on tariffs. We are seeing an end to the globalist dominance in our govt. The bottom two economic quintiles have been crushed under that approach to governance. Our focus should be one America First and then look at our relationship with our neighbors to the north and south.

That is not thinking. That is foolishness! You are not seeing an end to global dominance. You are just authorizing the pickers and choosers. What eco-socialist government EVER has not crushed the the 'bottom two quintiles? Stand back and watch what you've done... Because it is surely coming.

What is being formed is Feudalism - except in Corporatism, where the ultra-elite will reside. You have chosen them. Watch and see.

The TRUTH is that *NO* government can save you. ANY government promising to is LYING, it doesn't matter their colors. It's not just a lie. It's a damn lie.

You will find your populists are no better at running this mammoth government than the Democrats were. You will find that the voice has changed, but the breath smells the same. Because it must.

The problem is too much government, not who runs it.
And now the Right, of all things, has embraced big government too.
Thrown down the sword and capitulated.
The last gasp of liberty - And y'all are cheering.

It disgusts me. I am thoroughly disabused of the notion that folks are basically Conservative. They are not. They bow before government and beg for it to save them.
And government will eat them alive.
It happens EVERY TIME.
It will happen this time too.

Your messiah will destroy much.
He already has.

[roamer_1]

Trump and Vance are the finale of a downward trend in the GOP. Not the cause. It’s like having chest pains for years until one day you get a full cardiac arrest.

One thing for sure. The new GOP has lost the moral high ground in criticism of Gavin Newsome on economic and fiscal matters

That's right.

[roamer_1]

There are those crossing over our borders that have joined BLM and Antifa.

Building a wall and mass deportation IS being fiscally responsible.  We cannot economically sustain this invasion.

AOC policies aside which you are predicting will be implemented by Trump/Vance, what I am saying is unless we get our border under control and do some serious deportations, we're not going to have to worry about fiscal matters, our country will be gone.

That is called throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
It's a headfake. It's the magician's right hand.

It's the left hand you should be watching. And the left hand is in his record. Easy to see.

[roamer_1]

If a border wall was built and they weren't allowed to enter in the first place, there wouldn't be the need to spend the money to prosecute nor deport.

The border wall means nothing.
The minute the Democrats get their power back, they will defund patrols and the illegals will punch through the wall like butter. Watch and see. The wall means nothing without the commitment to guard it. It's the guards, not the wall.

[jmyrlefuller]

I don’t want anyone to think that I am of the belief that the GOP embraced free market and sound fiscal and economic policy the last 20 years. They’ve been trending away from both. The “too big to fail” was what the final straw. So it wasn’t like the GOP was doing a stand up job until Trump came along. It would be nice to see the GOP starting to trend  in the right direction, but I guess we’ll have to wait for that, if ever

Trump and Vance are the finale of a downward trend in the GOP. Not the cause. It’s like having chest pains for years until one day you get a full cardiac arrest.

One thing for sure. The new GOP has lost the moral high ground in criticism of Gavin Newsome on economic and fiscal matters

Free trade got us NAFTA. Free trade got us a multi-billion trade deficit with a Communist regime that now practically controls almost all our consumer goods manufacturing.

Border defense includes trade.

[roamer_1]

Free trade got us NAFTA. Free trade got us a multi-billion trade deficit with a Communist regime that now practically controls almost all our consumer goods manufacturing.

Border defense includes trade.

No. Big government got you that. Not Free Trade.

[mountaineer]

I'm willing to admit I'm getting old. I don't want to see a Republican party comprised only of folks who are as old - and older - than I. This guy's analysis is interesting:


After Decades Of Geriatric Leaders, J.D. Vance Offers Hope For Millennials
At 39 years old, he reflects much of what is best about his generation and understands much of what is wrong.
By: Auguste Meyrat
July 19, 2024

J.D. Vance was the best person that Donald Trump could pick to be his vice-presidential running mate. This is not because he served honorably in the military, attended Yale University, shows great intelligence, or understands the plight of the working class after growing up poor in small-town Ohio, although all these qualities are certainly helpful. Vance’s main virtue is that, at 39 years old, he is a true millennial.

Being part of the same generational cohort (I’m the same age as Vance), I’m well aware of how millennials are characterized. In his books The Dumbest Generation and its sequel The Dumbest Generation Grows Up, English professor Mark Bauerlein laments that the millennials are largely ignorant, lazy, boorish, emotionally fragile, shallow, and narcissistic. They have grown up with the internet and Marvel movies and thus developed no patience or empathy, which in turn has stunted their maturity and intellect.  ...

Which is why I, and likely most millennial conservatives, have hope in Vance. His story, as told in the now classic Hillbilly Elegy, is not just about poor white trash struggling to make a living in Appalachia and the Rust Belt; it is the story of millennials growing up in a globalized, atomized, and emasculated world with few authority figures to help them navigate through life’s many pitfalls. In the absence of intact families, local community, a vibrant church life, and even dignified work, many millennials in these parts of the country who didn’t have the privilege of moving somewhere else ended up wallowing in failure, supporting themselves with government checks, opiates, and endless excuses.  ...

Obviously, this story matters, and it’s precisely what makes Vance so appealing. There were other millennial VP contenders, such as Vivek Ramaswamy (38), Tulsi Gabbard (43), Elise Stefanik (40), and Sarah Huckabee Sanders (41), and all of them can speak eloquently to the millennial condition. But without exception, all of them were born into the American elite class and were thus insulated from the dysfunction of the working and middle classes. By contrast, Vance experienced every bit of it — and still succeeded. This makes him the most relatable of his peers as well the most trustworthy.  ...

For that reason, unlike the contenders to be Trump’s running mate, Vance better embodies the political and cultural values that will successfully reunite the majority of Americans. More importantly, he is the great example for millennials and younger generations to follow. He doesn’t just speak for the people featured in his memoir; he speaks for all those adults who feel exploited by Baby Boomers, dismissed by Gen Xers, and exasperated by Zoomers.  ...

Read the rest at The Federalist

[Bigun]

If we went back to making it against the law (and enforce it) to employ someone here illegally, to rent an apartment to, own a home, etc. along with no government benefits they would self deport. Make the penalties for employing an illegal expensive.

I've been saying exactly that for years!

[Kamaji]

That depends on where the point of elasticity is relative to how much the economy can grow.  The flaw with this discussion though is what is being advocated.  What is more important?  Funding government?  Or growing the economy.  Personally, I don't give a damn with whether lowering taxes will raise more revenue.  I care whether lowering taxes will free up the ability for our economy to grow.

The government doesn't need more money.  The government needs to reduce spending.  A lot.  And cutting government spending will do far more to grow our economy than will any revenue-increasing tax cut.  Right now, our government is printing up new money (to fund itself) faster than our economy is growing.  Which means we are going backwards.  Balance the budget first.  Then we can talk about taxes.

That's a different discussion.

[LMAO]

That is called throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
It's a headfake. It's the magician's right hand.

It's the left hand you should be watching. And the left hand is in his record. Easy to see.

If people support both Vance's and Trump's economic positions, that's fine. But will they accept the consequences

If people support protectionist tariffs, will they be fine with the consequences?

Do they accept the consequences of raising the minimum wage?

Do they accept the consequences of government intervention in the economy?

Do they accept the consequences  of  the federal reserve printing money to prop up GDP numbers?

Do they accept the consequences of the  government devaluing the dollar?

Do they accept the consequences of the government picking winners and losers in the economy?

People tend to think that economics follow their personal feelings

[LMAO]

Ilistened closely to JD Vance’s speech at the Republican Convention. I was surprised, even gob-smacked. Vance sounded like a socialist. I am told that he represents what in America is called the “New Right”. Those of us who still suffer from the influence of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, and our own PV Narasimha Rao, end up puzzled about what is Right about this New Right.

Vance does not like free trade. To hell with Adam Smith and David Ricardo; welcome French physiocrats. Those of us who have been taught about the disastrous 1930 interventions of Reed Smoot and Willis Hawley cannot but shudder a little bit. Vance articulates a passionate faith in industrial policy. Those of us who want investment decisions to be determined by entrepreneurs and markets find this approach quite puzzling and definitely not Right.

Vance wants government policy to favour what we in India in the old days would refer to as “backward areas”. We remember the days when our government forced factories to be set up in economically unviable spots in pursuit of this policy of favouring backward areas. Vance rants against Wall Street. It is not clear if he is entirely against all financial markets. But evidently, he is deeply suspicious of them. Would he prefer that capital be allocated by fiat instead of by anonymous auctions? That sounds a little bit like Xi Jinping.

https://theprint.in/opinion/jd-vance-his-new-right-cant-be-dismissed-glibly-he-appeals-to-something-deep-necessary/2181819/

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I'm willing to admit I'm getting old. I don't want to see a Republican party comprised only of folks who are as old - and older - than I. This guy's analysis is interesting:


After Decades Of Geriatric Leaders, J.D. Vance Offers Hope For Millennials
At 39 years old, he reflects much of what is best about his generation and understands much of what is wrong.
By: Auguste Meyrat
July 19, 2024Read the rest at The Federalist

DeSantis is a Millennial, military vet, etc.. The difference is that he is an actual conservative who believes in a limited federal government and market economy.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Oh, brother! 

That is not thinking. That is foolishness! You are not seeing an end to global dominance. You are just authorizing the pickers and choosers. What eco-socialist government EVER has not crushed the the 'bottom two quintiles? Stand back and watch what you've done... Because it is surely coming.

What is being formed is Feudalism - except in Corporatism, where the ultra-elite will reside. You have chosen them. Watch and see.

The TRUTH is that *NO* government can save you. ANY government promising to is LYING, it doesn't matter their colors. It's not just a lie. It's a damn lie.

You will find your populists are no better at running this mammoth government than the Democrats were. You will find that the voice has changed, but the breath smells the same. Because it must.

The problem is too much government, not who runs it.
And now the Right, of all things, has embraced big government too.
Thrown down the sword and capitulated.
The last gasp of liberty - And y'all are cheering.

It disgusts me. I am thoroughly disabused of the notion that folks are basically Conservative. They are not. They bow before government and beg for it to save them.
And government will eat them alive.
It happens EVERY TIME.
It will happen this time too.

Your messiah will destroy much.
He already has.

Thanks for taking the time to write that.  I'd almost slid backwards into thinking I could vote for Trump, but the Vance pick showed me that every single concern I had about Trump was valid.

[roamer_1]

If people support both Vance's and Trump's economic positions, that's fine. But will they accept the consequences

If people support protectionist tariffs, will they be fine with the consequences?

Do they accept the consequences of raising the minimum wage?

Do they accept the consequences of government intervention in the economy?

Do they accept the consequences  of  the federal reserve printing money to prop up GDP numbers?

Do they accept the consequences of the  government devaluing the dollar?

Do they accept the consequences of the government picking winners and losers in the economy?

People tend to think that economics follow their personal feelings

They don't understand, or they don't care. One of the two. And either one is the death of fiscal conservatism, and with it, Conservatism itself. One cannot exist without the other.

[libertybele]

Thanks for taking the time to write that.  I'd almost slid backwards into thinking I could vote for Trump, but the Vance pick showed me that every single concern I had about Trump was valid.

Well, Trump is the nominee.  I will vote for him because he is a true patriot.  As for his pick of JD as VP, I also believe it was a very poor choice and quite frankly he troubles me. (Donalds was my preference or Sanders or Burgum). 

It is what it is and you either vote DEM, abstain or vote down ballot.

I believe it was absolutely by the grace of God that Trump is alive and hopefully He will steer him and JD in the right direction.

[roamer_1]

Thanks for taking the time to write that.  I'd almost slid backwards into thinking I could vote for Trump, but the Vance pick showed me that every single concern I had about Trump was valid.

The entire theory of Conservatism (as it touches politics) revolves around small government - A government AFRAID of its constituents. The money ain't the thing. Small government is the thing... But fiscal conservatism is the leash on the dog called government.

[libertybele]

They don't understand, or they don't care. One of the two. And either one is the death of fiscal conservatism, and with it, Conservatism itself. One cannot exist without the other.

@roamer_1   We'll see what happens and I believe Trump fully understands, but I tend to think Trump is going to set his economic policies and not JD's.  JD has a lot to learn and it is Trump who is going to teach him a few things.  Trump has been around the block many times and JD has only gotten his shoes muddied for a short while.

[libertybele]

Ilistened closely to JD Vance’s speech at the Republican Convention. I was surprised, even gob-smacked. Vance sounded like a socialist. I am told that he represents what in America is called the “New Right”. Those of us who still suffer from the influence of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, and our own PV Narasimha Rao, end up puzzled about what is Right about this New Right.

Vance does not like free trade. To hell with Adam Smith and David Ricardo; welcome French physiocrats. Those of us who have been taught about the disastrous 1930 interventions of Reed Smoot and Willis Hawley cannot but shudder a little bit. Vance articulates a passionate faith in industrial policy. Those of us who want investment decisions to be determined by entrepreneurs and markets find this approach quite puzzling and definitely not Right.

Vance wants government policy to favour what we in India in the old days would refer to as “backward areas”. We remember the days when our government forced factories to be set up in economically unviable spots in pursuit of this policy of favouring backward areas. Vance rants against Wall Street. It is not clear if he is entirely against all financial markets. But evidently, he is deeply suspicious of them. Would he prefer that capital be allocated by fiat instead of by anonymous auctions? That sounds a little bit like Xi Jinping.

https://theprint.in/opinion/jd-vance-his-new-right-cant-be-dismissed-glibly-he-appeals-to-something-deep-necessary/2181819/

I highly doubt Trump is going to listen to JD, especially on economic policy. Trump has spent most of his life dealing with his own financial path. He grew his own dynasty.  Do you really think Trump is going to allow JD to come in and change that??

The problem is -- Trump is aged.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Name me one time that he vetoed a bill sent to his desk by Nancy Pelosi.


Trump failed the first time, what makes you think he will succeed the second time?

Is this a trick question of some sort?

Pretty easy to tee that one up.  There were 10, with 1 overridden

You are listening to too many TDS-inflicted on this site.

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/vetoes/TrumpDJ.htm

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1   We'll see what happens and I believe Trump fully understands, but I tend to think Trump is going to set his economic policies and not JD's.  JD has a lot to learn and it is Trump who is going to teach him a few things.  Trump has been around the block many times and JD has only gotten his shoes muddied for a short while.

Nonsense. His record belies your statement. He does not understand. His tariffs devastated business. his lockdowns brought tremendous financial destruction. He doesn't understand shit.

[mountaineer]

DeSantis is a Millennial, military vet, etc.. The difference is that he is an actual conservative who believes in a limited federal government and market economy.

He was my first choice.

[LMAO]

I highly doubt Trump is going to listen to JD, especially on economic policy.

You sure? What economic policy do they disagree on?

[LMAO]

The Trump /Vance economic strategy is to benefit some some parts of the economy at the expense of others.

Tariffs can protect certain American industries. But it makes everything more expensive for everyone else. Same with dollar devaluation. The idea is to make exports cheaper, but it raises costs on imports and makes things more expensive for American's and business that rely on imports

[Hoodat]

Is this a trick question of some sort?

Pretty easy to tee that one up.  There were 10, with 1 overridden

You are listening to too many TDS-inflicted on this site.

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/vetoes/TrumpDJ.htm

Only one of those ten bills was a spending bill.  And Trump vetoed it because he wanted even more spending.

[mountaineer]

Apparently, leaked memos show that J.D. Vance is so hardcore against wokeness that he froze dozens of ambassador nominations over their views on gender transition and DEI. ...

https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1814471956877746668

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Only one of those ten bills was a spending bill.  And Trump vetoed it because he wanted even more spending.

The bill you are referencing was for funding Defense, and he wanted higher pay raises for military and equipment, normally a conservative priority as it is the primary function of the federal government.

He also vetoed it as it had some onerous provisions that by all rights needed to be changed that I highlight.

Here's what he vetoed that was overridden:

The $740 billion bill includes pay raises for America's soldiers, modernizations for equipment, and provisions to require more scrutiny before troops are withdrawn from Germany or Afghanistan. President Donald Trump had threatened to veto the bill because it did not include a repeal of 1996 legislation shielding internet companies from being liable for what is posted on their websites by third parties. The bill also includes a provision to limit the president's use of emergency declarations to divert military construction funds to finance the expansion of the Mexico–United States barrier. Another provision within the act would require the military to rename bases that were named after figures from the Confederacy. The act also contains multiple anti-money laundering provisions and effectively bans anonymous shell companies.

Which of these provisions do you disagree with?

[catfish1957]

My greatest hope is after we become energy dominant again, we reinvest that windfall in reducing the defict.  If Trump does that he'll be up there with Reagan.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

My greatest hope is after we become energy dominant again, we reinvest that windfall in reducing the defict.  If Trump does that he'll be up there with Reagan.

My greatest hope is we reduce the size of the federal government by at least a third or more, as well as half its employees, who are paid much more than private sector counterparts that are also being held accountable rather than holding lifetime positions.

Government spending is our problem, not more revenue being taken in, whether it be from taxes or higher sales of oil and gas.

[Bigun]

My greatest hope is we reduce the size of the federal government by at least a third or more, as well as half its employees, who are paid much more than private sector counterparts that are also being held accountable rather than holding lifetime positions.

Government spending is our problem, not more revenue being taken in, whether it be from taxes or higher sales of oil and gas.

And getting rid of all these "Green" energy mandates would be the icing on the cake!

[libertybele]

Well, my greatest hope right now is that Trump is re-elected.  That would be a great start. 

[LMAO]

They don't understand, or they don't care. One of the two. And either one is the death of fiscal conservatism, and with it, Conservatism itself. One cannot exist without the other.

They would care if Trump and JD Vance were running on the Democrat side. There was a thread recently, where Biden was proposing rent control. Everybody agreed it was a stupid idea

If Trump and JD Vance did the same, their backers would either ignore it or support it

We are going to see a lot of  government intervention in the economy regardless of who gets elected. At least Obama admitted his shovel ready jobs program didn’t work

Prepare for Peron lite. And when that doesn’t work, watch his supporters blame the free market

[LMAO]

My greatest hope is we reduce the size of the federal government by at least a third or more, as well as half its employees, who are paid much more than private sector counterparts that are also being held accountable rather than holding lifetime positions.

Government spending is our problem, not more revenue being taken in, whether it be from taxes or higher sales of oil and gas.

That would mean actual reductions. Not just slowing the rate of growth or replacing government employees with his own lackeys

[LMAO]

My greatest hope is after we become energy dominant again, we reinvest that windfall in reducing the defict.  If Trump does that he'll be up there with Reagan.

Trump says he  believes that opening ANWAR will pay for Social Security so that’s already out the window

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-06/trump-pledges-to-expand-drilling-to-pay-for-senior-benefits

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/can-social-security-be-saved-selling-americas-oil-gas-reserves


Trump is not gonna change his political positions at this point because they’re already ingrained