>opposes gay marriage
>opposes abortion
>opposes drug legalization
>supports more illegal wars
>supports national security state
>supports tax cuts for the rich (aka himself)
This guy is not a moderate, he's just GWB 2.0.
I hated Teddy personally. Man was a dictator in everything but name and Eisenhower is a cancer because liberals always try to argue with his meme tax rates to justify their retardation.
Lincoln was a pretty bad president too. He effectively split the union.
>>66624546
gg disproving what I said about trump
fag
>>66624383
While his tax reform might seem like tax cuts for rich it also includes re-writing entire tax code. That will close tons of loopholes so rich might actually have to pay more taxes.
>>66624383
>opposes gay marriage
No he doesn't. He's said that "what is done is done." when asked about the supreme court ruling. Nothing different here.
>opposes abortion
No he doesn't, he opposes government funds being used to finance abortion.. which is already barred. Literally nothing would change again.
>opposes drug legalization
Again wrong. He said drug legalization should be dependent on individual states. If Oregon or Colorado thinks that's right for their states, then so be it.
>supports more illegal wars
Like what? ISIS isn't an organized group of national or government backed fighters. This wouldn't be considered a war.
>supports national security state
We've been living in a national security state since the 1800's.
>supports tax cuts for the rich (aka himself)
He supports tax cuts for everyone, from the poor to the middle class, to the rich. The most effected by his cuts would be the middle class, not the rich.
>>66624383
Nice Facebook memes
>>66624612
>While his tax reform might seem like tax cuts for rich
Which it does. It will massively blow up the deficit as well.
>>66624842
Reagan
>war with russia and third world shitholes
HW
>war with iraq
Clinton
>no war besides minor bombing of slav shits
Bush
>Iraq war and afghanistan war
Bill clinton was a shit president who got lucky with the dotcom bubble
There hasnt been a good president since eisenhower
>>66624798
>No he doesn't.
http://www.newnownext.com/donald-trump-vows-to-select-judges-who-will-overturn-obergefell-v-hodges/01/2016/
>No he doesn't,
http://www.lifenews.com/2016/02/18/donald-trump-roe-v-wade-was-wrongly-decided-i-will-appoint-judges-to-change-it/
>Again wrong.
>Study legalization, but don't legalize now
http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Donald_Trump_Drugs.htm
>Like what? ISIS isn't an organized group of national or government backed fighters. This wouldn't be considered a war.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/12/22/trump-on-ground-troops-against-islamic-state-i-would-do-whatever-you-have-to/
>We've been living in a national security state since the 1800's.
Cause we elect people like Trump.
>He supports tax cuts for everyone, from the poor to the middle class, to the rich. The most effected by his cuts would be the middle class, not the rich.
Tax cuts benefits the rich for the most part.
>>66625099
are you that dumb that you cant understand that trump molded his own values to fit with being a republican candidate? He doesnt believe in half of that social bullshit because that shit doesnt matter and he'll say what people want to hear. You think anybody really gives a fuck about gay marriage or abortion? fuck no. Thats literally meme issues brought up by leftist faggots trying to rip apart the established social climate of the US.
good lord you are fucking stupid
>>66624383
>lol
>lol
>fair enough, they are literally destroying millions of lives around the world
>stops terrorists, if you do nothing wrong you have nothing to hide
>maybe
I will never accept degeneracy. Therefore, I will never vote for a Democrat. Regarding taxing the rich at higher rates, only an imbecile who hadn't studied basic economics would propose that. The rich flee to lower taxed nations if their taxes are increased, resulting in the government generating less money. Not only that, but businesses would be compelled to raise the costs of their products and services to make up for the money they lost through taxes. Thus, increasing the cost of living.
>>66625331
>He doesnt believe in half of that social bullshit
Doesn't matter, he will appoint Republican judges who will enact Christian sharia because of the Republican senate that controls the nomination process.
>>66625331
>You think anybody really gives a fuck about gay marriage or abortion?
Republicans do.
>>66625068
>They good boys they didn't do nothing
>>66625068
So on top of being shit with money, they're also dangerous.
k
bamp
>>66624842
Clinton had his arm twisted into it by the GOP after vetoing the budget and causing a shut down. He gave in. It's like saying Hitler ended WW2 by killing himself so he's the hero.
>>66624383
>opposes gay marriage
Literal faggot here. I delineated by problems with Obergefell here.
http://pastebin.com/8bQKdwuX
>opposes abortion
Almost everyone opposes abortion; the only question is to what degree.
The most disapproving pro lifer would not support abortion at any percentage of the term of the fetus, not at 0%; at all points it is an individual.
Most of the most approving pro-choicers would not approve of abortion in the 8th month, so they would not support abortion at 89%; at the 8th month it is an individual.
SCOTUS even went with the basis that abortion is to inherently be avoided, ruling on a strict restrictions in the third trimester, looser ones in the second, and almost none in the third.
To them, 67% was too much, and at that point it was an individual; at the 4th month it is an individual.
See where I'm going with this?
In almost all reasonable discussions of the topic, the fetus is assumed to be an individual and have all according rights, including right to life. The question is when these rights can be afforded.
While on a practical basis I support abortion in all circumstances, on a philosophical basis it's a hard pill to swallow under any circumstances.
>Drugs
Most of those positions were in line with state deference on the matter.
>War
Nothing he said their alluded to how this military action will be conducted- congressionally or otherwise.
>Tax cuts benefits the rich for the most part.
Whatisthelaffercurve
>>66625816
>Christian Sharia
Scalia, our third most conservative jurist in the past 30 years, got shit from the RCC and evangelicals for not accepting their argument against abortion- namely right to life without due process of law- most specifically that a fetus counts as said 'life' from inception.
His reasoning wasn't tyrannical nor religious, but the following:
>Abortion: Y/N/Otherwise
Does the constitution have anything to say about the matter?
>Not about abortion, specifically.
What are the arguments?
>Pro abortion: implied privacy rights apply http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html
No sufficient support is found in constitutional text.
No sufficient support is found in pre constitutional material
No sufficient support is found in case history
>Anti abortion: explicit 14th amendment right to life applies
Sufficient support is found for right to life, however in terms of defining 'life':
No sufficient support is found in constitutional text.
No sufficient support is found in pre constitutional material
No sufficient support is found in case history
>Neither the plaintiff nor the defendant has a sufficient argument for a decision to apply at a national level
>Therefore 10th amendment applies; the decision is to be handled by the democratic processes at the state level.
Even Robert Bork, probably the most conservative jurist in the past 30 years, suggested that constitutional amendment would be necessary for a federal gay marriage ban.
