Maybe we need for Trump to get elected.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

How's he going to force them to pay it? By seizing assets? Wars? Handshakes and an exchange of cookies? lol

Tariffs, cutting foreign aid, increased fees on visas, increase fees on border crossing, impounding money sent to Mexico by illegals. Google it. I actually agree with him on this. The Mexican government isn't doing anything to staunch the flow of illegals into the US. Why should the US be forced to pay the bill to keep out illegals?

Trump is the most establishment candidate out of all of them..Why? He started kissing Saudi ass, we have seen the current liar-in-chief breaking his back kneeling down to Saudi King.

I think more americans will be killed in middle east for Saudi cause. Saudi doesn't want stronger neighbors (or leaders from those countries) like Iraq, Libya. Syrian leader turn out to be a bit more resilient, then next one is Iran. When Saudi king says jump, our leaders will ask how high. He even said, Saudi will pay for the cost, are we Saudi's mercenaries? Why is our children fighting Saudi cause?

Trump: 'I would want to protect Saudi Arabia'



We don't have any choice - MIC will not let a non establishment person to be next liar-in-chief - be it Trump or Clinton. When will people realize this....

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman


This my take on the guy. It may be wrong, but this is what I'm going on. His 'wall' and bombing rhetoric is just that. That's how one 'negotiates'. Take the extreme-most expensive if one is selling something - and negotiate downwards. That fits how he does business. Get noisy in response? He doubles down.
Show a willingness or force a willingness for real negotiation and he will now be 'reasonable'.

This, I believe is his M.O.. Especially on international issues. Talk tough, get their attention and take it from there.

That's how 'business' gets done. He's winning when no one and I mean NO ONE thought he'd get this far never mind look like he may win the whole thing. I, for one, think this guys may just produce some results.

Fix everything? No one can do that. Slow the down-spiral? Maybe. It's a chance I'm willing to take.....

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

None of which you said is true. But merely a point of view and the usual global fuzzy nonsense...
Banning a "religion" you say? Let me tell you, ..(I Really don't care if you do or don't)...I'm telling you! You don't want their "peace and understanding ". I know, you'll
say "you've been there and done that"..
Insulting Latinos? What's a latino? What's a canadian? What's an Irishman? What's a Hispanic? What's a German? What's a ...? If you come to the US. and define yourself as something other than.. You need to go back home. I'll tell you this. The malamukes wouldn't care to understand you or your reasoning

a reply to: nwtrucker

You're on to something. Couldn't have said it better.

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman
Maybe we need for Trump to get elected.

Maybe we need a fascist dictator so people really understand why the constitution is important. Maybe we need a wall alienating one of our main trading partners. Hey we can vote him out in 4 years or impeach him. Trump may be a xenophobe with lunatic policies but he's WAY better than Bernie sanders(wondering how we are going to pay for the free stuff he is promising), Hillary(clinton dynasty/CFR/Globalist's pick) or Cruz(bush/sachs operative).

If you want to vote for trump vote for trump(I am not). NOT HILLARY. NOT CRUZ.

Last time I looked we had a 3 part Government, so your dictator ideas are rather moot. Obama thought he could just come into office and everyone would just kneel at his feet to everything he wanted to do, how did that work? The one crime that Trump is guilty of is he is not a professional politician and it seems America wants that type that says all the right things and does nothing in the end.

I do not like trump, just like I do not like being dealt a a pair of twos, but I still need to play them, right? What kind of hand is Hillary, I do not know, but I would say she isn't even a playable hand. Obama didn't want to work with anyone so he basically became a lame duck after his first year and it took him four years to figure that out, but the damage was already done. Hillary would be the same, four years of nothing....

If Trump plays it right he can actually do good, but we will see after his first year if he would be like Obama or not. I do not see Hillary doing a single thing during her presidency, so how do we play are crappy hand?

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: enlightenedservant

How's he going to force them to pay it? By seizing assets? Wars? Handshakes and an exchange of cookies? lol

Tariffs, cutting foreign aid, increased fees on visas, increase fees on border crossing, impounding money sent to Mexico by illegals. Google it. I actually agree with him on this. The Mexican government isn't doing anything to staunch the flow of illegals into the US. Why should the US be forced to pay the bill to keep out illegals?

You realize that tariffs work both ways, right? Mexico, China, and Canada are our 3 biggest trade partners both for imports and exports. American exports would be decimated if Mexico returned the favor and also added tariffs, since Mexico is the 2nd largest buyer for our exports. So how would that pay for this wall when our own businesses would have to pay more to have their products sold there? And we both know the companies would just pass the costs down to us.

And visa fees always involve a thing called "reciprocity". This is a fancy way of saying "One country will respond in kind to another country's actions". Brazil increased their visa fees and security checks for Americans after 9/11 because the US did that to Brazilian citizens. So why would Mexico be any different? So once again, how would that raise money for a wall when Americans and American businesses would also have to pay the same increased amounts? (btw, when I got a business visa in Mexico, it was a whopping $25 or $35 lol. Not sure how much money that will raise, especially since it was valid for 3-6 months.)

And what fees for border crossings? I don't think Mexican citizens pay crap to enter America, as long as they have valid passports and come as tourists. And the same goes for US citizens, since both countries have a visa-free deal for tourists. You should see the El Paso/Juarez border stations on Friday nights and Sunday nights. Ridiculously large amounts of people cross back & forth then, which is good for business on both sides (note: Each time it took me & my colleagues hours to get through the stations on Fridays and we didn't spend a penny at the crossings).

As for cutting foreign aid? LOL How would that be Mexico spending money for the wall? American foreign aid is American taxpayer money. So reallocating "foreign aid" from Mexico to the Trump wall would still be Americans paying for the wall. And for the record, one of the biggest uses of US aid to Mexico is to fight the War on Drugs down there. Personally, I hate the Drug War so I don't mind if we stop that program. But are you sure that's the position the Republican Party will take? lol

As for "impounding money sent to Mexico by illegals". One, those funds are called "remittances". And two, that's also called "theft". The funny thing is this: If you believe the US can identify the Mexican citizens who are illegally working in the US, why aren't they simply deporting those workers? Or prosecuting the companies that are illegally employing them? Like seriously, if we could identify the people so easily that we could also identify the various ways they send money back home, why can't we manage to find them to deport them or charge their illegal employers? Your policy is kind of backwards, isn't it?

And before you ask, no. We wouldn't just be able to just track the money being sent into Mexico because Mexico is one of our 3 largest trade partners. Literally hundreds of billions of dollars legally flow back and forth between the US & Mexican economies. And that doesn't count the countless billions of illegal money from drugs, trafficking, cartel front companies, and the such. How is the US government supposed to check each transaction to see if they're from legal companies, legal immigrants, tourists, or illegal workers? Especially since the Republican Party simultaneously wants to decrease the funding and powers of the federal government. How will an underfunded and weaker US govt be able to do what a well funded US govt cannot?

Hillary and Cruz are total globalist nwo operatives.

At least Trump is not receiving orders from Soros,Kissenger,CFR and Rockefeller.

But his policies are just crazy.

I just hope this is just mindless rhetoric to attract new voters and not real ramblings of a despot.

a reply to: enlightenedservant


One places the tariffs on countries with unfairly low wages. The Chinas, the Indias, etc. Level the playing field a bit.

Besides, we far and away a net importer. That means we gain more on the tariffs than it costs us. Use those tariffs to subsidize those suffering from retaliatory tariffs.

One leaves the Canadas and traditional nations like Britain unchanged.

Another way to go about it could be industry specific rather than against a specific nation such as the auto industry.

Just a thought on the issue....

I personally don't like him but he gets my vote for having done amazing things in his life.

They gave us 'thousand points of light'. And then it was 'trickle-down economics'. For the vast majority of us things just continued to decline at an accelerating pace as prices soared and jobs were outsourced. Then They tanked the economy and tried to blame us for the fiasco. But in any case, reached deep into our pockets to bail-out all the elite that screwed us and took our assets, businesses, homes, and jobs. And by all analyses they ended up far better off after the crash than they were before as wealth accreted to the top fraction of a percent at a rate that dwarfs any other period in history.

So now The Donald tells us, "We're going to make our country rich again; we're going to make our country great again. "And we need the rich in order to make it great, I am sorry to tell you." Yup, that's what we need. More wealth secreted away in the Elites' coffers. More for them, less for us. And for those batting their pills around on Donald's country club greens I'll bet the country will be better --- for them. Wake up people. WTF is the matter with you. This is the same song-and-dance they've used to screw us over the last two decades. I'm horrified that people just can't or don't want to see it. We are doomed. 99% of us that is...

a reply to: nwtrucker

Remember the context, though. The person I responded to was saying we should raise tariffs against Mexico as one way to get Mexico to pay for Trump's wall. I was showing why that wouldn't work (as well as pointing out why the other suggestions wouldn't work).

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: nwtrucker

Remember the context, though. The person I responded to was saying we should raise tariffs against Mexico as one way to get Mexico to pay for Trump's wall. I was showing why that wouldn't work (as well as pointing out why the other suggestions wouldn't work).

Ah, sorry, I missed the post you were responding to.

On Mexico, in general-they have a wall on their southern border with Guatemala- pressure needs to be applied on their gov't to reverse this 'solution' of their of using the U.S. as a substitute economy for their own gain.

The threat of a wall or tariffs or revision/cancellation of NAFTA is negotiating leverage. Assuming that intention even exists in the capital. Which, at least rhetoric-wise it does with Trump.

I only see industry specific tariffs in Mexico's case and they would be more industry directed incentive NOT to move to Mexico. The "Carrier" issue would be an example. If they faced, say, a 15% tariff if they moved those jobs to Mexico,(or anywhere else) they might re-think the numbers. Especially if they were offered that 15% as a protection to remain in the U.S..

a reply to: enlightenedservant


P.S. I hold the view similar to emergency responders. To wit, stop the bleeding, first and foremost. In this case further loss of jobs/industries. Selective, industry specific tariffs both as incentive to remain and increased to cost to import into the U.S. their now out-of-country products.


Then work out a strategy to regains some of our lost industries. Retaliation? Likely. I see no alternative in reversing our movement to a third world status.

The Trump supporters I've talked to do not believe he is a perfect candidate or will be a perfect president. But he is the only one offering an alternative of any kind.

In Texas, a decade ago, there was a 3-way race for the republican nomination (i.e., the 'real' election) for Texas governor. ALL THREE republican candidates ran on the "open borders and amnesty for all" ticket---which was hugely UNpopular with the republican voters.

Even the maverick, Carole Keeton Strayhorn Rylander Keeton (multiple marriages) was "brought around" after about three weeks of saying that while we needed legal immigration from Mexico, we needed to stop all illegal entry. Then she suddenly "had a change of heart" (i.e., got money from the construction cartel and the hotels lobby) and sang the same tune as every other Democrat and Republican candidate.

That race was won by Governor Good-Hair (Rick Perry).

That was WAY before someone bought him that pair of "smart-glasses," that changed his political philosophy to anti-big government. Maybe he got those glasses from Rowdy Roddy Piper. whatever.

The fact is, as PT Barnum as Trump may be, he is the ONLY candidate pushing for controlling immigration and cutting our strings from the WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, SHAFTA, TPP, EIEIO.

He says such off-color things about his own and other peoples body parts that the debates needed a TV-14 rating.

But maybe that's what it takes to get an advocate for the plebs that want to be led by him.