Topic: Fiorina, yes or no

[IronDioPriest]

I am beginning to see Trump as the republican version of obama. He orates to a crowd, telling them what they want to hear in vague enough terms to allow them to "fill in the details" in their own minds. He offers nothing in the way of concrete plans as to how to make this happen, just sunshine and everything will be better when I am in power.

I totally agree. "Hope and Change"; "Make America Great Again". I see little difference in how these two slogans are designed to appeal to their target audience.

[John Florida]

  I'm not supporting anyone yet but do have a list of who isn't getting my support.  So I sit and wait it out      But holding my nose again is out.

[AmericanPatriot]

Trump ain't no Reagan but he had slogans, too.
"Morning in America" was one

I'm not a Trump-ette but I'm confused about some of the reactions here to him since he seems to be advocating things we talk about here

Illegal immigration
2A protection
Getting rid of Obamacare
Etc.

He has balls and stands up to the propaganda machine
Not a Washington insider

And more

[Weisshaupt]

I'm not a Trump-ette but I'm confused about some of the reactions here to him since he seems to be advocating things we talk about here

Illegal immigration
2A protection
Getting rid of Obamacare
Etc.

I think its because none of us believe he is serious about those issues. He is good enough buddies with the Clintons to invite them to his wedding and seat them in the front row.   He is narcissistic enough to WANT to be on reality TV even though he has more than enough wealth  to stay out of the limelight. Yes, he is SAYING the right things,  but he says them because it gets him the attention he craves, and any truth to the statements is probably completely incidental. When in office he will continue the Crony Capitalist shenanigans because he is a crony capitalist. He is good at the game, enjoys the snobbery, and probably is looking forward to turning the tables on some adversaries once in power.
I do not for one second thinks he wants to end the era of big government, or the era of the rich oligarchy - he is firmly part of that club.  It wouldn't surprise me if Democrats operatives didn't put him up to it -- Hey Trump, go over there and pull the wind from that populist sail so no real Conservatives can be nominated. AT this point I think a lo of his support is coming from disenfranchised Democrats - not form the GOP base, but for some reason he is leading the GOP  polls. Oh right - because now he says he is a Republican - when in the past he was always a Democrat.  He is no Reagan.  He hasn't seen the error of his ways. He only wants power and popularity and a media to feed his narcissistic arrogance. 
.

[Alphabet Soup]

I don't think he's even saying the "right things" as much as he's saying provocative things. He's all over the map and reflects a poorly thought out and anything but comprehensive philosophy. It's just that people are so tired of the same old crap and desperate to win for a change that they cling to anything that even remotely resembles a winner.

The inescapable question that I have regarding Trump is what would he do (and what would become of us) when, six months into his presidency, he gets bored with some aspect of the job or offended by someone?

[AmericanPatriot]

I've wondered about the depth of his convictions since many are fairly new.

However, if he can successfully bring about the collapse of the GOP, he ain't all bad

[Pandora]

 

 

[Weisshaupt]

I've wondered about the depth of his convictions since many are fairly new.

However, if he can successfully bring about the collapse of the GOP, he ain't all bad

Not sure they need help making themselves irrelevant - they have been doing a bang up job by themselves  for the last couple of decades,  but Trump might finally put that final nail in,  so yeah, good on him for that - I guess.

[Glock32]

For the "let it burn" column: in WWII there was a serious plan by the western Allies to assassinate Hitler.  There were even agents placed near his mountain retreat.  But ultimately they concluded Hitler would bring down Germany faster than anything the Allies could do to it.

So it is with the Dems in charge of this train wreck.

[Libertas]

So in that regard I guess I am of the "let it burn" persuasion. I am determined not to endorse or reward incompetence or embrace leftist standards by casting a vote for anyone except a conservative. Call it a temper tantrum, call it selfish, call it what you like - I'm done.

I see you and I are in the same boat.

I don't know how big that boat is....but it sure has a lot of passengers!

Permission to come aboard?  I'll bring me booty and some rum.   Arrrgghh! 

[ToddF]

You want people to stop using the emergency room, then don't make it mandatory by law  to treat people who can't pay in emergency rooms.

That one will never happen.  America will never let people literally die on the streets.  That being said, I have no problem with Carly's mandate of bare bones, catastrophic coverage, to cover that kind of emergency treatment.

[Predator Don]

I'm not sure it is disenfranchised democrats who are supporting Trump. The radicals are supporting sanders and the rest Hillary because of embarrassment for their Obama vote and Hillary makes them feel all better. He may be all message but it does take on a conservative vent....dems don't support anything conservative. I guess there could be a few dems who believe Trump will fall in line, but that requires a form of intelligence, it doesn't exist.

Personally, I love Trump today....that doesn't equate to a vote but since I believe it will eventually burn, I want to have some fun while our political parties take it down.....because in the end, does it really matter who was at the helm. Feral beasts are feral beasts, whether in Congress or the streets of Compton....but in the meantime, I'm having fun with my so called conservative friends defending Trump. I like reminding them Fox is telling them what to do, and just like throwing their support to Corker and Alexander here in Tennessee, which I told them would be disaster, they will go for Jeb, because he will be the lesser of two evils.

[Pandora]

You want people to stop using the emergency room, then don't make it mandatory by law  to treat people who can't pay in emergency rooms.

That one will never happen.  America will never let people literally die on the streets.  That being said, I have no problem with Carly's mandate of bare bones, catastrophic coverage, to cover that kind of emergency treatment.

Point that out for me in the Constitution.

[Weisshaupt]

You want people to stop using the emergency room, then don't make it mandatory by law  to treat people who can't pay in emergency rooms.

That one will never happen.  America will never let people literally die on the streets.  That being said, I have no problem with Carly's mandate of bare bones, catastrophic coverage, to cover that kind of emergency treatment.

"America" might very well not let that happen but the government had better - because, to Pandora's point, the Government has no right to force Doctors to treat patients, to force bakers to bake cakes or to make anyone pay for any private service they do not want to purchase. If the constitution can be bent here, it can be bent anywhere else. The rules mean something or they don't and the obviously mean nothing to Carly in this circumstance. If this is something the Govt can and should be doing get an amendment. If you can't then the govt shouldn't be doing it. I for one will oppose and such suggestion. 

America can either provide to charity, or hospitals can do charity work  or any of a dozen other approaches can be used to help solve the problem of how low life non-contributing scum get health care - the vast majority  of which don't buy insurance because they don't have to  because "Murica" won't let them be turned away from Emergency rooms.

If we simply abolished employer programs - forcing EVERYONE to search for and buy insurance on their own, you would find a much larger market, with much better offerings and you could keep you insurance plan from the age of 18 till death because it doesn't come from your employer.
.

[Glock32]

If we simply abolished employer programs - forcing EVERYONE to search for and buy insurance on their own, you would find a much larger market, with much better offerings and you could keep you insurance plan from the age of 18 till death because it doesn't come from your employer.

And it's worth noting that the whole reason employers got into health insurance in the first place is because of New Deal wage fixing.  Employers couldn't lure top talent with salaries so they looked for alternate types of carrots to dangle and came upon health insurance plans.

Regarding the cost of indigent care at emergency rooms, I am sure there's a solution that does not involve government coercion.  That's the proper domain of the church, and a role it has fulfilled for literally 2,000 years.  Americans will not permit people to die on the sidewalk in front of hospital ERs and will find a way to help them without government meddling.  That is the real insidious thing about the state inserting itself into the realm of charity, it acts as a disincentive for more genuine, more effective, and more local private charity.  It becomes too easy to abstract it onto some nebulous government program.  I think you can find evidence of this in churches that favor socialistic government programs, they seem too attracted to the idea that they can subcontract their duty to charity out to the state.

[ToddF]

You want people to stop using the emergency room, then don't make it mandatory by law  to treat people who can't pay in emergency rooms.

That one will never happen.  America will never let people literally die on the streets.  That being said, I have no problem with Carly's mandate of bare bones, catastrophic coverage, to cover that kind of emergency treatment.

Point that out for me in the Constitution.

Right after the amendment forcing doctors to give treatment to someone in the emergency room.  If you have one, you have to have the other.  If you've determined that we can force a doctor to give treatment, we can force someone to pay for it.

[BigAlSouth]

. . .
I can see myself casting a vote for her if she somehow gets the nomination. I'd still rather vote for Ted Cruz. He's in love with the constitution and the country, and he's as smart as they come.

I agree. Fiorina is smart as a whip, talks like a true conservative. She would actually make a good VP. I would vote for the party's nominee as long as it's not Jeb! Dr. Carson troubles me quite a bit because he's not really ready for prime time.

My honest opinion about Trump? If he gets the nomination, I think it will be a mistake. But the nominee is the nominee.

As of this moment, it's Cruz/Fiorina for me. The fallback is Trump/Fiorina with Cruz as Attorney General.

[warpmine]

Honestly, I don't really care who is the nominee as we'll be asked to just bend over anyway as it's been done to us since post Reagan. I would love to see some heads roll in an attempt to bring the rule of law back to the republic but I must be honest, I don't expect it to ever come back. A civil war would immediately break out as soon as that happens which of course needs to happen in order for those that have broken the law to be punished. Allowing any in this regime to skirt by unpunished will be disappointing but then par for the course in this post republic empire. The only thing missing is the title of Emperor.

[Pandora]

You want people to stop using the emergency room, then don't make it mandatory by law  to treat people who can't pay in emergency rooms.

That one will never happen.  America will never let people literally die on the streets.  That being said, I have no problem with Carly's mandate of bare bones, catastrophic coverage, to cover that kind of emergency treatment.

Point that out for me in the Constitution.

Right after the amendment forcing doctors to give treatment to someone in the emergency room.  If you have one, you have to have the other.  If you've determined that we can force a doctor to give treatment, we can force someone to pay for it.

"If you've .... we can force ...".  See, I've not determined any such thing and the "we" in question doesn't include me either. 

I'm saying the sentiments outlined in your statement is exactly how WE got right where we are now.  It's got to stop, because a little force here, a little unConstitutional mandate there leads to bigger things, always.  No one is ever a little bit pregnant.

[Weisshaupt]

I'm saying the sentiments outlined in your statement is exactly how WE got right where we are now.  It's got to stop, because a little force here, a little unConstitutional mandate there leads to bigger things, always.  No one is ever a little bit pregnant.

^^^that^^^^

Anyone who questions it need only look at the last 100 years.  Raising  corn on your own land to feed your own cows is "interstate commerce" because someone said bending the rules was expedient.