Profile image
By RedState (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

The Trump Candidacy is Based on False Premises

Friday, November 6, 2015 6:23
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

Argument 1:

Trump is self-funding and therefore he is not at risk of acting like a puppet to donors.

First, this line of attack was always silly. It may be true that the Democrats that Trump donated to for decades did him favors (mostly assisted him in stealing private property through eminent domain), but that doesn’t mean all elected officials act like puppets. Donations are simply a form of speech. As Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) 93% has pointed out several times, people donating to him are buying into him and his agenda, not the other way around.

Second, it has now been exposed that Trump actively courted the three major donors that he now attacks for seeking endorsements from. Trump can dispute the specifics, but it is clear that he actively sought support from these donors, got rejected, then attacked other candidates as “puppets” for getting support from the same exact donors.

Third, it has become clear that Trump isn’t self-funding, despite repeated claims. Most of Trump’s campaign money comes from donors and loans to the campaign (which he is clearly planning to recoup). Trump has actually given less of his own money to his campaign than Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. Trump does benefit from getting an extraordinary amount of free media, which allows him to spend less than most candidates.

Last note: Trump has also been attacking other candidate’s Super Pacs lately, but these attacks only started after The Washington Post revealed his campaign was closely coordinating with his own Super Pac. After his campaign was caught lying about it, Trump was forced to ask them to shut down.

Argument 2:

Trump has proven to know almost nothing about policy specifics throughout this campaign. Trump justifies and excuses his ignorance by repeatedly claiming it won’t matter because he will hire “great people” and they will figure everything out.

We have a prime example of what kind of people Trump would hire to run the government: In A 2009, Trump said that he would hire President Obama. Trump went on to explain that Obama has “handled the tremendous mess he walked into very well”. Given that almost everyone, including Trump, now agrees Obama has done a horrible job, what’s to say that the people Trump hires in his administration wouldn’t turn out the same way? Especially since Trump seems to agree with Obama on most policy issues.

Argument 3:

Trump’s key issue throughout this campaign has been immigration. Trump has claimed that voters who care about this issue should vote for him because he has the best positions and everyone else is weak on this issue.

Trump’s evidence for his strong position is his harsh language about illegal immigrants and his immigration position paper, which was widely hailed by immigration hardliners.

There was always some doubt that Trump’s immigration posturing was legitimate given his tendency to adopt liberal positions, his analysis that Romney lost in 2012 because he was too “mean-spirited” towards illegal immigrants, and reporting that Trump has previously been very open to amnesty. This suspicion was validated recently as it became clear that Trump did not know key details from his own immigration paper. In addition, his book specifically calls for immigration policies that are contrary to his immigration paper. It appears other candidates are starting to point out Trump’s inconsistencies on this issue.

Argument 4:

Trump has claimed that a key part of his economic agenda would be to renegotiate trade deals and force companies to keep jobs here.

First, Trump’s protectionist position requires an audience that doesn’t understand the benefits of free trade or the costs of trade wars. Two respected conservative economists recently noted that Trump’s tariff proposal would be the biggest tax hike on American consumers in modern times. The costs of everyday products would rise by yuuuuge amounts. While it may preserve some jobs in specific industries here, this attack on economic liberty would cost far more growth and job creation overall. (Milton Friedman explains it here)

Second, it has become obvious that Trump doesn’t practice what he preaches. Trump’s companies have a long history of producing products overseas. See here:

Trump1 Trump2

It has become clear that many of the central premises of Trump’s campaign are simply false. He is saying things that aren’t true and hoping his audience is too ill-informed to check.

The post The Trump Candidacy is Based on False Premises appeared first on RedState.


Report abuse


Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories



Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.