Glad Someone Finally Said It

 

Blastfax kudos to Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) for coming out and saying what everybody knows is true but nobody wants to admit.

We are living with exactly what Democrats want.
They want higher gas prices.
They want open borders.
They want massive spending.
They want to make people dependent on government.

Yes, this is what Democrats want. All of it. And they also want the Government to monitor your bank account, the Government to tax you for every mile you drive, the Government to indoctrinate your children that white people are responsible for every injustice in the world, and the Government to label you a domestic terrorist if you speak up against any of it. (OK, to be fair, an awful lot of Republicans want open borders and massive spending, too.) They would also be perfectly happy to keep Covid restrictions in place forever, and, to those who are complaining about the scarcity and high cost of consumer goods, the Democrats and the Washington Post, have a simple message: “Stop complaining and lower your expectations, you peasants.”

For the middle and working class, “Lower your expectations.” For the political elite, “Ready the private jet, I have a Climate Conference to attend.”

It’s very important in politics to define your opponent. Democrats have convinced large numbers of people that Republicans are gay-hating racists. (Remember “Mike Pence wants to force gay kids into electroshock therapy.” Or “Mitt Romney wants to put black people in chains.” Or, “Trump said our troops were a bunch of losers.”)  Republicans have been very weak on this. They will try, mostly unsuccessfully, to define individual Democrat politicians. (“Bernie Sanders is a socialist.” “Kamala Harris can be difficult to warm up to.”) But they seem reluctant to define Democrats as a whole, probably because they think that would make it more difficult to cut deals with Democrats, should they ever win another majority.

That said, Ron Johnson is right, and more Republicans should be saying this.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 50 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):
    None of his supporters wanted a smaller government – not a single one of them

    I beg to differ.

    • #31
  2. Ray Gunner Coolidge
    Ray Gunner
    @RayGunner

    tigerlily (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Is there a point at which Democrats realize that these policies will cost them elections? Are they so ideologically driven that they can abide that? Obviously we haven’t reached that point yet, but I’ve been operating on the assumption that all Democrats pretty much care about is being in power. They have to see that’s in jeopardy.

    Until they start losing elections Democrats will keep the foot on the gas pedal to progressive nirvana. The results of their policies will not matter to them until it hurts them politically. Look around at the Leftist run cities – Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago and so forth. The people in those places keep voting for failure mainly, I think, because it makes them feel good about themselves.

    This is absolutely true and I have seen it with my own eyes.  I live in a very liberal California town and have dear friends who are just as distressed about California’s increasingly expensive yet decaying quality of life as I am.  They even acknowledge–in whispers–that bad Democrat policies make our quality of life worse.  But when election time comes around–so help me–they would sooner have the flesh flayed from their bones than be caught voting for a conservative Republican who might turn things around.

    • #32
  3. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Stina (View Comment):

    MarciN (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    People identify with higher gas prices

    I just got gas this morning, and on the pump was a sticker with a cartoon figure of Joe Biden pointing to the diesel gas price. The caption said, “Thanks, Joe.” The sticker was printed, so some truck driver is pasting them around. The gas station hadn’t removed it. :-)

    I’ve heard of gas station owners putting them on their own pumps.

    This was in a recent memes post:

     

    • #33
  4. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):

    tigerlily (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Is there a point at which Democrats realize that these policies will cost them elections? Are they so ideologically driven that they can abide that? Obviously we haven’t reached that point yet, but I’ve been operating on the assumption that all Democrats pretty much care about is being in power. They have to see that’s in jeopardy.

    Until they start losing elections Democrats will keep the foot on the gas pedal to progressive nirvana. The results of their policies will not matter to them until it hurts them politically. Look around at the Leftist run cities – Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago and so forth. The people in those places keep voting for failure mainly, I think, because it makes them feel good about themselves.

    This is absolutely true and I have seen it with my own eyes. I live in a very liberal California town and have dear friends who are just as distressed about California’s increasingly expensive yet decaying quality of life as I am. They even acknowledge–in whispers–that bad Democrat policies make our quality of life worse. But when election time comes around–so help me–they would sooner have the flesh flayed from their bones than be caught voting for a conservative Republican who might turn things around.

    True. The intellectual gymnastics they’ll perform to justify continuing to vote Democrat are impressive. And they really don’t like having that pointed out. 

    • #34
  5. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):

    tigerlily (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Is there a point at which Democrats realize that these policies will cost them elections? Are they so ideologically driven that they can abide that? Obviously we haven’t reached that point yet, but I’ve been operating on the assumption that all Democrats pretty much care about is being in power. They have to see that’s in jeopardy.

    Until they start losing elections Democrats will keep the foot on the gas pedal to progressive nirvana. The results of their policies will not matter to them until it hurts them politically. Look around at the Leftist run cities – Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago and so forth. The people in those places keep voting for failure mainly, I think, because it makes them feel good about themselves.

    This is absolutely true and I have seen it with my own eyes. I live in a very liberal California town and have dear friends who are just as distressed about California’s increasingly expensive yet decaying quality of life as I am. They even acknowledge–in whispers–that bad Democrat policies make our quality of life worse. But when election time comes around–so help me–they would sooner have the flesh flayed from their bones than be caught voting for a conservative Republican who might turn things around.

    True. The intellectual gymnastics they’ll perform to justify continuing to vote Democrat are impressive. And they really don’t like having that pointed out.

    The way I saw that among neighbors when I lived in Phoenix and some of my own relatives too, is like “Wow the Democrats have really messed things up!  We have to elect more Democrats to fix it!”

    • #35
  6. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):

    tigerlily (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Is there a point at which Democrats realize that these policies will cost them elections? Are they so ideologically driven that they can abide that? Obviously we haven’t reached that point yet, but I’ve been operating on the assumption that all Democrats pretty much care about is being in power. They have to see that’s in jeopardy.

    Until they start losing elections Democrats will keep the foot on the gas pedal to progressive nirvana. The results of their policies will not matter to them until it hurts them politically. Look around at the Leftist run cities – Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago and so forth. The people in those places keep voting for failure mainly, I think, because it makes them feel good about themselves.

    This is absolutely true and I have seen it with my own eyes. I live in a very liberal California town and have dear friends who are just as distressed about California’s increasingly expensive yet decaying quality of life as I am. They even acknowledge–in whispers–that bad Democrat policies make our quality of life worse. But when election time comes around–so help me–they would sooner have the flesh flayed from their bones than be caught voting for a conservative Republican who might turn things around.

    True. The intellectual gymnastics they’ll perform to justify continuing to vote Democrat are impressive. And they really don’t like having that pointed out.

    The way I saw that among neighbors when I lived in Phoenix and some of my own relatives too, is like “Wow the Democrats have really messed things up! We have to elect more Democrats to fix it!”

    What I heard back in the first years of Trump’s administration was not that his policies caused the prosperity, the increase in blue-collar wages, the increase in minority employment. No, it was that Trump was just a beneficiary of the “business cycle”. Damn it, you can’t fight that kind of stupidity. I would expect to hear –if I were listening — that Biden’s policies didn’t cause the coming depression, but rather that he is the victim of the business cycle. 

    • #36
  7. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    Both Ron Paul and Rand Paul have been saying this out loud for a long time.

    But then, they are libertarians.

    Donald Trump has been suggesting this is the case as well.

    Glad to see a Republican is finally aboard.

    In the very near future, may some more party members indicate the possibility of not needing spinal column replacements.

    I missed the part where Trump was against massive spending. He was NOT a champion for smaller government. None of his supporters wanted a smaller government – not a single one of them. Not only was he the biggest spending president we ever had until Biden came along but he also made farmers even more dependent on government handouts. Before he was even elected he campaigned AGAINST ending the ethanol mandate. Because of his tariffs and China’s response he felt the need to bail out soybean farmers. He also was against entitlement reform. And his supporters look the other way from his profligacy all the while pretending they care about the fiscal train wreck. Republicans office holders are not going to care about these things until you care about them first.

    It’s wholly inaccurate to say none of Trump’s supporters (not a single one of them!) wanted smaller government. It’s not even close to the truth. But thanks for playing.

    I’m not playing. Interesting that you think this is some kind of game.

    Well it certainly isn’t To Tell the Truth considering you think that none of Trump’s supporters want smaller government. After seeing that, I was not aware that you took this particularly seriously.

    Considering the deathly silence towards the fiscal disaster he authored I have zero reason to believe otherwise. Dubya got plenty of criticism because of his overspending – and rightly so. Trump was graded on a curve when his fiscal record was even worse, much worse.

    I’m always baffled by those who are called out for a clearly inaccurate comment, yet choose to double down on it rather that just say “I exaggerated” or the like.

    I would guess (note, guess) that the number of posts by Trump supporters here who favor smaller government are in the thousands. It would be easier to find some of my own comments criticizing him for signing a bloated budget, but I’m unwilling to waste even that amount of time to prove the obvious.

    • #37
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):

    tigerlily (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Is there a point at which Democrats realize that these policies will cost them elections? Are they so ideologically driven that they can abide that? Obviously we haven’t reached that point yet, but I’ve been operating on the assumption that all Democrats pretty much care about is being in power. They have to see that’s in jeopardy.

    Until they start losing elections Democrats will keep the foot on the gas pedal to progressive nirvana. The results of their policies will not matter to them until it hurts them politically. Look around at the Leftist run cities – Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago and so forth. The people in those places keep voting for failure mainly, I think, because it makes them feel good about themselves.

    This is absolutely true and I have seen it with my own eyes. I live in a very liberal California town and have dear friends who are just as distressed about California’s increasingly expensive yet decaying quality of life as I am. They even acknowledge–in whispers–that bad Democrat policies make our quality of life worse. But when election time comes around–so help me–they would sooner have the flesh flayed from their bones than be caught voting for a conservative Republican who might turn things around.

    True. The intellectual gymnastics they’ll perform to justify continuing to vote Democrat are impressive. And they really don’t like having that pointed out.

    The way I saw that among neighbors when I lived in Phoenix and some of my own relatives too, is like “Wow the Democrats have really messed things up! We have to elect more Democrats to fix it!”

    What I heard back in the first years of Trump’s administration was not that his policies caused the prosperity, the increase in blue-collar wages, the increase in minority employment. No, it was that Trump was just a beneficiary of the “business cycle”. Damn it, you can’t fight that kind of stupidity. I would expect to hear –if I were listening — that Biden’s policies didn’t cause the coming depression, but rather that he is the victim of the business cycle.

    Actually what I described before, wasn’t all of it.  The higher employment, lower gas prices, etc, during the Trump years, were actually “leftover Obama.”  And I’m sure that now they’re saying all the current problems and the Afghanistan mess etc, are really “leftover Trump.”

    Thankfully I can’t hear them from this distance.

    • #38
  9. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    Both Ron Paul and Rand Paul have been saying this out loud for a long time.

    But then, they are libertarians.

    Donald Trump has been suggesting this is the case as well.

    Glad to see a Republican is finally aboard.

    In the very near future, may some more party members indicate the possibility of not needing spinal column replacements.

    I missed the part where Trump was against massive spending. He was NOT a champion for smaller government. None of his supporters wanted a smaller government – not a single one of them. Not only was he the biggest spending president we ever had until Biden came along but he also made farmers even more dependent on government handouts. Before he was even elected he campaigned AGAINST ending the ethanol mandate. Because of his tariffs and China’s response he felt the need to bail out soybean farmers. He also was against entitlement reform. And his supporters look the other way from his profligacy all the while pretending they care about the fiscal train wreck. Republicans office holders are not going to care about these things until you care about them first.

    It’s wholly inaccurate to say none of Trump’s supporters (not a single one of them!) wanted smaller government. It’s not even close to the truth. But thanks for playing.

    I’m not playing. Interesting that you think this is some kind of game.

    Well it certainly isn’t To Tell the Truth considering you think that none of Trump’s supporters want smaller government. After seeing that, I was not aware that you took this particularly seriously.

    Considering the deathly silence towards the fiscal disaster he authored I have zero reason to believe otherwise. Dubya got plenty of criticism because of his overspending – and rightly so. Trump was graded on a curve when his fiscal record was even worse, much worse.

    I’m always baffled by those who are called out for a clearly inaccurate comment, yet choose to double down on it rather that just say “I exaggerated” or the like.

    I would guess (note, guess) that the number of posts by Trump supporters here who favor smaller government are in the thousands. It would be easier to find some of my own comments criticizing him for signing a bloated budget, but I’m unwilling to waste even that amount of time to prove the obvious.

    I figure he probably meant Trump supporters in Congress etc, but that’s not what he wrote.

    • #39
  10. spaceman_spiff Member
    spaceman_spiff
    @spacemanspiff

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment)

    It’s wholly inaccurate to say none of Trump’s supporters (not a single one of them!) wanted smaller government. It’s not even close to the truth. But thanks for playing.

    I’m not playing. Interesting that you think this is some kind of game.

    Well it certainly isn’t To Tell the Truth considering you think that none of Trump’s supporters want smaller government. After seeing that, I was not aware that you took this particularly seriously.

    Considering the deathly silence towards the fiscal disaster he authored I have zero reason to believe otherwise. Dubya got plenty of criticism because of his overspending – and rightly so. Trump was graded on a curve when his fiscal record was even worse, much worse.

    I’m always baffled by those who are called out for a clearly inaccurate comment, yet choose to double down on it rather that just say “I exaggerated” or the like.

    I would guess (note, guess) that the number of posts by Trump supporters here who favor smaller government are in the thousands. It would be easier to find some of my own comments criticizing him for signing a bloated budget, but I’m unwilling to waste even that amount of time to prove the obvious.

    He STARTED his campaign pledging to not do anything about a program that is the very definition of wasteful Washington, the ethanol mandate. Then he quadrupled down on fiscal recklessness by not even considering entitlement reform. He took it completely off the table. His starting point left more than half of the budget untouched. On top of this he pledged a tax cut. You didn’t need to be Kreskin to know what would happen. For all this he was rewarded with the nomination.

    Nobody on talk radio, nobody on Fox News spoke out against this. If a politician or a pundit raised an objection, they either fell back in line or they were excommunicated. And the Republican base swarmed to his rallies and rewarded them with their votes. I’m supposed to be impressed that somebody somewhere on the internet said something? Even with close to full employment we were running trillion dollar deficits!

    • #40
  11. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment)

    It’s wholly inaccurate to say none of Trump’s supporters (not a single one of them!) wanted smaller government. It’s not even close to the truth. But thanks for playing.

    I’m not playing. Interesting that you think this is some kind of game.

    Well it certainly isn’t To Tell the Truth considering you think that none of Trump’s supporters want smaller government. After seeing that, I was not aware that you took this particularly seriously.

    Considering the deathly silence towards the fiscal disaster he authored I have zero reason to believe otherwise. Dubya got plenty of criticism because of his overspending – and rightly so. Trump was graded on a curve when his fiscal record was even worse, much worse.

    I’m always baffled by those who are called out for a clearly inaccurate comment, yet choose to double down on it rather that just say “I exaggerated” or the like.

    I would guess (note, guess) that the number of posts by Trump supporters here who favor smaller government are in the thousands. It would be easier to find some of my own comments criticizing him for signing a bloated budget, but I’m unwilling to waste even that amount of time to prove the obvious.

    He STARTED his campaign pledging to not do anything about a program that is the very definition of wasteful Washington, the ethanol mandate. Then he quadrupled down on fiscal recklessness by not even considering entitlement reform. He took it completely off the table. His starting point left more than half of the budget untouched. On top of this he pledged a tax cut. You didn’t need to be Kreskin to know what would happen. For all this he was rewarded with the nomination.

    Nobody on talk radio, nobody on Fox News spoke out against this. If a politician or a pundit raised an objection, they either fell back in line or they were excommunicated. And the Republican base swarmed to his rallies and rewarded them with their votes. I’m supposed to be impressed that somebody somewhere on the internet said something? Even with close to full employment we were running trillion dollar deficits!

    And that’s how you get Biden.

    • #41
  12. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    kedavis (View Comment):
    And that’s how you get Biden.

    The political tone deafness is off the charts.

    In Trump’s. First budget, he wanted to cut younger people out of funding social security. It was rejected.

    Just because he didn’t campaign on it, he saw a surer way of removing it than any Amal government mouthpiece that has ever run and lost.

    If the largest generation since the boomers were not paying into social security, they would eventually vote against social security for the shrinking boomers.

    But now THEY are just as invested in the social security sham as the Boomers and the Zoomers are a mid-generation like the Xers. They are too small compared to millenials to have a lot of political clout.

    • #42
  13. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment)

    It’s wholly inaccurate to say none of Trump’s supporters (not a single one of them!) wanted smaller government. It’s not even close to the truth. But thanks for playing.

    I’m not playing. Interesting that you think this is some kind of game.

    Well it certainly isn’t To Tell the Truth considering you think that none of Trump’s supporters want smaller government. After seeing that, I was not aware that you took this particularly seriously.

    Considering the deathly silence towards the fiscal disaster he authored I have zero reason to believe otherwise. Dubya got plenty of criticism because of his overspending – and rightly so. Trump was graded on a curve when his fiscal record was even worse, much worse.

    I’m always baffled by those who are called out for a clearly inaccurate comment, yet choose to double down on it rather that just say “I exaggerated” or the like.

    I would guess (note, guess) that the number of posts by Trump supporters here who favor smaller government are in the thousands. It would be easier to find some of my own comments criticizing him for signing a bloated budget, but I’m unwilling to waste even that amount of time to prove the obvious.

    He STARTED his campaign pledging to not do anything about a program that is the very definition of wasteful Washington, the ethanol mandate. Then he quadrupled down on fiscal recklessness by not even considering entitlement reform. He took it completely off the table. His starting point left more than half of the budget untouched. On top of this he pledged a tax cut. You didn’t need to be Kreskin to know what would happen. For all this he was rewarded with the nomination.

    Nobody on talk radio, nobody on Fox News spoke out against this. If a politician or a pundit raised an objection, they either fell back in line or they were excommunicated. And the Republican base swarmed to his rallies and rewarded them with their votes. I’m supposed to be impressed that somebody somewhere on the internet said something? Even with close to full employment we were running trillion dollar deficits!

    You are fully entitled to the above concerns.  You are not entitled to claim something that is untrue and refuse to back off it.  See my earlier posts.

    • #43
  14. OmegaPaladin Moderator
    OmegaPaladin
    @OmegaPaladin

    I think we are seeing an interesting parallel here.  A number of Trump supporters were worried by his spending.  According to Spiff, they should have immediately become NeverTrump and railed against the guy, but they liked too much else that the

    To democrats, all the failings of the dems pale in comparison to the GOP:

    The GOP represent stupidity and racism and all the things you left behind to get where you are.  The GOP want women shackled to a crib rather than in the workforce.  The GOP is a dumb jock clinging to his guns and religion, or Mr. Burns from the Simpsons.

    The way people describe the GOP, I would not be a part of it. 

    • #44
  15. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    I think we are seeing an interesting parallel here. A number of Trump supporters were worried by his spending. According to Spiff, they should have immediately become NeverTrump and railed against the guy, but they liked too much else that the

    To democrats, all the failings of the dems pale in comparison to the GOP:

    The GOP represent stupidity and racism and all the things you left behind to get where you are. The GOP want women shackled to a crib rather than in the workforce. The GOP is a dumb jock clinging to his guns and religion, or Mr. Burns from the Simpsons.

    The way people describe the GOP, I would not be a part of it.

    Hm.  Those are the parts I liked.

    • #45
  16. Gazpacho Grande' Coolidge
    Gazpacho Grande'
    @ChrisCampion

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment)

    It’s wholly inaccurate to say none of Trump’s supporters (not a single one of them!) wanted smaller government. It’s not even close to the truth. But thanks for playing.

    I’m not playing. Interesting that you think this is some kind of game.

    Well it certainly isn’t To Tell the Truth considering you think that none of Trump’s supporters want smaller government. After seeing that, I was not aware that you took this particularly seriously.

    Considering the deathly silence towards the fiscal disaster he authored I have zero reason to believe otherwise. Dubya got plenty of criticism because of his overspending – and rightly so. Trump was graded on a curve when his fiscal record was even worse, much worse.

    I’m always baffled by those who are called out for a clearly inaccurate comment, yet choose to double down on it rather that just say “I exaggerated” or the like.

    I would guess (note, guess) that the number of posts by Trump supporters here who favor smaller government are in the thousands. It would be easier to find some of my own comments criticizing him for signing a bloated budget, but I’m unwilling to waste even that amount of time to prove the obvious.

    He STARTED his campaign pledging to not do anything about a program that is the very definition of wasteful Washington, the ethanol mandate. Then he quadrupled down on fiscal recklessness by not even considering entitlement reform. He took it completely off the table. His starting point left more than half of the budget untouched. On top of this he pledged a tax cut. You didn’t need to be Kreskin to know what would happen. For all this he was rewarded with the nomination.

    Nobody on talk radio, nobody on Fox News spoke out against this. If a politician or a pundit raised an objection, they either fell back in line or they were excommunicated. And the Republican base swarmed to his rallies and rewarded them with their votes. I’m supposed to be impressed that somebody somewhere on the internet said something? Even with close to full employment we were running trillion dollar deficits!

    Nobody considers entitlement reform.  Because they want to stay in office.

    Why is this hard to understand?  Why was it on Trump to suddenly do something that no one else had done, ever – assuming he could get the votes to do it?   As I understand things, Republicans also enjoy being in office.

    Tax cuts grow the economy, which increases tax revenues.  You could look it up.

    • #46
  17. spaceman_spiff Member
    spaceman_spiff
    @spacemanspiff

    Gazpacho Grande’ (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    I’m always baffled by those who are called out for a clearly inaccurate comment, yet choose to double down on it rather that just say “I exaggerated” or the like.

    I would guess (note, guess) that the number of posts by Trump supporters here who favor smaller government are in the thousands. It would be easier to find some of my own comments criticizing him for signing a bloated budget, but I’m unwilling to waste even that amount of time to prove the obvious.

    He STARTED his campaign pledging to not do anything about a program that is the very definition of wasteful Washington, the ethanol mandate. Then he quadrupled down on fiscal recklessness by not even considering entitlement reform. He took it completely off the table. His starting point left more than half of the budget untouched. On top of this he pledged a tax cut. You didn’t need to be Kreskin to know what would happen. For all this he was rewarded with the nomination.

    Nobody on talk radio, nobody on Fox News spoke out against this. If a politician or a pundit raised an objection, they either fell back in line or they were excommunicated. And the Republican base swarmed to his rallies and rewarded them with their votes. I’m supposed to be impressed that somebody somewhere on the internet said something? Even with close to full employment we were running trillion dollar deficits!

    Nobody considers entitlement reform. Because they want to stay in office.

    Why is this hard to understand? Why was it on Trump to suddenly do something that no one else had done, ever – assuming he could get the votes to do it? As I understand things, Republicans also enjoy being in office.

    Tax cuts grow the economy, which increases tax revenues. You could look it up.

    Ryan pushed it but of course all the fake conservatives hate him. Dubya pushed it. He’s the last GOP presidential candidate to get over 50% of the vote. Ignoring the problem won’t make it go away. I get why Trump was too afraid to address the problem. Trump’s supporters praise him for being some kind of great fighter. He didn’t fight the battles that mattered. He had petty feuds over press coverage. And now we are approaching $30 trillion in debt driven by entitlement spending.

    Coolidge cut taxes too but he also cut spending. If you are not willing to do the second, you undermine the argument for the tax cut. Yes, tax cuts grow the economy but they don’t create a dollar’s growth in tax revenue for every dollar of taxes cut. And if instead of cutting spending you dramatically increase spending, you have a tsunami of red ink.

    • #47
  18. spaceman_spiff Member
    spaceman_spiff
    @spacemanspiff

    Django (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    One can legitimately criticize Trump for not making an effort to cut spending or reform entitlements, but the truth is, there is exactly zero appetite in Washington for either of those. Even “Deficit Hawk” Paul Ryan signed off on budget deals that gave Obama more spending than he had even asked for. It would have been a waste of political capital to even try. Although, securing the border would save the Government billions in services and welfare provided illegal immigrants and their anchor children.

    That said, however, the statement “None of his supporters wanted a smaller government – not a single one of them.” is a falsehood.

    Name one. Name a single supporter who criticized Trump for his overspending. Trump was consistently rewarded for disregarding entirely fiscal responsibility. If Obama and Trump had only been as spendthrift as Bush, we would have about $10 trillion dollars less debt today. Bush increased our debt by $5 trillion over 8 years. Obama and Trump increased it by almost $20 trillion over 12 years. Bush wasn’t all that terrific on this issue either but he looks like Coolidge compared to those two.

    As for it being a waste of political capital to even try to get our fiscal house in order, that only proves my point. Trump’s base did not care about this issue. Period.

    One year, Trump provided a defense of his budget. That is something he would not have had to do if there had been no criticism.

    I didn’t say there was no criticism. There’s always criticism but he got little pushback from so-called conservatives. And if anyone did make a fiscal conservative critique of his spending, they were banished from the party, like Justin Amash.

    • #48
  19. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    One can legitimately criticize Trump for not making an effort to cut spending or reform entitlements, but the truth is, there is exactly zero appetite in Washington for either of those. Even “Deficit Hawk” Paul Ryan signed off on budget deals that gave Obama more spending than he had even asked for. It would have been a waste of political capital to even try. Although, securing the border would save the Government billions in services and welfare provided illegal immigrants and their anchor children.

    That said, however, the statement “None of his supporters wanted a smaller government – not a single one of them.” is a falsehood.

    Name one. Name a single supporter who criticized Trump for his overspending. Trump was consistently rewarded for disregarding entirely fiscal responsibility. If Obama and Trump had only been as spendthrift as Bush, we would have about $10 trillion dollars less debt today. Bush increased our debt by $5 trillion over 8 years. Obama and Trump increased it by almost $20 trillion over 12 years. Bush wasn’t all that terrific on this issue either but he looks like Coolidge compared to those two.

    As for it being a waste of political capital to even try to get our fiscal house in order, that only proves my point. Trump’s base did not care about this issue. Period.

    One year, Trump provided a defense of his budget. That is something he would not have had to do if there had been no criticism.

    I didn’t say there was no criticism. There’s always criticism but he got little pushback from so-called conservatives. And if anyone did make a fiscal conservative critique of his spending, they were banished from the party, like Justin Amash.

    Maybe they accepted his defense? Regarding Amash, good riddance. 

    • #49
  20. spaceman_spiff Member
    spaceman_spiff
    @spacemanspiff

    Django (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    spaceman_spiff (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    One can legitimately criticize Trump for not making an effort to cut spending or reform entitlements, but the truth is, there is exactly zero appetite in Washington for either of those. Even “Deficit Hawk” Paul Ryan signed off on budget deals that gave Obama more spending than he had even asked for. It would have been a waste of political capital to even try. Although, securing the border would save the Government billions in services and welfare provided illegal immigrants and their anchor children.

    That said, however, the statement “None of his supporters wanted a smaller government – not a single one of them.” is a falsehood.

    Name one. Name a single supporter who criticized Trump for his overspending. Trump was consistently rewarded for disregarding entirely fiscal responsibility. If Obama and Trump had only been as spendthrift as Bush, we would have about $10 trillion dollars less debt today. Bush increased our debt by $5 trillion over 8 years. Obama and Trump increased it by almost $20 trillion over 12 years. Bush wasn’t all that terrific on this issue either but he looks like Coolidge compared to those two.

    As for it being a waste of political capital to even try to get our fiscal house in order, that only proves my point. Trump’s base did not care about this issue. Period.

    One year, Trump provided a defense of his budget. That is something he would not have had to do if there had been no criticism.

    I didn’t say there was no criticism. There’s always criticism but he got little pushback from so-called conservatives. And if anyone did make a fiscal conservative critique of his spending, they were banished from the party, like Justin Amash.

    Maybe they accepted his defense? Regarding Amash, good riddance.

    You are proving my point. They accepted what they once would have opposed. Trump was routinely graded on a curve even when it meant ditching conservative priorities. A party that can’t handle pushback from real deal fiscal conservatives like Amash has given up on conservatism. And so what if Trump wanted more military spending? For him the defense budget was apparently nothing more than a jobs program. In Afghanistan his only goal was to surrender to the enemy. Since that was his plan, why did we need increased defense spending anyway?

    • #50
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.