Is Trump liberal or conservative?

Post Reply New Topic

'Struggle'? More like a personal vandetta. I feel bad for the poor Hispanic man or woman he overworked for a dollar an hour who did something to piss him off and make him hell-bent on punishing every immigrant in this country of Latin nationality (legal or illegal). Not to mention the Muslims and Asian Americans who are feeling the wrath of him and his army of angry white folks who are basically saying "We stole this land fair and square and we ain't sharing it with you b*****s!"

There is one glaring exception to this. In the beginning of his presidency when he put travel bans against the list of countries -- he took that list straight from Obama.

Last edited by QFT on 30 Apr 2020, 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Until the 1970s, the Democratic Party in the South was the socially Conservative party. They exposed racial segregation, for example. They were the remnants of the old, socially-conservative Democratic Party of the 19th century.

The Republican Party was the “Party of Lincoln,” meaning many Southern whites bore a grudge against the Republicans because they freed the slaves.

The “Solid South,” until around 1968, meant that the South voted “solidly” Democratic.

You're righ about all that. In fact I think it's pretty damn sad because it proves just how ingrained racism is in the culture of the south, no matter which political party dominates the region.

Yes, Kraftie makes a good point that the “switch” didn’t happen at the same time in the whole country.

In the 60s, the North East Republicans were drifting to the right but there were still people like Nelson Rockefeller who would have fitted in with the Kennedys (figure of speech - I’m sure better informed people will point out lots that Rockefeller hated Catholics or something like that).

Meanwhile in the South, the Democrats were still largely in favour of segregation. George Wallace was a Democrat. He reluctantly threw away the racist rhetoric in the 80s when he realised he needed black votes. But a lot of black Southerners can still remember the Dixiecrats and it still shapes their view of politics.

So you said in the other reply that the party switch happened 150 years ago, and now you are saying it happened in the 1970-s?

So could it be that you are saying that up north they switched 150 years ago and down south they switched in the 1970-s, and since David Duke is down south while Donald Trump is up north, thats why the recent switch is applicable to Duke but not to Trump?

This leads to the other question. How can party on different parts of the country push opposite ideology if everyone in the party have a common goal -- to nominate someone for the election -- and they can't nominate one person to represent the northern branch and the other to nominate the southern branch, they have to nominate one person to represent everyone in that party?



I thought that Lincoln was the one who freed the slaves? And I thought he was up north?

I also heard southerners claiming that Lincoln wanted to ship blacks to Africa but his death prevented this from happening. So basically the "southern brand of racism" is slavery and "northern brand of racism" is shipping blacks back to Africa, and Lincoln was siding with the northern brand.

Or am I confusing him with someone else?

In any case, the whole thing of "bearing a grudge for freeing slaves" doesn't apply to David Duke since he opposes slavery. In fact he blames the Jews for slave trade and thats one of the things he dislikes the Jews for -- which implies that he thinks slavery is a bad thing. I think David Dukes argument is that blacks don't owe whites anything (there shouldn't be a slavery) but whites don't owe blacks anything either (which means that admissions to colleges and jobs should be merrit-based) and he believes that merrit-based selection would naturally favor whites since he believes whites are more talented. So he basically attributes the fact that there are so many blacks that get into prestigious universities to the pro-black bias which he thinks is wrong just like he thinks slavery is wrong, too.

I am not saying I agree with him, I am just saying thats his line of thinking. So I don't see why he would bear grudge against people that freed slaves if he doesn't support slavery to begin with.



But what if the candidate that got democratic nomination is from the north? Would they still vote for him just because he is a democrat? THat doesn't make much sense if you are saying that democrats up north were more liberal than republicans up north.

Every political party is a coalition between groups who want different things. The positions of the party, including who they want to hold offices, is the result of a great deal of compromise and chicanery. The US system, which strongly favours two party rule, is a particularly extreme example of that.

I just got through explaining that.
Sorry. I wasn't totally clear. There were two "switches" between the parties. One national, and later one that was regional. I wasn't sure which switch that you were taking about.

David Duke was a SOUTHERN DEMOCRAT. Also known as a Dixiecrat. Like Lester Maddox, and George Wallace, and Jesse Helms, etc.. Whites in the South were conservative, but were Dems. But then began to vote GOP in the Seventies, and then actually switched voter registration in the Nineties.

But that's just SOUTHERN Democrats. In the north and northeast Democrats contemporary with Strom Thurmond and with the early David Duke tended to be Liberals, and tended to oppose Southern Democrats.

The GOP was founded on the eve of Civil War as an antislavery party (the ultimate progressive cause of the time).Lincoln was the first GOP president. Teddy Roosevelt was quite progressive. So long ago the two parties "switched places" on the national level. But you are partially right that..within the south...there was an equally radical regional switch that happened later. And that was indeed during the lifetime of folks today, including Trump. But again Trump was not a Southerner, nor was he a Dixiecrat like the early David Duke.

And there are other terms you can use that say the same thing: Trump is a pragmatic national libertarian; he's a small-r and small-d federal democratic-republican; he's a constitutionalist — all these are accurate because the American system of federal constitutional republican government is fundamentally libertarian.

Trump's opposites are the global lefto-fascists — whether they are global corruptocrats like Clinton and Biden, communist kooks like Bernie Sanders, Fabian socialists like Obama, or fascist street thugs like antifa. Because he is their opposite, all these people hate him intensely, whether they are in the halls of Congress, in the corridors of the UN, or on the pages of obscure websites for autistic people.

Question Number 10: Who is indisputably the most important person in the United States of America? He who shelters us from the harshness of the outside world, and to whom we owe everything we have including out lives?

Answer 1: Overseer Trump
Answer 2: Overseer Trump
Answer 3: Overseer Trump
Answer 4: Overseer Trump

That was in the early 70s. It was called the Southern Strategy, because it was a GOP plan to win over conservative southern Democrats who were butthurt over the Civil Rights Act being passed.

What has Trump done to make you think he's a Libertarian?

Trump practices subsidies, tariffs and bailouts, not free markets.

Trump seems opposed to freedoms, because it conflicts with his visions of Making-America-Great.

How can we achieve MAGA, if we permit "s**thole country immigrants"?
How can we achieve MAGA, if we allow free trade?

As Walrus said, Trump practices authoritarianism.

Mises Would Not Support Trump
https://mises.org/wire/mises-would-not-support-trump

So are you saying Republicans don't really believe in conservative values, they are just trying to "market" themselves to southerners? But then why do they still sound conservative if you have a privite conversation with them, where none of the southerners can hear them?

trump is just the flip side of the same counterfeit coin with ronnie raygun on the other side. he is a dark sider ronnie raygun with no pretense of polish. [PAW-lish, NOT POH-lish]

Extreme majority of people don't fit in perfectly to either far left or far right. If someone supports mostly things that the right side supports, then he or she is on the right side even if there are some individual points they don't support. Same with left. If the things someone supports from right and left are pretty even, then they're usually called centrists.

If someone switches sides a lot based on what's convinient for them at the moment, then their main purpose is to support themselves, not a particular acenda.

That’s Trump in a nutshell.