Quote:
Originally Posted by AENeuman
My support for Trump would be very similar to my support of legalization of pot. Putting the conservative philosophy and approach out in the open will control the previous approach of obstruction and fear mongering. I think our checks and balance system will largely render Trump impotent. This will either be a good thing because a) he will do little, which is generally the best approach for any president, b) compromise, and go back to his previously long held moderate positions.
Cruz and HRC I see as much more effective in achieving their agenda, thus not likely getting my support.
|
I think Trump might be the most successful at "getting things done" compared to Cruz and Rubio. He strikes me as much more of a pragmatist than an ideologue - and those people tend to get more done. I don't think Trump would bat an eye to sign a pro-choice bill, pro-gay marriage bill, gun control bill, but I also see him being more organized fiscally (his team, not him specifically) and using the bully pulpit on that one. I think Cruz would use up all his chips on fights involving the supreme court (would work) and social issues (that would ultimately fall short). Trump, on the other hand, would have a pretty short attention span on that stuff, view some of it as "silly" and then gravitate towards his "passion" in the fiscal/foreign policy arenas. Rubio would be too green to get a lot done, but I don't think that would be a bad thing.
In the end, I think Clinton would be a lot like Bill and battle the republicans publicly on 2-3 big issues - while signing/compromising on a bunch of less publicized bills. If I were a social conservative, I would be pushing pretty hard for Cruz. I think much of the right will be pretty frustrated with the first 4 years of a Trump presidency. It's also why I wouldn't mind Trump on some level because of how much of a pragmatist I think he'd be - but I really can't see myself stomaching 4 years of that asshat bloviating to us.