Republicans, make your case to vote for Trump in 2020

I'd like to do something just a bit different with this thread. Republicans on this forum if you were making a case to a moderate democrat in an effort to get them to vote for Trump next go around, what would you say?

Ended the cold war with south and north korea. He isn't Hillary.

He isn't Hillary is enough

I'd hold out until I saw who he was running against in the general election before I made the case to reelect him. If a better, more qualified Democrat ran against him on a platform that didn't consist of the current Democratic mantra of Resist, Russia, abolish ICE, and "he said mean things and screwed Stormy Daniels" then I could see myself voting for who I believe would have the country's (not my feelings) best interests at heart.

For example, I don't have to stick to party lines, I was more for Senator McCain than President Obama 2008, but was conflicted because of McCain's running mate (if he had anyone besides Sarah Palin there wouldn't have been a conflict). I wanted Obama to win in 2012 hands down, because I wasn't feeling Romney at all, but if someone I liked more was running against Obama, then I probably would have went for them.

I know that some people will vote for whoever President Trump's opponent is no matter who it is, but the right answer would be to figure out if they really are going to be a better president. TDS may cause his biggest haters to vote for a potato in 2020 if it was backed by the DNC, but if the person running against him is running on a horrible platform, and is going to clearly make things worse than anything Trump could ever hope to do, then you have to ask yourself if you hate him more than you love your country.

Another thing to consider is that convincing someone to vote for Trump could be difficult simply because his goals may be just fine with conservatives but not with liberals. I'm not talking about bipartisan things like certain aspects of foreign relations and fixing infrastructure, I'm talking about partisan things such as gun control, military funding, etc. A big example is with immigration; a conservative that believes in strong borders may be all in with him putting a merit-based system in place for immigration, while a liberal that wants to let more people in and give Dreamers amnesty probably would want to make it easier to get a visa. Likewise, someone pro-choice isn't going to want to see someone put on the Supreme Court that could potentially rule against Roe v Wade while someone pro-life is probably hoping that the Supreme Court makes a decision that will result in abortion being illegal within the next few years.

Couldn't be worse and this path we are on is not a good one.

2 more Republican nominated Supreme court justices. Which means a turn away from liberals justices idea that they are "lawmakers"

That is all I need.

Hmmm....yet the Republican justices are making laws. Amazing.

Not really but let´s just agree to disagree.

Sure. But reality is on my side. You can disagree with that. It's been happening. Anyone paying attention knows that. But hey.............fox news and trump tweets are all you need............

Conservative justices stated that corporations are people. This whole notion that the Supreme Court shouldn't be "lawmakers" harken to a time when conservatives were mad when their unconstitutional laws were overthrown, such as segregation and abortion.

But please, continue your fantasy that Republicans are small government conservatives because it does humor me a lot.

Wait, so let me understand this correctly, you are for our judicial branch to act as lawmakers?

@Serraph105: I assume this hypothetical moderate Democrat is a stand-in for someone similar to you? What would it take for someone to convince you to vote for Trump?

@ad1x2: I don't always agree with everything you (or anyone else here :p) says but it's still sad to see that well thought out posts like yours get ignored in favour of the same no-argument, pointless bickering that always happens around here. "My side is right, your side is wrong" is how we do politics in these forums.

@korvus: There's just not much to respond to. Distilled to it's succinct elements, it says:

I'll vote for the best candidate.

I don't like the Democrats' messaging.

It will be hard to convince a member of the party to switch because their goals are different.

There's just not much there to respond to, particularly since we don't know the other candidates yet and the last item is close to a self evident truth.

True, and yet his post is still miles ahead of what anybody else in this thread (or the similar ones that pop up every now and then) has said. Puts these discussions in a rather bad light, doesn't it?

@korvus: Eh, like any other platform you have a mix of good and bad, thought out and not. You take what information you can from the conversation and drive it forward if something interests you.

@mattbbpl: You're probably right. As a non-American I tend to be more a reader than a poster on this sort of thing. Of course I have my own opinions, but if I'm going to be talking out of my ass might as well be something regarding my own country ;)

@korvus: Haha, no worries. We're all here for our own reasons, and it's good to have some outside perspective.

@mattbbpl: From this side when we look at current US politics it looks like, and pardon the language, a clusterfuck. Lots of threats, finger pointing, blame games and very little plans or solutions from either side. Republicans will endorse anyone who will further their view, morals and standards be damned, doing the very things they bitched and moaned Dems were doing during the Obama administration. Democrats are too busy feeling righteous and put forth very little in terms of convincing people to side with them other than "we're on the right side of the discussion". And in between these two we have groups of people who somehow are still apathetic regarding their duty of exerting their voting rights and people who are still pinning for an angry 80 year old high in volume but low on plans to come save the country.

At the same time the rest of the world is probably spending more time than they should looking closely at a country they'd pay no attention to otherwise (it's not meant as an insult but to most non Americans the US is the place movies and music comes from and is not really in our minds a lot...well, it didn't use to be, anyway) scared of where their allegiance is going to be when shit hits the fan and trying to separate truth from bullshit.

It's like a dystopian comedy, except nobody is laughing. Tough times for everyone, man...

@korvus: It's definitely a cluster. I object to the implication of equivalence, but I guess you can view that as you may. Perhaps your view on that will change with time, or perhaps not.

@mattbbpl: Well, saying that both sides are failing to meet expectations (which keep getting lower everyday) doesn't necessarily make them "equivalent", just...lacking. I doubt many Americans can say they are 100% confident and pleased with their party, whichever it may be.

@korvus: I definitely agree they're both lacking.

@n64dd: about that...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/07/07/north-korea-foreign-ministry-says-talks-with-pompeo-regrettable-acc.html

North Korea Foreign Ministry says talks with Pompeo 'regrettable,' accuses US of unilateral demands for denuclearization

@Jacanuk: so you're OK with for profit prisons and the war on drugs that d93s nothing to solve it?

Yes, i am sort of happy with our justice system as to the prisons concerned, and if you mean if i am fine with drugs being illegal, then yes of course I am.

That's a pretty narrow minded way to look at it. Trust me, it could be a lot worse, and if the DNC lets hubris get in the way in 2020 like they did in 2016 with Hillary Clinton we may see Trump getting reelected.

@Jacanuk: not what I mean. For profit prison have huge state level and federal level lobbying ferms...which means they have massive effect on how laws are made and how judges rule cases. That mean they want to have as much prisoners possible to be payed for holding for the state and us government. And they use there buying power to make sure it says that way buy making sure laws say as harsh as they can jail people even if they are no violent offender....which are the majority of people in jail now.

What I'm saying is that you're OK with keeping a system warped to hold people who do light crime for years with violent criminal just so corporate prisons and get riCher of your tax dollars.

And the war on crime is even worse. Why it's give the drug seller more profit and as a by product creates more crime. Making something rare the many people want just allows the people who have it and want to resell it richer. And profit enspire people to be willin fight and kill to get those profits.

The war on drugs just makes a new prohibition Era and brings in new version of the mobs that came with it. On the Mexican border line these laws made a new version of the 1930's mob with there war on drugs.

Ok, i get what you mean now and yes i am fine with people doing time for the crime they have committed, if you are somehow to "arrogant" to care about the law, well as they say "don´t do the crime, if you can´t do the time" And I am all for privately run prisons, they can run on a different level than state-run and do not have to deal with the same red-tape or regulations.

War on Drugs is a thing that should never mean that drugs are legalized, it´s like saying the "war on murder" is not working and therefore we should legalize murder or any other crime.

It´s funny that the people for a legalizing come up with one of the most futile arguments as to why it should be legal, no one expects it to completely eradicated, people are still people. But the human cost is too high to allow it to be legal.

Trump isn't getting reelected....he did energize a decent portion of the population against him. Angry people vote.

Government convicts people and government should imprison them. Private prisons are not good for the population nor the criminals. Also drug users should be sentenced to rehab. Not prison.

Whoops: https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/07/politics/trump-claims-credit/index.html

So, in other words, you're against Democrats who run on common sense and decency. Good to know.

Right, because the textualist god Gorsuch never interprets laws to mean something that wasn't explicitly said, right?

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/01/neil-gorsuch-is-a-terrible-writer.html

Convinced? Neither was Ginsburg, who (correctly) dismissed Gorsuch’s tangent as an irrelevant “history lesson.” She also ridiculed Gorsuch’s “grace period” theory as “entirely imaginative,” given the total lack of evidence that Congress “had any such ancient law in mind when it drafted” this statute. Gorsuch’s dissent, Ginsburg wrote, cannot, “for all its mighty striving,” identify “even one federal statute” that uses the word differently. “From what statutory text, then,” she wondered, “does the dissent start?”

None, as it turns out. Gorsuch’s theory is utterly divorced from the text of the law, and based instead on “our foundational principles of federalism.” Or so he claims. In reality, the court has already unanimously upheld this statute’s constitutionality, and Gorsuch’s federalist fretting makes little sense given the majority’s minimal intrusion upon states’ rights. Yet he closes his opinion with a return to the fence metaphor, accusing his colleagues of disregarding the Constitution:

The general election is still 28 months away. A lot can happen between now and then that can either help or hurt his reelection chances. Not to mention we don't even know who he will ultimately go against in the general election. Can you honestly say that whoever his opponent is, no matter what (even if they are the absolute worst candidate ever), is still going to win just because he or she isn't Trump?

Also, while there are plenty of angry Never Trumpers that will vote against him, there are also plenty of angry Trump supporters that will make it their mission to turn out and vote for him just to stick it to the Never Trumpers that dismiss their opinions over a sense of moral and intellectual superiority.

@Jacanuk: 1. You don't know what you're talking about. Laws are not set in stone. They can be changed. The issue is that people who control the pay for profit prison system are pay republican law maker not to change the law. They using there financial power to warp the laws for their own profit. None of the majority of people in jail are there because they violated laws to help people or keep people safe. They are are in jail because of laws made to jail them for doing thing the laws has no business in harshly regulating. Of laws no one would be hurt if the action they did were legal.

2. You really don't know what you are taking about. More people are hurt and killed by the effect of make certain drugs illegal. All states the legalized weed use have a dramatic crime drop. Mean while states like Arizona and Texas have a blood border due to the Mexican cartels. We have the war on drugs for over 40 years with no effect while legalizing weed damage the cartels far more in the short year it has been passed.

And not say legalize all drugs...just the low level ones.

It's clear that you never researched any of this.

Trump's is a minority and his policies will soon affect that base. Look at the mid west farmers.

If that is all you got out of my post, then you have failed to recognize that some of us don't stick to party lines and let our feelings override our desire to see what is best for the country happen. Resist, Russia, get rid of ICE, and Trump is a meanie that sleeps with porn stars is not a common sense, decent platform to run on.

I already stated that I would vote Democrat if they were a better option in the 2020 election; and so far we don't even know who he will be running against. For all we know, he may not even make it through the primaries. Or am I going to assume you are one of the people that would vote for a potato over Trump simply because the potato isn't Trump?

So far the most of the midwest farmers in my circle are blaming the drop in soybean prices on Obama. There is word that some of that is changing though.

Jerome Schwagerl farms near Beardsley, in western Minnesota. When Trump took office, he said, he was willing to hold out on making any judgments, to give the new president enough time to work on trade issues.

But now that Trump is implementing his strategy, Schwagerl said he's seen enough: "He's going to bankrupt agriculture trying to do it."

Grain prices have been dropping ever since the president's trade disputes with China, Mexico, Canada and the European Union began last spring. Soybean prices alone have dropped by about 18 percent.

"I don't think there's any farmer that can continue producing a crop for what the prices are right now," Schwagerl said.

He wonders if he'll be in business a year from now.

That is a very socialist way of looking at prisons, we are a free market and therefore private prisons make sense, in fact, in most cases, private companies can run prisons a lot more efficient than the state can.

Well, laws are set in stone so far as if you break them, you have a chance of going to jail. There are no "ups I'm sorry I broke the law" and if you think there are laws that should not be upheld, well good luck and I hope that you are "lucky" enough to not get reported. Or i hope you are smart enough to use the means democracy grants you.

And people in jail are there because they lack the morals to not break ht make normal people not break societies rules.

And utter nonsense, The reason why cartels have so much power in poor countries is that the government is corrupt, And criminals dying, well if you live by the sword you die by the sword.

But sure legalize marijuana for medicinal use, do not see a purpose in legalizing it for recreational use, but that is not up to me, that is up to the people in a democratic vote, and well majority rules.

"Because it is the law" is not a defense of the law.

An awful lot of things don't make sense as private entities in our economy, and we recognize that by that making them private. Why do prisons make sense as private entities? Is there an incentive to provide a better product at reduced cost?

Why Prisons make sense as a private run facility is because they can do it at a much lower cost since they are not faced with the same bureaucracy and change in leadership.

@Jacanuk: 1.you're still not.getting it. The issue is not up holding the law. The issue is changing the law. All laws can be change . The issue is getting law makers to change the laws the are bad and pointless. And laws maker are being paid by pro profit prisons to keep bad laws in. That is the issue. You're saying you'really OK with having law makers to make harsh laws to put more money in their pocket.

2. Weeds can't grow with out water. And with drug cartels can't develop or grow without money. It matters not if the government is corrupt or not you can't kill off a monster you keep feeding. If you want.to end the cartels you am for their profits.

@Jacanuk: you clearly don't understand how profit can corrupt law. Just look at flint as an example.

I don't get how that is supposed to appeal to a moderate Democrat.

The DOJ has found that private prisons offer fewer services at greater security and safety risk to inmates and staff, without producing substantial savings. And justice should not be administered for profit.

@mattbbpl: I truly don't know Matt. What I do know is that I'm getting tired of the only "positive" thing I hear from Trump supporters is that he does a great job of trolling democrats. I wanted to to hear his supporters to try to discuss the positive things of substance that Trump has done that potentially appeals to both sides of the political spectrum.

Of course, I am not ok with laws made to "fill someone's pocket" but the answer will never be to break them and then afterwards complain about the consequences. Especially not the criminal laws. So sure it´s hard to change but as you have seen it´s not impossible and that is the way to do it.

You are jumping to serious undocumented claims here, you claim that the cartels will not earn money if you legalize it, which is an assumption. Considering studies show that there is a rise in use in legalized states, it will be stupid to think that people will not continue to buy what is cheapest.

Dispensaries have to pay tax and have costs that far outweigh that of "drug dealer" , So while some people may get their drugs from the legal open source, is safe to assume there will still be a massive underground sale.

well, the problem is that there are so few operates on the market so there is no real competition. But the state also needs to cap cost to keep it low, since most companies often use government contracts as a way to fuel their money tank and inflate costs.

Facts say private prisons are not the answer.........and you're the ONLY person I have heard sing their praises. Some things should not be capitalism.

@Jacanuk: 1. When did I say it was OK to break the law. All I'm saying is we need to change the laws and kick the law makers that are in the way. Voting R is counter productive of that. Changing the law is hard because lawmakers make it hard. Mean while if it's a vote to make massive tax cut for the rich which the averge tax pay will have to pay out of pocket certain law makers have no issue rushing out under a weeks time.

You don't see that as currupt?

2. The cartels are already losing money because of legalizing weed. The only other way to.make money is people trafficing, and selling harder the make drug that cost more to make. If we legalize weed the mass majority of profits for them goes and it will make it easier to take them out. This historical has been already proven.