You do realize that he was the first president to really drive this big government progressive agenda?

I believe you are nuts.

You may want to look a bit further back than the last month on trump. He is a long road of contradiction, theft by relationship to politicians through government programs, theft through bankrupcy. Yes his actions are legal, but still theft.

Perhaps the worst thing he will do is the thing I dislike most about Obama, and he has made it clear he will do it. He has stated he will use executive order to get things done, he will just do good things. A tyrant who does good things is still a tyrant, and we cannot have another or it will be so cemented in our culture that we will never remove the tyrants power.

No Trump has clearly told us he is a tyrant, but he will be a good tyrant. I want no more tyrants.

I just searched it. It says it will be simple by showing you a very simple form. There's a line for "income". The hard thing about taxes if figuring out that line, figuring how how fast you can depreciate machines, how you account for the cost of using vehicles, etc. Making the other lines simpler is no big deal.

Also I didn't see any specifics about how he would cut gov't. He says the payroll taxes system would be eliminated, but SS and Medicare would remain funded. How? If we suppose for the moment that we take care of SS and Medicare, the next biggest thing is military. And he has carried on about using the military more. So I don't see where the cuts could come from. Cutting the EPA is one item, but not enough to move the needle. Moreover, turning that over to the states makes it hard to fight non-local threats like global warming. If we don't do something about that, it will cost more than a few billion dollars. Maybe he has a plan to deal with that without a large federal agency, which I is something I would support.

I am very familiar with the Fair Tax, so is Cruz. He is smarter than I was about it. He once said he would love to do it if we could guarentee it would be done while doing away with other taxes. his fear, and I think it well founded, was that if you put the fair tax in place it would only be a matter of time until it was an additional tax to all we have now, rather than a replacement.

I think he is right unless you can change the culture first to a constitutional culture, then repeal the needed amendments and add a very explicit one removing all other taxes constitutionally, your going to just get an additional tax.

Have you looked at Cruz's plan? If not I would do so. He calls out specific agencies he would do away with. He has said that since the EPA was put in by executive order he can remove it by the same and turn that responsibility back to the states where it belongs.

I am not sure I trust that he will do it, but who else has even said they would do it.

he has said, and did say to those in Iowa, at meetings attempting to preserve them, that he would do away with all subsidies, including the corn/methanol subsidies. A person who will tell people this just before the big vote day is the kind of person I think we need.

He thinks he can do the 10% tax, I think he will have to settle for something more like Mike Lee's plan, but either would be a huge improvement.

I'd be happy with another Teddy Roosevelt.

We've had the opposite of that, no guide, no morals, no ethics...just Alistar Crowley "Be what ever you will", there are no consequences.

If it were so, I'd rather have a president in fear of those consequences, even if he only understood them in a pagan sense rather than someone like obobo with no moral guide, no mind, no conscience nor the slightest knowledge of our constitution and the rule of law.

The problem with progressives and establishment types alike is they have no respect or mutuality for conscious human life.

In spite of what were taught, there is much to admire about us. Those that have caused the world problems, those that blame mankind are in fact the problem and are nothing like the majority of men. (historically includes women also)

While I agree it wont go all at once. I even think Cruz's 10% tax may be impossible to pass and it may end up being Mike Lee's 15% and 25% two level tax we end up with if Cruz gets elected. Both would be steps towards a better US. You seem to live in an all or nothing fantasy world. I thought Objectivists were about facing reality and having a stratagy taht can work.

An all or nothing approach will never work, and will never get us back. It may have in 1890 had someone opposed rail road subsidies and Sherman law. We are to far from the correct path to right it in one blow now, incremental political process is the only way it will happen.

Our poeple will not elect Gary. Like Ron Paul he will have a following and if he runs he will be doing the country a disservice. The best thing he could do is back Cruz. He cant win, but he may split the small government people off of Cruz and make the Socialist or the criminal win. I hope he is smart enough to not run at all.

Xenok
I must agree with you.

I will not vote for anyone who wears their religion on their sleeve, or in the case of Cruz, vote to elect Jesus to be the next president.

I notice several Trumpers in the Gulch.
There are many things that frighten me about Trump, but I'll illustrate just one of them
Trump says he'll level the playing field with China. China has devalued its currency which artificially causes their prices to be lower and therefore more competitive. Trump wants them to stop this practice, but how will he make them do so? The only way he can is to place a tariff on their products. China then has many retaliatory options, none of them good. They can start a tariff war. As the prices rise it will slow down the purchase of both countries goods and caught in the middle will be the American consumer. Worst of all, if the battle gets hotter still, China can turn to selling the billions in American bonds that it holds. In the end, because of our great size and China's great size not only will our economies suffer, but world-wide economies will start sliding, which can lead to a hot war, and the villain would be us.This illustrates that either Trump cannot comprehend basic global economics, or he is just spouting rhetoric. Either way, I wouldn't trust him to be president. When he realizes his true position in the world, he well might turn to Fascism.

As to Cruz: He's way too religious in his proclamations -- but, no one knows or understands the Constitution better than him. He has won cases at Supreme Court level and is the only senator to stick up for the promises he's made to constituents, even to his own peril. Of all of the bison herd of Republican contenders, he has the most integrity. No, he's not perfect. You'll not find Howard Roark or John Galt, or Hank Reardon running for office, but Cruz is as close as you're going to get with any chance of winning.

Cruz is another religious zealot. Haven't we had enough of religion-driven government

Ted Cruz is a decent speaker, but without the oratorical gifts of Reagan. I said that Reagan would make a great President back in 1964, after hearing him speak on behalf of Goldwater. Cruz doesn't convince me in the same way.

I think every one of the GOP candidates except Trump has been tripped up by at least the appearance, if not the actual evidence, of hypocrisy, from contradictory statements made, not in the distant past, but in the course of the current campaign. The insistence by the media of a candidate making sworn concrete, immutable statements on every position is a trap that a real leader with any sense avoids.

I've spent a lot of time reviewing statements of every potential candidate, and of all of them, as outrageous as it may sound to others in this forum, Trump exhibits more common sense than all the others. Taking just one issue, taxation, to which every other candidate has rigidly endorsed one or the other attractive-sounding position. I've heard proposals for a flat tax, fair tax (my favorite), no tax, or a simplified version of the current tax. When asked his position on taxes, Trump simply acknowledged that all of those proposals have the possibility of helping the economy, and that he would work to implement the best, most achievable changes as quickly as possible. While he makes inflammatory public statements to draw media attention and discover the public's deepest motivations, he's pragmatic, rather than rigidly ideological.

Ideologues either fail, or lead people into catastrophic historical events. It takes real skill to induce people to stop waiting for government to take care of them, and get them excited about what they can accomplish if the government does its best to remove barriers. Perverse as it may sound to some here, Donald Trump seems to be the only political figure sending that message.

At this point I plan to vote for Cruz in the primary.
The RINO "mainstream" of the hypocrisy party I've come to despise hates Cruz for his conservative principles.
Cruz is listed as a Republican libertarian too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberta...
I consider voting for Cruz as making a statement.
I have Johnson under consideration for the general election.

I would prefer a candidate who supports THE FAIR TAX, WHICH IS A FORM OF A NATIONAL SALES TAX.

My choice as well.

"a 10% flat tax would be a big benefit to him, me and everyone else"
Every presidential election since I became aware of politics has had someone on this promise. It sidesteps the tough questions of how to reduce gov't. I don't think it's realistic. OTOH, I'd rather here this than what I heard last night. I caught about 20% of the marathon Democratic debate. I heard them both say they would increase taxes by $100 billion a year, and that sounds like not enough to cover all of Sanders' spending promises. I'm disappointed that Clinton didn't say she opposed all net increases in tax.

Well, again I agree 100%. Good distinction.

If it wasn't an income tax I would agree. The productivity tax has to go.