This meme applies to a lot of populists, non-interventionists, and fiscal hawks, who think Trump is one of them:
The tax cuts and defense spending is a shoe-in…border control, wall, deportations, and trade deal renegotiation…much less likely.
Politics is storytelling. Tell people a good story and they will vote for you.
There’s a joke…politicians are like schizophrenics – they have two personalities: one for the campaign and the other after they get into office. The voter has to hope the latter doesn’t diverge too much from the former, but it often does.
Many people think Trump is like Ron Paul – someone who wants balanced budgets, less debt, a small military, and less foreign intervention…after all, Trump was billed during the primaries as a sort of ‘anti-establishment’ figure, in contrast to neocons like G. W. Bush who embody the ‘establishment’. Lost or buried in the sea of MAGA baseball caps, private jets, enthusiasm, and speeches – was his actual plan. Trump is not Ron Paul..not even close. He’s not like Bush either…He’s something different, combining spending with nationalism. Some could call it ‘civil nationalism’ or ‘citizenism’ (or as I describe it, a right-wing FDR).
Vox Day writes:
This is good news. Even the hardcore economic-growth-at-all-costs conservatives are finally beginning to understand that their politics are a non-starter. Moore is smart enough that he’ll likely come around completely before long.
But your ‘god emperor’ wants more economic growth, and will spend to get it.
Or from Oil Price.com: Geopolitical Overhaul: What Will A Post-Obama World Look Like?
Debt reduction, stimulated domestic economic growth and employment, the visible reduction of what is seen internationally as overbearing statism in the U.S. economy, and creative attempts to build a new era of investment in the U.S. will be critical to building back long-term U.S. global capabilities. This would imply a process to reduce U.S. debt creation through the creation of Federal budget surpluses, something which several U.S. administrations until this point have felt disinclined to attempt. Deficit spending by the U.S. Government has been a short-term tool to buy votes, creating a longer-term certainty of economic self-strangulation.
A full four-year term by the Trump Administration spent on achieving stable economic growth would al-most certainly guarantee Pres. Trump a second term in office, but it does not mean that such a domestic focus should represent a return to U.S. isolationism. Quite the contrary, adept management of a growing economy — even in a situation in which stimulus is created by incentivizing domestic investment and pur-chasing — can stimulate the revival of the U.S. as a net exporter of cash (investments).
Did you not read the headlines? Trump wants more spending:
Trump Says He’ll Spend More Than $500 Billion on Infrastructure
Donald Trump: we need more fighter jets, ships and soldiers
Trump calls for military spending increase
Military Experts: Trump Defense Spending Plans Would Break the Budget
I’m like only one of maybe eight people who actually reads this stuff.
Another thing that’s annoying are all these labels to describe a variation of something preexisting. It seems like every year, the ‘new right’ reemerges. How can it keep being ‘new’ every year? Or ‘The base’ vs. ‘The Establishment’. Is Trump The Establishment now that he has won?
These experts think Trump is like clay…to be molded to fit their preexisting beliefs about him, without actually understanding his objectives. It’s just funny…how pundits and experts think ‘voter ignorance’ is something that they are too smart to fall for, but they often are just as vulnerable to it.