Post: #1

Now that the Republican primary is over, it's time to turn our attention to what will be a tough and brutal general election campaign against the HAG.

In this thread and (perhaps) others to follow, I would like to outline some policy proposals that will help Trump gain the upper hand in this election. Before I start, a few comments to set the stage:

The most important observation is the most obvious one. The general election is very different from the GOP primary because voters who comprise the general electorate are very different from GOP primary voters. This is a truism, but it has very important consequences for the kind of campaign Trump needs to run.

Some of Trump's main themes in the GOP primary: building a wall; deporting illegal immigrants; banning Muslim non-citizens from entering the US; etc -- are a LOT less popular with the public in general than they are with the GOP primary electorate. To many independent voters these proposals sound extreme. In addition, their thrust is negative: they are all about keeping people away, walls, deportations, bans, etc. These proposals helped Trump with many Republican voters, but it can be a different story with the public at large.

Trump cannot completely back away from these policies in the general election, nor does he need to. But what he must do is to put a greater emphasis on other themes: themes which are positive, which can appeal to a broad swath of the general electorate, and which at the same time can allow Trump to differentiate himself from the HAG. These should be themes that Trump has already mentioned in the primary campaign, so it would not be as if they are just being invented now -- they simply need to be brought into the foreground and given a stronger and more pointed emphasis.

With that, I'd like to suggest the first such policy proposal which, in my opinion, is a great fit for all these requirements. Here it is:

Rebuilding America's Infastructure; or, in short, REBUILDING AMERICA.

What this means is easy to understand. America's infrastructure is crumbling; our bridges, tunnels, roads, airports, and even our Internet and communications infrastructure, are in disrepair. Compared to some places in the world our infrastructure might as well be that of a third world country. This needs to end, and NOW. It is time for a massive project to rebuild America. Trump is the president that will get this done.

Here is why this is such a perfect theme for Trump:

1. He believes it. He has mentioned this a number of times in the course of the primary, in many rallies, and -- pointedly -- in his remarks in New York on May 3rd, the night he became the presumptive and inevitable nominee.

2. It is a popular theme with the general public. People know that our infrastructure is in bad shape. They also know that a massive infrastructure investment project will jumpstart the economy and put millions of Americans to work. It appeals to both white collar voters who are consumers of infrastructure, and to blue collar voters who will know that they will be getting good high paying jobs rebuilding America.

3. It allows Trump to put forward a theme that no Republican president has ever done. In fact, it's more of a Democratic theme, and many "true conservative" types will scream and shout about "Big Government" and how evil it is, and how we don't have money for it. That's great -- it will allow the general public to see Trump for the pragmatic, centrist moderate that he is, someone who is not afraid to borrow ideas from the left and who only cares about America first, not any rigid ideology. And to the deficit whiners he can retort that interest rates are at record lows, and that he will save money by reducing our foreign entanglements, making other countries pay their fair share of the defense burden, and streamlining useless and wasteful government agencies like the EPA and others.

4. It allows Trump to remind the voters of the sphere in which he has the most real world experience and expertise: he is a BUILDER, he has built and rebuilt so many great structures all over the world, he loves it and understands it. So far, this has mainly been associated with the wall, but the wall is a structure meant to keep people out; it may be necessary but it should not be the only structure that Trump is associated with. Voters should think of him as someone who will lead the rebuilding of America's roads, bridges, airports, tunnels and so on. He will rebuild America and make it NEW and BEAUTIFUL.

In addition -- and this is very important -- Trump can say that he knows how to make these projects happen on time and under budget. The usual knock against infrastructure spending is that it's a massive boondoggle for corrupt construction companies that milk the taxpayer and take forever to get anything done. Trump can credibly say: that won't happen with me. He can say:

Quote:"Remember Obama's stimulus? We spent almost a trillion dollars and what did we get? How come all our infrastructure is in worse shape than ever? That's because it was run by incompetent politicians who have no idea what the hell they're doing. It won't happen that way with me folks, that I can tell you. We will REBUILD AMERICA and we will do it ahead of time and under budget. It's going to be so beautiful -- we're going to have the country we deserve".

He can say all of this with a straight face and voters will believe him because he really will know what he's talking about. Even if the HAG and the Democrats try to steal this theme from him, they just can't compete with his credibility and expertise when it comes to REBUILDING AMERICA.

Trump needs to be associated in voters' minds with America's future; he will Make America Great Again by literally rebuilding it, by making it a shining and sparkling place the reflects our proper role in the world. He will make it a country that looks and feels and runs great.

It's a win/win/win/win. Sometime soon, Trump should give a major speech about rebuilding American infrastructure; and he should make it one of the major cornerstones of his general election campaign.

Post: #2

If you like this suggestion and feel that it might be useful for Trump's campaign to see it, feel free to tweet it to some of the main Trumpers online. In particular, Bill Mitchell:

https://twitter.com/mitchellvii

But also anyone else that you think can get it to Trump's people.

Post: #3

This deserves to be seen by Trump's people.

Post: #4

LOZ Excellent Summary of Rebuilding America...

For additional consideration and discussion:

Trump Official Positions: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions

Trump Official Issues: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/issues/

Post: #5

Trump can also repeatedly state that the job of these good, honest American jobs were lost because of government focus on environmentalism. He can then amplify that into claiming that anti-male prejudice caused those jobs to vanish.

Post: #6

(05-04-2016 10:43 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Trump can also repeatedly state that the job of these good, honest American jobs were lost because of government focus on environmentalism. He can then amplify that into claiming that anti-male prejudice caused those jobs to vanish.

The point of this idea is that it's positive. It's about Making America Great Again by literally rebuilding it, so that we have the roads, bridges, tunnels and airports befitting a superpower, and so that we have a country which is second to none in every way and a pleasure to live in and travel through.

Trump can mention that he will severely curtail mostly useless agencies like the EPA, as part of his pitch for how the infrastructure spending will be paid for. And he should repeatedly stress how Obama's "stimulus" failed and how different it will be when he is in charge -- less spending for better results. But there is no need to dwell on things like "anti-male prejudice". It's about the country as a whole and it's for everyone, men and women, whites and blacks and hispanics and Asians. It's about Rebuilding America to make it a great place for everyone to live in.

Post: #7

Reading into this, do you suggest Trump follow the same strategy of not attacking Hillary, unless she attacks first?

Post: #8

One of the ways for us to send our idea to Trump: Contact Mike Cernovich (maybe through Roosh). Cernovich is acquainted with Milo Yiannopolous and Ann Coulter. Ann Coulter is one of the few people Trump follows on Twitter and has participated in some of his campaign events.
The proxy is a bit complicated but it can be done: RVF->Cernovich->Milo->Ann Coulter->Trump.

Post: #9

(05-04-2016 11:05 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Reading into this, do you suggest Trump follow the same strategy of not attacking Hillary, unless she attacks first?

Trump should treat Crooked Hillary Clinton -- with her Tired Clinton ideas -- exactly the same as he treated all his other rivals. Male or female, it makes no difference.

But let's keep this thread focused on the specific proposal(s). We can discuss general election tactics in a different thread.

Post: #10

Because of my line of work, I'd like to see a complete overhaul of the American food production system. This would have a great effect on the health and fitness of American men and women.

Our food system is way too influenced by the likes of McDonald's, Monsanto, Coca Cola, Pepsi, Cattleman's Association etc.

Americans eat too much fast food, junk food, processed meat, because it's cheap. Too cheap. Animal welfare might be seen as a liberal cause around here but it's pretty goddamn brutal and unnecessarily so.

On top of it the USDA and FDA need a complete overhaul for letting us be exposed to god knows how many chemicals and pesticides. They offer subsidies for large farms to overproduce food (using shitloads of pesticides and GMO crops) while almost zero subsidies are available for small farms.

If Trump is going to preach about free market and railing against lobbyists, I'd like to see this apply to the food production system as well. Offer incentives for independent farms that refuse to buy Monsanto products or use harmful chemicals. Stop subsidizing the food giants. If consumers have to pay double for a Big Mac, so be it.

Edit: My bad, I misunderstood the thread. I thought this was a list of things we'd like to see The Don fix in this country, not policy proposals to be used in the election.

Post: #11

HRC has already been attacking and victim trolling Trump as her victimizer. (A skill she became expert at living and married to Billy Bubba).

Gloves are now definitely off - suspect that Trump builds up a coalition behind the scenes while Bernie is still savaging her policies, Wall Street and George Soros connections.

When your adversaries are in a circular firing squad feud best to stay out of the line of fire.

Post: #12

Thank you, TLOZ.

A similar twitter chain involves Vox Day.

RVF -> Vox Day (Supreme Dark Lord on Twitter) -> Milo -> Ann Coulter's -> Mr. Trump

Post: #13

So we need a big government pump-priming project? America has been rotting because of too little government?

The more things change, the more they stay the same, it seems. To win, we need Trump to be more of the opposite of the whole reason we want him to win: a leftist. Let there be no learning from history.

This election is basically a final make-or-break test case for democracy. Either it's possible for Trump to win running on a right-wing platform of "Make America Great Again", or it's not. If it's not, that's all we need to know. If the electorate is willing to vote in someone like Hillary, to further their anti-social desires, and let America collapse in the long-run because of it, that's all we need to know.

What we don't need is Trump pandering to leftism. Then there was no point all along and all this excitement has been for nothing. He doesn't need to get in because he's Trump. That's pure cult of personality bullshit. He needs to get in because he actually gets how business works and will cut government interference in private life where appropriate. He's constantly said he's going to make savings by cutting government (slash Education and EPA etc).

Saying we need Trump to be more leftist so we can win is like saying we need the chick to be uglier so we can score her. It defeats the whole purpose of why we want him to win.

Post: #14

The Wall will be a big project in and of itself.


Actually this is one thing I would like to see be made part of the campaign going forward: I want to see the architectural plans of the wall. I have no doubt Trump has plans for this wall, and the wall is going to be an enduring legacy for the next century or longer. Lets make this a fantastic wall, it should be a work of art and a tourist attraction.

I do absolutely agree that we can afford to spend on our own infrastructure as well. Yes, I'm wary of government jobs spending as well. But lets be realistic: Our infrastructure in this country *is* in poor shape, and we can afford to stop throwing away billions and trillions of dollars a year in 'foreign aid' to shitholes that are ungrateful or outright hostile to us. Cash those checks to put Americans back to work while we try to figure out how to stop the gushing wounds of corporations outsourcing all of our jobs to China, India, etc.

Post: #15

Phoenix,

Who in this thread has advocated for a big government pump-priming project?

Post: #16

MMX2010,

Did you read OP?

Post: #17

I think his first moves will have to be based around the economy, trade deals etc, because the USA will need money to pay for many of his great policies.

For example, he might have to pay for the wall to be built, then get Mexico to pay. I believe he can do this, but he has to generate the money first.

I am not doubting his ability to turn America around, I'm just curious as to how he will do it.


My post is not that well articulated, so basically what I'm saying is: I think he needs to fix the economy first, how will he do it.

Post: #18

(05-05-2016 12:55 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  MMX2010,

Did you read OP?

Yes, the OP clearly states that the government-supported funds to rebuild our infrastructure will come from reductions in the EPA and other wasteful programs.

Thus, it is possible to simultaneously reduce overall government spending AND rebuild our infrastructure through government intervention.

Post: #19

My point is that 'rebuild our infrastructure' isn't the role of the state. Be that state headed by Trump or anyone else. The state should get out of the way and let the infrastructure build itself. The whole very reason that the infrastructure is rotting is that the state is so heavily involved in it.

There is no incentive for a political custodian of a piece of infrastructure to do more than the bare minimum to stop it collapsing. In four years, he's gone, he doesn't get to keep the infrastructure or it's profits, so he need only avoid a catastrophic event that hurts his reputation. This is why bullshit like this only happens in public infrastructure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Lee_l...re_scandal . An owner, on the other hand, does have a vested long-term incentive. So long as the state doesn't hurt that incentive with taxes, regulations, etc.

Individual citizens and private teams thereof build infrastructure just like any other business. Anyone who thinks 'infrastructure' is the role of the state need go no further than a few train trips in Japan to cast that myth aside. That fully private, multi-company rail network runs like well-greased clockwork.

Trump's only role should be withdrawing state impediments to private business. Heaven knows every other president after him will probably do the opposite. As he once said in a speech: (paraphrasing) "You need a guy like me for the next 8 years, after that you can spend the next 25 letting it rot again".

On the other hand, 'infrastructure' like The Wall is the role of the state. The leftists basically have it all upside down.

Post: #20

Isn't this just another transportation infrastructure bill?
It feels like "bringing back jobs through infrastructure spending" has been the job creation plan of every modern politician I can think of. I know it was a big Obama thing. I think it was a Romney thing, though I'd have to check.

In this election alone, everything you just wrote could've been cribbed off of Bernie Sander's job creation page:

Quote: "PUTTING 13 MILLION AMERICANS TO WORK
A PLAN TO REBUILD AMERICA
For most of our history, the U.S. proudly led the world in building infrastructure that grew our economy, gave our businesses a competitive advantage, and provided our workers a decent standard of living. Sadly, that is no longer the case.

Today, the U.S. spends less than 2 percent of GDP on infrastructure, less than at any point in the last twenty years. Meanwhile, Europe spends close to twice our rate, and China spends close to four times our rate. It is no wonder the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report now ranks our overall infrastructure at 12th in the world – down from 7th place just a decade ago.

The results are all around us:

One of every 9 bridges in our country is structurally deficient, and nearly a quarter are functionally obsolete. Almost one-third of our roads are in poor or mediocre condition, and more than 42 percent of all urban highways are congested. Transit systems across the country struggling to address deferred maintenance and 45% of American households lack any meaningful access to transit at all."

Or Hillary Clinton's page:

Quote:Boost public investment in infrastructure and scientific research. One of the best ways to drive jobs and improve our nation’s competitiveness is to invest in infrastructure and scientific research. Hillary has called for a national infrastructure bank that would leverage public and private funds to invest in projects across the country.

Post: #21

Phoenix, how is rebuilding the countries infrastructure "pandering to leftism" ?

It wouldn't be a ploy, it's desperately needed. It is literally crumbling, I sit on bridges in traffic that look a lot wrorse than what I've seen in Colombia for example. Rebuilding what needs to be rebuilt will require government spending and government coordination, thats just the facts of the current situation, whether one likes it or not. The reason it's crumbling is precisely due to political nonsense- what we need is realism, nationalism.

Libertarian ideals are not going to become reality quickly enough to rebuild what needs to be rebuilt before it's too late.

As an Australian living in Japan you may be fine with Americas infrastructure crumbling or Trump ultimately losing in order to pat him and yourself on the back for sticking to a rigid ideology, but as an American I am not ok with it, we have to live with it. We must deal with the situation as it stands today, in reality.

It is absolutely necessary from Trump to take a slightly different tack in the general election. If you want him to run a pure right wing or anti-government campaign in the general then he will likely lose.

He must appeal to some people in the middle, and even some of the left (as he has), in order to win. Doing so does not negate what he stands for or mean he's not who he says he is. It's similar writing a different version of your resume for a different employer- he needs to emphasize the skills that appeal to a different audience, it's as simple as that.

Trump doesn't care about political ideals- he only cares about what actually works, and in the end that is all most Americans care about as well. That is as it should be.

If you wanted conservative purism then you should have been supporting Ted Cruz, and you see exactly where that gets you. Or Ron Paul for his libertarian ideas, or dozens of others that never had nor will have a chance of getting elected.

On the other hand, Trump, with proposals like these, could get elected.

Quote:My point is that 'rebuild our infrastructure' isn't the role of the state. Be that state headed by Trump or anyone else. The state should get out of the way and let the infrastructure build itself.

These are all great words and ideas, but it's just fantasy right now in the U.S. It's not realism, it's not something that can or will happen any time soon.

Perfect is the enemy of good.

Keep waiting for this and I'll have another bridge collapse in my city.

Post: #22

Phoenix,

As a libertarian, you think the government is the initiation of force. As a former libertarian, I think government is simultaneously the initiation of force and a way to unite the people around a common goal.

Right now, it's Trump versus Hillary, Love versus Evil. If Trump loses, Hillary wins.

TLOZ's plan is brilliant because it allows people to unite around the common goal of building better roads and bridges. It is also positive: positive in emotional message, and positive in the philosophical sense that you're concretely imagining the roads and bridges, and concretely imagining your role in building them. Given that voting is also a positive action, chaining a series of positive images is a highly effective way of getting Trump elected.

Your argument stinks because it's negative. NOT negative in tone, but negative in philosophical action. "Witness Trump do nothing but get government out of the way, then wait for the magic to happen." Voters don't want to watch and do nothing; they want to participate and do something important.

So TLOZ's plan is better than your counter-argument.

Post: #23

(05-05-2016 02:29 AM)GlobalMan Wrote:  Rebuilding what needs to be rebuilt will require government spending and government coordination, thats just the facts of the current situation, whether one likes it or not. The reason it's crumbling is precisely due to political nonsense- what we need is realism, nationalism.

Libertarian ideals are not going to become reality quickly enough to rebuild what needs to be rebuilt before it's too late.

As an Australian living in Japan you may be fine with Americas infrastructure crumbling or Trump ultimately losing in order to pat him and yourself on the back for sticking to a rigid ideology, but as an American I am not ok with it, we have to live with it. We must deal with the situation as it stands today, in reality.

The personal labeling, character attacks, and dismissing of concepts because they can be grouped into 'ideology', is not debate worthy. You can do better than that.

The reality, the actual solution, is to sell as many of the bridges as possible. There is no such thing as 'this time it would be different'. Selling off the government-owned railways in Japan to the private sector left Japan with one of the best rail systems in the world. Selling off the bridges in America would logically do the same for the same underlying reasons -- personal incentive.

Government central co-ordination only works for war. It does not work for economy, as the genius central planners in the USSR proved. Even the best performing instances of nationalistic economic growth (such as South Korea under Park Chung Hee) were lead by businessmen (such as Chung Ju-yung) but with the support of government in a nationalistic sense.

(05-05-2016 02:39 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  As a libertarian...

Stay on topic.

(05-05-2016 02:39 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Your argument stinks because it's negative. NOT negative in tone, but negative in philosophical action. "Witness Trump do nothing but get government out of the way, then wait for the magic to happen." Voters don't want to watch and do nothing; they want to participate and do something important.

Incorrect.
The attitude that Trump should fix all our ills is a negation of our self-agency. That magic you sneer at, is everyday men and women going about their daily lives. The idea that 'Trump should fix it all' is a mockery of the human spirit, and an abdication of every man and woman's role to live their best and fullest lives, for the betterment of themselves and their country. Even Trump knows this -- we're going to make America great again.

Post: #24

(05-05-2016 05:17 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

(05-05-2016 02:29 AM)GlobalMan Wrote:  Rebuilding what needs to be rebuilt will require government spending and government coordination, thats just the facts of the current situation, whether one likes it or not. The reason it's crumbling is precisely due to political nonsense- what we need is realism, nationalism.

Libertarian ideals are not going to become reality quickly enough to rebuild what needs to be rebuilt before it's too late.

As an Australian living in Japan you may be fine with Americas infrastructure crumbling or Trump ultimately losing in order to pat him and yourself on the back for sticking to a rigid ideology, but as an American I am not ok with it, we have to live with it. We must deal with the situation as it stands today, in reality.

The personal labeling, character attacks, and dismissing of concepts because they can be grouped into 'ideology', is not debate worthy. You can do better than that.

Can you point out where I have done those things? Is correctly pointing out the ideas as "libertarian" an insult? It certainly isn't meant that way.

Stating your national origin and that you are not someone with a vested interest in America's future and thus may be more willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater is not a "character attack", I think it's an accurate summation of the tone of your first post.

I think you're being a little sensitive here.

I have dismissed some of some concepts not because they are an ideology, everything is an ideology, I've done so because they are in no way realistic given the current situation and current needs. They are ideals. For example, this:

Quote:The state should get out of the way and let the infrastructure build itself

The infrastructure of this nation of 350+ million people will not "(re)build itself" simply with the government getting out of the way.

We are not talking about a one train system. We are talking about massive nationwide deterioration in one of the largest nations on Earth.

If you can spell out how what you prescribe is anything but a nice sounding fantasy, in this situation, then please do so.

Post: #25

(05-05-2016 05:42 AM)GlobalMan Wrote:  Can you point out where I have done those things? Is correctly pointing out the ideas as "libertarian" an insult? It certainly isn't meant that way.

Stating your national origin and that you are not someone with a vested interest in America's future and thus may be more willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater is not a "character attack", I think it's an accurate summation of the tone of your first post.

It's deviation from the point at debate.

And if I didn't have a vested interest in Americas future, I wouldn't care less about Trump. America is the center of the western world. If it falls, so will we. If it rises, so will we.

(05-05-2016 05:42 AM)GlobalMan Wrote:  The infrastructure of this nation of 350+ million people will not "(re)build itself" simply with the government getting out of the way.

Even 350+ million people couldn't rebuild America's infrastructure? Are they all disabled? Trump's buildings, as a private businessman, do not crumble. That's why he has his high reputation -- which took decades to construct. He's north of 70 now. He has had personal lifetime incentive, as his sons will inherent ownership of his personal brand and his companies, as he did from his father before him. A government has no such incentive unless perhaps it's a monarchy. Which in the US it is not.

If you want to stop elephants going extinct, you sell them. https://ricochet.com/archives/privatize-the-elephant/

If you want bridges to stop collapsing, you sell them. Preferably to someone like Trump.

This is not ideological, unrealistic, or self-serving. It is purely fact.