…until just before the Republican convention. That means I listened to the words behind the red-meat circus of his rallies. The words were consistent. They still are, even his dumb economic positions. But the Left is screaming so loudly, they cannot hear them. And the Right refuse to hear them. So, I will quote what I reported about one of his many policy positions — his position on military murder and mayhem:

MOST OF Donald Trump's rally speeches lead to the conclusion that cutting the military-spending colossus (by making the rest of the world pay for its services) is one part of his strategy to turn the US economy around and put it on a sane economic footing. Perhaps defense corporations could manufacture "plowshares" or tiny homes, and put American workers back in the factories. At the very least, we know that Trump envisions policies that lessen cold war rhetoric and endlessly rising military costs, with spending lavished on so-called defense corporations

As for the ongoing Endless Wars™, Trump believes that nations should pay their fair share of the world's defense costs. He's looking at you, NATO. American workers can't afford to pay your share of your defense anymore. Especially when your people enjoy national health care and the US worker class lives in a dystopian society where they are forced to pay four times more for a lot less.

Trump's view of Israel is in line with this. He suggests that it's Israel who should pay aid the US ($3 billion per year) and not the other way around. Why should American workers carry the burden of Israel's lavish defense costs on their backs? He questions why the US military is not fully reimbursed by Israel when it labors to serve Israel's strategic advantage. The US takes on grave risk when it destroys select Middle East nations so that Israel's hands are clean. And again, why are US workers forced to pick up this tab with nothing to show for it but terrorist blowback in their homeland?

Trump spoke before AIPAC and assured Israel's powerful lobby that he fully supports the nation of Israel. He said he would continue to fight their wars (and support the ethnic-cleansing of the Shiites across the Middle East). But he told the supporters of his campaign that he would invoice Israel for US military costs, to be paid in advance. To Trump, the current arrangement is a lousy deal for the American people. Trump is a business man, not an ideologue. It's abundantly clear to him that the American people cannot afford to be philanthropists to a religious state on the opposite side of the planet. The American people can't even afford to feed themselves, collectively. One in four of American children are chronically hungry.

One thing that has infuriated the Republican Neocons, and driven them and their donors to Hillary's campaign, is Donald Trump's businesslike attitude about the costly Endless Wars™, which are driven by the Neocon ideology for global supremacy. Their outrage is mirrored by the US war profiteers of the defense industry, who had dutifully logged donations to Hillary from the beginning. They are determined to drown out Trump's message, by any means, before it becomes part of the national conversation. As for the financiers who launder the war profits and run the casinos for the spoiled, do-nothing Plutocrats-of-America — they are keeping their heads down in this final stretch. They invested heavily in Hillary in advance by sitting through her "top secret" top-dollar speeches. Meanwhile, the Party's core constituency is silently seething because Donald Trump broke their political Party and he's not even a Republican!

Naturally, his position is politically incorrect: refusing to fight for anybody or anything unless unless the US gets reimbursed, up front. He is a businessman, after all. Isn't the Left even curious why the Neocons hate Trump so violently?

Keep in mind, he can no more implement non-war than he could do any of the nutty fever dreams that Americans are having about Trump. Presidents are fairly powerless without congress. And the Democrats hate him almost as much as the Republicans do. He gets no respect.

A Federal government that does absolutely nothing is a dream come true for most of the world.

there is no difference. A vote for clinton is a vote for clinton. In fact, one might argue the former (eyes open) is worse because that person has the knowledge to know better. That person is arguably more responsible for the conseuqences than the unthinking fool. I would argue it's cowardice that motivates a knowing person to vote for someone untenable like clinton.

the word "let"--it makes absolutely no sense to vote for her to protect somebody from Trump.

If she can rig a primary six ways to Sunday and face no consequences for that crime, she can rig the general too. Probably she will. In any case, your vote for her is nothing but optics: a contribution to her cover story, her ridiculous, endless search for credibility.

I'm sorry to be insulting, but it's just plain stupid, after we've seen Hill rig the primaries, to think that she can't rearrange the results in the general too. Unless you think Trump has better election fraud resources than she does--and I'd like to hear that case made, because on the face of it, it looks like all the Democratic and Republican fraud resources are at Hillary's disposal. The Bushes are certainly on her side.

Think about that: Bush Republicans and Clinton Democrats in positions of authority over our elections, from Secretaries of State on down, willing to rig the election for HRC. I find it highly unlikely Trump, even with all his money, is going to be able to buy an operation that matches up.

The (only) silver lining in all this is that neither you nor anyone else needs to vote Hillary out of fear.

Don't forget that Hill's already said that Bill's already going to be put in charge in certain areas - if you see a crooked dick coming to screw you, duck and cover! Never vote for it!