Gov. Sanford to primary Trump?

[Anti Globalist]

Yes because running a primary against a sitting president has worked out so well in the past. Only way to successfully primary Trump would be to get someone thats more famous than him. Problem is, thats pretty much impossible since Trump is the most famous billionaire in the country.

[kahless]

I am well aware what Ron said while in Congress.

+ No Amnesty
+ Abolish the Welfare State
+ End Birthright Citizenship
+ Protect Lawful Immigrants – As President, Ron Paul will encourage legal immigration by streamlining the entry process without rewarding lawbreakers.

After all that has been done then perhaps we can circle back to Enforce Border Security WITHOUT the threat of eminent domain and biometrics.


The problem is, only until those +'s are addressed first, the threat of eminent domain and biometrics becomes INCREASED. And you know it.

If you are well aware of it then why did you say this and call me out for opposing globalism/open borders?

Perhaps you need to sit Ron down too and explain the errors of his ways.

One thing I have learned in life that has allowed me to succeed - if you do not stand on principle, don't expect it in return.

You want restrictionism... what goes around comes around. And this government is known best for that.

I posted Ron's polices, they included restrictions. Ron is not the open borders globalist you try to paint him to be.

btw - I oppose biometrics and for the most part eminent domain (except if there an issue with securing the actual border from invasion). But that was not the discussion we were having.

[UWDude]

Here's one of my proofs, and I have a whole lot more. This is where my feet hit the actual pavement. Pretty good numbers, don't you think? And that's just 2 out of I can't remember how many I did ;-)

[]

is this how you deny your feelings? With charts?

answer me:
Do you want America destroyed, with or without your help?

All I see now is an attempt to draw votes away from an enemy, not promotion of "freedom and liberty", now that I know your real intentions. You have lied over and over again. Thousands of times, when cornered about your obvious bias, you would try to weasel out by saying things like, "I was merely posting facts" while omitting any and every good that Trump has ever done.

Crooks on the shadows, I see you.

[PAF]

If you are well aware of it then why did you say this and call me out for opposing globalism/open borders?

I posted Ron's polices, they included restrictions. Ron is not the open borders globalist you try to paint him to be.

btw - I oppose biometrics and for the most part eminent domain (except if there an issue with securing the actual border from invasion). But that was not the discussion we were having.

I have near exhausted all attempts to explain my position. It is either not good enough, or folks are too brainwashed to want to even try to understand.

Perhaps look up Reagans speech, maybe you'll understand.

All countries have borders, like cities and states. Having borders does not mean forcefully taking private property and giving it to the Fed, or building walls to restrict the freedom to travel freely.

Open borders, as you call it, is nothing more than preserving that right to freely travel. The problem is, this government continues to steal money from people and redistribute to any/all who want it. That is not the borders fault, or the people who own that land - that is the fault of the politicians who want to control people.

I make no position or opposition to borders. I am against a useless, costly, senseless physical wall which will instill into people that the government has any right to restrict any of our freedoms. Sacrificing one right does not preserve another right. Sacrificing one right will lead to other rights being taken away, because that is the only way to enforce it.

People like to bring up Ron's talking points about the border and try to equate it to a wall. It won't fly, because Ron Paul has repeated over and over again that while we should protect our borders (philosophically) to preserve each and every one of our freedoms, he vehemently opposes an actual wall because that would in fact not preserve any of our freedoms.

[Swordsmyth]

I have near exhausted all attempts to explain my position. It is either not good enough, or folks are too brainwashed to want to even try to understand.

Perhaps look up Reagans speech, maybe you'll understand.

All countries have borders, like cities and states. Having borders does not mean forcefully taking private property and giving it to the Fed, or building walls to restrict the freedom to travel freely.

Open borders, as you call it, is nothing more than preserving that right to freely travel. The problem is, this government continues to steal money from people and redistribute to any/all who want it. That is not the borders fault, or the people who own that land - that is the fault of the politicians who want to control people.

I make no position or opposition to borders. I am against a useless, costly, senseless physical wall which will instill into people that the government has any right to restrict any of our freedoms. Sacrificing one right does not preserve another right. Sacrificing one right will lead to other rights being taken away, because that is the only way to enforce it.

People like to bring up Ron's talking points about the border and try to equate it to a wall. It won't fly, because Ron Paul has repeated over and over again that while we should protect our borders (philosophically) to preserve each and every one of our freedoms, he vehemently opposes an actual wall because that would in fact not preserve any of our freedoms.

That's a nice set of lies but you have repeatedly opposed borders and border control of any kind, you want the invaders to be allowed to come and destroy liberty.

[kahless]

That's a nice set of lies but you have repeatedly opposed borders and border control of any kind, you want the invaders to be allowed to come and destroy liberty.

It is like a long running con on these forums. What is most annoying is not the differences between beliefs of people that post here. It is when a member is being dishonest to provide cover for the con job.

[UWDude]

It is like a long running con on these forums. What is most annoying is not the differences between beliefs of people that post here. It is when a member is being dishonest to provide cover for the con job.

The most amazing part is when they condemn trumps stated policies, and then when he is incapable of enacting them, they condemn him for failing.

[Swordsmyth]

It is like a long running con on these forums. What is most annoying is not the differences between beliefs of people that post here. It is when a member is being dishonest to provide cover for the con job.

And the mods ignore it no matter how dishonest or rude they act.

[PAF]

is this how you deny your feelings? With charts?

answer me:
Do you want America destroyed, with or without your help?

All I see now is an attempt to draw votes away from an enemy, not promotion of "freedom and liberty", now that I know your real intentions. You have lied over and over again. Thousands of times, when cornered about your obvious bias, you would try to weasel out by saying things like, "I was merely posting facts" while omitting any and every good that Trump has ever done.

Crooks on the shadows, I see you.

America is a place. It used to be a beacon of liberty, or it was intended to be. History shows that central planners had better ideas and created this "centralized" Constitution, and then the "central" bank that followed. Into nation building around the globe, fast forward to 1971 where the dollar was officially no longer backed by gold, and the further decline of the frn.

Politicians on both sides of the isle take MIC lobby money. We fund the UN, IMF, write up contracts (not signed by me), such as NAFTA and other crap, which stifles the true free market.

Do I want America destroyed? America is a place. It does not make decisions. What I would like to do is throw out all the bums in the White House, save 3 or 4, so that government will stop stealing my money, giving it to freeloaders and restricting my freedoms. I do not want or need biometric id. I do not want or need to be TSA'd, nor should I have to pay a stranger some sum of money for a "permit" because I choose to rewire my basement, certainly when I already have private insurance in case anything were to happen.

The problems are not with America. It is with people who have crap for brains and don't even realize where we are headed.

New World Order. It will still be called America, if that's what makes you happy. And the NWO doesn't give a flying flip if human beings are immigrants or not - ALL people will be controlled no matter where they are in the world. And THAT is the distraction.

You are willing to give up some liberties thinking you'll gain others. Private Property, Contract Rights, the freedom to travel freely. You give those up, you certainly don't deserve them. So the saying goes.

[Swordsmyth]

America is a place. It used to be a beacon of liberty, or it was intended to be. History shows that central planners had better ideas and created this "centralized" Constitution, and then the "central" bank that followed. Into nation building around the globe, fast forward to 1971 where the dollar was officially no longer backed by gold, and the further decline of the frn.

Politicians on both sides of the isle take MIC lobby money. We fund the UN, IMF, write up contracts (not signed by me), such as NAFTA and other crap, which stifles the true free market.

Do I want America destroyed? America is a place. It does not make decisions. What I would like to do is throw out all the bums in the White House, save 3 or 4, so that government will stop stealing my money, giving it to freeloaders and restricting my freedoms. I do not want or need biometric id. I do not want or need to be TSA'd, nor should I have to pay a stranger some sum of money for a "permit" because I choose to rewire my basement, certainly when I already have private insurance in case anything were to happen.

The problems are not with America. It is with people who have crap for brains and don't even realize where we are headed.

New World Order. It will still be called America, if that's what makes you happy. And the NWO doesn't give a flying flip if human beings are immigrants or not - ALL people will be controlled no matter where they are in the world. And THAT is the distraction.

You are willing to give up some liberties thinking you'll gain others. Private Property, Contract Rights, the freedom to travel freely. You give those up, you certainly don't deserve them. So the saying goes.

And you expect us to believe that Utopia can be achieved by allowing a communist invasion promoted by the people you CLAIM to oppose.

[otherone]

Yes because running a primary against a sitting president has worked out so well in the past. Only way to successfully primary Trump would be to get someone thats more famous than him. Problem is, thats pretty much impossible since Trump is the most famous billionaire in the country.

[PAF]

And you expect us to believe that Utopia can be achieved by allowing a communist invasion promoted by the people you CLAIM to oppose.

No worries there, Smytie. You may get your way, so the consensus is. And then in a few years you'll do what every other person has done for well over a hundred years: wonder why oh why, and not take ownership.

[kahless]

Will the Colonel defend our borders, deport illegals and build a wall?

[Swordsmyth]

No worries there, Smytie. You may get your way, so the consensus is. And then in a few years you'll do what every other person has done for well over a hundred years: wonder why oh why, and not take ownership.

Whatever happens will be better than allowing what you want.

[otherone]

Will the Colonel defend our borders, deport illegals and build a wall?

Why does he have to? Trump has already done all those things.

[UWDude]

America is a place. It used to be a beacon of liberty, or it was intended to be. History shows that central planners had better ideas and created this "centralized" Constitution, and then the "central" bank that followed. Into nation building around the globe, fast forward to 1971 where the dollar was officially no longer backed by gold, and the further decline of the frn.

Politicians on both sides of the isle take MIC lobby money. We fund the UN, IMF, write up contracts (not signed by me), such as NAFTA and other crap, which stifles the true free market.

Do I want America destroyed? America is a place. It does not make decisions. What I would like to do is throw out all the bums in the White House, save 3 or 4, so that government will stop stealing my money, giving it to freeloaders and restricting my freedoms. I do not want or need biometric id. I do not want or need to be TSA'd, nor should I have to pay a stranger some sum of money for a "permit" because I choose to rewire my basement, certainly when I already have private insurance in case anything were to happen.

The problems are not with America. It is with people who have crap for brains and don't even realize where we are headed.

New World Order. It will still be called America, if that's what makes you happy. And the NWO doesn't give a flying flip if human beings are immigrants or not - ALL people will be controlled no matter where they are in the world. And THAT is the distraction.

You are willing to give up some liberties thinking you'll gain others. Private Property, Contract Rights, the freedom to travel freely. You give those up, you certainly don't deserve them. So the saying goes.

You are willing to give up your country, in hopes of something better.
There will be no better, especially if the destruction is done the way you think it should be done.

I am sure you can find posts of mine, many years ago, wanting America to be destroyed, just as you have stated you wanted recently.

So I know where you are coming from.

I remember, as I counted the reasons in my head, as I damned America and Americans every day, a small voice asking, "but is there any way in hell something better would come after?" I knew the answer was "no way in hell", but I didn't care, because my righteous anger. (and it is righteous).

I remember asking, as I wrestled with my hatred of Americans, and the hypocrisy and country itself, "would the oppressed now, upon victory, rule with any more benevolence or freedom?" I knew the answer was "no way in hell", but I held on to my hatred, because righteousness and morals.

Now I look outside of America... ..where is the Freedom of Speech? Would I prefer the social credit system? Where is the right to bear arms? People are being thrown in prison for years for social media posts around the world.

So, yeah, you want America to be destroyed, because America is destroying itself. Reminds me of the logic of destroying Libya to save Libya.

[gaazn]

Mark Sanford is a good guy and a strong competitor when he's the underdog. He won his first race while starting near the back of the polls at maybe 1% and ended up beating the establishment candidate. An underdog in race for governor, he won also won against the establishment candidate. Still hated by the establishment, but he still has significant support in SC. His pro-smallbiz and pro-environment positions strengthens his anti-establishment credentials.

He should run even if big long-shot if doing so enhances his chances in 2024 because Pence is an awful candidate and is definitely no Trump.

[Brian4Liberty]

Sanford has made some bad decisions in the past. He has kind of lost some of his credibility. It would be nice for someone to stand for fiscal sanity. That used to be what the freedom caucus did, but their leaders have gotten too wrapped up in the Trump circus and Democrat conspiracies to focus on the budget and spending.

[Brian4Liberty]

Sanford went on the hardcore leftist show The View today. Another bad decision by Sanford. They are adding up.

He was able to mention that he wants to address the debt, but that was not the bulk of the conversation. They ignored it when he said it. It was all about criticizing Trump and calling him a racist. Uber leftist Joy Behar suggested that he run as an independent instead of Republican to siphon votes from Trump in the General Election, as the whole point is to defeat Trump.

Ironically, Sanford put his foot in his mouth by singling out Whoopi Goldberg as someone he could work with and she wouldn’t have to “go back where she came from”. If Sanford wasn’t playing useful idiot for their attacks on Trump, they would be attacking Sanford as the racist of the day.

He also praised John McCain, probably because his daughter is on the show.

Off to a great start Sanford.

[Warlord]

LOL Brian, thanks for that report. Doesn't sound too good.

[oyarde]

Sanford on the view . Ya that is really helping . WTF

[Swordsmyth]

Sanford went on the hardcore leftist show The View today. Another bad decision by Sanford. They are adding up.

He was able to mention that he wants to address the debt, but that was not the bulk of the conversation. They ignored it when he said it. It was all about criticizing Trump and calling him a racist. Uber leftist Joy Behar suggested that he run as an independent instead of Republican to siphon votes from Trump in the General Election, as the whole point is to defeat Trump.

Ironically, Sanford put his foot in his mouth by singling out Whoopi Goldberg as someone he could work with and she wouldn’t have to “go back where she came from”. If Sanford wasn’t playing useful idiot for their attacks on Trump, they would be attacking Sanford as the racist of the day.

He also praised John McCain, probably because his daughter is on the show.

Off to a great start Sanford.

Putting the loser in losertarian, the LP will be hard pressed to decide whether to put him or Amash at the top of the ticket.

[Brian4Liberty]

Putting the loser in losertarian, the LP will be hard pressed to decide whether to put him or Amash at the top of the ticket.

Sanford made it clear he would remain a Republican, just like John McCain.

[kahless]

Is McCain going to just die again?

[Krugminator2]

Sanford went on the hardcore leftist show The View today. Another bad decision by Sanford. They are adding up.

He was able to mention that he wants to address the debt, but that was not the bulk of the conversation. They ignored it when he said it. It was all about criticizing Trump and calling him a racist. Uber leftist Joy Behar suggested that he run as an independent instead of Republican to siphon votes from Trump in the General Election, as the whole point is to defeat Trump.

Ironically, Sanford put his foot in his mouth by singling out Whoopi Goldberg as someone he could work with and she wouldn’t have to “go back where she came from”. If Sanford wasn’t playing useful idiot for their attacks on Trump, they would be attacking Sanford as the racist of the day.

He also praised John McCain, probably because his daughter is on the show.

Off to a great start Sanford.

What's funny is McCain would hated Mark Sanford because Sanford voted for military cuts. McCain was the only Republican to vote against Mulvaney.

Winning over Communists to libertarianism is a pipe dream. Kissing the ass of leftists wins you praise right up to the point that you can actually win. Didn't work for Ron or Rand. McCain spent a career as a cuckold and they tarred him as racist extremist in 2008.

[enhanced_deficit]

With both Foxnews polls and latest Gallup poll today turning on MAGA, some GOP donors could already be quietly reevaluating their 2020 funding plans.





Related

Trump GOP challenger Mark Sanford: Claims against Biden 'reek' of 'good 'ol boy politics'

Add a Mark Sanford "Defenders of Liberty" Sub-forum ASAP

[Swordsmyth]

https://twitter.com/amandawgolden/st...00329896169472

LOL