I would repeat, only Trump has the guts, rudeness and 'give a fuucckkk' type attitude to take political and economic problems head on. Mitt Romney has business background but he is more of a politician now than a turnaround type of guy. Other than that US should come under military dictatorship of joint committee of generals with a sole purpose of curing the ailments of the economy............ofcourse presiding over a layer of economic advisors with proven records of good performance in the market and economic predictions. Robert Rubin, Bill Gross type names come to mind right away.
What republican wants to be in charge when the American people are forced to accept massive cuts in entitlement spending and have their personal taxes increased 20-50% ? Case in point, look at the outrage Scott Walker ( a republican) drew when he attempted government reforms in Wisconsin yet Coumo (a dem) in New York is doing the same thing and not one word of dissent or protest. Just like how the left benefited when the economy "was driven into the ditch" by the right. The right and the country itself will benefit when the economy is ultimately driven of the cliff. As painful as it sounds it's better to let the boon and his leftist socialist ideologues remain in charge for another four years and be in charge when the economy ultimately implodes. At that point a Chris Christie / Paul Ryan / Rand Paul type can step in and dismantle the current socialist, bureaucrat driven economy constructed over the last 50 years.
Did you notice how we just ignored your post? That's because we are not interested in facts. We are far more tuned in to the false reality created by the media, and we base or views largely on the media and political campaign rhetoric. We are poor readers, but above average in our ability to grasp a sound bite and store it away for later retrieval. We are exceptionally good at comprehending images and can usually retain them even after just 3 seconds of viewing. That's where our core abilities lie. You have, without realizing it, stumbled on a political enigma, i.e., the labels "Republican" and "Democrat" don't mean quite what they meant 75 years ago. The idea that Republicans are fiscal conservatives and that Democrats are big spenders likely goes back to the depression era, Roosevelt's "New Deal," and the World War which helped bring us out of the great depression by putting almost everyone to work. The heavy borrowing during the Roosevelt years contrasted with his predecessor, Hoover's, comparatively tight-fisted policies may be the origin of the modern day myth. In recent years neither party has exercised much fiscal constraint. You are correct, though, that the Democrat administrations have been, on average, better stewards of the Treasury and borrowed less. We see now, however, huge leveraging up by the Federal Government in an effort to rescue the country from its worst recession since the Great Depression. Oddly, in spite of this, the Obama borrowing does not seem all that outsized when laid along side the Reagan borrowing expressed as additional debt taken on as a fraction of GDP. What makes the Obama borrowing look so terrible is that it is occurring at the same time that revenues have been greatly reduced because of the recession. Reagan was a "supply sider" and it was claimed that if you reduced taxes, revenues would actually grow. That happened in the nominal sense, but because of inflation and simultaneous heavy borrowing, and the borrowed money having been pumped into the economy largely via the defense industry, it is very likely incorrect to attribute revenue growth to reduced tax rates. Many economists today look askance at the "supply side" economics of the Reagan years.
Not even Republicans themselves have claimed that for quite a long time now. They are simply the "low tax" party, regardless of fiscal/infrastructure implications.
Don't see how we can afford that. When Odumbo took office, the national debt was $9T... if there isn't significant spending reform in the next 2 years, the debt will be $17-$18T when he leaves office. Why can't everyone see that DOUBLING THE NATIONAL DEBT IN ONE PRESIDENTIAL TERM DOES GREAT HARM THE COUNTRY, OUR FUTURE, AND THE FUTURES OF OUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS? GREEDY BASTARDS! POLITICOS AND TIT-SUCKING PARASITES!!