Trump: Raise Taxes

By Hunter Wallace

Trump is going full nationalist on the GOP … deport all the illegals, curb legal immigration, but keep Medicare and Social Security, end disastrous free trade deals, and raise taxes on the rich:

“This has gone on long enough. All that anyone can talk about right now is how Republican voters are itching for someone to “stand and fight,” “speak his mind,” and “tell it like it is.” All right then, here goes.

Donald Trump is not a conservative, and it’s beyond time every Republican knows it. This MSNBC caricature of the GOP incarnate is getting heaps of praise from frustrated conservative base voters and unfortunately too much airtime from conservative political pundits because he evidently “tells it like it is.” …

He called the Club for Growth a “pack of thieves”:

“NASHVILLE, Tennessee–In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, GOP front runner Donald Trump is firing back at the Club for Growth.

“They’re a pack of thieves,” Trump told Breitbart News as he was leaving Nashville’s Rocketown facility. He had just finished delivering a high-energy speech to an overflow crowd of more than 1,000 people. …

“They [the Club for Growth] came to my office looking for money. I turned them down. That’s why they’re after me,” Trump told Breitbart News.

Earlier in the week, the Club for Growth attacked Trump for his proposal to penalize Ford Motor Company for putting a car manufacturing plant in Mexico rather than Tennessee.

“Donald Trump’s threat to impose new taxes on U.S. car companies will hurt the American economy and cost more American jobs,” David McIntosh, President of the Club for Growth, said in a statement.

“It should thrill liberals and Democrats everywhere that Trump wants to create new taxes and start a trade war to force American companies to work where he demands,” McIntosh added.”

Trump as the heir to Pat Buchanan:

“Today, that may have changed. The similarities between the Buchanan and Trump agendas are pretty clear: Both are harsh critics of free trade, both staunchly oppose illegal immigration, both spoke out against the Iraq War and find themselves at odds with the party’s hawks. They each wear accusations of racism, xenophobia, and hatred as a badge of honor for bravery against the forces of political correctness. And they share a certain style: blunt talk, raised voices, jabbed fingers, and pounded podiums. …

It’s not surprising, then, that Buchanan sees Trump’s rise as sweet revenge on a Republican establishment that wrote him off as a political liability and a hatemonger.”

I’ve followed Pat Buchanan for 14 years. He inspired my political awakening. More here on the lie that we are “Far Right”:

“Two decades ago, in the spring of 1996, Newsweek magazine described a group of voters it called the “radical middle.” Formerly known as the Silent Majority, then the Reagan Democrats, these voters had supported Ross Perot in 1992, and were hoping the Texas billionaire would run again. Voters in the radical middle, Newsweek wrote, “see the traditional political system itself as the country’s chief problem.”

The radical middle is attracted to populists, outsiders, businessmen such as Perot and Lee Iacocca who have never held office, and to anyone, according to Newsweek, who is the “tribune of anti-insider discontent. …

Our political commentary is confused because it conceives of the Republican Party as a top-down entity. It’s not. There are two Republican parties, an elite party of the corporate upper crust and meritocratic winners that sits atop a mass party of whites without college degrees whose world-views and experiences and ambitions could not be more different from their social and economic betters. The former party enjoys the votes of the latter one, but those votes are not guaranteed. What so worries the GOP about Donald Trump is that he, like Ross Perot, has the resources and ego to rend the two parties apart. If history repeats itself, it will be because the Republican elite was so preoccupied with its own economic and ideological commitments that it failed to pay attention the needs and desires of millions of its voters. So the demagogue rises. The party splits. And the Clintons win.”

The truth is that the GOP’s economic agenda is the real loser and albatross that repels White voters, particularly in the Rust Belt, and now that Trump is running and can cut out the donor class altogether, he is free to dump their policy agenda and focus on popular reforms.

Moral of the story: it was the donor class, their money, and their ability to purchase puppets that was the real roadblock all along.

About Hunter Wallace 12366 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. I don’t see any difference between them.

    Gates and Zuckerberg want the same thing for the same reasons. They want open borders to profit off cheap labor. They have an economic motive to destroy the country and turn it into Brazil.

    In Texas, Gentile billionaires like Bob Perry and Charles Butts have supported open borders for years, and have singlehandedly quashed all attempts to crackdown on illegal aliens even though Texas had a Republican supermajority in the state legislature after the 2010 midterms.

  2. “They have an economic motive to destroy the country and turn it into Brazil.”

    Maybe so–but Zuckerberg also has a racial motive.

  3. The same is true of the onion farmers in Georgia, the poultry industry in Arkansas, the citrus and blueberry growers in Florida, etc. It’s all about cheap labor and the profit motive, not some non-existent sense of racial loyalty.

  4. “He told Trump he hoped to be paid the $85,000.00 due him for fulfilling his end of the contract as it was the honorable thing to do …”

    Really? So this typically-clownish Limbaugh listener was of the view that it would be honorable for Trump to put him ahead of all of Trump’s other creditors? Sounds like a violation of bankruptcy law.

  5. “… not some non-existent sense of racial loyalty.”

    Really? You think Zuckerberg has no sense of racial loyalty?

  6. I think my 11:42 pm comment was being typed as you were posting your 11:40 pm comment, which, basically, is a reply to it. Okay–you think you know that Zuckerberg is somehow different from the two other Jews you named. I guess you’re right then.

  7. Sam said,”…We are taxed to death.

    Most of the monies are used to subsidize indolent negroes, wetbacks and useless, wasteful government programs…”

    The amount of money going to welfare pales in consideration to what the bankers got. Ron Paul got a very limited audit of the FED. After the crash the FED gave $16 Trillion to the banks to “save the housing market”. This is somewhere around $250,000 per family of four in the US. The housing problem could have been “solved” with every family in the US getting a house for 1% interest. And that’s not the worst of it. There have been studies that have concluded that the banks were given over $29 Trillion. At that rate ALL personal debt of all Americans could have been paid off and then every family would have had a house at 1% or no interest. What do you think that would do for growth? The reason we don’t have growth is the overall debt burden is too high to sustain growth. Only the very rich have money and they don’t spend it. A spiraling death trap like the third world. At the same time they are cartelling all aspects of our lives. Charging high rates for internet, water, power. If they could charge for air they would.

    Hear about the lady in Florida that ran her home on solar with a solar well pump. The utilities sued her and a judge ordered her to hook up to utilities she didn’t need and pay them. She had to move out of her house.

Comments are closed.