[TheRealThing]

What about your list was well sourced? You rattle off lists of names, as if those names should influence people to support Trump.

As I pointed out, Laffer dismissed Trump's threats of imposing high tariffs on Chinese products and Trump's promises to deport millions of illegal aliens as political rhetoric. In fact, Laffer has stated that he expects Trump to favor free trade policies if elected instead of pursuing the protectionist policies that he has espoused on the campaign trail.

So, who do you trust more, Donald Trump or Art Laffer? Art Laffer's assessment of Trump's economic plan is based partly on his assumption that Trump will not keep some of the most popular promises he has made during his campaign.



Maybe Laffer's prediction of which promises Trump will keep and which ones he will break will come true. My point has been and remains that listing endorsements with no context is pretty meaningless. When Ronald Reagan took office, his views on capitalism and economic freedom were well established. Laffer did not have to predict what kind of economic plan Reagan would adopt once he was elected president because Reagan's political philosophy had remained virtually the same since the early 60s and he put his ideas to work as California's governor.

Believing that Trump will create the same kind of economic climate as Reagan did requires a great deal of faith in Trump. Laffer has such faith and I do not. That is not an insult aimed at Laffer, it is an insult of Trump.

The above quote was taken from an August, 2015 Washington Post article but I recently watched a Laffer interview in which he made the same points as he made in the August article. I do not pretend to have Laffer's economic credentials, but my opinion of Trump's honesty is just as valid as Laffer's or anybody else's.

Opinions are necessary ingredient in any debate. What separates debate winners and losers is the ability to support those opinions with facts. There is no better example than our debate over whether Colorado held a primary election to pledge delegates to the GOP national convention in 2012.

You were doomed to lose that debate when you took the position that a well documented historical event - the non-binding 2012 Colorado GOP Caucuses - never happened. When the facts no longer support an opinion, it is time to adopt a new opinion. Adopting an opinion that is not supported by facts is worse than having no opinion at all.

Excuse me? LOL

Two things, first Laffer is all-in for Trump, I've heard him speak too many times about his support for Trump and his financial plan for that to be in question, even in your mind.

Secondly, I knew you would eventually run home to bring that back up, since in your mind getting the last word, or thinking you got the last word seems to seal the deal for you. And even though you can't seem to get your story exactly straight about what I actually said, still, it is hard to believe you would stick your head back into that same noose but here you are doing it anyway. So, even in watching the video, confusion still clouds your better judgment I see?

As fate would have it, I had actually conversed with Joey Bunch on a personal level in times past. According to the article the staff of The Denver Post do not agree with you. And it is as I said before and not that you will listen this time, but I will lay it out again just this once. If you're right, that means the staff of the Post either lied or they are wrong. You went to Politico or some such site and checked to make a point with me and they have it wrong according to the understanding and the words of the Coloradans I've read. The Colorado delegation of 2012 was bound to vote for Santorum in the first round. That according to senior political correspondent Joey Bunch.

Now, don't get me wrong. I know you're a front line economist, a psychiatrist, and a news anchor. I had just not considered that you were a lawyer and an expert on Colorado GOP rules and a historian as well. I know, I know, I should have been able to figure that out on my own. nicker:

But please, don't give up on this. Heck, you could probably bring it up a couple hundred more times before you could accept you're wrong.