Trump's position on Eminent Domain is reason enough not to vote for him.

are you really going to comment in here or are you just marketing? If you hang out, you'll get more of a response. ....

Eminent domain is a holdover from medieval times. The basic idea is that the king owns all land. You have your property at the sufferance of the crown. That is what a real estate title is: the king make you the Duke of York. Change your religion, and the king will take the title away. It is the crown's to grant and revoke.

Another example is "treasure trove." (We do not have it in the USA. In the UK, it was changed about 10 years ago.) The theory there, again, is that the king owns all land, is that any gold or silver found on the land must belong to the king. The law in the UK was changed, not repealed. It was because of all the Roman coins that were and are being found with metal detectors. There was no way the Crown had any use for them. The British Museum could not handle the inputs. Collectors pointed out that these things are common, not rare -- and being washed with a 2% silver solution as late empire coins were, does not make them "treasure trove." So, the (ahem) "compromise" new law is that all discoveries must be offered first to the Crown, and the British Museum will decide which (if any) are worth keeping. And the finder must be reimbursed for their value. But it is still illegal to keep the discovery secret.

Eminent domain: Your land today; your inventions tomorrow.

Trump loves eminent domain when he can use it to loot from property owners.
What's good for General Bullmoose is whats good for the USA.
(Always hated that phrase but it fits Trump so [perfectly.)
Eminent domain has absolutely no valid use on commercial projects. If they must have property owned by others they must buy it in the free market. Private property rights are the bedrock of individual liberty.

There is no "Gulch" position about this. There is only the position of those who are here as individuals. Personally I think almost all cases of use of Eminent Domain are profoundly wrong and against the spirit of the founder's intent. Any dictation by government of price and forcible taking must always be questioned vigorously.

As I learn about objectivism, one of the issues I am having trouble with is that of property ownership. If one acquires ownership of property by putting it to productive use, shouldn't someone who can put it to more productive use have a better claim?

Clearly I don't like eminent domain, but it does seem consistent with the idea of property belonging to the one who can best develop it.

The New Hampshire debate was full of action and in the episode, several clips are played to show what happened at this debate. Rubio literally repeated the exact same phrase four times, Donald Trump was booed several times! And is eminent domain as necessary as Donald Trump says it is? All this and more on this episode.