I have several BRILLIANT ideas for posts that I conceived in my mind whilst I was in Nashville and on the drive home. However, being an old fa….uh….fogey, I’m too tired to write. One of our readers suggested a forum for you guys to talk politics.
Good idea. I’ve not watched the debates, just a few snippets and clips. I’ve got it DVRed, but the Yankees were beating the Red Sox and I lacked the mental energy to engage. My impressions.
Donald Trump is a moron – how can anyone take him seriously? On Twitter last night he called Megyn Kelly a bimbo. Can you imagine anyone but him getting away with that. Time to end this experiment in imbecility America. Dump the Trump!
From his time at SEND and from the clips I saw last night, I’m standing in the station considering boarding the Marco Rubio bandwagon. He’s smart. He’s sincere (or he fakes it well). I like what I’ve seen.
For the last couple of weeks, I’ve been growing more impressed with Carly Fiorina. She was the winner by TKO in the “b-team” debate, and may start moving up. I’m thinking “Rubio-Fiorina” would look good on a bumper sticker. Or “Fiorina-Rubio.”
Rand Paul is going to sink like a stone. Just not connecting. I was never a fan of his dad, but he seems to want to be a combination of quirky outsider like his dad and establishment insider. It’s not working. Plus, in a world of terrorism, I’m not convinced his foreign policy isn’t a recipe for disaster.
There are a few others who seemed to make good impressions on quite a few – Huckabee, Cruz, even Christie impressed some folks (he’s not an option for me.
So, what did you think?
I didn’t watch the “kid’s table” debate, but I heard Carly Fiorina did very well. I’m going to make a point to learn more about her. I watched the main debate, and I’m beginning to organize the candidates into tiers based on my likelihood of voting for them in the primary. Tier 1 includes my favorites as of right now. Tier 2 includes folks on the outside looking in, but whom I haven’t ruled out. I don’t see anyone outside these tiers getting my vote.
Tier One: Cruz, Rubio, Huckabee
Tier Two: Walker, Fiorina, Paul
In the context of talking about his past company bankruptcies and support of liberal candidates and causes, Trump admitted that he did whatever he could to advance his own interests. What makes anyone think he’s not doing the same thing now as a candidate?
I’d like to know why some on this board are stridently anti-Huckabee. I’ve seen the accusation that he’s just running to swell his mailing list. I’m not convinced that’s a fair accusation.
I am anti-Huckabee for president. His hucksterism can be checked and his mail list fundraising was craven and demagogic. It would be assessing his state-of-mind to say he is running to expand his list, so I’ll back off of that.
That said, he does well in debates and is a solid guy. Not a chance of getting the nomination but has a solid following.
Carla Fiorna- No. She has close ties to the CIA. She is for bulk collection by the NSA which is in violation with the 4th amendment.
Jeb Bush- No. He worked with Bloomburg on a council that Jeb chaired that supported planned parenthood. While he pushed for Common core. Jeb is for amnesty and is a warmonger.
Chris Christi- No. He is for NSA data collection illegally. He supported the Patriot act which violates the 4th amendment. He is a warmonger and supports gun control.
Marco Rubio- No. Both parents are foreigners from Puerto Rico. He should not be qualified to run. He is also a warmonger.
Ben Carson – No. He supports the right to bear arms in rural places but not cities. He is also against informed consent.
Ted Cruz- No. He isn’t qualified to run for president. His dad is from Puerto Rico (or Cuba I can’t remember. ) He is for the bill of rights and constitution. He also voted for the TPA the first time but no on the 2nd. The TPA gave fast track authority to bring up treaties like TPP for vote without amending it and no more than 20 hours for debate.
Trump- Mabe. He needs to be more clear on issues. Is he a springboard for Hillary to win? He donated mostly to democrats and to Jeb so he donates to rhinos and socialist democrats. On issues like immigration he is correct.
Rand Paul- Yes. He is spot on with NSA. He killed the Patriot act provisions that allowed illegal spying on U.S. citizens. He fought against planned parenthood. He is not a sell out he is what we need as president.
Graham- No. He voted for TPP. He is for patriot act. He is a rhino.
Having foreigners as parents disqualifies you to be president? I can’t tell if this is racist or not.
Maybe not racist…Xenophobic would be better.
Bill Mac, that’s an interesting statement. Not sure what it means.
Also, a “no” on Cruz because he is FOR “the bill of rights and constitution”?????
First, Puerto Rico is a territory of the United States. Its residents are official US Citizens.
Second, Rubio’s parents are from Cuba, not Puerto Rico. (Cruz’s father was Cuban as well.) And Cuban refugees, historically, have voted Republican and tend to be Conservative in their politics (seeing as they ran away from the Communist dictatorship of Cuba they tend to vote in reaction/opposition to policies and politicians that are close to what they ran away from).
Third, Rubio was born in the United States. Like it or not, that is a fact.
Seeing as you cannot even get two candidates personal history correct, why should anyone listen to you? To say nothing of your clear and complete total misunderstanding of the United States Constitution. But then again, I have come to expect this from Paul-bots.
Paul fell off the big boy stage last night. Fiorina will replace him
Puerto Rico is a US territory. Residents are US citizens. Comment is dumb.
“Trump Maybe”….have you changed your mind since the CNN interview and his trash mouth statements. If my 43 and 48 year old kids said things like that I would still sent them to their room
Do I want my 14 yo grandson hearing a Pres of the US talk such trash mouthed, no I don’t think so. It is bad enough that their sports stars beat their wives and take drugs. Don’t ned Trump for Pres.
Would be interesting to see if the 40 year olds comply.
Carly Fiorina ran a Fortune 500 company into the ground and was fired. I just can’t bring myself to like her.
I think the most impressive was Governor Kasich, if this is how to spell his name, he had some great answers and was likable. I look for him to be the one to run against the democrats.
Kasich was directly appealing to Millenials and I would say he also interested Republican moderates, Reagan Democrats, and independents. Unless the polling work he did to select his statements is fabulous, it works in Ohio to the detriment of being able to win the nomination.
In other words: he probably is better at purple states but maybe not so much red ones.
Greg, I think that is a good analysis of Kasich. I just don’t think he can put enough fire in the base. Also, I don’t like purple.
I only watched the “main” debate (due to work schedule) so I can only speak to that.
Cruz, Walker, and Huckabee looked the most Presidential in nearly every aspect. While I did not agree with every point they made/supported, I think all three could win the general election and become the next President of the United States.
Rubio, I believe, is on the borderline of joining the previous three. I don’t think he stood out as the Conservative solution last night, but he did show he would be a good solution. Maybe with a little more work he will make it.
Carson was the most “un”-politician I have ever scene. He was the normal guy that people love to spend time with. He is the type of guy one would invite to speak before some big group gathering or something….wait…never mind on that last part. Unfortunately I don’t think he has the experience or temperament to be President, but who ever the nominee becomes better select Carson to be their Health and Human Services Secretary or something is very very wrong.
Christie, Paul, Kasick, and Bush all for different reasons gave reason for me not to support them. Christie, Kasick and Bush all showed they were a bit too moderate for my taste. Paul just seemed like he was ticked that Trump usurped him as the resident renegade.
Ahh Trump. I am by no means a prophet, but I do believe in discernment, and my “uh-oh” meter was going haywire overtime he spoke. Something does not sit right about him for me. He has a documented past of being very liberal on many issues, and while people can change, that still concerns me. He takes any opposition to himself, or his ideas as a personal attack (sounds like he would fit in with us bloggers quite nicely). He talks a big game on running on his own money and not being subservient to special interests, and then makes a big deal on how he has done that very thing his entire career. I do not believe he truly wants to be the Republican nominee for President. I believe something else is going on, whether it is just someone who is board and wants to have some fun at others expense; someone who is trying to stir things up for the good of the party (I hope it is this); or someone who is actually a plant sent by someone else for the sole purpose of destroying the GOP field allowing someone else to become President. I hope I am wrong, but I fear the last one.
As for the prior debate and Carly Fiorina, from the clips I have seen both of and after the debate (like how she intellectually humiliated Chris Mathews…which I admit is not hard) i think she has cemented herself as the most likely VP Choice for whoever takes the nomination.
“I believe something else is going on, whether it is just someone who is board and wants to have some fun at others expense; someone who is trying to stir things up for the good of the party (I hope it is this); or someone who is actually a plant sent by someone else for the sole purpose of destroying the GOP field allowing someone else to become President. I hope I am wrong, but I fear the last one.”
You ain’t the only one who smells something fishy down on the boardwalk
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/07/politics/trump-clinton-cnn-lemon-phone-call/index.html
Thanks for putting my thoughts into words. Saved me a lot of time.
I don’t think Trump is out of it yet. Although I think Kasich will be the one running against the democrats, Ben Carson was clearly the most intellectual, but congress doesn’t want president’s to think on their own, and I think it’s a shame. Ben Carson would get my vote without any questions. I do like Kasich because I don’t think he is that close to the Tea Party, although I could be wrong.
Jess,
I like Carson too. Kaisich is a solid guy as well.
Being that I don’t think there’s a dimes difference in most Rs and the Ds when it comes to governing, I’ll ride the Trump wagon as long as possible. I don’t think anyone can buy him off for special interests. And a lot of what he is saying resonates well with me.
It’s okay with you that he called Megyn. Kelly a bimbo?
No, that was a mistake. He shouldn’t have. But right now I’ll rather have that risk versus having another Mitch McConnell compromising type. I’m just not sold on any of the others as having the guts to throw special interest lobbies out of the white house and stand up to the opposition party and say “Get the #%&* out of my office!”
“But right now I’ll rather have that risk versus having another Mitch McConnell compromising type.”
Don’t get me started on McConnell who is 100% establishment compromiser and I give lots of blame to for not fighting Obamacare tooth and nail when it was possible to do so. But be careful, he is a good friend to Mohler. Mohler’s daughter even got an internship in his office a perk given out to close friends.
What I read of McConnell today – I wish I lived in his state so I could vote against him!
McConnell and really all the leadership in the R party have been huge disappointments to conservatives for years. They’ve been scared out of their minds ever since O got in office. Someone like Trump, IMO, won’t be scared of for example Chuck Schumer the next D leader in the Senate).
As for friends with Mohler, I could not care less who his friends are in the evangelical world. What good has that done?
After the way she set the tone of what was supposed to be an examination of presidential candidates and relevant issues, Kelly turns it into a national enquirer session complete with yellow-journal investigative scourges, “bimbo” was light ( if he did indeed call her that) . I’m surprised he didn’t call her worse. Just heard Mark ale in say the same thing. If they could get past one another, Trump and Rand Paul might make a good team.
That you would EVER justify that kind of language about another human being, and about a lady, says a lot about your character – and perhaps explains why you are in favor of Trump. He demonstrates no self-control in his words and you support his despicable insulting words. You should examine yourself, Scott.
To say that calling a woman a “bimbo” is okay, or that it was “light” – well, frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself.
Dave:
Correction. You say “I say it’s okay”. Typical of you always putting your own words into the mouths of others
.
I said, “I’m surprised he didn’t call her worse.”
You said I said calling her a “bimbo” is okay.
Your judgment and comments about my character are always a part of your interaction with me Dave….and I’m afraid that demonstrates more about your CHARACTER and its insufficiencies than any you find in mine.
You have a tendency to pop off before you think.
Also a sign of flaw in character. You ain’t no poster boy.
Scott, it is unthinkable that we would do anything but reject Trump’s boorish words. You can play games any way you wish. You can parse your words as you please. But you gave cover to Trump for using a derogatory and sexually insulting term.
It was not Megyn Kelly’s job to lob softballs at Trump. She was being a journalist. Would that the MSM would do the same with HRC in their interviews.
You defended Trump and spoke not a word of rebuke for his demeaning words.
Worse then “Bimbo”…”bleeding from the eyes and wherever else” Completely unacceptable for anyone and characterizes the lowest kind of human being.
I went into the debate thinking Trump would get my vote…no way now he showed himself for what he is. If he runs a third ticket he will split the conservative vote and solidify a Dem. win. He will be responsible for driving the final nail in the coffin of America. If he does run a third ticket he will prove that he has no interest in the welfare of the nation and will show himself to be an arrogant bag of wind who is only interested in Donald.
Driscoll called women much worse years before he imploded and it did not seem to be such a huge issue as he had “correct doctrine” and “preached the Gospel”.
Consistency is a good thing in these matters.
“Driscoll called women much worse years before he imploded and it did not seem to be such a huge issue as he had “correct doctrine” and “preached the Gospel””
Lydia, you assume too much here. You assume that there was no criticism of certain comments Driscoll made. Or, have you read every comment stream on the internet in their entirety related to Driscoll and thus concluded that he got a pass because of his doctrine?
Lydia
Re Driscoll a major difference. To be honest I thought he was a disaster waiting to happen from day one. That is not hindsight I have material that I can provide where that was my position from years age. I will not speak for others but I am certainly not alone.
Second he is not leading the nation in the highest office.
I think Megan baited the bear and should not complain that the bear growled.
Fox News came off as a tabloid organization wanting to insert itself into the debate rather than moderate. As a debate forum, the format was abysmal in my opinion.
I don’t think she drew anything out of Trump that most people did not already know was there. She wrestled with a pig. The pig enjoyed it and she came out stinking. So much for objectivity.
PS–Trumps greatest weakness is that as a politician he has to “speak.” I don’t see how he will overcome who he is.
Les: C’mon, tell me you’re joking. He’s an idiot. This whole campaign is a sideshow. He said he’d put Sarah Palin in his administration!
No Bill I’m not joking. I’m tired of compromisers. And I happen to like Sarah Palin.
Les: You’re killing me.
Me too Les. What makes Sarah Palin any less qualified than the rest of the line-up.
In fact, what makes any American that can get ELECTED unqualified?
Mean’t that I’m in agreement with Les about Palin.
Les
I think this is the first time I have disagreed with you (Cardinal fans must stick together :-)). I like Palin, Trump oh my, not anymore.
Idiots aren’t billionaires
You can make a lot of money and still be a moral idiot. This man is a megalomaniac, immoral self-absorbed, narcissistic brute who thinks he’s above the rules and answers to no one but himself.
Other than that, he’s a great guy.
Trump is like some bloggers in SBC life. Some of what he says I agree with, some of it I don’t but admit there is room for debate, and some of what he says is obnoxious bloviation. When that OB becomes BO and starts to overwhelm everything else he says, its time for him to take a seat and be quite. His most recent comment on Megyn Kelly and “blood” makes me wish he develops chronic constipation AND diarrhea for the rest of his life. I know of no greater curse.
Then qualify it as a moral idiot, or immoral, which I’d agree with. But the man is not an idiot. He’s single handedly changed the debate and hopefully gotten us past the PC attitude that is crippling this nation. He zeroed in on that from the beginning, that’s not the earmark of an idiot. Rude and crude, yes. Idiot, far from it
Yes, he’s changed the debate, kind of like a room full of adults trying to talk while a monkey dances in the corner, screeching and throwing feces at them changes the debate.
That he is garnering a following at all makes me despair.
So do you believe that debate last night would have revealed anything if he wasn’t running? It would have been a 2 hour anoo fest. A PC spectacular. Trump has served a purpose a, and in the long run, it will benefit the country. Politics is full of people afraid to offend anyone. Kind of like some preachers. You don’t have to be across like Trump to be honest, and we saw more honest opinion last night than any debate I’ve ever watched.
Snooze fest and crass
Yep. Because of Donald Trump, the debate ratings were higher than any other in history. Trump is drawing the ratings, and 24 million people were exposed to candidates making their case for conservative solutions that make since.
Dave:
You can be a “preacher” and be a “moral idiot” as well. Plenty of news stories attesting to that fact.
“Trump is a narcissistic, immoral, self-absorbed brute” according to Miller. If Trump calling Meaghan Kelly is a sign of my lack of character Dave, what does your assessment of Trump say about yours?
Don’t do as I do….Do as I say do must be your modus operandai………speaks tons about your “character”.
Scott, you want to make this about me, and your personal hatred for me. Fine, let’s address this.
I described Trump. He is a megalomaniac. He is immoral. He is self-absorbed and he is a brute. A bully.
Those are descriptive terms for his behavior.
There is a difference between that an using a sexually-suggestive and demeaning insult like “bimbo” or the comment about her menstruation.
He’s a brute and a bully.
Erick Erickson was 100% correct. This isn’t about being politically correct, this is about common decency.
So, I stand by my words. They are accurate descriptions and they are qualitatively different than words like bimbo or the suggestion that Kelly is having her period.
Trump seems to lack respect for women.
I like his suites other than that he has no redeeming factors.
He didn’t rise from squalor to amass billions. He was born with a silver safe deposit key in his hand.
Plus, Al Capone made a lot of money.
What is so horrible about Sarah Palin?
Frankly, the kindest way I can put it is she’s not smart. She can’t think on her feet, she can only spout conservative platitudes. She couldn’t stick out even a single term as the governor of one of the least populous states in the union. Her foreign policy experience “began” when she obtained a passport in 2006, her first year as governor. She is the female Trump.
You didn’t ask me, Les, but I will tell you why I do not care for Sarah Palin. My biggest problem with her is that she does not finish what she starts. Of the political offices she has won, which ones has she actually completed? I do not want a nationally elected leader who gives up, regardless of the reasons for it. And I do not trust her to be in such a high office for those very reasons.
She has a gift of gab, and I think she is sincere about her beliefs. Maybe the problem is that she was in over her head when she became the VP nominee, and never caught up. She could have, if not then, then in the intervening years. But she seems to have chosen not to do so. Not smart? I am not impressed by her there either, but I think the important things for an elected official are (1) to be smart enough to hire smart people, and (2) to be an effective leader in order to get things done. And by her tendency to quit, I do not think she is an effective leader.
John
“Frankly, the kindest way I can put it is she’s not smart. She can’t think on her feet, she can only spout conservative platitudes. She couldn’t stick out even a single term as the governor of one of the least populous states in the union. Her foreign policy experience “began” when she obtained a passport in 2006, her first year as governor.”
She could have stayed as gov and fought lawsuits for the rest of her term. The opposition were going to take her out one way or another. One problem is we have so little balance in such matters.
However, I was wondering if you guys could outline Obama’s experience in the same areas before he was elected.
And yes, I will be comparing them all in light of Obama and the absolute disaster of his two terms to date. What is scary is that Obama economy is fast becoming accepted and normal. We did not even do that with Jimmy Carter.
Actually, Lydia, I agree that President Obama suffers from the same issue of being ineffective due to too little experience in the political realm. And that is the same reason it makes it very difficult for me to support Ben Carson–he is brilliant, and seems to be “my kind” of conservative, but I think being President, and dealing with other world leaders, international situations, and our own congress would be very different from leading a surgical team.
John
“…but I think being President, and dealing with other world leaders, international situations, and our own congress would be very different from leading a surgical team.”
Ironically, they said the same about Reagan. He was not “smart” and had no real experience in the proper realms. I think strong guiding principles/purpose and bringing in experienced people is a big part of it.
Lydia: I think by all accounts being president is harder than being governor of Alaska. If she couldn’t handle the heat there, she can’t handle the big time. Why do you keep throwing Obama at us? As far as I can tell, only Jess thinks he’s great.
It just seems like your standards for president are incredibly low.
As it so happens, I voted for Reagan, both times he ran for President. I would also add that he was not without leadership experience. He had served as president of the Screen Actor’s Guild, AND more importantly as governor of California. Frankly, after all these years, I do not recall how much that impacted my decision back then, but it would today because I have seen too many ineffective leaders.
John
Les likes the Donald because they are both Presbyterians. 😉
Glad he’s not SBC!
I’m often reminded that Carter was a Southern Baptist.
I often think of him when I recall that I bought my first house during his administration. It was VA loan (a point and half less than conventional) and it was 13.5%!
I’m almost thinking that being SBC is a strike against any candidate.
Don’t have a heart attack….I’m 100 percent in agreement with Les, politically at least.
Trump has emptied a gallon or two of much needed solvent on the grime of payola politics and religio-political influence that has been hampering this process for the last several decades.
Right now, he’s doing some real good. Regardless of what some may think about his “character”. We’ve had good presidents in the past who weren’t……”saints”.
The Bible reminds us that the one who fights the battle (David) doesn’t build the temple (Solomon).
Let’s just hope that Trump doesn’t punish the GOP if he begins falling in the polls like a lead balloon.
“Being that I don’t think there’s a dimes difference in most Rs and the Ds when it comes to governing,”
Absolutely! So give me the guy or gal who will be most likely NOT to grow government and want to micromanage my life for me.
” I’ll ride the Trump wagon as long as possible. I don’t think anyone can buy him off for special interests. And a lot of what he is saying resonates well with me.”
Trump is like a perpetual “trump card” for the primary and is helping to frame what should be the national debate. He is like the bomb throwing back bencher who DARES to say things a lot of people are thinking on issues like illegal immigration, etc.
We may not want that type as President but for crying out loud we are coming up on 8 years of Obama. I think we missed the moral outrage boat a long time ago.
Adam Blosser, I don’t think he’s my kind of Presbyterian. 🙂
Well mark this day down for historical significance. DL disagrees with me for the first time he thinks. Scott and Lydia and I agree for what surely is the first time ever. What in the world is going on?
“Scott and Lydia and I agree for what surely is the first time ever. What in the world is going on?”
Maybe you are not a Calvinist politically? :o)
I think Donald Trump will come closest to representing all Americans and not just a few as the establishment GOP does today.
I believe in the separation of church and state. Any party or religious organization that tries to combine these two entities will not receive my support. There has been too many true Americans who have given their lives so the church will be free of government rule. Here we are today trying to combine the two once again.
The SBC is as wrong as wrong can get when it comes to the issue of the separation of church and state. God forbid, may these two never become married again.
Every pastor should stand firm and fight for this separation to continue. Any doctrine that tries to combine these two “the church and the state,” is a doctrine right out of hell.
The church should care enough for America to want to elect a president that will represent the lost and saved alike. I think it was George Washington who warned us of only a two party system, and how bad it would be for our nation. That has certainly come to fruition.
I don’t like some things that goes on in our government, but, my job it to win one soul at a time to Christ.
Jesus was not a Republican, or Democrat. Conservative does not equal Christianity. Liberal does not equal the anti-Christ. We are trying to tell the lost how to live their lives when we don’t even tell the church how to live theirs. I’ve heard too many folks on Voices say they don’t like brow beaters.
I think todays church has a major problem. Read 2nd Timothy 3rd Chapter and see if Paul is directing this toward today’s church.
It has come to the point that it’s hard to tell the difference between the church and the world because the church has become so worldly.
Dave,
You are a fool and an embarrassment to the SBC. Move out of your parent’s basement and do something productive. Thanks mate.
This might be the funniest thing I have ever read on SBCVoices. It’s either very good sarcasm (based on some history that I am not very familiar with) which is always funny; OR it is serious, and extremely funny in its own right.
Mom, I wish you’d stop commenting under the name Alasdair.
lol
Dave, I highly doubt it’s your mom. Based on a keen analysis, this is a late 20s or so pimply faced guy who himself is living in his mom’s basement and likely has Cheetos stains on his fingers and keyboard.
Les,
lol, again….ha ha ha
David
I checked to see if Alasdair’s IP address put him in Montana, but no, evidently he’s from the DC area.
now ir was funny until you mentioned Montana..booo
It had nothing to do with you, D.L. Just a stupid joke, I suppose.
Trump is made of Teflon right now, we’ll see if that continues much longer. If/when he finally implodes I see his anti-establishment vote looking hard at Cruz. I was really impressed by Cruz, his answer to the has God spoken to you question was absolutely perfect. For me right now:
Cruz
Huckabee
Walker
Rubio
Carson
Jeff P.,
I am almost exactly with you, but I put Huckabee just below Walker instead of above him.
Ditto your ditto.
I think I would absolutely love and enthusiastically support a Cruz/Walker or a Walker/Cruz ticket!
Interchange Rubio in there too – based on what I know now -,any of those three making up the ticket wound get my support.
Tarheel,
Who are you trying to kid? As long as they are a republican, you would support them, no matter what they believe.
Walker would rather let the mother die than abort the child who is killing her. This does not go over well with the majority of Americans.
Cruz doesn’t know his right from his left. He is in bed with the Tea Party. Matter of fact, he is the Tea Party.
I hope you have noticed that Fox News wants Trump out of there.
I think the first debate was a joke, there was nothing said about Social Security and Medicare. There was nothing said about equal pay for equal work which applies to women. There was nothing said about raising the minimum wage. There was nothing said about making it easier for black people to vote. No black person should have to stand in line four hours to vote.
Fox wants their man to be elected, thus, hardly no questions about social issues. Immigration was brought up, but it was mostly about the fence, and little about becoming a citizen.
In my opinion, Ben Carson is by far the best candidate, but he doesn’t stand a chance. The Donald is the next best choice.
Unless social issues come to the front of the discussion there will be another democrat president. If the republicans tell the truth about social issues there will be a democrat president anyway.
The hard line republicans want war with Iran. They were putting down the deal we made with Iran before they even had a chance to read it. That is ignorance and a down right shame. We already have too many wars that are unpaid for. That entire region isn’t worth the life of one American man or woman.
The Republican party had better have a plan this election, or it will be just like the last one, a democrat will walk into the white house once again. So far there is no plan. The Senate and the House hasn’t approved one yet that the Republican candidate can run on. Neither has Fox news approved a plan.
The news said yesterday that Trump is getting serious about the election, and his campaign is putting together a plan to present to the people. Fox news or congress doesn’t have to approve it as long as Trump approves it. Trump is bypassing all the big shots, he doesn’t care what they think. He just wants the vote of the American people. I have to admire that.
Jess: What policies of Trump’s do you like, specifically? For that matter, what policies of Carson’s do you like, specifically? You said Trump represents most Americans. How, exactly?
It seems appropriate to talk about the candidates’ faith in a forum like this.
Baptists have more candidates in the race than any other group besides Roman Catholicism, but Marco Rubio sometimes goes to a Baptist church so ministerially speaking I think that makes us even. Cruz, Walker, Huckabee and Graham are all Baptists.
Cruz is staunchly Southern Baptist. More importantly he is staunchly pro-life and natural marriage and outspoken proponent of religious freedom at home and abroad. Kudos to him for sharing the life changing message of Jesus during the debate.
Walker was a Baptist deacon at Underwood Memorial Baptist until 2005. Underwood Baptist moved in a liberal direction. Walker and his family joined non-denom. evangelical Meadowbrook Church. He is very open about his faith in Jesus.
Huckabee as an ordained Southern Baptist minister has never shied away from sharing the good news of Jesus.
Graham attends Corinth Baptist in Seneca, SC.
The Roman Catholic candidates include Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, and Rick Santorum. Bush was Episcopal but joined Catholicism with his wife. Christie disagrees with “the church” saying homosexuality is not a sin. Jindal converted from Hinduism and considers himself “evangelical Catholic.” Rubio was born Catholic but became a Mormon and is now at a Catholic church again, and Santorum is a very conservative Roman Catholic.
The two Presbyterians are Rand Paul and Donald Trump. Paul’s wife is a deacon at a PCUSA church in Bowling green. Trump attends church on important occasions.
Rick Perry and Jim Gilmore are Methodists although Perry now attends Lake Hills Church in Austin.
The Anglicans/Episcopalians are represented by John Kasich (Anglican) who says he is still partly Catholic and Carly Fiorina who was raised Episcopalian.
Ben Carson is the lone Seventh Day Adventist.
George Pataki hasn’t publicly claimed any faith. He is pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, and anti-religious freedom legislation.
Really thought Cruz, Huckabee and Walker were well spoken of their faith. Cruz taking on the Washington cartel as he call it is bold and strikes the same nerve Trump does. Cruz isn’t as cold full obviously but he has the passion and the knowledge Trump doesn’t. Theyll split that vote until Trump blows up but when he does Cruz will be the throw the bums out candidate and that’s going to carry a lot of weight this year. He has more grassroots support than any other candidate
Colerful hate typing on this phone
I’ve heard one candidate speak of a “personal relationship with Jesus Christ.” Not that others haven’t of whom I am unaware.
And not that anyone, not the preacher, not the two PKs, not the Indian nor any of the others deserve a single vote based on their faith. Frankly, I rather hate to see evangelicals start salivating when the faith bell is rung.
BTW, Jeb not only goes to Mass on Sundays but makes guacamole, he told 13k Baptists in Nashville.
Cruz was clear last night. Walker spoke of forgiveness by the blood of Jesus. Huckabee is not in doubt. Not sure why you’d not like a candidate being open about faith. Challenge is to see one elected who won’t compromise his faith once in office, which is the norm today
I don’t like a candidate who parades his faith as if like followers are a voting bloc.
Cruz was asked directly about God, so was Walker. Cruz is hardly known for his faith as a politician though it’s sincere, he’s a tea party hero. Walker the same, he’s known for reforming a very liberal state. Neither paraded it and neither did Huckabee.
Amen! William.
Granted, sharing one’s faith is not the only thing we should look at. By all accounts, Jimmy Carter shared his faith, and I sure wouldn’t want a clone of him.
But I do think a candidate’s faith is important to their own governance and the people whom they govern. How do you deal with Proverbs 29:2?
“When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice, but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.”
I’m fine with it. Define “righteous” and “wicked.”
However you define it, at the very least it would have to include whether one has been saved or not. We cannot be righteous apart from salvation. A clear testimony is therefore important.
An adherence to Biblical morality would also apply.
Let me add, that where and if a person goes to church does give an indication of what a person believes and how they live their life. Righteousness matters.
So, who was the more righteous candidate in the last election? the 2008 election?
By the time the primaries reached Mississippi in the last two election cycles the candidates had been whittled down to two. The answer to your question: In 2008 – Huckabee and in 2012 – Santorum.
But that is beside the point. I am not having to choose from the 2008 or 2012 candidates. There are currently 16 candidates (I put Pataki with the Democrats on abortion, debauchery, and religious intolerance) to choose from. It is the righteousness of those candidates that I am concerned with.
Did you vote in the presidential election in 2008 and 2012 Matt? If so, for whom?
I didn’t like my choices in either of those elections, but the righteousness question in both of those elections was as clear as night and day. In each case one candidate supported a party platform that was pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, and at one point wanted to make sure that God was in no way a part of that platform. The other candidate in each of those elections did not support that platform.
I’ll be blunt. The Republicans have their flaws for sure, but any Christian who votes for candidates supporting the Democrats current platform has clearly allowed their politics to influence their faith rather than their faith influence their politics.
So, Matt, you voted for McCain and Romney?
McCain openly declared himself not to be a born again Christian and Romney was the LDS candidate.
You said “saved or not” and “clear testimony” would be required “at the very least.” Meaning that (if you voted for McC and R) you supported an unrighteous candidate?
Just trying to apply the principles you invoked.
I voted 3rd party. Constitution Party. Hoping for a better option this year
Your question was not “who was righteous?” but “Who was the most righteous?” Out of the options we had, the most righteous choice was abundantly clear.
One more thing. You cannot defend the atrocious platform of the Democrats by attacking the Republicans. That is nothing but a diversion.
Matt, you said “we cannot be righteous apart from salvation”. A candidate lacking salvation has zero righteousness? Can you get “more” righteousness with some fraction or multiple of none?
True righteousness comes from salvation. The testimonies of the current candidates matter. That is what started this conversation. Dave’s post was geared toward this election. My comment that started this discussion was about the faith of the current candidates. In this group of candidates, we do indeed have some solid Christians to choose from.
You drug up past elections. When there is no Christian to vote for, I vote for the one closest to Biblical morality. If you will go back and reread my comment, you will see that I mentioned that.
I will concede your point about being MOST righteous. I should have framed it as the candidate closest to Biblical morality.
Let’s look at it in reverse order. Can one candidate be more wicked than another? Yes, Yes, and Yes again. You can’t get much more wicked than supporting the butchering of innocent babies. There is no getting around that. Since there is no justification for that wickedness, some like to change the subject and discuss the shortcomings of Republican politicians. It is a false argument. There is no moral equivalency. It is like a murder trial where the defense attorney’s argument to the judge is, “Sure my man murdered somebody, but your wife spent too much money at the grocery store last week, so it OK that my client committed murder.”
We are going in circles. I have no illusions of changing your mind, and you have provided no Scriptural basis to change mine. I will bow out and let you have the last word.
No one is going in circles here. I thought when you flung yourself down the road you picked you would run off a cliff eventually. I commend you for applying the brakes.
Tossing out a marker, a verse of Scripture, as if one obtains a voting guide thereby is impossible. It’s more complicated than that. Same for abortion.
The faith and righteousness of a candidate is an important factor for a Christian voter. I will not seek to defend that anymore, because I said I would be quiet, but the rightness of abortion is NOT complicated.
There is absolutely no justification for voting for those who support the murder of children. This thread has gone off the deep end when on one hand we castigate a man, saying in effect there is no justification for calling a woman a “bimbo,” but there is justification for murdering children.
I sure hope that you are in the minority on this, but the fact that you have posting privileges here is a scary thing. It is definitely time for me to sign back off of this blog.
On a side note, read an article by Rush Limbaugh today(don’t listen anymore) and apparently yesterday on his show he said some powerful RNC donors had put out the word to get Trump out of the race. He thought the other candidates would go after Trump but said apparently FOX carried that mantle.
They opened the debate in a way that sure seemed like it was aimed specifically at putting Trump in a bad position before the debate started. Trump’s animosity toward Megyn Kelly might not be excusable, but it is certainly understandable. The fact that he called her out on it is appealing to many folks who are looking for a fighter to get in and fight the establishment tactics.
Kind of like Cruz calling Mitch McConnell a liar. Good on him. It is time someone in Washington started telling the truth.
I actually think Trump gains some ground in the next round of polling, especially on Bush who was awful last night.
“It is time someone in Washington started telling the truth.”
And those two instances tell me those guys are not going to bend over and take it the tail pipe like almost all other Republicans. I like that and frankly we need that. Otherwise nothing will change.
And it should be very clear there is a substantial part of the conservative base that feels exactly that way. In some ways it’s a lot like 1980 when everyone thought Reagan was to far to the right. Reagan stuck to his guns, and that is the perception of both Trump and Cruz. I actually think Trump likes Cruz and that could be very important down the road
Ranked in inverse order. Those who don’t have a snowball’s chance in Gehenna, the fast melters first:
1. Pataki, Gilmore: Didn’t know either were still alive and breathing. Neither shows a pulse politically.
2. Carson: I like him but this ain’t brain surgery. Showed charm but lack of depth in the debate.
3. Trump: Rodeo clown. Very rich rodeo clown. No chance at the nomination.
4. Graham: Will put American troops in Syria. No First Lady would be a plus but he’s my Sec Def.
5. Perry, Santorum, Huckabee: All had high water marks in the last election. Perry is notably stronger this time. Santorum is solid but will never gain traction. Huckabee has a reliable but limited following.
6. Jindal: Rhodes scholar. I like him. Would love to see the Hindu/Sikh ticket (Jindal, SC governor Nikki Haley, though both have left their ancestral faith group).
7. Kasich: Has actually done something, governed a state. Would be a good president but very dark horse.
8. Paul: Petulant smirks don’t get votes. Ideologues not Reagan seldom get enough electoral college votes to win.
9. Christie: Love the combativeness, probably a closet Southern Baptist. Could be better NJ VP than the last one from that state.
10. Fiorina: Extreme longshot but will make the men candidates be sure they put on their big boy pants. Formidable.
11. Cruz, Walker: Cruz is an adroit debater but there aren’t enough angry white dudes to get there. Has 2020 and beyond to get to the top. Walker knows how to plant his feet and stand strong, not sure he knows how to win the masses.
12. Rubio, Bush: Money counts in this bidness and Bush has a ton of it. Rubio is competent, charismatic, congenial which may be the winning trifecta.
I just got an email from the American Rodeo Clown Association demanding an apology for the insult.
Dave,
I wish you would let loose and tell us how you really feel about Trump.
You better not be too mean to him. With his money and NY ties, he might one day buy the Yankees.
I survived all those years with George running things. I don’t think MLB would approve it.
But thanks for giving me a nightmare.
That would be a nightmare for a Yankees fan wouldn’t it?
But it would be so much fun for me as a Cardinals fan to watch it. Celebrity apprentice meets the New York Yankees: Trump could pay exorbitant amounts of money to hire talent and then turn around and tell them “you’re fired.”
Donald Trump and the Yankees deserve each other.
I almost tweeted a picture of a horse’s backside last night with the caption – “Great picture of Trump from tonight’s debate.” Just didn’t have the nerve.
And you think “Bimbo” is bad? 🙂 emoticon just for you.
I didn’t do it, but I guess that biblically, if I have the thought in my heart, I’m guilty, eh?
Just call it Trump’s “bimbo interruption.”
If the nominee is Bush then we’ll see 1992 all over again as nobody sane wants another Bush or Clinton presidency. Trump will run third party as he knows he can tap in to that angst. Hillary probably wins. America loses if any of the three are elected
I’m not a huge fan of Jeb Bush – mostly because he seems to say things that get him into trouble.
But I do not understand why people assume that because he is a “Bush” that he automatically shouldn’t be a president. Why is his last name a disqualifying factor? That seems grossly unfair to me.
I just see him of more of the same. An establishment politician who is going to go about things exactly as we have been. Obama was anti establishment in the wrong way, we need someone who will buck the powers that be in the right way. Jeb is not that guy
Huckabee, Cruz, Rubio, in that order.
But I will vote for the eventual GOP candidate in the general election.
And Megyn Kelly has now replaced Meg Ryan as my celebrity crush. She is smart, beautiful and tough. Shame on Donald Trump!
Megyn Kelly? Tough? From what I saw, Kelly was only tough toward one specific candidate.
For what it is worth, I like some things about Trump, but he comes in at number 16 on my list. Only George Pataki falls lower.
Rick,
If I can jump off subject for just a moment, I have, hopefully in a friendly way, sparred with you and David a little the last couple of days, but I feel I should tell you how much I appreciate much of what both you and David say here at SBC Voices. I rarely jump in and comment, so you wouldn’t know this, but very often, I am saying “amen” to what you write. From a normally silent reader, I really do appreciate your engaging on the various issues. Thank you.
And thank you, Matt. That was a much kinder reception than I often receive in some of the forums in which I participate, owing largely to the fact that I am overly opionated.
Thanks for your involvement here as well.
Kelly ask difficult questions to several candidates – she asked kasich A stupid get your question about “what if one of your family members were gay…” – She scott walker if he would really rather a woman die than have an abortion (a typical pro-choice oriented false choice) – she asked Ted Cruz if God speaks to him directly – certainly trying to paint him in the light of one who hears voices.
I was not very impressed with Miss Kelly’s approach but it clearly wasn’t just one candidate.
I will defend her a little on this people are saying that her asking the “pledge question” was unfair to Donald Trump – that question has been asked and numerous other presidential debates – it’s a common debate question for presidential debates. Especially when there is someone who is floating the idea of doing so like Trump is doing.
*asked Kasich a stupid gotcha question…
Tarheel
Let me respectively disagree my Brother. I think Kelley’s questions were relevant to a first round debate. Regarding the gay question to the governor It is relevant because so many are coming out of the “closet” etc that many who are against the gay agenda, discover they have friends or family members who are of alternate lifestyles. The context is, it is easy to have a position when it does not affect (or is it “effect”) you personally. Hence, are you still opposed when it does, or will you change your mind etc.
Re. the hearing from God, those of us in the active church environment understand what we mine by a word from God. Other strong conservatives who have little use for the church do not. So they don’t know if one is going to a mountain top and hearing voices or what.. It gave Cruz a chance to set the record straight about what this means and he did a good job in his answer for 23 million people to hear.
The question to Walker was spot on in that this is a core issue in the pro life debate, one is which we are divided. It is a valid pro life issue.
This morn I disagreed for the first time with Les and now with you. What is this world coming to 🙂
The most relevant question of the evening was the first one. If Trump launches a third party ticket it will split the conservative vote and will give the election to Clinton. I went into the debate leaning toward Trump. His hand raise did it for me. If he would split the vote and give the election to the Democrats then he is everything his critics say he is.
Debate summary: Epic hip hop battle of the rich & powerful. Rupert Murdoch tries to put Trump in his place via Fox and Megyn Kelly.
If that wasn’t obvious nothing else was. And I’m betting it backfires and Trump gains on both Bush and Walker.
If he gains on anybody after the CNN comments the next morning then God forgive us if we are in support of such a vulgar trash mouth.
Don’t disagree DL. But nothing he has said before; McCain, murderers and rapists, etc. has hurt him yet. His numbers go up. He may be pushing the envelope a little to far with Kelly, but until his numbers actually go down, I say he gains separation from Bush and Walker. If that happens he’ll get even more bombastic and crude. He’s Howard Beale from the movie Network. He rants for ratings and gets them.
to be sure
Hey DL, first poll is in. Bush expands lead on Bush, second going in and Walker, third going in to 16 points. 23%-7%. Cruz was second at 13, Carson at 11, Rubio and Fiorina at 8. 3 of the top 4 have never held political office. Notice a trend? Poll was by NBC News
I should say Trump expands lead
I sincerely think that what we are watching is a public power struggle between Trump and Murdoch. And neither one holding the type of power they do is good for our country. I would be perfectly content to see them both knock each other out politically.
And even though—as many have told me—obviously biased candidate debates are something that has been going on for a long time, and we should just accept it as the way it is, I don’t think it is a good thing for democracy. I don’t think a corporation with such an obvious political axe to grind as Fox News should be allowed to dictate the way candidate debates are carried out. There should be better controls to ensure there is some modicum of neutrality.
Also, with people like Trump, Murdoch, and the Koch Bros. calling the shots from behind the scenes in the Republican Party, I think it is pretty naive to think that as Christians we can really make a difference.
I will vote. And I will probably listen to a few more debates to help me decide whom to vote for. But I will not lose any sleep thinking about who is going to win. It is what it is.
We would make a bigger difference if we started paying attention to and getting involved in local and state politics. Yea right now, we don’t have a “huge” impact on the national scene, BUT we can have a huge impact locally. If our city and county governments start representing us like we want, we can have a larger impact on our state. And if our states start representing us like we want we can have a larger impact on the nation. It all begins locally.
Also, my theological understanding of the relationship of church and culture doesn’t lead me to place a whole lot of emphasis on spending that much time or resources on politics at whatever level. It is fun sometimes to talk about and keep abreast of issues. But I don’t think the kingdom of God is advanced by political means. And my interest in the advance of the kingdom of God through personal evangelism, discipleship, and the ministry of the local church far outstrips my interest in cultural transformation by means of politics.
David,
I agree.
Some might be called to political life, but all are called to further the Kingdom using spiritual weapons of war.
Murdoch, the Kochs and such on the right. Soros and such on the left. The system is corrupt and money and potential power are the corrupter. I agree about not getting caught up in the political process, it’s not our mission. We influence and see culture changed by being salt and light, not by winning elections. I’ve gotten in some trouble for saying the exact things you are but politics are divisive by nature. If I’m openly Republican where our church is it alienates our mission field. If I were openly Democrat it would alienate many in the church. I’m not Independent either, I’m nothing politically. I avoid it except for a few discussions like this. My goodness the issues are there and we speak to them, but no political party or entity is dealing with those things. Only Jesus can. I’ll vote. I’ve voted 3rd party several times because the two “candidates” weren’t palatable to me. But I’ll never try to make a Pub or Dem, I’ll stick with trying to make disciples
David
I agree that God is in control. I also think that earnest prayer is our real hope. However I am not ready to admit that as Christians we cannot make a difference. that seems to throwing in the towel. If Hillary gets elected I will rethink my position
I am not trying to advance the Kingdom through politics. I am trying to vote for people who protect the unborn, be supportive of our friends in the Middle East, let a person decide who they will bake for and will not, seek to destroy those who crucify children rape young teens and displace millions of people. These are humanity issues. No decent person should bury their head to these atrocities.
I can do both as a Pastor. I can make an informed decision at the polls, encourage others to do the same and still witness to the Blood of Christ. Why must these be put into .juxtaposition to each other. Can we not do both?
D. L.,
I will say it this way. In the preaching (from the pulpit or otherwise) of the church, I believe we should preach the whole counsel of God. If the Bible addresses an issue, or a straightforward interpretation of biblical principles addresses an issue, I believe we do well to focus on these issues in approximately the same proportion the Bible itself focuses on them.
In my opinion, Evangelicals in the US have generally focused on political issues far more in the past 40 years or so than the Bible does. Also, I believe there are a lot of political issues that are not addressed in the Bible. Or if they are, they are addressed in such a way that the correct choice for Christians, when it comes to casting a vote, is not totally clear.
For instance, I just did the ISideWith.com test online, which asks a bunch of different questions to determine where you stand on the issues and which candidate best matches your own position. Although of all the 100 or so different questions I answered, my answer on a few of them was determined by my understanding of Scripture, on the great majority of them, it was not. Maybe my interpretation of Scripture influences the way I think about a number of these other issues to one degree or another. But on a lot of them, if I am honest, my common sense, or cultural education, or just plain personal preferences influence my view as much as does my understanding of Scripture.
In the church (and as representatives of the church), I believe we should clearly proclaim our views on those particular issues that are clearly addressed in Scripture. On the other issues, we should largely remain silent, and leave it to each individual to decide for themselves what makes the best sense to them. Otherwise, we run the risk of dividing the Body of Christ over issues on which He has not clearly spoken and which He has not called us to defend.
David
i am not advocating messages from the pulpit on most issues. When the Scripture is clear i.e. sam sex marriage I must preach. However, even then a Biblical exegesis and let it fallen in the political or cultural arena where it may. I am talking about my privilege and responsibility as a citizen. When i go to a political meeting I go as a voting citizen not as a pastor. I advocate my views as a citizen. Admittedly they are based on God’s word but it is a view I express not at sermon.
Christian must IMO be highlyengaged in the election process. Not from the pulpit but from the speakers stand at the city council etc.
D. L.,
I continue to respond not because I am trying to pick a fight on this, but because going back and forth like this helps me to verbalize and clarify my own views.
That being said,
1) I made a special point above to say “from the pulpit or otherwise,” When I say “preaching,” I mean in the broad sense of the word, not the narrow.
2) As private citizens I believe we all should feel free to advocate the views that seem best to each of us. I am not saying pastors or other church representatives should not feel free to do this.
3) What I am saying is, on those issues the Bible does not clearly address, we should not use the platform of the church (broad understanding of the word “platform”) in order to do so, though.
4) I don’t think I agree that “Christians MUST be highly engaged in the election process.” I guess when there is a clear biblical issue at stake, such as abortion, over which a particular election really stands a chance of influencing laws and as a result saving lives, there is a certain responsibility that goes along with that. But if the choice is between one view on the Alaskan pipeline or another, for instance, or minimum wage laws, or a host of different other issues the Bible doesn’t clearly address, I don’t think Christians have an obligation to be highly engaged. If they want to, fine. I am not opposed. But I certainly don’t think they have a moral or spiritual obligation to do so.
David
I have never known you to pick aright or be unkind. 1,2,3 I agree. Number 4 I guess I see it differently. Now, I will freely admit I have a generational bias. I am a War Baby. My Dad was at Omaha Beach on D day in went through the Ardennes and the Bulge with the Third Army. I was taught in that post war culture that I honored those who died etc. by being involved in the election process. So again a bias I freely admit.
As I see it, again I don’t have to make a choice, I can do both as long as I am faithful to the pulpit (at large) to sticking to advancing the Kingdom not a political issue.
Thank you for the discussion my brother, I always learn from you.
“aright” should be “a fight”
Thoughts didn’t change much a few surprises though. Here’s what I posted on FB This morning.
Straight from the in case anyone cares department –. My Last night’s debate analysis. I will address all 17 candidates and make some comments about the future of some campaigns.
Donald Trump imploded himself. Or at least with thinking people he did. Some didn’t like it but Megan Kelly asked him questions that would certainly be part of any campaign if he were to win the nomination. And I’m referring to the question about his sexist and racist remarks.
These questions went to his character – a very important – perhaps most important? – Facet of leadership. Just the fact that he has made those statements in the first place (and he’s made even worse ones) reveals things that are deeply concerning about who he really is – and The way he answered the questions Megan asked and then went to Twitter with more revealed clearly his lack of personal character and discipline.
The “what if a member of your family were gay…” Kasich question – was unfair and irrelevant. But to the point on his candidacy – He’s a bit a of fence straddler don’t think he’ll be around much longer.
Somewhat Surprisingly in my view, I thought Huckabee did very well. But, his time has passed. Did well 2008 – passed on 2012 and should have run.
Cruz did very well. He will be a force to contend with. I like him a lot. Solid on issues. “Washington cartel” is good line – he wants trumps anti Washington support – may get it. He certainly been anti establishment since he get to the senate.
Carson did pretty well – better toward the end statement on race and his joke about brain surgery at the end were outstanding. Boring voice – no apparent passion – good on issues. Cabinet position.
I’m not a Christie fan in any way – but he did a really good job especially taking on the grandstanding rand Paul. He’s too far to left on social issues for my taste – but he’s a great campaigner.
Paul looked very petty and even more desperate – but the die hard libertarians will hang with him – problem is they’re only about 5% of the GOP electorate and even less of general. He got owned by everyone he tried to attack. His behavior and smack downs he received may contribute further to his current free fall in the polls.
Jeb Bush did exactly what he needed to do – not hurt himself. Which means he did well – trumps fall will possibly benefit him most and he knows that that’s why he just stood by and let it happen hoping to gain without taking risks.
I thought Walker and Rubio were very presidential in their demeanor, held their own on tough questions without looking desperate and both are absolutely solid on the issues – especially abortion. They both, along with huckabee and Cruz showed that there’s only a few with real bonafides on abortion issue.
If the next debate has a top 10 in the polls format like this one I predict Kasich will be out Carly Fiorina will be in.
Ms. Fiorina completely blew out the other six in the 5 PM debate. Did so on substance too! She’s impressive!
Santorum did well, just not going to get traction – SCOTUS?
Perry didn’t hurt himself which is exactly what he needed to do is to show that he can actually handle being there. Much improved from 2012.
Jindal as much as I like him is likely toast. (I say this only because of lack of name recognition and traction – which will probably not be coming) cabinet member – definitely!
Gilmore – is well – Gilmore. bye-bye.
Pataki and Graham were very burnt toast before he even entered the race and even more so now. Squishy moderates/liberals.
I like a lot of the candidates in some ways. But trying to think through on my own who I really like and support, the best test I can come up with is whose campaign would I actually donate money to—they’re inspiring enough that I’d actually sacrifice in a tangible way to support.
For me I’d currently be willing to (but haven’t yet) give to Rubio, Carson, and Fiorina. If the race progressed and several or all of those seemed to be eliminated from contention, I think Walker and Cruz might rise to that point for me, but they’re not there at this point.
I wouldn’t give to Trump or Kasich. Doubtful on Christie, Bush, Paul, Huckabee, unless they got the nomination, then I probably would reluctantly.
Don’t know if anyone else finds that criteria helpful or not but it helps me clarify in my own mind.
I will cast my ballot in this election based predominantly upon how I think the candidate will act on the issues of abortion and religious liberty. Because of past bad experiences, I will favor the candidates who have a long-tenured and consistent history of supporting these issues. I like Cruz & Huckabee.
But I’m willing to second the idea of The Donald as owner of the New York Yankees.
Have you looked into Scott Walker? – He has a long, consistent and serious record being pro-life and actually doing something about it – Wisconsin ended the relationship with Planned Parenthood four years ago – way before it was popular to do so. Look at the numerous other pro-life initiatives he has gotten passed in a purple/blue state. It’s impressive.
Dr. Bart
Yankees Ok my Cardinals NO!!!
Cardinals…NO! Dewitt has been a wonderful owner. Now the Rams and Kroenke….Trump may be an improvement over him.
Anybody is an improvement over Kroenke
Trump isn’t always open and honest –my impression.
Trump is in it for the power not the issues -my impression.
I don’t think he cares one way or the other about abortion or gay marriage or religious rights for he is a man of money, and money only.
He might be good for the economy and he might not. He has used the law to get through his failures, and I think if he was elected he may fall back on the idea- I didn’t fail, the country did-
When asked about his bankruptcies and the thousands who lost their jobs, he showed no empathy for hid people.
So I don’t want to be one of his people.
If you need a middle of the road guy to win the election, Kasich might be him, but even though he is my governor, I think he paled somewhat on that stage before some of the others.
I liked Huckabee, but can he win the election?
I liked Cruz, and Rubio, and Walker.
Can they win?
In the Ohio primary, I will probably vote for one of those three.
Trump is the “conservative” Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner. The thing he wants most is to remain in the spotlight. You really think he cares about the country? About the people he purports to want to govern? Trump thinks the chief end of man is to worship Trump and enjoy him forever.
Bill,
That’s my impression as well.
Hey, Bill, look behind you. Duck!
Great observation Bill – he wants to be president of America Corporation – to further line his pockets and forward his immoral agendas.
I’m just blown away at the number of Christians who are supporting Donald Trump – there is absolutely nothing to attract a bible believing Christian to that candidate – absolutely nothing.
In many ways the president is the nation’s top diplomat. He meets people from all nations and all walks of life. Every citizen is his/her constituent. You think having the president take to twitter in outrage when he gets a tough question is a good thing? You think calling the British ambassador a fat slob or suggesting the Brazilian ambassador is having her period is the right way to go? Trump has the thinnest skin of any politician I’ve eve seen (followed by Paul). You think building a border wall, and simply telling the Mexicans they have to pay for it is a viable immigration strategy? . This guy claims he doesn’t “do bankrupt” and then when it is pointed out that he has in fact taken some of his companies into bankruptcy, his head explodes. I don’t understand how being non-PC is now somehow the highest virtue. I know lots of people who aren’t particularly PC, and many who can be blunt, but they are still basically decent human beings. Trump isn’t one of them. Being non-PC doesn’t equal equal being a rude, obnoxious, thin skinned blowhard who lashes out every time he is crossed, and then complains that people aren’t nice to him.
Non PC isn’t a virtue, it is however much needed in this day and age. Trump goes beyond non PC to obnoxious but forgiveness is granted as other than Cruz, who doesn’t have his celebrity, no one is as non PC as the Donald. The nation is craving straight talk. Whether Trump is giving that is debatable, but the rest of them should learn from it. It’s honesty, at least the perceived nature of, that is the virtue being craved
Boldness does not equal honesty. While I appreciate Trump’s willingness to say unpopular things without apology, I have no confidence in the strength of his philosophical convictions. He admitted exploiting a broken political system to give money to all sorts of candidates in exchange for future favors. Trump knows how to tap into conservatives’ anti-PC sentiments, and he’ll say anything to keep chumming the waters. There are genuine conservatives in this race. No need to waste a vote on Trump. Maybe it’s good to have him at this point to keep ratings high and interest piqued, allowing some legitimate candidates to get more exposure.
I agree, but the fact he is perceived as the straight shooter should let us know how fed up with the establishment bait and switch many people are
“In many ways the president is the nation’s top diplomat. He meets people from all nations and all walks of life. ”
Obama? Top diplomat? Bowing to kings. Insulting America to other leaders? Why are people forgetting that we elected an inexperienced hollow man who despises the American dream simply because of the color of his skin? Obama never even tried to represent ALL Americans. He was a divider from day one.
yep
That’s not the point, Lydia.
Has Obama been an effective diplomat? I would certainly say he has not. I think he has been weak when he should have shown strength, etc.
But Trumps brand of bullying, name-calling, and such would NOT go over well. You need an iron hand with a velvet glove. If Obama has been soft, Trumps brand of brutishness would not be a helpful balance.
“That’s not the point, Lydia.”
I think it is the point. How come someone like Obama got past the primary? And then was elected twice?
I sincerely doubt Trump can win the primary. Such people flame out in politics. He will alienate both sides and the establishment has to take him out which is what Kelly was attempting to do, it seems. My point is that he is so non PC he is actually helping frame the policy debates if we can get past his bizarre hair and behavior. You realize there are issues so controversial serious candidates tend to whitewash them. Let the bully -jerk bring them up. At least the issues are out there.
The issue is to defeat Clinton. I do not care for Bush I like Fiorina. The question now becomes not who I like the most, (for me Huckabee hands down) but who can defeat the Democrats. I think at this point that would be a Bush/Fiorina ticket. Bush could bring in some Hispanic votes and some more moderate conservatives even a conservative democrat. Fiorina would wrangle some women votes.
Don’t prefer that line up but it is better than Hillary.
A moderate Republican may not be much better in practice than a Democrat. I’d rather vote for the person who will do the best job and not make assumptions about whether he or she can win. The more we refuse to vote for conservatives, the more we move to the left overall. That’s not to say that electability doesn’t matter. Give a choice between similar candidates, it may be the deciding factor. I don’t think it should be the only or primary (no pun intended) factor, however.
Jeff
I certainly understand your argument. There are times when one votes for one that cannot win (third party, write in etc) to make a statement. However 2016 is not the time to do that. Clinton must b defeated t all cost. If we have 8 years of her presidency on top of Obama’s failed presidency we just might take the nation to a point from which we cannot return.
I am committed to defeating Clinton. Anybdy in the Republican lineup would be better. in fact i would rather have Mickey Mouse that Clointon.
Strong words I realize but the nation is in desperate shape.
A fun question that people can pose to those Trump supporters that are hating on Fox News and Megyn Kelly. If she had taken the same tone with, and asked similarly hard hitting “gotcha” questions to Hillary, or Biden, or any DNC candidate, would you not be praising her for going after the Democrat? How Trump-bots answer that would be very telling to the quality of people they are.
I’m not a “Trump-bot” but as I have said above somewhere, I prefer him so far. As for her questioning, I had not problem at all with it. He did cross the line in the bimbo remark to be sure. But she can ask any and all of them anything as far as I’m concerned. I like Megan.
Seems to me that more than Trump being hurt or feeling picked on, he’s being a master, again, at having the focus on himself and rallying people who feel like the media folk are unfair, to himself.
Les, I would say as far as Trump supporters go, you are in the minority of people who are not cursing and hating Megyn Kelly right now.
“A fun question that people can pose to those Trump supporters that are hating on Fox News and Megyn Kelly. If she had taken the same tone with, and asked similarly hard hitting “gotcha” questions to Hillary, or Biden, or any DNC candidate, would you not be praising her for going after the Democrat? ”
What democrat candidate would put themselves in a position to answer questions from one Fox News moderator in a debate? That is not how the debate game is played. And it IS a game.
Comments here prove that the game works. People are commenting on how the candidates looked and handled questions. Not a lot on policy. Do you remember how Obama did in the debates?
I would not vote for Trump but I am all for having such types in the primary because of a much bigger picture of complacency with establishment policy.
Lydia, maybe (is this a pipe-dream?) the MSM will take a cue from Fox and actually ask some hard questions in the Democratic debate? And if they do, the Dems can hardly cry foul, after this.
good point
I think Megyn Kelly did her job. She is SUPPOSED to ask tough questions. We are so used to watching the media lob softballs at HRC and others, “What is it about you that is so wonderful, Mrs Clinton?” that we aren’t used to seeing journalism.
We saw real journalism from Kelly and Baier and Fox. I think a lot of people expected a love fest from Fox to the GOP candidates and they got some real questions, tough questions.
Bravo.
And it exposed that Trump is actually, like most bullies, unable to take what he dishes out.
I agree. Those tough questions actually made it an interesting and helpful debate, rather than just a platform for the candidates’ talking points.
It’s the top spot in the country. If you aren’t ready to field hard questions, go away. Own your words, own your positions, have enough intelligence to think on your feet and answer the freaking questions.
All this boo-hooing over unfair questions is sickening. Attacking the questioner is just low class.
Republican candidates ought to have the most left-wing, vitriolic conservaphobes on the planet as their debate moderators. If they can hold their ground and answer questions under that kind of pressure, maybe they’re ready for prime time. Complaining about Fox News moderators is like complaining the water in the kiddie pool is too cold on your toes.
This headline says it all:
In reading this thread I notice how we focus on personalities and not policies, with a few exceptions scattered here and there. I guess we are not so distant in our thinking from the secular world. Yes I realize my comment is personalty oriented.
John
I understand your issue. It has credibility. I would say however, that personalities are people. People have character. Yes policies are important but character in the WH is also of utmost importance.
Trump for me is an example. I like what he says he wants to do as Pres., however I cannot abide that type of person in the nations highest office.
D.L.
I think you are buying into secular sound bites. I think we all are for the most part, with few exceptions. Moderators are taking up 1/3 of the time and framing questions out of context. Megyn completely setup an out of context question against Trump. Don’t conclude I support in any way Trump. I don’t.
We are no longer being discerning in our lives. Hence we fall into secular logic easily. The good news is we have time to change before the general election. I pray we use this time to use the gift of discernment we have been given.
If we don’t use discernment in a subject as simple as politics, will we use it affectedly with as important issue as discipleship?
John
I agree to some extent. My Spiritual gift is discernment. You are spot on. However I do not see how that applies to the obvious. If a man comes at my truck because I made him mad and he is carrying a .38 it is not a matter of discernment for me to take the .45 Auto out of my center console and defend myself and wife.
My point Trump said some things in the CNN interview that was totally repulsive. I don’t have to pray for discernment to oppose a person who openly talks about her bodily functions.
It was wrong and vulgar not because of discernment but because of the clear teaching of scripture. I gave that kind of talk up when I left the Jr. Hi. locker.
D. L.
It’s funny how we forget to mention that Trump said the same thing about Chris Wallace in that interview.
“Believe me there’s a big difference between Mike Wallace and Chris Wallace. Because I watched him last night and, you know, blood pouring out of his eyes, too.”
Maybe there is something about Chris Wallace’s anatomy I am not aware of.
I think Trump is channeling the frustrations of many American people, that and he is a celebrity and we seem to worship celebrities. Like we do Megyn Kelly. Although if you hear what Megyn said on the Howard Stern show in April 2010 along with her GQ spread maybe she herself is no different than the Donald. Just 2 people marketing themselves to grow their ego and make money off of low information Americans.
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. Just because Trump might be microscopically better than Obama (something I’m not convinced of), then he’s OK? Just because he’s bold enough to say literally whatever pops into his head, he’s OK? His lying doesn’t matter (I don’t do bankruptcy)? His flip flopping doesn’t matter (abortion)? His misogyny doesn’t matter? His idiot policies (make the Mexicans pay for the wall to keep themselves out of the country) don’t matter? Do you want a man who stays up late to insult a woman on twitter whom he perceives to have been “not nice to him” to have his hands on our nuclear arsenal?
” I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. Just because Trump might be microscopically better than Obama (something I’m not convinced of), then he’s OK? ”
Obama is about as close as we have ever come to a sort of Manchurian candidate. Do you remember how little there was out there about his career when he ran? He was a Senator for how long? 7 months? He became a Senator because……remember that? His claim to experience was a “community organizer”. Think ACORN. A democratic congress were the ones who were promoting policies in his first year. NOT Obama.
Obama is one of the most tightly controlled candidates there has been when it comes to speaking and does horrible without prepared remarks. We rarely get to see that side. If Bimbo was on the teleprompter he would most likely have said it. The ugly truth is that America wanted a black president but if you notice it actually made race relations even more contentious. Obama is more than a socialist. His ideology is actually a hatred of America and desire to see her fail. The middle class has suffered economic failure more under Obama than any other president. But no one can say anything or they are: racist.
See Trump for what he is: a bomb thrower who is saying things others are afraid to say about certain politically correct issues. And see it another way. Any jerk can run for President if they can get the backing. Obama did.
He doesn’t say things people are afraid to say, he says things it wouldn’t occur for normal, semi-decent, sane people to say. People aren’t sitting around thinking “I wish I could call Rosie O’Donnell a fat slob but I’m too afraid”.
You don’t have to convince me how bad Obama is, but it is naive to think that literally no one cold be worse. Trump is playing to the absolute worst in people, and unfortunately it seems to be working.
“He doesn’t say things people are afraid to say, he says things it wouldn’t occur for normal, semi-decent, sane people to say. People aren’t sitting around thinking “I wish I could call Rosie O’Donnell a fat slob but I’m too afraid”.
Very true. We also had 8 years of a President that DID things normal, semi decent, sane people would not do. His name is Bill Clinton. He ushered in a whole new way for teens to view having sex as a technicality that is with us today. His wife, the “stand by your philandering man oligarchical feminist” actually benefited from it all. So where is the lesson in all of that? Was it learned? Trump is not even President! He is paying for attention from the press.
Do you know what the answer to all of this is in the long run? Less government power over our lives all the way around. Rather than looking for the perfect Christian candidate (Hello: Jimmy “I heart Arafat” Carter) let us zero in on those who have a track record of keeping government growth in check or at least promote policies that will try to start dismantling it. Carter was an economic disaster but he was a ” great Christian” who taught SS.
Being president is now akin to being a rock star celebrity. It was meant to be a servant function. The president is supposed to be our employee who protects the Constitution. I realize we are a long way from that –but a girl can dream.
I don’t have a faith litmus test for the president. Trump’s faith, or lack thereof makes no difference to me. I’ve listed my preferences before, but here they are again. We need a president who is:
Articulate
Able to think on his/her feet, rather than just spouting soundbites.
Intelligent.
Knowledgeable.
Personable.
Honest.
The only thing I would give Trump in the above categories is knowledge within a limited business sphere.
You may think Trump is going to propel Republicans to greater heights, but he isn’t. He’s going to hand the election to Clinton.
Les: What part of Trump’s immigration policy do you find so compelling? Build a wall and make the Mexicans pay? (idiotic) Deport all illegals (can’t be done) and then let the good ones back in? Tell Mexico to stop sending their murderers and rapists to our country?
Agree Bill. Well said.
“Trump is playing to the absolute worst in people, and unfortunately it seems to be working.
Bingo, bill!
I am perplexed at the number of Christians who ignore the realities of who he is and embrace his hateful rhetoric.
Bill Mac,
Surely he says some things most decent people wouldn’t say. But he also is saying things that many decent people, especially many politicians, are thinking and afraid to say. One example is the border issue. He is not wrong in what he’s saying.
What, specifically, is he not wrong about? Building a wall and making Mexico pay for it? That the Mexican government is sending us their rapists and murderers? That we can deport all 11 million illegals and then let the good ones back in?
Immigration has been at the forefront of news for the last few years. Why people think no one was talking about it until Trump came along is beyond me.
I know I can’t let this go, but I am simply astonished that anyone could think this guy would be anything but a disaster as president. He’s a rich, spoiled child. Would you call someone who gets into twitter wars with a reporter a “statesman”? Do you think his comments about McCain’s war record will make him a good commander in chief?
Trump gets uninvited to some conservative conference over the bimbo comment, and he calls the head of the conference a major sleaze and buffoon. This is how he handles conflict. And this is the man you want leading the country?
Read his twitter feed for ten minutes and then get back to me. If my children acted like this I would be furious and deeply ashamed, and yet he’s getting kudos for it.
Bill, We all know that only the most dedicated citizens of Mexico are coming to America. :o) Actually, they send quite a bit of non taxed money home and Mexico loves that. The other thing that really gets to me is how the women make treks home to Mexico every other year or so. They literally take the kids out of school for a year and then bring them back for us to educate after they have missed a year of school. This happens all the time here. So we start over trying to teach them basics. Even English because it is not important to them to learn it.
How about YOU try that sometime with your kids with no proof of homeschooling, etc. What gets to me is how “normal” all this is– even our government infrastructure.
I don’t think Trump will be Prez and I would not vote for him. But I am certainly glad he is bringing these PC issues up. Americans are so afraid to discuss these things for fear of being called mean or “almost racist”.
So, we fall for the soft kind of discrimination.
I’m not in favor of illegal immigration. I’m just not willing to stand around without calling Trump what he is.
There aren’t enough Republicans in this country to elect a president without getting independents and some dems to cross over. Trump simply reinforces the stereotype that Republicans are racist misogynistic morons. You may be happy that he’s bringing up immigration, but you won’t (I assume) be smiling when he hands the election to Clinton.
Besides, calling illegals rapists and murderers isn’t exactly a immigration policy. I suppose forcing Mexico to pay for and build a wall to keep their people out of the US could be considered a policy, but one that might come out of a kindergarten class.
“m not in favor of illegal immigration. I’m just not willing to stand around without calling Trump what he is.”
I might understand where you are coming from in all your comments if this were the real primary. I might even understand where bloggers here are coming from if they had been as outraged years back by Driscoll who billed himself as a pastor. But there was not real shame there at all. Yet, on Trump, who is a shrill narcissist in a huge line up who is being take on by the establishment, we are supposed to be outraged?
I will save that for those who claim to be of Christ and call women much worse.
Les, it seems that we rarely disagree and when we do its typically over minor things – but this time I’m amazed at how far apart we are. Trump’s rhetoric and lifestyle in no way represents anything good and moral. Nothing I’d want in a President.
C’mon man!
Bill Mac,
He’s not wrong about what others are criticizing him for saying…the worst are being sent over. The Mexican government is complicit. Are there some good people coming over? For sure. But in general he is correct.
Tarheel, it’s a weird universe. I have agreed here a couple times with Lydia and Scott Shaver. I know. I know. Maybe that right there is enough for me to do some serious examining of my position. 🙂
How exactly do you know that the Mexican government is actually sending murderers and rapists over here? How exactly is Trump privy to this information and no one else is? It seems that if this were true, we could show all the amnesty-mongers out there and shut them up.
This man literally says anything that comes into his head. It is not inconceivable that a small portion of it might stray into the realm of possibility, but is that what you want in a president? And what is his solution?
Speaking of literal, Trump says you have to “literally be hit by a tractor” to take advantage of Obamacare. I’m no fan of Obamacare but that seems just a smidgen untrue.
Bill Mac, I said the Mexican government is complicit. Trump is generally and widely criticized for talking about all the illegals who are in fact criminals coming over. He said a while back,
“”When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. …They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems to us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
Now sending? As in the certified government is actually sending? I don’t think so. It was a speech and “sending” was not the best choice of words. But notice, he said “Mexico.”
The fact is that the gist of what he said is true. Many, many criminals have come over and the Mexican government has been complicit in them being here now and committing crimes.
“Thanks to the Supreme Court ruling Zadvydas v. Davis (2001), the U.S. has become a dumping ground for Third World rapists. Aliens convicted of violent crimes can’t be held for more than six months if their home country (surprise) doesn’t want to take them back. The ruling unleashed 134,000 aliens onto American streets in only three years.” http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/24/report-released-illegal-aliens-rapists-not-tracked-or-registered-as-sex-offenders/
Does Mexico want them back? I think not apparently.
Les,
It seems you (and Trump) are simply stating the obvious. Is there any better proof that it is raining than to step outside and see for oneself.
I think the semantics of “sending” confuses the issue. I don’t think the Mexican government is taking applications for murderers and rapists, et. al. to cross the porous border. I also doubt they mind sending such persons to our shores, either.
There have been posts on the Internet that demonstrate the Mexican governments “sending” of the bad apples. I’ve read them but these types of information are hard to verify.
I’d bet that the U.S. government knows more about this issue than they are saying.
“They’re bringing drugs. ”
Mexican heroin is reaching epidemic proportions here. It is just too easy to bring in. And the fastest growing group becoming addicts are girls 13-15. The big thing here in schools is telling students not to accept even a soda from someone because the fastest way to make an addict is to trick them the first time. There is a reason illegals can afford big new SUV’s but our middle class America is shrinking.
Lydia,
If all you say it true, why is the president Obama’s approval rating around 50%. That means he has a great approval rating with the end of his terms coming up. He may have not been the greatest toward the Christian community, but he is great for America.
A president must represent “all” Americans, and that is what I will be looking for in the next president. The Affordable Care Act is one of the greatest things that has ever happened in this country.
Jess
Wow you are just plain wrong. His approve rating is one evidence of just how degenerate this nation has become under his leadership. I won’t list the issues here, you know them as well as I do. If you can abide some of his actions we are definitely not on the same page.
DL, Facts mean nothing to Jess – liberal talking points are his only source.
“If all you say it true, why is the president Obama’s approval rating around 50%. That means he has a great approval rating with the end of his terms coming up.”
Once you get folks hooked on the nanny state, it is hard to turn it around. Some people like it when bureaucrats micromanage their lives for them. Too bad we are not turning out more independent adults. Obama pretty much made his career living off government grants. He knows nothing else.
Jess: Perhaps I’m wrong, but I assume healthcare has become more affordable for you since Obamacare? Does it bother you at all that it is become much, much less affordable for millions of people? Healthcare didn’t really get cheaper, you know that right? For some to get cheaper healthcare, it has to become more expensive for others. Is that OK, as long as it’s not you?
Insurance premiums are skyrocketing for millions of people, deductibles are going through the roof. Millions lost their insurance. Does that not bother you at all?
Do you favor Socialism? It seems like you favor anything that falls under government control.
Bill Mack
great comment and spot on
The ugly truth is that America wanted a black president but if you notice it actually made race relations even more contentious.
What???? A statement that is a little more than over the top. In fact that is a little more than out of line. I don’t want to use the word racist….but pretty close.
Thanks Debbie! QED.
Lydia: Read your statement. To say some wanted a black President and that Obama is too blame for police shooting blacks and blacks not taking it, speaking out and protesting is well…..I want to use the word ridiculous.
“To say some wanted a black President and that Obama is too blame for police shooting blacks and blacks not taking it, speaking out and protesting is well…..I want to use the word ridiculous.”
I said that? I was actually thinking on a much bigger picture level of moving past the idea of “race” and thinking of such ironies as Clarence Thomas and Ben Carson juxtaposed with Obama and say, Al Sharpton.
Which ones move past race? And which ones need to make race a factor in most everything?
The soft discrimination of thinking that focusing on race is pious is not helping anyone get past such an ignorant idea that there are different “races”! I am thinking there must be power and money behind the concept or we would be able to move on.
Lydia: To move past what? The fact is that there are still racial problems out there, to ignore it is to ignore facts. Just watch the news. We have to continue to focus on race because it is a problem. Nothing pious about it, it’s being a human being who cares about other human beings.
To call it being pious is also ridiculous and ignoring the truth.
Debbie
I am not going to pass judgment as to why but the tension between African Americans and the Anglo population is worse than I have seen it since the sixties. I lived through the 60’s with the tension etc. The Ferguson riots and the Baltimore riot equal why transpired in areas like East St. Louis etc.
It seems we have not earned much since then.
Things have gotten better in some areas (voting, for example) but not in others. There are way too many being killed by police and the communication of the situation(s) is so much better than it used to be.
Ummm DL: Maybe because racism still exists?
Here is what I see, but how that actually reflects reality, i can;t say:
Certain segments of our society, Democrats in particular, have sought power by offering government assistance to the black and/or poor community with the idea that govt. money beholds those receiving it to continue to vote for the Democrat Party. [Same idea with encouraging illegal immigration, that those folks also getting handouts would vote the same].
Besides helping out the party it also keeps the poor people down and needful and dependent on the govt. And one way to aid themselves is to keep race relations stirred up. Instead of telling the poor that hard work and education is what will raise their standard of living, they tell them that the white folks are keeping them down. Now of course some white folks are racist, but that is not the now cause of the problem. But ‘race’ becomes the scapegoat to justify their unhappiness in life, the black on black crime, and the many children living without a dad at home.
Those, who like Dr. Carson, do work hard and apply themselves can get out of the cycle. And many do.
And the blame does not all fall on the Democrats either.
Many leaders and even pastors have used the dissatisfaction to further their own agendas.
These people are not content. And they are not content with their life for the same reason why every one who is not content with their life is discontent: they are not trusting in the Lord, and instead are looking to this world for fulfillment. They have a sense of community [a good thing] but without proper wisdom they put community ahead of God and truth [a bad thing].
So yes there are race problems in this country, but its mostly one ethnic people having them, and not mostly because of racism or discrimination.
“Re Driscoll a major difference. To be honest I thought he was a disaster waiting to happen from day one. That is not hindsight I have material that I can provide where that was my position from years age. I will not speak for others but I am certainly not alone.
Second he is not leading the nation in the highest office.”
Actually Driscoll is worse because he claimed to be teaching about Jesus Christ and representing His truth. His DNA is all over the SBC with Acts 29 and many of our leaders promoted him. Sadly, few had the nerve to speak up when he was so degrading to women calling them…wait! I cannot write it here it because is so despicable and degrading.
I don’t expect our president to be a pastor and represent Jesus Christ. I expect him/her to uphold the Constitution and not micromanage our lives for us. Our president is not to be a pastor nor is the president to be our nanny.
Lydia
Good comment I agree. You are correct in what you say of SBC leaders. However there are 16 million of us and I don’t think the rank and file ever had much use for Driscoll. Also while our leaders in the SBC are spotlighted and visible I do not think they have the influence on the SBC rank and file Pastors as did say the Adrian Rodgers, Jerry Vines era. Not passing judgement on whether this is good or bad but I think it is a fact. The application of this concept is that many did not really care what some SBC leader said about Driscoll or other issue for that matter.
Not I now the response is, what about the hight attendance at the SEND conference. That is a valid argument. This conference is new. People like new. The telling factor will be whether or not it will have decades of hight attendance as did the SBC annual meeting.
After this ramble my point is….Many are now detached from SBC leadership and really do not get involved in issues any more. They quietly Pastor their church.
As Trump said, and it is entirely true. They (Fox moderators or the rest of the media) would not be talking about securing the border and actually asking questions about it in the first debate if it were not for Trump. The Democrats want an open border so they can destroy the country and catapult us forever into socialism. The Republicans have appeased Big Business and others so they can get cheap labor. Furthermore, the Republicans (Mr. Free Trade) want to continue to let manufacturing move overseas and then bring their goods back into the country tariff free destroying the middle class. Huckabee, Rubio, Bush, and even Jindall have been soft on illegal immigration, and the Senate is horrifically following Obama on the Asian Free Trade agreement.
McConnell and by extension the rest of the Senators in this race have capitulated to Obama, including Cruz and Paul. They refused to get any legislation on the table to overthrow Obamacare, they refused to shutdown the government if necessary, and, other than Cruz, they bow at the throne of SCOTUS.
Trump, at least, appears to want to spar with China, Japan, and Mexico. Good! To many Republicans kowtow to the Chinese.
I don’t know if Trump will win the nomination, but I, along with Les, and many of the people I chat with about politics like Trump because he seems to hate politicians as much as the rest of us. The longer he stays in, the more the others will be forced to quit speaking like politicians and give us reason to vote for them.
As for Trump vs. Meghan Kelly (or the rest of the atrocious Fox Moderators) — go Donald. The Moderators in the first debate were professional. Those in the second were trying to sell us on their celebrity. The very first question was atrocious. Any sane person wouldn’t commit (at the first debate) to following any of those guys. They have to prove themselves in the coming months they are worthy of supporting. Remember the 1st Primary isn’t till next year. That was aimed squarely at Trump and he blasted back. Good for Him!
Nate
Obamacare cannot be shut down as long as he is in office A veto on legalization cannot be overridden. Best to hope for a Repub. in the white house in 2016 and it can and I think will be done. My rationale is that if we elect a Repub. president we would also likely elect a stronger majority in Congress
Last time that we had a Republican President and Republican Congress, we got Medicare Part D, which added $318 billion to the federal debt in its first 8 years.
Jeff
Medicare is a whole different story. If you can talk the government into giving me back my investment called Social Security for the last 58 years with interest they would never have to send me a SS check anymore each month nor pay for my prescriptions. I would be financially independent. SS is the worse investment I have eve made. If I had that money in the Stock market and made money at the same rate I have on those investments I would finance the campaign of the man of your choice (as long as it is Huckabee 🙂 )
A republican president will appoint the all powerful secretary of health and human services who can essentially end many of the policies of ObamaCare because of the way the law is written giving that person tremendous powers.
Nate
Mark the date and time I said this, then you can buy me coffee 🙂 Trump will not win the nomination…not going to happen. One of three things will happen (1) He will crash and burn…eventually his supporters will rise up and ask for substance not just crude and offensive remarks. (2) He will run on a third ticket split the conservative vote and hand the election to Clinton. He cannot win. If he does this he will show himself to be a total windbag who has no concern at all for this nation. (3) He will lose the Repub. nomination and show some class and support the Repub. candidate.
Mark the date so we can come back to this: It is Aug 9 4:40 pm Mountain time. If I am wrong i will stand on the highest Mountain top in Montana (13,000 ft.) and say I was wrong and Nate was right 😉
D.L., If you read my comments I never said that Trump would win the nomination. However, if the other Republicans remain so afraid of him that they keep asking the Chairman of the RNC to force Trump out of the Republican nomination (see Perry for example) then he will run as a 3rd party guy and ruin any chance of getting a Republican elected. Let the nomination process play out. Let’s see if these “politicians” will actually realize they are suppose to be for the people. Trump resonates with the people whether you like it or not.
At this point, none of the other Republicans have shown anything to me other then they continue to speak and act like politicians. Again, the only reason illegal immigration is on the table is because of Trump. Which of the Republicans has talked tough about China? Right, only Trump. The others better get their game together.
“The longer he stays in, the more the others will be forced to quit speaking like politicians and give us reason to vote for them.”
One pundit thinks Trump is a result of the “Obama Effect” and I agree. It is less about Trump and more about speaking up about the real problems and the direction this country has gone. Any candidate could chose to take on the obvious. I am hoping they won’t be able to dodge them so easily due to Trump.
I do know in my neck of the woods, illegal immigration is literally overloading the infrastructure. And the biggest drug problem is now Mexican Heroin.
I am a big proponent of LEGAL immigration.
Nate,
Amen!
Let’s see. Trump has opinions about everything, is focused completely on himself and his own ego and power. He flip flops on issues when they become inconvenient, and plays fast and loose with the truth. Sounds like a politician to me.
There are reports of illegal immigrants helping build at least one of Trump’s hotels. Trump owns/has owned several casinos. I’m sure there’s nothing illegal going on there. No illegal workers, no organized crime.
Bill,
Do you have facts to back up your rumor that Trump is directly hiring Illegals, and is involved in organized crime? Major news outlets sure would like your sources.
John: The first three words of my comment are “there are reports”. They are public domain; I didn’t create them or make them up. I notice also that you use the words “directly hire”. Of course people in Trump’s position “directly hire” very few people, but lots of important people have gotten into trouble for employing illegals or contractors who hire illegals even if they didn’t conduct the interviews and make the offers themselves.
Bill,
It is kind of like the assault Romney faced in the election over gardeners that he “hired”. By the way organized crime was removed from casinos in the 1970’s according to the FBI, replaced by organized capitalist.
In California, Nevada, Texas and Arizona, along with many other states. According to well documented government reports, in the last 20 years the majority of all new homes built were built by illegals. Thus by your logic does this make these homeowners what, criminals? Do you live in a newer home or any of your family members?
My family pretty much all live in northern NY, in non-new houses. Not a big immigrant population here, legal or illegal.
Is hiring illegal immigrants illegal? After all, if they couldn’t get jobs, they certainly wouldn’t come here in the numbers that they are.
It was aimed a trump because he’s said – if “I don’t win I’m going to run third-party” – it’s a common question in debates when someone is saying they’ll do that.
Plus, if he’s not a republican and has no intention of advancing the Republican Party – that’s fine if he believes that- but integrity might dictate that one for whom that’s true perhaps should not run as a republican though.
Plus – he’s for single payer healthcare and more “freedom to choose abortion” .
Christians Calling Trump’s constant racist, sexist, vulgar, crude pronouncements “truth telling” is sad. Very sad.
I agree it’s the Obama effect – in that as people clamor for something new – someone “nonpolitical”, “post partisan” – they ignore who a person really is – his lack of moral character what they really believe – just to get that “something new” – Trump – Obama in another body in many ways – and truthfully Trumps voting base boasts similar motives as Obamas.
Plus he’s not non political – he’s an admitted huge part the problem – remember “Bought and sold politicians”. Have to be brought before they are so – so the buyer is just as guilty in the corrupt system as the seller.
Tarheel,
If Trump is similar to the president he cannot be all bad.
“Is hiring illegal immigrants illegal? After all, if they couldn’t get jobs, they certainly wouldn’t come here in the numbers that they are.”
They don’t get “jobs” they are mostly self employed working under the table but the big thing is to have a child born in the USA if you are an illegal.
If someone pays you to do something, that’s a job.
Under the table is still illegal.
When I think “job” I tend to view W2’s, tracking days/hours worked, etc. Lots of records/accountability.
My bad.
One thing we need to ask is how an illegal gets a drivers license. Then remember motor voter. There are reasons candidates wont get serious with this issue.
Do you have proof of statement Lydia?
By statement I mean that they are getting paid under the table?
You have not done much hiring, Debbie?
Proof of what?
Do you have proof of this statement Lydia?
Yea, putting trump In office would remove “big business” stranglehold on politics.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/28/news/economy/donald-trump-polls-taxes-wages/index.html
Notice who he’d appoint.
“””The SBC is as wrong as wrong can get when it comes to the issue of the separation of church and state.”””
Simply stating something does not make it true. Stating it multiple times does not increase the truth value.
Jack,
Especially when it was truth the first time.
Bill Mac,
I didn’t say Trump represents most Americans. I said he will have a plan to present to the Americans. As far as Ben Carson and Donald Trump’s plans, I don’t know yet what they will be. I do know both men are very intelligent, and it doesn’t take an experienced person to be a good president. In my opinion some good old common sense will go a long way which is very scarce in Washington D.C.
Well no, that isn’t quite what you said. I also asked what specific policies of Trump’s you think are so impressive.
With Trump’s extremely thin skin, and propensity to verbally attack anyone who dares disagree with him, or hurt his wittle feewings, I doubt he’s going to represent everyone.
How about this Trump quote from Esquire:
H’ray for non-PC!
Remember he’s also the face of the Birther movement, right out there on the far right wing of crazy.
This is the man you guys are rallying around.
Crickets
“Lydia: To move past what? The fact is that there are still racial problems out there, to ignore it is to ignore facts. Just watch the news. We have to continue to focus on race because it is a problem. Nothing pious about it, it’s being a human being who cares about other human beings.
To call it being pious is also ridiculous and ignoring the truth.”
Hey Debbie, You once made a comment on this blog that we are all racists even if we don’t know it. My approach to the issue is about lifting everyone up. Not playing into the us/them dichotomy.
I am not sure it is profitable for us to have conversations. We are on different planets when it comes to communication. Think what you will.
Lydia, I agree with Debbie. In theory we are all racists. We are all liars. We are all [add whatever sin you wish].
To say we are “all racists” has the same truth value as to say “we are all human.” This has little practical value however. It leads to the kind of division we see with race-baiters like Sharpton, Jackson, and Obama.
I will freely admit I have the capacity to judge someone unfairly according to race. That doesn’t mean I do so. I also have the capacity to murder someone in a fit of anger. I haven’t done so . . . at least not yet.
I certainly understand racial bias. A few months ago my son-in-law was walking his children across the street from our school and church to my house. He is a tall, Mexican man. His daughter looks Mexican and his son is as white as they come. We received a call to the church office that a “man was stealing two of our children.”
I understand the potential for racism in our nation. But, to say that everyone is a “racist” simply guarantees division.
Jack,
I agree with much of what you say here, but I really think Debbie read right past something very profound that Lydia said. I will paste it below.
” ‘To say some wanted a black President and that Obama is too blame for police shooting blacks and blacks not taking it, speaking out and protesting is well…..I want to use the word ridiculous.’
I said that? I was actually thinking on a much bigger picture level of moving past the idea of “race” and thinking of such ironies as Clarence Thomas and Ben Carson juxtaposed with Obama and say, Al Sharpton.
Which ones move past race? And which ones need to make race a factor in most everything?
The soft discrimination of thinking that focusing on race is pious is not helping anyone get past such an ignorant idea that there are different “races”! I am thinking there must be power and money behind the concept or we would be able to move on.”
This comment was simply brilliant, and it was unfortunate that it did not get more attention.
WOW! I just watched Trump’s Press Conference and speech. This has to be the smartest guy on the planet. To get into a staring contest with Fox News and win, this guy should be president.
Jess: It’s easy. Just renounce all your Christian convictions and pull the lever.
By the way, Trump wants to appeal Obamacare. Yeah, he’s really staring down Fox News.
Bill Mac, as they say, “even a broken clock gives the correct time twice a day!”
I know that this will make some people’s heads explode, but I don’t think repealing Obamacare is realistic. The legislation is truly a disaster and I wish I had a time machine and a way to prevent it, but I think by the time a repeal is a possibility (if it ever is), the country will have adjusted to it and repealing it will cause as much chaos as the original legislation did. I think the only hope is to dismantle it piece by piece, replacing it with something workable.
This is one of the big problems I have with politics, is that politicians stake out positions that rally the faithful but are nearly impossible to realize. Like repealing Obamacare, and deporting all illegal aliens, or the various constitutional amendments that have been proposed over the last few years. Taking these positions gets the sheep to fall in line, and have the advantage of never having to be fulfilled.
Yes, he wants to repeal it and replace it with “something terrific” – yep that’s all he’s said – except when he said in the debate a numerous other times that “socialized medicine is a good thing”
I think he has no short term memory. He never worries about whether what he says today can be reconciled with what he said yesterday.
Jess, I’m not sure he’s the “smartest guy on the planet.” Stephen Hawking, for one, is pretty smart.
Unless you mean by “smart,” that he is a shrewd, unscrupulous businessman. He freely admits he used the laws of the land to bilk creditors out of billions of dollars.
Maybe he could “bilk” China out of some of the billions we owe them. But, would it be wise to “bilk” a nation that can field a 200 million man army?
The more I learn of Trump the more I hope he fizzles–and the sooner the better. He freely admits he is not a Christian and feels no compulsion to ask anyone for forgiveness–ever! And, that includes God. That is straight out of an interview on T.V.
Jack,
The way I see it I’m not electing a Christian or Pope. I want a president that will represent all people Christian and unsaved alike. I think a Conservative Christian president will be bad for the country. Look what happened under Ronald Regan, eight percent unemployment. We had war with the two Bush’s. Gas prices were out of this world. No regulation for the stock market. Don’t get me started.
Under a Liberal Christian president, Obama has given us the Affordable Care Act which has been a life saver for millions of Americans. If repealed, it would be devastating to the Republican party, and I don’t think they could recover from a repeal.
Jack, I know you will bring up gay marriage. First of all there are six Republicans on the Supreme Court, thus we now have gay marriage, (which really isn’t God’s view of a true marriage.) I’m against gay marriage, but if they want to be miserable like the rest of us, so be it. LOL
Do you imagine that if you keep repeating this fiction, it will suddenly become true? It is perhaps the silliest thing anyone says on the entire internet – that Democrats bear no responsibility for abortion.
If there were a contest for “Most Nonsensical Assertion” ever made in blogdom, Jess, yours would probably win. But it is still a complete falsehood.
Obama is the president MOST supportive of the killing of babies in their mother’s wombs in American history. That is a fact. The Republican platform opposes abortion, while the Democrats enthusiastically support the brutality of Planned Parenthood and abortion.
You cannot make a lie true by repeating it over and over. It’s still a lie.