My disdain for conspiracy theories is pretty well public here on SBC Voices. Most conspiracies are absurd and assume a big, bad boogeyman running things in a way that usually doesn’t exist in reality. But there is a little voice in the back of my head that wonders about this election – is it possible that the mainstream media is working to ensure that Hillary Clinton makes it into the Oval Office? I have some reservations about that premise, three primary ones:
- Hillary has had a somewhat prickly relationship with the press. Would they really engage in a grand scheme to win an election for someone who treats them like the enemy as she often does?
- Are they really that smart? That organized? That disciplined? My view of the mainstream press is pretty low and I have trouble believing they could pull it off.
- Is there some William Randolph Hearst-type figure pulling strings behind the scenes? We like to demonize George Soros or the Koch brothers (on the GOP side) or others, but are they really able to work the strings and control CNN, MSNBC, and the major networks like dancing marionettes? It seems ludicrous.
May I be completely serious (and biblical) for a moment? The scripture provides the best answer for conspiracy theories. “Why do the nations rage?” the Psalmist asks. He goes on to say how God laughs at them. People plot and plan and scheme, but God remains sovereign. He lifts up one and sets down another. People attempt conspiracies. God accomplishes his purposes. So, as we explore conspiracy theories, we should never forget that.
On the other hand, there are some nagging realities that seem to make this theory seem like more than the rantings of a late-night AM radio DJ. I have friends who are convinced the fix is in, that the media are playing us all like a banjo (can’t think of any more cheesy cliches so I’ll move on). Could they be right? Here are some items for consideration.
- The mainstream media, with the exception of FOX and the alt-right sites, are clearly all-in on the Democratic side. There can be little debate on that. Watch them interview Hillary. “What makes you such a brilliant, accomplished woman?” Then watch the same person skewer Trump. Now, you know me. I don’t have a problem with anyone skewering Trump. Fire away. But Hillary should be asked to answer for her crimes, malfeasance, misdeeds, and flip-flops as well. They almost never do. Hillary will win the vote at the major media sites, not counting FOX, by something approaching 99%. So, they are certainly sympathetic if not conspiratorial.
- Hillary is a horrible candidate – people don’t like her, except for her passionate devotees. They knew that she would have lost to any of perhaps 6 to 10 of the Republican candidates, and probably by a wide margin to three or four of them. Something had to be done. Hillary could not lose again.
- So, the media declared Donald Trump the winner of the Republican primaries long before he had won even half of the delegates he needed to actually guarantee his nomination. It wasn’t just sycophants like Sean Hannity who gave up any journalistic credibility to fawn over Trump. CNN, MSNBC – they went all in on the Trump candidacy. Why? Is it possible that they knew that he was unelectable? Trump has enough skeletons in his closet to stock Walmarts across the country for Halloween. They knew it. Could it be that they were setting him up so that they could knock him down?
- Does anyone believe that the press just happened to discover these recordings of the Donald’s vile and disgusting words about that woman recently? The press and October surprises have a long history.
- Did anyone happen to notice that Wikileaks was promising a bombshell revelation that would ruin Hillary’s candidacy, and suddenly this recording was “discovered” by the Washington Post? Coincidence?
- Does anyone wonder if maybe they have a few more of these kinds of things in the secret vaults of their Illuminati headquarters just waiting for another uptick in the polls for Trump. Trump gains two points? BOOM! Another recording released. Some bad news for Mrs. Clinton? BIFF! Another one is made public. The race tightens in a battleground state? ZOWIE! Another revelation sees the light of day.
Have I become paranoid? Maybe.
In the long run, I kind of doubt a real conspiracy, but I suspect something a little less formal. They love Hillary. They hate Republicans. Some of the better candidates scared them on the GOP side, so they worked to pump up the one guy guaranteed to lose. They helped to inflate him till he got the nomination and they held back anything damaging until afterward – keeping their powder dry.
Anyone have a tinfoil hat I can borrow? I’m hearing messages in my head!
I know you guys might want to watch and discuss the debate tonight – here’s your open forum. I’m going to do something productive. Not sure what. I may watch reruns of Andy Griffith. Let me know if anyone sees a mockingjay fly by the screen at any time.
I’ve got a post coming this week on the moon landing, the assassination of Kennedy, and the Calvinist takeover.
Dave, First, you can make your own tinfoil hat out of aluminum wrap like Reynolds Wrap. Second, when you said you don’t have one, you disabused me of the notion that you had posted a picture of yourself wearing one. Third, do conservative evangelical Christians need to ‘conspire’ together to promote what we favor or react negatively to what we don’t like? No. Thus the mainstream liberal media doesn’t need to conspire together to promote Hillary or paint Trump worse than he actually is. We agree here. Fourth, The USA, for the most part, has been cut loose from its… Read more »
that was… vote for either of the two candidates… not forefather of women….
Or, is it just the folly of our democratic system? Does the Lord really expect everybody to know how to select competent government leaders? Would any college football program ever leave the selection of a head coach to popular vote? Do they not probably consult football experts for a choice? And such was the way our early government was set up. It only degenerated into the popular vote we have today. The masses are an easy target for manipulation. That said, it is amusing to see the hypocritical moral outrage over Trump’s “lewd conversations” by those who openly support blatant… Read more »
Doug, just for the record, the President isn’t picked by a popular vote. I get your point, but this election is about which states can be won. The Electoral College decides the Presidency, and if not them, then the House of Representatives. Technically speaking we are a Republic, not a democracy.
You are right. We support your views
It is good that we condemn Trump’s professed “former” behavior, but we must equally condemn all our past and present leaders — R & D — who are either openly homosexual or support those who are, or who’ve expressed the same type behavior as Trump and received media coverup. Remember, it was the most recent Republican convention that expressed support for homosexual behavior. This implicates all R & Ds in promoting lewdness.
Best line I’ve seen (saw it on Eric Schumacher’s site):
After watching the debate, Mexico has agreed to build the wall and pay for it!
I love it!
And per one of the news channels (I don’t remember which), they said that immediately after the debate, and regarding Trump’s statement that Muslims “must” report criminal and illegal activities they witness, some supposedly prominent Muslim tweeted, “There is a suspicious man on a stage in Missouri beating up a women.”
If you want to judge the debate on the ability to attack and score points, Trump had a good night. But I cannot believe that people cannot (or will not) see the obvious. The man has no ideas or policies in his head. He cannot and does not speak in any level of detail because he doesn’t have any details. He wants to renegotiate trade deals, but won’t say how. This is a man who gives no specifics, ever. How will he reform the tax code? We don’t know, but it will be great. How will he prosecute the war?… Read more »
Dave:
That is a good line.
I don’t believe there is a conspiracy.
I do believe that most major media outlets are very friendly to and work with Democrats in the federal elections.
The thing that surprises me is how week the Republican opposition research is.
There were over a dozen Republican candidates, many of whom were well funded, and none of them unearthed any live tape like this. I am sure that we will be treated to more, and I suspect the new tapes, women etc. are already scheduled for appearances on the news shows. But it is surprising that none of them found this.
The list of losers grows longer:
Brilliant theologian Wayne Grudem, a Trump supporter, has had an epiphany and is now undecided. Executive paraphrase: “Gosh…shoulda researched the guy better…” Stick with obscure theological stuff, Doc.
There has always been a short list of evangelical winners and Russell Moore is top of that list.
Add Jerry Falwell. He’s so proud of Donald Trump. I suspect many Liberty students feel like they’re living in the Twilight Zone.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScdLe5fbVw0d12MtiYcJCf-hLDjpr7AdiYTIkMBttqdLuTQbg/viewform
Apparently, many students at Liberty are more ethically mature than Falwell.
Bill, I disagree about Grudem, on this basis sure, he looks a little silly for endorsing, then unendorsing Trump, but Grace needs to extend to someone like that.
He made a mistake. I made one once. Long time ago. No sense going into ancient history.
I was more impressed with his willingness to admit error. That was WAYNE GRUDEM. I respect him for his willingness to admit it.
Punctuation is nearly impossible on a phone.
True. Kudos to Grudem for waking up.
Poor Ted Cruz wishes he has a time machine! Just a week or two too early.
Yeah, I’m guessing Ted Cruz is wishing he’d held off on his flip flop.
And then there’s this:
Citing ‘life’ issues, black Southern Baptist pastor says he’ll vote for Clinton
https://baptistnews.com/article/citing-life-issues-black-southern-baptist-pastor-says-hell-vote-for-clinton/#.V_utkegrK1s
David R. Brumbelow
David B: I don’t blame him and if truth be told, among the two candidates I would rather have Hilary for the same reason and for the sake of my daughters, granddaughters and yes even my son.
We express outrage at a man for his behavior toward women, yet a prominent SBC leader signs a friend of the court letter to support the building of a temple for a foreign god and we give him praise? Perhaps we think the Lord is more offended by the groping of females than groping other gods? Christ spoke against those Pharisees who “strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.”
Doug: I am also a strong supporter of religious freedom. This is America which is built on religious freedom. And yes, I believe God is strongly offended by the groping of females. We are not on this earth for any male to make us feel subhuman.
Those without Christ need the Gospel. I would support the signing of such a document.
Debbie, Gospel leaders are to call all men to repentance, not pander to their idolatry and unbelief. They are to treat the cause, not the symptom. Ungodliness is the root of immoral behavior.
Doug: I agree that Gospel leaders are to call to repentance. But in America, it is built on religious freedom. I believe somewhere on this site is a couple of articles Bart wrote on this subject to which I agree. It does not go against our Christian beliefs to believe in religious freedom for all in this country. It should be. One religion should not be a mandated dominance.
Doug: Here is one article Bart wrote in June that is closest to what you and I are discussing.
https://sbcvoices.com/yes-muslims-really-qualify-for-religious-freedom/
Debbie, and thus as Jesus said to the Pharisees, “Neglecting the commandment of God [in this case, the First commandment] you hold to the tradition of men.”
Nowhere does God support the notion of an autonomous conscience. Romans teaches that all men know the true God, but reject him for idols. The ministry of the gospel is to call all men to repentance, not succor them in their idolatry. It is the duty of all governments to acknowledge Christ as Lord.
Debbie, I actually prefer this one: The Biblical Case for Religious Liberty. I will note that no one yet, in more than a year, has made any serious effort to rebut it, much less succeeded.
Yes because Russell Moore totally doesn’t call idolaters to repentance (rolls eyes).
Yes Bart, that article is a very good one. Thank you.
Bart, I offer a rebuttal to your interpretation of John 18:36, which your “Biblical Case for Religious Liberty” is predicated on: https://christcommonwealth.org/2016/08/24/christs-political-interest/
You read unclearly if you take the organization of that post to be that there is a single verse upon which the entire argument is predicated. Rather, there’s a page full of biblical exegesis dealing with a large number of passages considered in their contexts as well as in the context of the overall biblical narrative.
Doug, Baptists have always believed that the GOVERNMENT should support religious freedom and the CHURCH should preach the gospel. You oppose religious freedom as do many Christians. Anyone who says that Muslims should not have religious freedom is an opponent of religious freedom. I oppose your opposition. It is not supporting idolatry to support the right of other religions to operate. We are not Israel, but Rome. Paul never asked the empire to outlaw the idol temples, only for the freedom to preach Christ. You, I suppose, continue to labor under the deception that America is some kind of theocracy?… Read more »
Dave, Paul preached in the days of the Church’s infancy. Christ clearly taught that was a temporary condition. In using the parable of the mustard seed and leaven, he prefigured the progressive growth of the Kingdom from a position of obscurity to a place of dominance. This was also taught in Daniel where the little stone becomes a mountain and fills the whole earth. Nevertheless, the apostles openly condemned the worship of false gods and persistently called all to repentance. The apostles never sought a truce with government whereby in exchange for freedom from persecution, they would accept the legitimacy… Read more »
Your scriptural interps are anything but “clear.”
1. “Christ clearly taught that was a temporary condition.” Indeed, it is a temporary condition that still remains. We don’t have to scratch our heads and wonder when this will be resolved. Revelation 11:15 announces it for us quite clearly. 2. “The apostles openly condemned the worship of false gods and persistently called all to repentance.” As does Dave. As do I. As does Russell Moore. As does every gospel preacher and every gospel church. This is entirely consistent with Religious Liberty. 3. “The apostles never sought a truce with government whereby in exchange for freedom from persecution, they would… Read more »
Bart, I never explicitly named anyone, but if I were to claim I was against rape—even preached against it—yet at the same time supported safe houses for rapists, would you not call me out? Likewise, the Lord has in no way commissioned his ministers to support safe houses for false gods.
You need to explain why the Lord explicitly restrained the worship of idols and false gods in Israel, in connection with the First Commandment; and why Paul in 1 Timothy 1:9 lists the religious categories “ungodly and sinners” and “unholy and profane” as lawful uses of law.
I agree the national media (ABC, NBC, CBS) strongly leans toward the liberal side. I don’t see it as a conspiracy, just that the media culture is liberal and is sympathetic to liberal causes. I think in many ways, they are so biased they do not even know it. Not all, but many. Perhaps they need Conservative Political and Evangelical Christian Sensitivity Training. If you don’t believe it, poll them on things like abortion, same sex marriage, transgenders and restrooms, the right of a Christian baker or florist to not cater, and thereby basically endorse, a homosexual wedding, etc. It… Read more »
I’ve got to disagree with this statement: “Trump has enough skeletons in his closet to stock Walmarts across the country for Halloween.”
Trump’s skeletons are not in the closet. They’ve been sitting out on the front porch for all to see for many years now. Kinda scares me to think of what is actually in the closet given what I see out in the open.
Fair point.
Conspiracy? Maybe, but I lean towards no. Agenda is the better word I think. And since biblical morals do not enter the equation for the liberal agenda they protect, project and propagate a unified front for the overall agenda in spite of bitter differences in the nuts and bolts of said agenda.
Let me give an example of this from today. After the last debate, of which the general consensus was Hillary won, the stock market rallied the next day. It was widely attributed to Hillary winning the debate and Wall Street viewing her favorably. Well today, the market is rallying again. While Hillary may not have clearly lost the debate last night, though I think she did, she clearly didnt win. What’s the cause today? The rally fit the agenda to elect Hillary last time, it doesn’t today, so it is ignored on those grounds as it does not fit the… Read more »
Conspiracy theories are exceptionally kooky… …unless they are actually true. Actually this theory does have some historic credibility. Propaganda has been employed throughout history. Even in the Bible we have references to the chronicles that kings would keep. The reason they are referenced but not quoted is because it was understood that there was generally some truth in them albeit rather embellished. Kings do that sort of thing to help keep their people in line and to try to cement their legacy after their death. Most recently we have the famous Nazi propaganda machine that convinced the majority of a… Read more »
“The comments Mr. Trump made 11 years ago were deplorable and I condemn them entirely,” [James Dobson] said.
“I also find Hillary Clinton’s support of partial birth abortion criminal and her opinion of evangelicals to be bigoted.
“There really is only one difference between the two.
Mr. Trump promises to support religious liberty and the dignity of the unborn.
Mrs. Clinton promises she will not.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/10/10/jerry-falwell-jr-the-gop-establishment-could-be-behind-donald-trump-video-leak/
David R. Brumbelow
Yeah, David, but Evan McMullin, for example, promises to support religious liberty and the dignity of the unborn, and he’s actually credible when he says so.
“But he’s not a viable candidate”? Neither is Trump, who has never yet, not in his best moments, enjoyed a single millisecond in which he was ahead of Hillary Clinton in the Electoral College.
David, FYI: “Thomas Dewey did beat Harry Truman – at least in the 1948 Gallup presidential polls. The perennial Republican frontrunner never trailed Truman in a Gallup poll after March 1948, and Dewey held an eight-point lead heading into September. (Truman also trailed in two polls from rival organizations.) On Election Eve, Dewey had a five-point lead in the polls. As we all know, Truman won the 1948 election by more than four percent in the popular voting, and he won by a wide margin in the Electoral College. The Truman win forced polling companies to change how they surveyed… Read more »
Dave Miller…nothing wrong with wearing a tin foil hat from time to time. I think your conspiracy theory is a possibility – but I will proffer one of my own by asking a couple of question: If you were Donald Trump and you wanted to stage the worlds most profound and ego building publicity stunt while at the same time securing, again, the White House for his long time friends and financial landing grounds, and fellow progressives (the Clinton’s) – – – — what would you do differently than he has done in this election? Even if he loses he… Read more »
You forget a few little items. 1. Hillary is not a horrible candidate. She is supremely qualified for the position with a proven track record of competence in government. That said, she is also a politician and you will never, ever find a squeaky clean politician. Hillary has dirt under her fingernails, but no more than any other politician, and probably a fair bit less than quite a few. 2. Most of the criticisms people level against Hillary are gross exaggerations if not outright fabrications. Many of those who typically demonize the left don’t seem to actually care whether or… Read more »
Dave, you make some great points about the media’s role re: the Trump campaign … from start to finish, they appear to have maneuvered things for such a time as this. Their quadrennial behavior is just as predictable as every political candidate claiming Jesus in an election year.
I too have wondered if the media built up Trump just to tear him down. But let’s face it, Trump is a spectacle, and media outlets are going to go where the news is. If you’ve got people talking about issues vs a clown with a wig and orange skin running around shouting a lot, which one is news? If you have rallies where you may have violence breakout at any time, encouraged by the man on the platform, that’s going to draw the cameras.
Bill, I’m no Trump fan, but let’s condemn him accurately: “If you have rallies where you may have violence breakout at any time, encouraged by the man on the platform…” To be accurate, the violence isn’t being encouraged by Trump or his followers. Rather, it’s the inappropriate response of some people who actively oppose him. (Some say the violence is even being funded by people on the left, if you want to subscribe to conspiracy theories.) Blaming Trump for it is like saying that it’s a girl’s fault that she keeps getting raped because she dresses alluringly. Otherwise, your central… Read more »
Jim: There is this incident for a start:
“There may be somebody with tomatoes in the audience,” Trump warned people at a rally in Iowa last month. “If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.”
He also justified the white supporter who suckerpunched a black man at one of his rallies, and said he was considering paying his legal fees.
I’m not defending him on those issues, and I agree that those are part of his lack of moral character, but are you linking those things to the violence of the anti-Trump crowds or are you saying that they are in any way on the same scale with them? I can see people being confused over a lack of distinction between the two.
This from the link from Greg Harvey: Unshackled, Trump unleashes aggressive attacks on own party WASHINGTON (AP) – The “shackles” gone, Donald Trump stepped up his fierce attacks on his own party leaders Tuesday, promising to teach Republicans who oppose him a lesson and fight for the presidency “the way I want to.” Exactly four weeks before Election Day and with his campaign floundering, the businessman reverted to the combative, divisive strategy that propelled him to victory in the GOP primary: Attack every critic – including fellow Republicans. Those close to Trump suggested it was “open season” on every detractor,… Read more »
Jim: You seemed to be saying that I was wrong about Trump inciting violence in his rallies. That was my only point in providing the link. There may well be some anti-Trump violence but I don’t see Trump’s opponents encouraging it, as Trump did.
“Rather we are voting for Trump because we think the next generation will be much better off without a Leftist Supreme Court. We also think the protection of America’s borders are at stake. We also think the unborn deserve better than Hillary Rodham Clinton, and that even a known womanizer like Trump will be kinder to the unborn than a Leftist Democrat like Clinton. We also think our military personnel and their families will have grander support if Donald Trump is elected. We further believe small businesses will flourish under a Trump presidency more than a Clinton White House. We… Read more »
I think I’m going to preach from this text on November 6: Isaiah 8:11-15 – “For the Lord spoke thus to me with his strong hand upon me, and warned me not to walk in the way of this people, saying: 12 “Do not call conspiracy all that this people calls conspiracy, and do not fear what they fear, nor be in dread. 13 But the Lord of hosts, him you shall honor as holy. Let him be your fear, and let him be your dread. 14 And he will become a sanctuary and a stone of offense and a… Read more »
David B., The hypocrisy of Southern Baptists in supporting Trump will be a sore spot and source of division for many years to come. It means first of all, we owe Bill Clinton an apology. Secondly, it means that we are embracing a man who is admitting to sexual assault(a felony) to be POTUS. Thirdly, we, re telling our wives, sisters, mothers, & daughters that we are comfortable voting for such a man to be in the White House. Fourthly, a recent poll revealed that 60% of America believe DT is a racist. SBC leaders are comfortable endorsing a racist… Read more »
Dwight, much agreement here.
I think it would be accurate to state that if Trump were a democrat articulating many of the same views (many of which are closer to progressive ideology than conservative ideology) as well as acting and speaking in the same ways – he would be roundly criticized and certainly not supported by the likes of Jefrress, Falwell Jr., Dobson, Bauer, Perkins, and all of the other evangelical Trump Kool-Aid drinkers (even people on this very forum).
I think this is also true – even if the opponent was not Hillary. I think the fact that it is Hillary gives people, in their mind, cover. The hypocrisy and power hungry republican partisanship shows through brightly though. I say this as one who up until this election was one of those faithful republican votes no matter what – and I could justify and rationalize and explain good sounding (Christian) reasons for being so – but there has come a time in my life when I have had to look myself in the mirror and ask “Do you really… Read more »
Tar Heel,
One for the record books, or maybe two, three at the most…you & I agreeing on something-:). You are spot on in your analysis and augmented my reasoning. Mohler & Moore are actually saving the credibility of the SBC with their consistent, courageous, and principled stand.
Dwight, have you considered voting for a third-party candidate? I’ve got to say, Hillary Clinton is also a terribly bad choice. I think it is difficult to be very persuasive in critiquing Trump voters if one is planning to vote for Clinton.
So, why not a third-party or write-in vote for you?
Bart, That was my intent ’till I observed the first debate. Read your post so I’m aware that u are aware of my reasoning whether u agree or not, and obviously u don’t. Your question is a fair one. I realized that I would be offering myself up to such an observation/critique/criticism etc, by taking the position that I have on Trump supporters. But, they have reasoning that’s justifiable to them for voting Trump(none of which I agree with, in terms of Trump’s willingness to deliver) & I have my reasoning that’s makes real good sense to me since I’m… Read more »
Yes. You did write that you had initially considered a third-party or write-in candidate. I had forgotten that part of the essay, because once I had read that you were voting for Hillary, the shock value of that drove the rest of the post into the background for me. I genuinely had forgotten that part of the post. I do disagree, Dwight. It is not merely about abortion, although that is an important enough question all by itself. Really, I think we’d all have to acknowledge that the world grew more dangerous and America grew weaker during Hillary Clinton’s term… Read more »
Bart: If you will remember history, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson were just two Presidents who had the power to change the course of the Civil Rights Movement and used it.
Bart, The President sets a tone or spirit in a nation, somewhat analogous to the spirit & tone a father sets for the house. The President can influence, fund, and legislate decisions/regulations & federal funding regarding body cameras for policemen. Hillary mentioned something in the first debate regarding establishing national standards regarding police shootings….what constitutes a threat…updated training…etc. She even went so far as to attribute “implicit bias” as being the underlying factor behind some of the police shootings. She(as most Republicans) does not view police shootings as 100% the fault of the person shot. How she addresses this subject… Read more »
I can understand a conservative Christian voting for Trump since he is one of only two choices.
I can understand a conservative Christian not voting for Trump.
I can understand a conservative Christian voting for a third party candidate as a protest against both Trump and Clinton being unqualified.
I can understand a conservative Christian not voting at all for president this time, though they should vote on the other candidates and offices.
I cannot understand a conservative Christian voting for Hillary Clinton.
David R. Brumbelow
I agree with you David B. How anyone can vote for the baby killer, with blood on her hands, is beyond me. But not to worry. There will likely be no grilling or shaming here for Hillary supporters. Only Trump supporters are subject to grilling and shaming and attacks.
Are there Hillary supporters posting here?
Well, are there commenters here who plan to vote for Hillary? Would they state so unequivocally?
David B., Don’t know that I’ve ever or would ever identify myself as a “conservative Christian.” The word “conservative” carries a lot of baggage in the Black community. Theologically speaking, I identify myself as orthodox, fundamental, or traditionalists rather than conservative. The Bible does not identify believers as “Christians.” The Bible identifies believers as Kingdom-citizens or disciples of the Kingdom, people of the Way, disciples of Christ, etc. So, you’re right: I’m not a conservative Christian. In many Black circles conservatism & racism are synonymous. I disagree with that premise. But, because it is a popular viewpoint, I shy away… Read more »
A defense of Ted Cruz. I think Cruz has gotten a lot of unfair criticism. He is not a liar. He is a principled conservative. He is not perfect, but as far as I know, a good, decent man. Others have spoken at political conventions without endorsing the candidate. Why could they not just respectfully let him have his moment at the Republican Convention? After all he ran a strong campaign and had many supporters. He deserved to speak, and he did not say a word against the nominee. It seems to some that Cruz was set up or ambushed… Read more »
I’m Bart Barber, and I approve of this comment.
Me, too,
This AP report frames the situation rather compactly:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CAMPAIGN_2016_EVANGELICALS
Trump’s ‘grab ’em’ comment unleashes national conversation NEW YORK (AP) – On Facebook and Twitter, on the phone and on the job, from living rooms to hair salons, Donald Trump’s “Grab ’em by the p—-” comment has unleashed a tsunami of stories from women sharing painful memories of sexual assaults. Many of these women were grabbed by the genitals – exactly as Trump described doing – by men who fled or melted into a crowd. Some women were molested as children on a playground or school bus. Others were groped on a train or dance floor. They’ve told of attacks… Read more »
First of all, I voted for Dr. Ben Carson in our state’s primary. I also really liked Dr. Rand Paul. Mr. Trump was never my 15th pick let alone my first pick. I supported Trump when he won the nomination because I am adamantly against Hillary Clinton. My detestation for the Democratic party is unyielding. In spite of all that, it has become impossible for me to support Donald Trump any longer. I do not know for sure how that lack of support will play out on election day, other than I will not vote for Mrs. Clinton. The key… Read more »
John, I feel ya! It was hard for me to get there too. Welcome aboard. 🙂
#nevertrump. #neverhillary
This summary was provided by Dr. Malcolm Yarnell in a tweet today. It describes my position well, and deserves to be rescued from the false charges of “defending Trump,” “abandoning virtue” or “embarrassing evangelicals.”
Your Choice:
1. Vote for deplorable policies w @HillaryClinton
2. Vote for mixed policies w @realDonaldTrump
3. Waste your vote on 3rd party
Rick, one of those rare times on these blogs where we agree. I plan to vote #2 to try and stop #1 with a reasonable belief that my vote will prevent the increase of babies being slaughtered.
Les,
What is the basis for your belief that a vote for Trump will result in a decrease in abortions? He can’t wave a magic wand & change the abortion laws? The Republicans are probably moving to Minority status in the Senate & the house. What then is the basis for your belief? If voting Republican was the answer to abortion, why then during the 32 yrs I’be voted Republican, abortions have not decreased? How can an immoral man such as Trump, lead the nation to make such a moral righteous change? Aren’t you being naive?
Dwight,
First, I said my vote will be to try and prevent an increase in baby slaughter.
DT is explicit that he will seek to retain in place the famed Hyde amendment. HRC is explicit that she wants the Hyde amendment killed off…pun intended. Kill the Hyde amendment = kill more babies.
There is a sense in which any vote that does not go to the winner is wasted, is there not?
And yet, there is a sense in which any vote that accomplishes the purpose intended by the person casting it is not wasted, is there not?
A third party vote is only wasted in the minds of those who wanted that vote to go to someone else.
#3 is a false choice. We are not called to vote for the person who could win, but for the best person.
If Trump were down 70%-30% in the polls, by your logic you would be required to vote for Clinton since voting for Trump would be a wasted vote.
Many people despise the “wasted vote philosophy” but binary voters exist and we are not going away. I know it seems illogical to you and many others, but its logic is embraced by millions. This third party stuff makes as much sense to us as picking the Eagles to win a game between the Cowboys and the Redskins.
I understand the philosophy. It guarantees that nothing will change in American politics and that Christians will always be the slaves of the republican party.
I will say this though. You’re right. We have effectively a two party system even if we don’t have one by law. But this is how we #nevertrumpers see it: (in as much as I can speak for them). From the moment Trump became the nominee, a Clinton presidency was inevitable. Trump was the only one in the 15 (or whatever) candidate field who could not beat Clinton. So we are looking to mitigate the disaster as best we can, and that is to try to effect change for the future of the party that has the best hope of… Read more »
Binary voters and third-party voters need to reach a détente in which I acknowledge that your rationale is not unreasonable and you acknowledge that my rationale is not unreasonable and we both acknowledge that we’re driven to these extremes by the worst slate of candidates in our lifetimes.
I think we reach that détente in part by acknowledging that neither of us are absolutists in our position. I plan to vote outside the two major parties. And yet, in general, I adhere to the “binary-voter” idea. I just cannot do so this time. Otherwise, that has been a lifelong pattern for me, in spite of the fact that there have been many election cycles in which some third-party or independent candidate has existed who more closely aligned to my values than did the candidate who eventually received my vote. Thus, I acknowledge that the binary-voting argument has some… Read more »
Rick: “This third party stuff makes as much sense to us as picking the Eagles to win a game between the Cowboys and the Redskins.” An illogical, apples to oranges comparison. When the game is between the Cowboys and Redskins, there are only two options. There are not only two options of whom to vote for in this election, no matter how long and how loud anyone says it.
Robert Vaughn, maybe it’s like a playoff between the New England Patriots, Green Bay Packers, and 4 high school football teams of your choice.
Yes, Robert, I realize that *technically* there are always those names at the bottom of the ballot listing people and parties no one has ever heard of. I am talking about “for all practical purposes.”
Taking the footnote of the also-ran candidates into consideration, I suppose one would have to go with Les Prouty’s much more accurate analogy, although I would substitute the Cowboys for Green Bay because, after all, Dez caught that ball!
Robert, Rick: For me it doesn’t matter if it makes sense or not. It’s about my strong conviction and not pleasing any person or making sense. I am simply going with the fact that I will not ‘hold my nose’ and vote. I feel that I would be going against everything I hold strongly to if I voted for either candidate.
I should have added Les’ name as well. 🙂
Debbie, for which candidate are you planning to vote?
Rick: I am voting for neither. I have officially switched to Independent from Republican.(My new voting card says Independent). In Oklahoma I can only vote if the parties give permission to all Independents to vote.
Debbie,
So as an Independent, you *cannot* vote in the Presidential election without party permission? Am I understanding you correctly? I’ve never heard of this. Do the parties typically grant such permission or deny it? If they deny it, then it means you, as a registered voter, are being denied suffrage. That’s outrageous.
Let me ask the question this way. IF the parties DID give permission to Independents, for whom would you vote?
In the primaries, I think she’s talking about.
The restriction on independents voting in Oklahoma only applies to primaries.
Thanks, Dave and Bill, for that helpful clarification. Debbie, please allow me to rephrase. If you don’t mind me asking, in the GENERAL election, as an Independent, for whom are you planning to vote?
Yes, in the Primaries.
Rick: As to your question, I am as of now undecided. As of now I am not voting for anyone as President unless I can find a third party candidate I can vote for. Some I cannot because I do not have enough knowledge to vote for. Hillary and Trump I will not vote for. The Presidential space would as of now be blank on my voting ballot.
Rick: In Oklahoma only three parties are recognized. Republican, Democrat and Libertarian. But there are too many disagreements for me to have switched to Libertarian.
Debbie,
I am re-registering as an independent as well. Like you, I cannot go along with the libertarians either. They are too anarchist for my taste, and many of them are flat out anti religious.
As of right now, Lord willing, I will be challenging our incumbent Oklahoma house representative in the 2018 election.
Let’s change that.
1. Vote for the deplorable policies of Hillary.
2. Vote for the deplorable actions and character of Trump.
3. Invest your vote in breaking the two-party stranglehold on America’s future.
Ok Dave. I am finally listening. How do we make that change? In Oklahoma, write ins aren’t even tallied, so independents and third party candidates must find a way to get on the ballot. Do you have any suggestions?
John: I don’t think the tally matters. Data analysts will crunch the numbers. If an unusually low number of registered republicans vote for Trump, they’ll certainly know why. All I think that matters is that they get the message that they can’t simply give us anyone and we’ll fall in line.
John: Even no votes are noticed. Each time people do not show up at the polls, especially in larger than normal numbers, it is noticed. Just the outcry of those not voting for Trump and protesting him as a candidate are being noticed. Those such as Russell Moore, Max Lucado The Gospel Coalition, the withdrawal of support from Wayne Grudem, the withdrawal of support from the many Republican Senators etc. is being noticed. And the Liberty University students against Trump is being noticed. I am not worried about making a difference number wise.
I won’t be voting for Trump, and make no defense for any of his actions. At the same time I can understand my Christian friends who are choosing to vote for him. A friend recently pointed out that he does not vote for a president of our nation based on how good a person he or she might be, but rather whether he thinks that person will be able to lead and accomplish the purpose of government set forth in the Scriptures. For example, Roman 13:3-4 says one of the great duties of authority is to keep evil in check.… Read more »
Thank you Tarheel.The fact is I was never all that attached to Donald Trump. I was attached and tenaciously loyal to the Republican Party. But, that party has obviously left us.
Well, I guess Dave finally picked up that copy of Carroll Quigley’s “Tragedy and Hope”. (Shout out to Dr. JW)
Seriously, books like “Propaganda” by Edward Bernays will make you start unrolling that Reynolds Wrap.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_(book)
“Voting for an out of control egomaniac like Donald Trump would be like playing Russian roulette with the future of this country.
Voting for someone with a track record like Hillary Clinton’s is like putting a shotgun to your head and pulling the trigger.
And not voting at all is just giving up.
Nobody said that being a good citizen would be easy.”
-Thomas Sowell
http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2016/08/02/the-political-picture-n2200760
David R. Brumbelow
That’s a good quote.
Personally, I’m close to giving up.
Here’s a chilling thought. The vitriol at the Trump rallies is at a fever pitch. People in the press box are vilified like nothing I’ve seen, and some have had to have secret service protection. If Trump loses this thing, as seems likely, and he continues to cry “rigged election” as he’s been doing since winning the nomination, then I think we’re going to see violence. At a Pence rally there was already talk of a revolution if Trump loses.
I think we see an attempted revolution inside the Republican Party whether Trump wins or loses. Many Republican voters simply believe it is time to blow things up and will attempt to do so where they have the most influence. Trump is the first salvo. This anti-establishment anger is not going away and will be amplified by a Hillary presidency.
All they will accomplish is putting the democrats in charge for a few more election cycles. Since the advent of conservative talk in 1988 there has been exactly one republican elected as president. That is over a period of nearly thirty years. This will be extended now at least another four and likely indefinitely into the future. They gave us Bill Clinton with non stop criticism of GHW Bush; they have blown up congressional majorities a couple of times; now they give us Donald Trump as a nominee and threaten to blow up the conservative house and senate again. There… Read more »
I am in a meeting with Al Mohler and he just said that he could not vote for Trump, especially after appearing on TV 46 times to discuss Bill Clinton and saying Clinton should resign.
But he added that he understands and respects the decisions of those Christians who feel they must vote for Trump when comparing the 2 candidates.
He said that such people are dedicated and sincere believers, and they are not crazy or immoral in their choice.
That’s all I have been asking for.
Thank you Dr. Mohler.
Tim, the nominees since 88 have been GHWB, Dole, GWB, McCain and Romney prior to this year. Each as establishment as they come. The next test will be the test. The establishment cozier up to the Yea Party movement to win majorities in 201″, and since then have run from them. Well that vocal minority has only gained traction as the Republican establishment has become to be viewed as hardly distinguishable from Democrats on many issues. That anger resulted in Trump this year with more primary votes than any candidate ever. It’s not going away and will only grow, just… Read more »
Phone typos
Next cycle 2018
Tea Party
JeffP: You keep using the words “Republican Party” but it’s not anymore. I don’t know the name for it but it’s not the Republican Party any longer which is why this year I left.
And with this anti-establishment comes anti-freedom for anyone as they rail their anger at women, immigrants, non-white people and a host of other things. And even Christians are joining in for reasons that are just beyond my understanding. Hate and Christianity just do not mix. That is not the kind of country I want my children and grandchildren raised in.
I think, Louis, that has been the message all along. I think there’s been a great misunderstanding – the condemnation of the Trump justifiers and Trump defenders has been taken as a condemnation of anyone who votes Trump.
I won’t, can’t, and frankly, don’t think you should. But that’s a personal choice. I think in general it is the promoters who are in the target, not the voters.
Dave, I have not been a promoter. I’ve been a defender of my decision. But I think the distinction your making somehow didn’t get through in the way intended. May just be me and my mistake.
I’m also amazed that a Hillary supporter/intended voter has largely been given a pass here the last 24-48 hours. Hardly a peep by those here who practically jump down Trump voters.
Les, since the primaries, it’s certainly been my impression that you have been a pretty consistent voice of support for Trump. But that’s just an impression.
Jeff P, if by establishment, you mean sane, decent, respectable conservatives, then I’m ready for some establishment conservatives.
Paul Ryan is my hero right now – the way he has taken a principled stand against Trump has been inspirational. I’d love to vote for him.
Dave, well that was not my intention to be a defender of Trump like you describe in your latest post, “For instance, I’ve said that the quarrel we have is not with those who are reluctantly voting for Trump as the lesser of two evils, though I disagree with that choice. The problem is those who are publicly defending Trump, saying his behavior isn’t so bad, and generally justifying his actions” I have always since the primary thought of myself as a reluctant voter, seeing Trump as the “lesser of two evils” and thus the only one with a shot… Read more »
You have no need to change my opinion. It is just an impression.
Dave, we’ll have to agree to disagree on Ryan, and many like him. Those sane conservatives have barely whimpered in spite of a majority in both houses as spending has gone to unfathomable levels, including the last budget compromise that fully funded Planned Parenthood. I understand the anger even if I myself don’t support Trump. I left the Republican Party for Independent status years ago, though I vote that way many times, and haven’t voted for a Democrat since I was an unsaved heathen. The system is wholly corrupt and broken, and establishment Republicans are wallowing in it just as… Read more »
Do we know for sure that Trump was born in the United States?
Max:
Trump was born on Mars!
That is a scandalous insult against our neighbor planet.
Yes, he was born “a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…”
Debbie, I see far more simply fed up with broken promises, corruption and compromise than I do bigots and racists. Probably best not to lump all in to the same category
Students from Liberty University just posted this on Twitter tonight. They call themselves Liberty United Against Trump.
https://twitter.com/Tyler_McNally/status/786353521117495296
Two women have come forward to claim Trump touched them inappropriately. I just watched an interview with Falwell, and he said he was voting Trump no matter what. Liberty deserves better.
It’s sad. I’m not ashamed to admit I teared up as I watched that interview. I love LU. I received a degree from there. I have recommended the school heartily to graduating high school students. I am taking online classes there now. However, I teared up because I’m just astounded and profoundly saddened by Jerry Falwell Jr.’s constant defense of Trump and making crystal clear in this interview his continued support “no matter what”. He even implied, in response to a direct question, that he’d continue that support even if it’s true that he is a serial predator. It’s embarrassing.… Read more »
Here is the full story of Liberty University Against Trump. These are a brave group of students. I hope there is no retaliation against them.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2016/10/12/liberty-students-form-antitrump-group-after-falwell-reaffirms-support-for-trump-n2231555
Sorry, that should be Liberty United Against Trump.
Dave, reasonable thoughts on your article. I just want to make a point here. If Hillary had broken a single law in this harsh political environment, she would be in jail, and it’s killing the GOP because they cannot find anything to jail her on. Political bias makes no one guilty of a crime. Maybe when all this mess is over the church will concentrate on evangelizing folks right here at home which should have been happening for years, but those pews are so soft and comfortable. I’m afraid the church has lost all religious clout with our citizens. This… Read more »
Really? People have gone to jail for what Hillary did with the emails. The reason she is not in jail is because the Obama admin gave her cover.
Jess, is it not true that you don’t want the church to stay out of politics, but that it should only be involved in DEMOCRAT politics? Has that not been your point through the years. You seem to have argued that we should be involved in politics as long as they are not conservative, pro-life, pro-family politics.
Has that changed?
I believe I have always said that the church should stay out of politics. I was actually for Trump when he started his campaign. The FBI couldn’t find any laws Hillary has broken, and that’s good enough for me.
I’m wondering what has changed.
You’ve been the biggest supporter of the Democratic party, in spite of their pro-death, pro-gay marriage, anti-biblical platform.
Suddenly now you want us out of politics. What changed?
He just can’t help himself. Trump’s response to one of the women’s allegations?
“Look at her …. I don’t think so”
Sometimes Trump can be crude and rude. Who doesn’t know that?
The other candidate is motivated by personal ambition and greed and lies about 90% of the time. That’s the alternative.
Sometimes?
Trump also personifies greed.
And you think he’s honest?
“Trump also personifies greed.”
So it’s a Tie? They’re both greedy?
“And you think he’s honest?”
Everybody on the planet is more honest than the other candidate.
Tom,
Yes…it’s a tie…. both candidates blatant immorality equally disqualifies them from office.
Proof that the media is in fact, Wormwood…… My Dear Wormwood, Be sure that the patient remains completely fixated on politics. Arguments, political gossip, and obsessing on the faults of people they have never met serves as an excellent distraction from advancing in personal virtue, character, and the things the patient can control. Make sure to keep the patient in a constant state of angst, frustration and general disdain towards the rest of the human race in order to avoid any kind of charity or inner peace from further developing. Ensure that the patient continues to believe that the problem… Read more »
Despite his own description of himself as a “winner”, Trump is putting in the least effort in his campaign of any candidate I remember in my lifetime. He is already preparing to lose, with all his talked of rigged election. Look for violence on election night from Trumpsters. It never even enters his limited imagination that he might be the cause of his own defeat. It’s everyone else’s fault. Right now all he is doing is playing to his rabid fans for applause. That’s all he ever really wanted out of this race anyway, but he managed to sucker lots… Read more »
“Look for violence on election night from Trumpsters.”
We’ve already had violence. Some Clintonistas bombed a Republican campaign HQ in NC.