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 moral foundation, has bought into evolution and godlessness, and finds no need to be fair and conscientious, and feels free to allow the ends to dictate the means [especially since there really is no wrong or right unless something infringes on its goals, then its wrong.
Finally, i won’t be watching the debate. I can’t in good conscience vote forefather of the woman candidates,
May God have mercy on the USA.
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 homosexual leaders.
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? We don’t know except he’s going to knock the heck out of ISIS. It’s clear he isn’t as smart as he says he is, but his problem is not intelligence, it’s ignorance. He doesn’t know anything, or want to know anything about being president. He wants to win the presidency, but it’s pretty clear he doesn’t want to be president. He doesn’t want to do the hard work of governing. He wants to have people praise him.
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?
Let the government protect religious freedom for Christians, Muslims, Mormons, Buddhists – all of us. Let the church do its work.
ONe day, we will all regret that opponents of religious freedom such as you were so prominent in the American church.
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 of false worship. In fact, it was because of the exact opposite stance that they were persecuted for preaching Christ…as LORD. In Romans, Paul clearly holds all men accountable for knowing the True God. It is not because God is obscure that men worship false gods, but because men are willful idolaters. Thus all men are to be called to repentance, and governments are held responsible to restrain in accordance with Truth — to whom much is given, much is required. This has been the basic position of the church until the modern Enlightenment period. I encourage you to read the reformers or Augustine: http://www.logoslibrary.org/augustine/correction/index.html
We must forsake the groping of other gods, before we condemn those who merely grope women.
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 accept the legitimacy of false worship.” Nor does Dave. Nor do I. Nor does Russell Moore. The very heart of Religious Liberty is that I do not have to accept the legitimacy of false worship, nor can anyone anywhere be forced to accept the legitimacy of any sort of worship. Notice, I am not saying that government SHOULD not force people to accept the legitimacy of worship; I’m saying that government CAN not do so.
4. “Paul clearly holds all men accountable for knowing the True God.” As does Dave. As do I. As does Russell Moore.
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 will be real interesting to see how the media handles it when a six foot three inch male high school student decides to join the girls basketball team because he identifies as female.
David R. Brumbelow
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 liberal, and yes, I think even more so, establishment agenda. And that establishment, which includes pubs and Dems, along with the media, is the real way to view this. And the disdain for that establishment is the only practical way to view Trump and his rise. Many obviously feel overthrowing that establishment and its inherent corruption is by far the most important issue in this election. To quote The Who, many are simply saying ” We Won’t be Fooled Again.” And I think that feeling is far deeper than any poll reflects
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 population of people that genocide would be a pretty cool thing to do. The reason propaganda is employed is because it actually works. People will believe all manner of lies before they believe the truth.
What I suspect, and it’s an unverifiable suspicion, is that the movement today isn’t so much for the purpose of power but survival. This comes in the form of population control. Many believe that for the human race to prosper we must dramatically reduce our population. If you are a person of means, then the way for your line to survive, you must be able to reduce your genetic defects and work to kill off most of everyone else in the world effectively and preemptively (that is, you need to do it before someone else does it to you). The best way is to keep the world at odds with itself. You want gene therapy available, but you don’t really want cures for the major illnesses (or at least have them readily available) – so you want to red-tape the health industry. You want the people you need to kill off to be dopes – so drugs are good to be legal. You want things like abortion, physician-assisted suicide, homosexuality, transgenderism, etc because they all work to slow down population growth if not eliminate it completely. You want to foster international and religious strife because that gets the people stupid enough to follow those things killed. You certainly don’t want nations to be peacefully prosperous. So I suspect that there is a class of individuals of exceptional means loosely associated with each other somewhat working together to push the world in this direction.
Interestingly, I think there is a class of people who are working against them. My suspicion on the Georgia Guidestones, for example, is that they have been placed and maintained by this group. I doubt a group that desired to accomplish the things on the stones would broadcast it like that.
To be sure, if my suspicions are correct, I’m not worried about it in the least, and none of you should be either. We still worship a sovereign God. If such a class of people exists as I have outlined, they are his tools for this time in history and cannot accomplish anything that he has not planned for them to do. So our goal is to proclaim, not the kingdom of the eugenicists, but the Kingdom of God to as many as possible so that if these kind of people are successful, there will be a multitude of fellow brothers and sisters worshiping with us at the throne of the Almighty.
“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 potential voters, including the timing and sampling methods of polling.”
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 will have won because he “played” the “unplayable” and revealed the hypocrisy of the “conservative movement” and the “evangelical right” thus further separating them from further participation in the political process…so the progressives can further take over….
We all know that looking for conspiracy theories can make one wacko – or reveal that one is already wacko – unless, as Jim points out above – the conspiracy theory believed is actually true.
Paranoia that someone is playing a yuge trick on you – does not necessarily mean that no one is playing a yuge trick on you.
LOL
or is it a a laugh out loud? Hmmmmmm……
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 not the claims are true, only if they can rouse the rabble (which explains a lot about Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck (though to his credit he opposes Trump), O’Reilly, etc). Even back in my right-wing Christian days I was often frustrated with those “of my kind” who seemed to care so little for the truth and were willing to believe just about any claim provided it advanced their ideology. Which explains a lot about the right-wing Christian world.
We can test this: what horrible, loathsome, despicable things can you tell me about Hillary? Now how detailed can you get beyond the basic labels and categories? What news pieces can you point to that aren’t just spinning the issues or spreading rumors? What documented evidence is out there that in any way supports these very broad and vaguely worded allegations? I can only think of one thing that might mark a legitimate difference which someone on the right might consider loathsome – abortion – and even that one is wildly overplayed. Beyond that, I bet you a cheeseburger you cannot tell me more than generalities. “Emails!” “Benghazi!” “Financial scandal!” Try to go deeper, and you’ll quickly run into trouble because there is no deep end on these scandals, only alt-right figures who care little about the truth and their audience who shares their disdain for anything more substantive than “Left bad! Hillary bad! Evil! Despicable!”
3. Any issues that had even a hint of legitimacy (ie, Benghazi and emails) have been run into the ground. We know they are non-issues. Only those with major ideological axes to grind continue making them an issue. She has been through major pressure on those issues, including major press coverage – including throughout the election cycle – so it’s pretty ridiculous to claim otherwise, and by this point there’s no news anyway. It’s a done issue. As my boy Bernie said, “Enough with the damn emails!”
4. Her opponent is Donald Trump. Even some traditionally conservative media sites are jumping on the Hillary bandwagon. People know Trump would be a disaster. And media sources are finally starting to do more than just “report the facts” and are including a degree of fact-checking.
5. Hidden files released at convenient times? Why would this ever require a conspiracy? I’m 93.4% sure that the Trump recording was found quite some time back and was being held until it was convenient. Being held, that is, by some Hillary supporter (or her own team) for use at a more opportune time. That’s how the game is played. Wikileaks and their sponsor Russia know all about that. So does every candidate that has ever run for office. October is a month home to many traditions, and every four years one of those traditions is the October Surprise.
6. Conspiracy? Of that magnitude? It would never happen. No one could pull off something of that magnitude.
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 point is spot on: it’s going to draw the cameras.
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, regardless of party. “It is so nice that the shackles have been taken off me and I can now fight for America the way I want to,” Trump said in a tweet that brought new concern – near panic in some cases – to a party trying to stave off an all-out civil war before Nov, 8.
This is not who I want in the White House. He would not be the President of all the people. This in my mind is insanity.
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 believe Immigration Reform most likely will happen under Trump not Clinton. We believe Health Care will get a fresh start under Trump but will only worsen under Clinton. We believe the 2nd Amendment will all but vanish under a Clinton administration.
I publicly detest the known vices of Donald Trump, vices which make it very hard to support him as president of the United States.
Better men than Trump were unfortunately eliminated in the primaries.
Rather than voting for Trump because he’s the best man for the job as president, I will vote for Trump because, given the only viable alternatives we possess, he’s the only man for the job.”
http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/2016/10/al-mohler-is-spot-on-about-donald-trump-dead-wrong-about-evangelicals.html
David R. Brumbelow
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 rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. 15 And many shall stumble on it. They shall fall and be broken; they shall be snared and taken.”
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 and a rapist for POTUS. Finally, anyone at 60 yrs of age who engages in the behavior DT described is a thug and gangster. With a straight face, Peter Lumpkin posted those words to defend voting for a racist, rapist, thug, & gangster. The reason I use such strong language is because, if Trump were Black, this is what the media & the SBC folks would be saying ’bout him. But, because he is, who he is, they are willing to give him a diabolical pass. Thank God for Al Mohler & Russel Moore, they understand to endorse Trump is simply not wise, and not in the best interest of the health of evangelicalism.
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 believe the principles and ideology you have purported all this time, or is it about beating ‘the other side’?
This has been hard. TO be honest there is a hankering in my gut to vote for ANYONE to keep Hillary out. I am tired of the Clinton’s…their lying tongues, their overt and continued corruption, their lawlessness, their immorality, their greed, their self aggrandizement….I could go on and on…..but…..
Trump is also the very embodiment of each of those ills and faults. He is *no* better than they on a single one of the issues I just rattled off. Therefore, I can no more vote, much less support and defend him than I can her.
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 absolutely convinced that Trump is a racist and misogynists. I find those two traits more detestable than anything that could be said ’bout Hillary.
I recognize that the thimble full of votes that I may possibly influence would not be enough to bring victory to Hillary. But, I did not want to explain to my grandchildren that I did not lift a finger to keep a racist and misogynist from occupying the White House.
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 as Secretary of State. Considering the growth of ISIS, the statistics about American deaths to terrorism attacks, the crisis in Syria, the outcome of the Arab Spring, and a whole host of other items that occurred on her watch, I don’t think there’s any way to assess her term as anything other than an abject failure. If her name were not “Clinton,” she would be stuck at a mid-level desk at Foggy Bottom.
The President of the United States has very little say in the hiring of training of local police officers. The President of the United States has tremendous influence on national foreign policy. What if your grandchildren live in a world in which they are regularly terrorized by foreign extremists? What will you say to them, then?
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 resonates with me. Trust me when I say Black parents and students are living on edge at the rash of publicized police/security related shootings since Trayvon Martin. They are looking for answers/solutions. DT offers none except for a “Stop & Frisk” Policy that was ruled unconstitutional as practiced in NY under Mayor’s following Gullianni. SCOTUS also rule on police brutality cases. Judge Sotomayer recently in a dissenting opinion stated that she opposed the current “shoot first & think later” policy affirmed by the The Supreme Court that’s practiced by many police departments. Bart, that’s very much a life issue. The unarmed Black man assisting at work an autistic young adult in North Hollywood, Florida, shot with his hands up lieing down…ask the policeman…why did you shoot me? The police responded, “I don’t know.” That’s a case of shoot first & think later, Judge Sotamayer was addressing. Even Justices, Hillary appoint, will probably rule better on racial and police brutality issues than Trump appointed justices. All I would want from a Hillary justice department is to make sure that both the citizens & policemen were treated fairly under the law in cases of alleged or real police brutality. Under Trump I have zero confidence that this would be done objectively.
Finally, the threat of terror from afar being a threat to my grandchildren is a concern, but, it does not appear to be nearly a pressing of concern as a potential police brutality threat. Social media is filled with many, many well documented video cases of police abuse from all over America. It is a serious, systemic problem that’s currently affecting the psyche of our children/youth/young adults. Terrorism does not seem to present nearly the same level of concern to them. Every Black pastor is being asked by his congregation, what are you all going to do to protect our children. This line of thinking drove the vote for Kennedy over Nixon, Johnson over whomever his opponent was, Carter over Reagan. In Arkansas, Republican Win Rockefeller over racist Jim Johnson, etc. Much of Hillary’s vote in the Black Community is being driven by police brutality. BTW, the vote for Kennedy paid off big time. He & his brother Bobby were two of the best friends the CR movement ever had. Literally, there was an emotional sadness that engulfed the Black Community at both of their deaths.
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 from labeling myself a conservative Christian.
Only my people will be impacted by Trump’s racism policy wise & otherwise. There’s a reason why David Duke & every racist group in the country is openly campaigning for Trump. You won’t begin to believe how weird it feels to be considering belonging to the same party as David Duke, the Alt Right People, & the “racial purist” Bart alluded to on his blog concerning this election. Dwight McKissic & David Duke will never vote for the same person.
Police brutality is real. Your kids/grandkids have no fears. Mine do. Those are the pro-lives that I’m voting to be protected. Hillary will do better @ racial justice and police brutality than racist Trump. I don’t expect u to understand this.
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 by Trump having his people gather to heckle Cruz’s speech. Payback? Just can’t let it go? Just wanting to make him look bad? Making sure to leave a sour note on his speech?
Cruz has been attacked for later saying he will vote for Trump. Why denigrate him for that? He is just doing what he earlier promised to do. And what most Republicans or Democrats do; despite differences support the final choice of the party.
I continue to have a lot of respect for Senator Ted Cruz, as well as a number of other conservative politicians.
David R. Brumbelow
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 getting out of taxicabs, harassment in the workplace and rapes on college campuses.
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 thing that made me decide this other than Mr. Trump’s juvenile comments and behavior, is that I can see this driving a wedge between me and some people that I love very much. Having a Republican for president is no longer worth that to me.
I have been very active in politics since I was 18 years old, and making this statement is hard for me to do. Nonetheless, I am going to bite the bullet and not vote for the Republican presidential candidate for the first time in my life.
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 representing us, or to plant the seeds of a third party that we can hitch our wagon to.
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 validity to it, even if I do not believe that it is an absolute validity that necessarily overrides all other concerns.
Likewise, I’ve got to think that a lot of binary-voters in this election cycle would not be binary voters if the two dominant parties were the Democratic Party and the Green Party. If the choice you faced were between Hillary Clinton and Jill Stein, I think you’d be shopping elsewhere. If there were an absolute commitment to the necessity of voting for a candidate “who can win,” then if the polling were 95/5 in favor of Clinton, you’d logically be forced to vote for her, right? But I can’t imagine that this is your actual position.
We’re both saying that binary voting is wise up to some point at which our convictions will not permit it. We’re just haggling over where that point actually is.
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. I believe that is the way many Christians are approaching this, and I can respect.
I think it is sad that many Christians are in such a turmoil and inflamed at one another over what one must ultimately decide upon his or her own conscience.
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 is very little to show for the anger conservative media has stirred up. The anti establishment anger is and will remain just that….anger. Meanwhile, the Democrats continue to march forward with their agenda.
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 as it has the last 6 years. People have voted Republican all their lives and see little fruit from it. They aren’t going back to the old ways
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 at stopping the most evil of the two. So in the conversations, I have tried to make that case and defend why I see it that way.
And in fact, this is probably the only place I’ve done this publicly. Not on my Facebook, for the general or the primary (where I voted for Cruz). I don’t think I’ve taken a position at all on my FB in this year and a half of election season. But be all that as it may, I doubt I’ll change your opinion of my position. But blessings to you anyway.
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 the Democrats are
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. No, it’s more than that – it’s disgusting!
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 is why I believe whole heartedly should stay out of politics and keep itself unspotted from the world.
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 is “out there” in the “broken system” rather than recognizing there is a problem with himself.
Keep up the good work,
Uncle Screwtape
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 of people into believing he wanted the best for the country.
“Look for violence on election night from Trumpsters.”
We’ve already had violence. Some Clintonistas bombed a Republican campaign HQ in NC.