Since Donald Trump announced his intention to run for president in June of 2015, a lot of people have wondered at Trump’s popularity among evangelical Christians. A man with Trump’s well documented moral failings seems an unlikely choice for a community that railed unrelentingly against Bill Clinton for his moral failures. But evangelical support has, on the whole, remained solid. Trump famously quipped that he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and he would not lose support. This statement, to the surprise of many, turns out to be true. Over the course of the campaign and his presidency, Donald Trump has said and done things that would have doomed almost any politician in our nation’s history up to 2016. But these things have had almost no negative effect on the president’s base of support. Nor have things that his supporters see as his successes grown his base of support. President Trump has divided evangelicals in a way that I don’t think we’ve ever seen, although that division is admittedly lopsided in favor of the president. People have wondered what straw it would take to break the camel’s back, what it would take to lose the support of a historically important Republican constituency. But there is no straw. There is no camel. American evangelicals are firmly and it seems irrevocably wedded to the president. High profile evangelicals, including those in our own denomination, sing his praises. He is, to quote DJT himself, “the chosen one”. Recently Erich Bridges posted a piece on Voices to challenge Christians about DJT’s evident (to the author) racism. Thinking, I presume, that if a reasonable case can be made that the president is, in fact, a racist, it would turn evangelical support away from him. Likewise, Dave posted a piece on the president’s retweeting of potentially blasphemous statements. As always a lively discussion ensued, and this is what we learned: It doesn’t matter. I want to take just a few paragraphs to break down this phenomenon and explain why nothing is going to change. I have separated evangelicals into basic categories and will explain why I think there isn’t going to be any movement.
- Never Trumpers: We can dispense with this group quickly. This group has never supported and will never support the president and so convincing them that he is a racist or blasphemer or (fill in the blank) isn’t going to do anything except reinforce their already negative opinion.
- Racists: I wish I could state that evangelicals and white supremacists do not overlap, and let me state that I think the overlap is very slight, but I think it would be naïve to think we don’t have racists among us. These folks already think Trump is a racist, or at least sympathetic to them. I think the percentage of Trump supporters who are truly racist is very small, but it’s real, and they aren’t moving.
- One Issue Voters: This is another group that can be dispensed with quickly. There are, I suppose, different issues that evangelicals might grab onto as their “one issue”, but race certainly isn’t one of them. For the vast majority, the issue is abortion, and since Trump ran and has governed as pro-life, his alleged racism or any other perceived vice will have no effect on this constituency.
- True Believers: These are the enthusiastic Trump supporters. The ones you see at rallies. These are the folks who think the president is actually honest and truthful, and when he says he won the popular vote, or that President Obama wiretapped him, they believe him. These are the ones who rejoice at every insult, jibe or accusation the president levels at Democrats, the media, or even those of his own party who dare to criticize him. No accusation of immorality, wrongdoing, blasphemy or racism will move these folks because if DJT denies it, they believe it, and that settles it. They aren’t moving.
- Hold-Your-Nosers: These are the reluctant Trump supporters. The ones who acknowledge that the president is pretty much all or most of the things his detractors say he is, but at the end of the day he isn’t a Democrat. This is the lesser of two evils argument and it is not unreasonable. But it also seems like these are the folks, out of all the groups listed, who are most likely to be swayed by a compelling argument that the president is a racist (or a blasphemer). Nope. Still not gonna happen. In economics, there is a phenomenon known as the sunk cost effect. This occurs when someone keeps investing in something they suspect might not pay off, but they stick with it because they don’t want to lose their investment. Reluctant Trump voters have already swallowed a great big steaming pile of corruption and immorality. A little racism or blasphemy isn’t going to tip the scales. All the reasons they had for voting for DJT are still in place, ie: he’s still not a Democrat. They are in too deep to change now.
Now, these groupings are my observations and they are no doubt imperfect. I may well have missed some groupings and there is no doubt some overlap between them. For example, I suspect the race group is a tiny subset of true believers and that one-issue voters are a subset of hold-your-nosers. But I provide them to propose the thesis that evangelicals are so entrenched in their opinions that no matter what the president does or says, past, present or future, that minds are unlikely to be changed. The president has sharply divided evangelicals and that rift is likely to remain in place until the Trump presidency is relegated to the pages of history.
What think you? Am I off base somewhere? Do you think there is likely to be movement among these groups or some that I may have missed? When I say there is unlikely to be movement, I do mean unlikely, not impossible. I personally know some Hold-Your-Nosers who have become Never Trumpers and folks on this board have indicated the opposite. But I believe these to be outliers and not part of a trend. What do you say? Do you think Hold-Your-Nosers will become True Believers? Is there anything that will shake True Believers into a different group? Let’s play nice.
Bill MacKinnon is a regular on this site, commenting under the name “Bill Mac.”
I’ve always thought that Bill Mac was one of the smartest guys here. I appreciate the article.
For me at the moment, it’s the lack of an alternative.
Exactly. Its just as it was in 2016–the choice was Hillary or Trump. As a political conservative and as an evangelical, that was a no brainer despite the pain. Now its Trump vs. ‘who can promise the most free stuff’ (with our $$$). And so far, there is no other “R” worth it. So we are back to a no brainer. And of course, now, despite my dislike of his demeanor and delivery, he has produced—despite ‘Rs’ and ‘Ds’. So merely talking about Trump without including the lack of viable options/alternatives is the dog chasing its tail.
When you guys say lack of a viable alternative, are you talking about Dems or Republicans? If the former, I would say that is covered by the Hold-Your-Nosers.
Pretty spot on. I agree I don’t see any major shift. The problem with most people, including many Baptist preachers, is we already know everything. Don’t bother us with facts, biblical or otherwise.
I think that Dr. Naylor said something like that at a SWBTS graduation I attended in his charge to graduates. Although, he couched it in more flowery words. Probably waas delivered as an alliteration in Memphis.
My position on Trump is not a secret, but wow – every time I read anything about those 277 Democratic candidates I think, “Are they part of a conspiracy to give us 4 more years of Donald Trump?” I mean, really. They are a dumpster fire (to use a term William loves).
If the Democrats gave us a candidate of sound mind with moderate positions on social issues and a healthy respect for the Constitution, they would, I’m afraid, win in a historic landslide. But they are racing to give us the most radically pro-death, socialist, president they can.
Given Trump’s low numbers, I think the Dems see a chance to go big (far left) in one fell swoop. If the president was a more normal Republican, the Dems would be forced to run a more moderate opponent. DJT may himself end up being responsible, at least in part, for a radical leftist in the Oval Office.
I don’t really think the country will go that far left. Elections are decided by the 10-15% in the middle in about 10 states. I can’t imagine the majority of them swinging that way, or maybe I just don’t want to believe it.
His numbers are on par with Obama and don’t believe those poll numbers remember it was all over but the election in 2016 and while I am no political analysis those numbers just don’t make sense I personally think given his likely opponent I think he will win big this time let’s face it his policies well you can’t argue with the facts are working
Oh yeah, They have gone so far left, they are playing right into his hands. (I think.)
Yeah, it’s an interesting situation. If we get a leftist, it will be Trump’s fault (IMO). If we get Trump, it will be the leftists fault.
Often the excesses of the other side are a factor in one side’s victory. Next year, it appears that you are right–both sides will be able to blame their own extremists for the loss–a rare situation in American politics.
A few Democrats of that kind have entered the race for the nomination. Sadly, they are dropping out due to lack of support. Beginning the debates so early was a mistake. Only the most extremist–and most activists–of either party really pay attention early. The early start is giving the Democratic extremists a leg up. “Never Trumper” types can only hope that one or two moderate Democrats will still be in when January rolls around and the Iowa Caucuses and NH Primary really make a difference. I think that many Democrats, and many Independents, long for such a moderate candidate and… Read more »
I think a great majority of people would really like someone who doesn’t sound like they are nuts. That leaves out Trump and folks like Warren, Sanders, and O’Rourke. A moderate Democrat is still going to be pro-choice, so they would still have to do without a great many evangelicals, but with the margins so thin the last time, it might tip the scales.
I think Warren would loose. However, a Biden/Harris ticket could win (Some sources have indicated that the DNC is strategizing to encourage this by promoting it as the Obama legacy ticket.).
There is no moderate Democrat look at there base and besides their platform supports same-sex marriage and abortion on demand and if they had their way would force all churches to perform same sex marriage or else I do not see the debate to vote Democratic is a vote for abortion and homosexual rights plane and simple.
“Dumpster fire” is so last year. Banned forthwith by blogger fiat.
You need to do some research instead of listening to conservative media. the whole “free stuff” mantra is a gross misrepresentation of the core group of candidates running on the Democratic ticket. Conservative policies on government spending are done, given the spending records Trump’s administration has set, aside from the open corruption, blatant disregard of the constitution and breaking the law and the refusal of what I once thought were “principled” Republicans to call it out and do something. I look back and think, gee, Ronald Reagan got me to register to vote as a Republican. It looks more and… Read more »
Lee: Principled Republicans have either retired or been primaried out. The party is Trump’s now. I think the race will be close.
I guess I’ll be a hold-your-noser. I will not vote for anyone who promises me free stuff. I will not vote for anyone who promises to only increase taxes for “the rich,” because that means that “the rich” will hold on to their money and stop investing in growth. It’s time for new parties but until that happens, I’m a disgruntled voter.
There are things that could be done to the tax code to encourage more reinvestment and discourage profit hoarding.
In a democracy — and I’m stealing from the work of actual political scientists*, not just bloviating on the Internet — the primary purpose of the tax code isn’t to encourage economically or socially beneficial outcomes. Rather, it’s to reward the key supporters of the party in power — which is to say the donor base. * The most accessible book on this — it has lively prose, very few charts, and is written for a general audience — is “The Dictator’s Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics.” There’s also a WILDLY popular 10-minute YouTube video called… Read more »
I don’t think the rich need to be taxed more necessarily, but I don’t think they should be able to shield their money in ways that are not available to the non-rich. I agree, it’s time for new parties.
Good article Bill Mac. I think you have the categories pretty well covered.
I’m surely a one issue voter. I’m fervently anti baby murder. But I’m also a “hold your nose” voter. But as others have said, for me this is a no brainer. The next prez will be either a Dem or a Republican. One cursory glance at the Dems and it’s a no brainer. I’ll go with the guy who promised to make strides to reduce the number of babies murdered and has delivered in the present and has made judicial appointments to reduce them in the future.
exactly Les!
Both of Trump’s SCOTUS appointees are on the record as having stated, specifically in response to Maine Senator Susan Collins, that Roe v. Wade is the “settled law of the land.” Along with Chief Justice Roberts, who is the first justice to have made that statement, that makes three Republican appointees who hold the same view as the four “liberals.” I don’t believe there is a government resolution to this issue. The church has the power to seriously reduce the number of abortions by reaching out to those individuals who are in a position to feel they have no choice… Read more »
Neither Gorsuch nor Roberts nor Kavanaugh ever used those words in their confirmation hearings or in public at any other time.
Sadly, I believe that Evangelical American Christianity has had a historic penchant to protect “the status quo”. Maybe you are right that there are few racists, but I do believe that there are a significant number of Evangelicals who want 1950’s America returned, and believe DJT is their delivery man.
And for me personally, I cannot bow to current “the end justify the means” approach to politics.
Mike you have some good insight here. Too often, for over a century, American Christians have been captive to the “status quo”. Our motto, sadly, has been, “be ye conformed to this world, lest ye be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” We miss completely the fact that Jesus challenged the staus quo–which is why he upset the guardians of “normalcy” in ancient Judea. We need to “follow Christ” rather than following this world, and learn to challenge the status quo with a higher and better way of life, as Jesus did.
Fred, how do you define “status quo”? Is status quo a continuation of infanticide? Is status quo a continued assault on religious liberty? Is status quo upending a large share of our economy? There are lots of 1950s values that I’d like to see stick around. I’m a hold your nose, two or three issue voter, but I’m curious if you’re endorsing voting for a Democrat in order to up end the status quo.
It sounds to me there are a lot of closet progressives commenting and writing just an observation.
Mike: That’s kind of where I am. I felt like I had to draw the line somewhere and I drew it at Trump. Although I think it’s more about xenophobia than it is racism, not that it makes it much better.
Issues, Issues , Issues. Trump won on the issues. Issues , issues, issues. 1. Immigration – both legal and illegal alien influx. Number one issue in nation for future. Borders and laws enforced. How crazy? 2. National Defense/security, military being rebuilt and security issues. 3. Trade issue TPP, NAFTA, and China trade rip off of American economy.7 4. Giving people of faith a seat at the table for real and their concerns, abortion and Johnson Amendment. 5. Economy, jobs being exported and a declining American economy environment. I will stop there, there are more issues of course.. So for the… Read more »
Steve: You have immoral in quotes. Does this mean you don’t think Trump is immoral? Regarding the Johnson Amendment, I’ve said this before, but if a preacher endorses a political candidate in my church, one of us will be looking for another church.
Why? When choices are so black and white now there was a time when Pastors had the courage to support those that at least in this case supports life and stands for religious freedom the Democratic party will not so kinda narrows it down don’t it.
Jim: If it is so obvious then it isn’t necessary to have it proclaimed from the pulpit. That isn’t what church is for.
Bill, Morality in the secular voting world of our society means different things to different people. Remember the old hit against the Moral Majority, ” they are not moral or the majority”. BTW, I was never in favor of the moral majority concept. My point is who is going to decide what is immoral, it certainly is not going to be faithful Christians. Most Americans that voted for W. Clinton/Trump knew their moral short comings or immorality and voted for them for a secular office. That is up to your church on how to handle your church. How about a… Read more »
Amen. Thank you, Mike
This is a fine post. Well written. Not sure I would use the monikers that you have used, but they capture a lot of folks. Is there a category for principled voters who selected Trump as the best hope for advancing their principles? That’s where I fit. I believe in our constitutional democracy. I want a judiciary committed to the role it was given in the Constitution. This touches on lots of issues. I also believe in having the most freedom for the greatest number of people possible. Political freedom, religious freedom, intellectual freedom, and economic freedom. With these principles,… Read more »
True Believer?
Part of the demographic shift is, I think, our own (conservatives) fault. For example, most 1st world countries with free market economies also have universal health care. They aren’t socialist countries, but conservatives keep calling them socialist. Young people (rightly or wrongly) are in favor of universal healthcare, so they think they are in favor or socialism. We are shooting ourselves in the foot.
Louis: I would consider Never Trumpers, One Issue Voters, and Hold-Your-Nosers all to be those who vote on principle.
Although it is interesting to see what categories folks fall into and why, I would also like to address the premise of the article. Will there be any change? What would it take? I’m suggesting there isn’t a line. There is no moral outrage that he can commit that will cause any significant movement. Jeffress suggested that if Trump were to commit adultery while in office evangelicals would stop supporting him. I think that’s nonsense.
I suggest high crimes and misdemeanors. Now define it.
Well, I would have considered paying hush money to a porn start just before the election to fall into that category but you know, mulligan and all that. I suspect a lot of people are relieved he was able to cover that up.
Paying the porn star sure seems seedy. Illegal though? Nope. High crime and misdemeanor? Well if Congress thinks so they should have at it.
Yeah, somehow I feel like we should have a higher standard.
“Yeah, somehow I feel like we should have a higher standard.”
Or President Hillary. Or President Warren or Sanders or …. I prefer the one we have now. But that’s why we each get to vote, right?
Well, I did say a higher standard, not just a different one.
Bill Mac: Hardly any country is completely free or socialist. Most societies have both free market elements and socialist elements. Even the Soviet Union had free market elements, small plots of land that could be owned. Right now, I would estimate that the US is about 50% socialist. Probably upwards of 40% of the total national income is confiscated in combined federal, state, and local taxes. Another 10% is taken through regulation. Healthcare delivery is a mess. We could tax to take care of the 10% or so that are poor and uninsurable, and the government needn’t have any business… Read more »
I’m not arguing in favor of universal health care. I’m simply saying that being against it because it’s socialist is a bad argument. Is our military socialist?
Btw, not true believer.
Always skeptical.
But more skeptical about the other folks.
Politics is always a matter of comparison between actual choices. Not nonexistent perfect candidates.
Last line of your comment – exactly what I was thinking as I read through the comments.
I am just a “back-row” Baptist, saved by Jesus who sees people, who claim to be born again believers, fawning over a narcissistic, lying, philanderer, who is a misogynistic racist that brags about sexually abusing women as hypocrites. Do these supporters/apologists condone this type of behavior? How would you handle this behavior from your pastor/leader?
Gerald, the typical response will be that we aren’t electing a pastor. It’s a valid point but there has to be a limit. For me Trump was past that limit, but not for everyone.
And of course some will simply say the things you accuse him of aren’t true. True believers.
Bill, I am afraid that you are correct on both points. My only question is “Where is Jimmy Carter when we need him?”
Gerald he’s as far left as any of the Dems. Advocates baby slaughter. We don’t need a baby slaughter advocate.
Jimmy Carter just came through for us.
He said Joe Biden is too old to be President.
Happy to oblige Bill Mac. Your mileage may vary.
I’m not sure what this is in response to.
No, we were not electing a pastor, but it would be nice if our draft-dodging CIC had an obvious moral compass. He has well exceeded any limit of honesty that even the most rabid right-wing evangelicals would find abhorrent if they actually do follow the Bible.
Gerald, I do follow the Bible. I realize emotions run high, but your insulation that those of us who voted for DT and plan to vote for DT do not follow the Bible is unwarranted and and over the line.
“Insinuation”
I was envisioning a layer of soft fiberglass. Very itchy.
So, Les, what does your Bible say about lying? Or racism? Or not following the laws of the land? My Bible tells me to resist this behavior, not support it.
Gerald, I suppose we use the same bible. So I’ll say that I don’t have a different version than you do save perhaps ESV vs NIV or vs NASB. That said, OUR bible says those things you listed are sins. 1. Perhaps DT has lied. I contend much of what he has said that people say is lying is political rhetoric. But I’ll grant that he has likely lied. As has every politician you have voted for in your life. None of us, including you and me, has gone through life 100% truthful. 2. Racism. That’s an often used accusation… Read more »
I wouldn’t tolerate any of the behavior you described Gerald from a pastor. But a president is not a pastor. So there’s that.
By the way I would also vote for a anti abortion blaspheming Mormon before I’d vote for an advocate of baby slaughter. There’s that too.
Thank you
Andrew Yang. Doesn’t appear crazy; has a good sense of humor, young successful – Sadly, zero name recognition.
I’m not looking for perfection, but I don’t think it’s too much to ask to want someone who reads, is articulate, is knowledgeable, and has a sense of basic human decency. But we can’t seem to manage it.
Bill Mac: It is a good argument to say that socialist systems are not efficient and do not produce good results because that is the history of socialism. Socialism has some inherent problems. First, no one spends someone else’s money more carefully than he spends his own. When govt collects money and then spends it on behalf of the public, it is less likely that they will spend that money more carefully than the taxpayer. Plus, the govt is taking a cut to finance operations. Second, govt agencies are not the extended will of the people. Govt agencies and employees… Read more »
Thank you Louis for your voice of reason. We all know that famous Margaret Thatcher quote. It doesn’t work in the end.
Again, I’m not arguing for socialism. I don’t like socialism. But I don’t like taking the easy way out and just crying “socialism” against our political opponents. It’s the new red scare.
I’m in favor of the narrow, more traditional definition of socialism, rather than just everything the Democrats like.
Bill Mac:
Providing a military for collective defense and the implementation of politically determined remedies related to defense is a socialist activity.
As such it suffers from the same problems I have cited.
But all economically free countries have recognized this to be a proper function of govt for millennia. Private armies would seem to me to be difficult in that context.
But if you want to argue for private armies, I might go for it.
I note that we did use private contractors in Iraq and they performed well in many instances.
I was a combo one issue/hold your nose voter in 2016. But in 2020 I will voting for Trump because of the results he has achieved.
It seems many in this discussion have left that part out for all of Trump’s faults his policies have and are working,or is it because they are working that many in this discussion have left that part out hummmm?Does make one wonder does it not?
Bill, You have done a great job summarizing the camps we exist in- both in the nation and in the SBC. Where I am currently is not saddened by those who decide to vote for President Trump but by those who do two things: defend his actions and act like he has said anything of substance. On his actions: Adultery. Sexual assault. Regularly lying. Defending racists. Racebaiting. Using the Lord’s name in vain. Nepotism. Cronyism. Manipulating the Church for his own ends. Basically anything and everything that conservative Christians have EVER accused a liberal of doing and ruled that it… Read more »
And there is baby slaughter. Just FYI.
Yes Les. There is baby slaughter. Which I hate and am opposed to. Does someone have to say that every time this discussion takes place to be credible? The growing ranks of pro-life Dems are disgusted with these candidates and their positions as well. Biden’s flip on Hyde is the reason he’s no longer a viable alternative on the Dem side to oppose Trump. It’s a bad state of affairs for those who are proponents of life. You have the baby murderers on one side and those who want to break apart families and not fund the social safety net… Read more »
It’s debatable as to what happens to families trying to get in to this country. It’s not debatable what happens to babies if Dems control. One is a less than desirable life situation. The other is death.
Living trumps (no pun intended) death. Oppressed living, as bad as it is, is better than being dead.
I continue to be among those that the right not to be dismembered or burned to death in the womb is a much different question than the contours of the welfare state. But call me old fashioned.
Amen!
100%
Ryan: I agree. It is the refusal of Christians to hold Trump to account that is the most discouraging thing in this whole situation. When I hear someone say that Trump doesn’t lie, I don’t even know what to do with that. It’s completely irrational. You can’t have a conversation because you aren’t even operating on the same plane of reality. I too don’t consider his presidency to be that successful. I think he has made the immigration crisis worse. Where’s the money from Mexico? I don’t agree with trade wars. It has gutted farmers in this country. His love… Read more »
This.
But Biden can handle Corn Pop!
Good analysis, Bill, and probably quite accurate, I am sad to say. If these evangelical subgroups haven’t abandoned Trump by now, they aren’t going to abandon him at all (barring his arrest for child porn, and even that might not be enough). Add to that the weakness and lefty-ness of the current Dem candidates and the absence of a solid, appealing, young moderate leader in either party currently willing to take him on, and you can make a case that Trump is likely to be re-elected despite that fact that at least 60 percent of American voters dislike him. However,… Read more »
So Erich will you be voting Democratic?
Yep. Until further notice….
Well you vote for more baby slaughter.
Comments like this are why Donald Trump was elected.
And I’m as anti-abortion as you are.
Funny, that you can hold your nose and vote for Trump and not be voting for more adultery or sex assault or racism, but Erich can’t hold his nose and vote for a Democrat.
The hypocrisy of that statement is telling.
You’re a better man than that Les.
Ryan, death is final. Adultery and racism and such… is awful. It’s sin. But victims live. Abortion? Victims are dead. There is a difference. A significant difference.
“Comments like this are why Donald Trump was elected.” And why he should be elected vs the Dems. Baby slaughter has been reduced under this presidency. Under any Dem Presidency baby slaughter will be increased. I do not apologize for being focused on ONE issue. Life.
Ryan, how can you be “as anti-abortion as you are” if you could vote for someone knowing they will promote abortion, while Les will NOT vote for someone knowing they will promote abortion?
Les. Your statement is false. Abortions fell under Obama and Clinton. Overall direction in abortion rate is shrinking no matter the President. But nice try.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/abortion-rate-declined/%3famp
I never said I would vote for someone who would expand abortion. That’s the talking point people who vote for Trump use. By not voting for him, we are voting for baby slaughter.
Not all Democrats are pro-abortion. It’s a false premise.
All of the candidates in this Dem field are. Especially now that Biden capitulated on Hyde. Which is awful.
Ryan, my “try” was indeed nice. And accurate. But don’t take my word for it. This article by pro baby slaughter people details some of the things Trump did in just his first year to reduce baby slaughter. Without these measures taken by the Trump administration more babies would have been slaughtered. And just think if we were talking about the first year of the President Hillary administration. Be thankful my friend for what Donald Trump has accomplished with regard to babies and praise God that He who sovereignly rules over every human ruler has ordained Trump to be president… Read more »
No Les. You were wrong. You said abortions increase under Democratic presidents. I presented facts (those things Trump has so much trouble with) that demonstrated the opposite.
No Ryan. Read my exact words again. I was talking about presidents going forward and compared to what would have happened under Hillary. Not your fault that you didn’t get that I was referring to Hillary in 2016 v Trump and any of the current Dem hopefuls. Sorry if I was not as clear as I hoped to be. If you can’t see that under Trump less babies are slaughtered than would have been under President Hillary and will be vs any current Dem hopeful, well you’re just likely so obsessed with DT “hate” that you’re blind.
Hi Ryan Abernathy, can you name a national Democrat or a national spokesperson in the Democratic that is not pro abortion? I cannot find one . Use to be Casey from Pa. thanks
Michael Wear. Justin Giboney.
There’s two. Also the governor of Louisiana whose name escapes me at this time.
Most recent survey fully 1/3 of Dems identify as pro-life.
Let us apply the same descriptions to the Democrat voters: Never Dems– Never going to vote for a Democrat as they are the party of socialism, abortion and radical fundamental change to our government and society. Racist—They believe that voting for Trump is a racist act, period. White privilege is a real evil and must be erased by eliminating western civilization culture and teachings. Critical Race Theory is a good tool to analyze past and present events. White privilege is so ingrained that we can not help , we are racist and do not know it and we cannot overcome… Read more »
Please tell me you realize the President’s “chosen one” comment was a joke…
Mark: It’s always a joke, or hyperbole, or an alternative fact, or fake news, or spin, or Trump being Trump, or just an outright denial of what he said. How many times have we been told not to take what the President says seriously (by his supporters)? This is what we’ve come to.
Bill Mac I suggest take him seriously, not necessarily literally. Lots of misdirection. Hence the lame stream media has constant head explosions.
Les: Seriously but not literally? I take lying seriously. You can add misdirection to the list above. It’s all lying.
Some lying. Yes. Some politic speak. Hmmmmm. Is he the first R to lie? Maybe some you’ve helped elect? Just wondering.
Les: Yes, unfortunately politicians lie. It’s all about drawing lines. How much are we willing to swallow?I know some won’t accept this but I believe this president to be an order of magnitude more dishonest than any who came before him. I cannot and will not vote for a man I consider to be the most immoral and corrupt to ever disgrace the Oval Office.
I was proud and grateful to hear from Gerald. He is a voice of reason from the pew. Thank you!
I have been a NeverTrumper since 2015 and will be in 2020. I will vote my morals and conscience and vote 3rd Party. If enough of us do the same, it will not be a bilateral choice but one of the voice crying out in the wilderness. For I cannot believe that God approves of compromise for a momentary political victory.
I tell you this, if some get their way and churches start endorsing Trump from the pulpit, that may well put the final nail in the coffin of American evangelicalism. How much of our witness are we willing to sacrifice for political power?
Never Trumper here. Yet sympathetic to the single issue voter. I will likely vote third party.
Ryan, Bill Mac: out of 70 plus comments. Yours are the only ones that so not have my stomach churning to the point of drowning Rolaids. If I did not know these men were born again I would not be able to tell by their comments. Let’s comments have me thinking “This is a recoeding” and a poor excuse to vote for Trump given the reasons you two have already given with proof. I may abstain from voting this election too.
I agree Debbie, What has not been brought up is where I find my position. I can not vote and I can not support either party. Why? Because I am a follower of Jesus and as such I am on the mission He has for me. If I vote for one or the other political party in the current climate then I disqualify myself from sharing the Gospel with the other side. I must stand for truth and love. If I vote for Trump every Democrat knows that I HATE him/her. How can they hear the love of Jesus from… Read more »
I’m with Strider.
My comment was not stomach churning? 😉
Amy, I think she missed a few. 😉
Interesting discussion. I have been quite partisan in my politics in the past. I still hold strong political opinions and do not understand the decisions others make that are not the same. Yet, I have come to see things a little differently in one regard. II am now not as concerned with where our decision on voting for Trump ends up as to our attitude and treatment of those Christians who don’t see things our way. I think the insults that Jeffress and Falwell, Jr. have thrown at Never Trump Christians is appalling and non-Christ like. Likewise the smug condemnation… Read more »
Good words!
No True Believers? Is it possible we don’t have any?
Bill, for the countries sake I hope you are wrong. If Trump doesn’t win, then that means we are looking at 4 years of Elizabeth Warren, or Buttigeig, or Sanders. In that scenario the Democrats might have the Senate and the House. Don’t come here and complain about the persecution that starts shortly after! When Christians are fired for not accepting full heartedly the LGBTQ agenda. Its already the case in many sectors of our culture… and will go all the way in that case.
Mark: You hope I am wrong about what? My overarching thesis is that evangelicals are divided into camps regarding Trump and that they are unlikely to change camps. Is that what you are talking about? I also think Trump is a disaster and unfit for the presidency, but I held that view before the election and it didn’t produce the results you fear, so I don’t think that can be it. I have not made a prediction about who will win the next presidential election, but if the Democrats win, I believe we can lay a significant amount of responsibility… Read more »
Bill, No. I mean the fact that you clearly want Trump to lose reelection. That means one of the Democrats wins. Then the above that I wrote happens.
Trump may well win the next election. I don’t know. To me, like the last election, it’s a lose lose situation. You know how Trump could ensure that he wins the next election? He could be better.
And why would Dems get the House and Senate if a Dem is elected president? Don’t the American people usually balance the scales as they did with Trump? There’s no question the country is becoming blue-er on the whole, but given what Republicans have become, are you surprised? Trump. Moore. Gianforte. Collins. Hunter. The party of family values, fiscal conservatism, and the rule of law. You might think it’s an Onion article only it’s so outrageous the Onion wouldn’t accept it.
Replying to Steve Newhouse on “Issues, Issues , Issues. Trump won on the issues.” “1. Immigration – both legal and illegal alien influx. Number one issue in nation for future. Borders and laws enforced. How crazy? “ Trump’s obsession with a useless wall has kept us from finding common sense solutions to the border crisis. Obama was as tough on illegal aliens as Trump without the drama and fake news about an invasion by rapists and murderers. “2. National Defense/security, military being rebuilt and security issues.” Trump’s attacks on our military alliances and groveling to Putin has hurt our military… Read more »
Ron West, Thank you , thank you very much for addressing the issues. In my opinion Trump won on the issues and will again. 1. The wall is just part of the enforcement of our Congress approved immigration laws. Border enforcement e verify, visa overstays, and chain migration are all part of the issue. Obama administration “fudged ” the numbers on deportations and counted immediate border turn backs as deportations. President Obama start the bring your child , get in policy that created the part of the recent crisis. There are between 25 to 35 million illegal aliens in this… Read more »
I think Bill’s analysis is pretty spot on and straight forward. The biggest dilemma I feel (as I study and prepare to preach Ro. 13- Christians and government to my church this Sunday,) is how believers will reconcile their long-held belief that “Character Counts” in how we vote- at least traditonally, with two political parties that profess antithetical and opposing political platforms and policies to one another- one much closer to biblical truth than the other. If Christians are to vote for the re-election of the incumbent President based on policies and politics that align much closer to the Bible’s… Read more »
Allow me an off the subject question please. I read Bill Mac’s comments often. However i do not know who he is. Could I request a short bio of Bill Mac?
Hi Darwin,
I’m a lifelong Southern Baptist in rural NY. I am a professor at a private university. I’m rather obsessed with fishing. I am also a lifelong Republican, fairly conservative but Hannity and Pirro wouldn’t like me. I like Boston for baseball and hockey. Theologically I’m a bit of a Molinist.
Thanks Bill…Obsessed with fishing, you must come to Montana. My son can float you down the best twelve miles of trout fishing in the lower 48. Baseball…my Cards are going the distance this year. Blessings my brother
This brings up a question:
If a candidate loses an election, whose fault is it? I imagine if DJT loses in 2020, Never Trumpers will be pariahs in the conservative community. Do Christians have an allegiance to the Republican party? Do we owe them our votes? Is it not the responsibility of the party to provide a candidate we can support? If the party moves and we do not, whose fault is that?
Bill, To your question; “Do Christians have an allegiance to the Republican Party?” I can only offer my anecdotal experience. By the way, I have ‘no dog’ in this fight. My wife and I have finally been dropped from the rolls of registered voters, as my last participation in this secular activity (purportedly having a bearing on the citizenry of a temporal country), I immediately realized I had seriously wounded my conscience and convictions. What led to this moral conflict? I left the ballot booth with a profound sense of embarrassment, guilt and self-loathing. I had defied my better judgment,… Read more »
Perhaps you would like to see the courts packed with left wing radicals you left out those of us that support Trump because the alternative is socialism or worse,While our salvation is not found in any government man made institution it is through the political process that we protect religious freedom,the unborn,and what is left of traditional marriage,or the freedom to educate our children and grandchildren outside of the walls of government ran centers of indoctrination centers.And for a Christian to praise God on Sunday and knowingly vote for those who support these things seems a bit strange to me.No… Read more »
“you left out those of us that support Trump because the alternative is socialism or worse”
I don’t think I did.
Jim: Just so I’m clear, if Trump commits adultery in the White House and lies about it, you think that is impeachable? There is nothing illegal about that. I wouldn’t support impeachment for that.
Bill Mac, after 110 comments you got how many responses to your question? My group the Never Trumpers explained why they are in that group, everyone else explained why the alternatives are worse. No answers I saw that answered whether there is a bridge too far for them regarding the President. My thought is that it would require an explicit and spectacular act of treason that could be corroborated by a trusted Republican official, because, A) The normal high crimes and misdemeanors aren’t going to cut it, and B) Everyone who is not in my tribe is a liar and… Read more »
I’m a “held my nose” voter but I don’t hold it against anyone who didn’t like Trump and didn’t vote for him. I’m more aggravated by the moral preening of the Never Trump crowd than I am at their position Trump is a bad man. We live in a secular society governed by secular laws run by secular people. So, yes, I will vote for him again simply because the alternatives are so disastrously worse. I don’t like it and would prefer better alternatives, but politics is a pragmatic operation, not an exercise in sorting out the most moral, decent… Read more »
Gus: This has been discussed elsewhere, but it goes to your comment. I for one do not hold it against someone who reluctantly votes for Trump because they think it is the lesser of two evils. It is a perfectly reasonable position even if it isn’t mine. What is disappointing are the Trump apologists in the evangelical community who wouldn’t consider for a moment trying to hold the president accountable for his actions and words. Passing off his lies as spin and hyperbole, the Access Hollywood tape as “locker room talk”, his attacks on his enemies not as something deplorable… Read more »
Thank you Bill Mac
Mike W. I think the Trump voters have explained their position very well and the spectrum of different reasons have been covered. If I would summarize I would say there is the pro life vote or the described single issue voter. Trump is the choice of that issue . #2 There are the “preservation” Trump voters concerned about the lower and Supreme Court appointments as well as his attempt to drain the swamp of establishment forces. #3 There are the voters who feel Trump is at listening and influenced by people of faith. Coupled with his strong support of Israel… Read more »
The question was a request, not a demand. I’m just curious. To answer your question, nothing will entice me to vote for Trump. Let me clarify, nothing will entice me to vote for Trump as he is. If he underwent a life-changing and credible transformation I would certainly consider it.
The Republican party has held us hostage and taken our votes for granted for too long. I think we need to demand better. That will never happen as long as they keep giving us people like Trump and we keep pulling the lever.
Bill Mac, Given your answer and it is certainly a respectful and thoughtful answer , then the issue is settled for you. Nothing will sway your Never Trump position and that is absolutely your right and we all get it. My point is at what point will Never Trumpers accept the fact that Trumpers are as steadfast and justified in their Trump support as Never Trumpers. There is not a 24/7 barrage in the mass media and social network for Never Trumpers to account for their Never Trump positions. There is not an ongoing , “what would it take for… Read more »
My main question is not why people are in the camps they are in, but whether anyone predicts significant movement between camps. I say no.
Bill Mac, the obvious and correct answer is no to your question, as you state. However , I believe Trump will move enough voters who are not Always or Never Trump to vote for him in the election based on performance and he will win bigly. The battle is over a small percent.
If one accepts the Left’s and the media’s illegitimate description of President Trump’s so-called offenses, then I suppose one would be less enthusiastic about 4 more years of his presidency. On the other hand, for me, I give no value to the Left’s hateful, predictable, and persistent assertions and political spin. They are brazen and shameless in their deliberate attempt to destroy President Trump and anyone associated with him. Instead of attempting to evaluate the question of how divided Christians are concerning President Trump, why don’t we discuss the question of where would our country be without President Trump? Or… Read more »
I know this is hard to understand, but I don’t go around “counting the lies” Trump has told. -I don’t track his “twitter rants.” -I don’t keep track of the latest scuttle-butt on whether Melania likes him or not. -I don’t read articles speculating on whether Barron is Donald’s son or not. -I don’t think Trump called Mexicans murderers and rapists, so I don’t dwell on the endless stories about it. -I don’t care what some cousin of his in Scotland thinks about him. -I have actually read and listened to the press conference after the Charlottesville situation so I… Read more »
I predict, after Trump leaves office, that we are going to find out that his presidency was indeed a dumpster fire. I think we are going to find out it was a 24/7/365 babysitting job of the unfortunates surrounding him trying constantly to reign him in, quiet him down, and keep him from starting wars, giving stuff away to dictators, revealing classified information, tanking the economy, and obstructing justice. Most if not all the people of integrity who gave working for him a shot couldn’t handle it. Even sycophants have been moved out if they had a lull in their… Read more »
“After Trump leaves office?” There’s already a ton of reporting to this effect. But Republicans, and R-leaning independents, tend to dismiss it as fake news. I don’t think that’ll change *if* he leaves office. I say “if” because I doubt we’ll have a peaceful transfer of power even if he’s defeated in 2020. Remember what he said when asked — on live national TV — whether he would accept the results of the 2016 election? “Of course I’ll respect it,” followed by a very short pause and: “… if I win.” And even THAT turned out to be a lie!… Read more »
David: I have no doubt Trump would try that if he could, but if he loses in 2020, I think you will see a frantic withdrawal of his supporters. Short of a few Fox News pundits, I think he’ll pretty much be left alone. As I said, I think right now everyone in his circle is engaged in a battle to reign him in. As we’ve seen, that burns them out pretty quickly.
I really, truly want you to be right.
In fact, we did not have a peaceful transition of power in 2016. Spying was occurring on the Trump campaign as FISA warrants were obtained based on opposition research paid for by the Clinton campaign. Others discussed exercising a constitutional amendment to try and allege that the newly elected President was unfit to hold office. Fortunately, these unethical, and what will probably end up being shown to be criminal, activities failed in their goal to stop or undo the peaceful transition of power. Despite your projection, Trump will for sure complain if he loses in 2020, but I highly doubt… Read more »
David: I have no doubt Trump wants to be a dictator, but we have too many safeguards in place for it to happen. Recall that Trump only avoided obstructing justice during the Mueller investigation because his subordinates disobeyed him repeatedly. No, the president can do plenty of damage while he’s president, and he will certainly go away noisily, but he’ll go. Besides, playing the victim and complaining are the things he does best, and a loss in 2020 would give him enough fodder to last him the rest of his life.
What does the aftermath of the Trump presidency bring for Christians in America? Let’s say Trump supporters pretty much get what they want, SCOTUS, more money in their pockets, the ability to freely support politicians from church pulpits, restrictions on the gay agenda, elimination of environmental restrictions, a great big honkin wall along the southern border, massive tariffs on our economic opponents , etc. Honest question: Do you think any of this will advance the gospel in this country? Or around the world? Do you see any downside to the evangelical allegiance to Trump? I think Never Trumpers are fully… Read more »
What will the aftermath of the Trump Presidency bring?
The Trump Presidency will have preserved and brought more personal, political, economic, religious, and intellectual freedom for ordinary persons.
The trends on the left will continue to be toward the restrictions of those freedoms.
More control of people in their ordinary lives. What they buy, say, eat, drive, watch, how they exercise their religion, how they order their lives. How they educate their children.
It’s really not complicated. Just listen to what they say.
So, 150 plus comments and where are we? Will there be movement from one camp to another regarding Donald Trump? No, it doesn’t appear that there will be. There wasn’t as many comments on “what would it take” to change camps but it appears for Trump supporters, it looks like the threshold is if DJT does something illegal (and I suspect that means really, really illegal). It does not appear that there is any kind of moral line that he can cross that will lose him support. For Never-Trumpers to change camps it seems that the threshold is moral. I… Read more »
Single Issue voter here – I vote for someone whom I believe is striving to honor God in their life. Nothing more, nothing less. Not looking for a perfect candidate, just one who seeks to honor God in their actions, in a manner that reflects what Scripture teaches. That means I won’t be voting for any of the Democrats. That means I won’t be voting for Donald Trump. That means I won’t be voting for a Libertarian or Green. I’ll be voting either third-party for a ballot candidate who meets the aforementioned criterion, or I will write in a candidate… Read more »
In the aftermath of this current True Believer political era (which I spend a considerable time pondering), I’m sensing that there are wounds which will take a long time to heal. Partly because the likely outcome (whether in this election or the next) will be a drastic shift towards socialism, and oppression against our faith, and the True Believers will lay the blame at the feet of the Never-Trumpers, whose reflex will be to retort that the penchent or right-wing extremism, devoid of a moral compass, is what drove the other party off the cliff of liberal socialism. Partly because… Read more »
Joel: I think many who would say they are in the one-issue or hold-your-nose camp are secretly in the true believer camp, but I don’t know how many. But as you suggest, I know first hand there are those in the church who actually rejoice in some of the despicable things Trump does. I think, I hope they are a minority. I am immensely troubled by the idea that some in the church long for the ability to endorse candidates from the pulpit. That one thing perhaps surprises me the most in all this. I personally have had to speak… Read more »
Bill Mac, for the record I totally hope that pulpit endorsements don’t happen. The church, as represented by the gathered believers as a congregation with weekly preaching etc should not be about politics. Our mission as a body gathered is the proclamation of the gospel. Not political pronouncements. But what of us as individual believers? Vote your Christian conscience and be as involved in politics or not as you wish. Proclaim the gospel to your friends and neighbors. Again but, what about our witness? Well 1. for most of us it’s not an issue. Literally besides on this forum, no… Read more »
I don’t really announce my politics that much either, but over the course of decades, people get to know you and it comes up. Everyone who knows me knows I won’t vote for a Democrat. I might consider it, I suppose, if the elusive pro-life Dem were to raise his/her head, but since I disagree with most of the other stuff they stand for I probably wouldn’t. So when Trump showed up of course my friends and colleagues wondered if I would support him. And of course I do not and made that very clear. People seem to appreciate what… Read more »
Here’s my main point Bill Mac. I interact each week with lots of non church people. Many non Christians. People I have to assume come from a broad spectrum of political leanings. I never bring up my political leanings in everyday life as I interact with people. I never probe and prod to see where people stand. I think there are a lot of people like me who’s political leanings and who we vote for and what we support never hurt our witness. It’s a non issue. Those on here who make that out to be a huge issue for… Read more »
Here’s an interesting thought. As far as I know Chick fil A has not endorsed candidates. Trump included. But they have said (officers personally) that they stand for traditional marriage. And they have donated money to support orgs that said orgs have donated to “not allowed” orgs according to the LBG… people.
So how has that worked out for CFA. They are still hated by the LBG… and almost all leftists. Should they renounce what they believe in for their witness sake? Nah. Silliness.
For the record, Les, my major objection was against the True Believers, and it has nothing to do with their witness. It has to do with where their hearts are really at, and WHY they are True Believers to start with. When someone’s a far more vocal apologist for Trump than they are for Christ, it’s indicative of the attitude of their heart. The issue of witness someone brings to the world is secondary to the issue of their own personal standing with the Savior. Since you don’t fit into that category, you probably don’t need to be concerned.
Joel sorry I misunderstood. I saw you write, “I am far less troubled by the sinner in the White House than I am by the True Believers who voted to put him there, and by the “single-issue” and Hold-your-nose” evangelical voters who have since exposed themselves as True Believers.“
As one who has expressed himself as a single issue (I actually prefer zenith issue) voter and one who has said I’m also in the hold your nose voter camp, it seemed as if you also see us as “True Believers” voters.
Perhaps I just misread.
Joel, I too don’t understand the ferociousness of the Trump defense from some. As some others have noted, what has he delivered that any other Republican would not have? It seems as some see the goal of the church to undergird American democracy.
BTW Joel, are the same Joel Hunt from Missouri who sometimes shows up in my Facebook as a friend of some of my friends, you know as FB tries to extend connections? If so, I think we have a mutual friend from my home church in the St. Louis area.
Les, yes, one and the same.
As I said, I don’t know how many True Believers there are out there, but watch a Trump rally. He is gathering thousands of people in one place, and they giggle and cheer while he spends an hour and a half mocking and insulting everyone who he perceives to be an enemy, not of America, but of him. They cheer, jeer, and threaten when he goes after the press pool. They cheer when he fat-shames one of his own supporters and has him ejected. The cheer when he offers to pay the legal fees of anyone who beats up a… Read more »
I read an article a few months ago that posited the idea that some evangelicals see the primary objective in politics these days as being a good witness. Achieving the objective of creating the “good society” (however one defines that) through the exercise of the political franchise, is to be subordinated to the objective of being a good witness. And it is believed that voting against one’s actual political beliefs is being a good witness when the candidate is not a good person or a worthy candidate. This idea has gained more traction in recent years now that it is… Read more »
I don’t see being a good witness as a political activity, but I do see being a good witness as informing all activities, including politics.
I don’t really disagree with this comment, but it would go a lot farther if Southern Baptists hadn’t made such a stink over morality until Trump came along.
Bill Mac:
I don’t disagree. Al Mohler said during the 2016 election that he had spoken so much about Clinton that he felt obliged to do the same re Trump.
But by the time of the vote, he was saying Christians could in good conscience vote for Trump. His earlier statements did not indicate that.
I suspect he’ll be more Trump this time. I think that’s because he’s ideological by nature and cannot bear the thought of the US becoming more socialist economically and leftist morally.
I don’t want the US to become Socialist or leftist, but I also don’t want a nation of Trumps, and I’m afraid that is the way we are heading. I wouldn’t go as far as Joel, but I definitely see people feel free-er to be obnoxious, rude, and xenophobic in ways they were not before. Trump is not responsible for the darkness inside all of us, but he speaks to it and all too often drawing it forth. No matter all the right policies, we cannot have a good society if its people are not good.
After the mishegoss (Yiddish for garbage) over the last few days, I just want a government filled with leaders who believe in following the principles found in the Constitution. People who believe that the branches of government should be co-equal and practiced on the concept of checks/balances. Yes, it would be nice if those members of the government were Christians but if they governed with the best interests of all the people at heart, their personal faith system I believe would be secondary.
Now … who wants to disagree with me?
First you have to find people who have read the constitution.
I have but you are right.
I’m not certain I have read all of it since I was in school, but then I’m not the “leader” of the free world.
I’m guessing asking the leader of a foreign nation to investigate your political opponents is not a threshold for anyone. Mulligan.
Bill Mac, I’ve read the transcript that was released. There’s no “there” there. Nothing impeachable. But I actually watch MSNBC a lot. Right now they are keeping a graphic on screen, kind of like a ticker, breathlessly counting the Dem votes needed to vote impeachment. This is all happening while we as a country face some very serious issues around the world. UN meetings in NY. Regarding our elected leader’s ability to effectively function in world affairs, this rush for impeachment will hamper him. It will not be good for our country. Politically I think this will be very positive… Read more »
I’m not suggesting it is impeachable. I’m suggesting it’s despicable.
Despicable? Well that’s your opinion. Not mine.
Curious. Are you hoping DT is impeached? And also from a political standpoint, are the Dems making a good move here moving in impeachment direction in your opinion?
I think Pelosi has her back to the wall. I think she fears the Clinton effect of impeachment, although Clinton was a popular president and Trump is decidedly not. I don’t think either party has enough integrity to convict someone from their own party, no matter what they do. So I’m not hoping for impeachment. I’m not at all worried about Trump’s ability to effectively function in world affairs because I don’t think he’s capable of it, impeachment or not. Do you seriously think it is OK for the leader of the country to ask a foreign leader to investigate… Read more »
I I don’t have a problem with what he did. Ukraine has been investigating the company that Hunter B had been serving in the board and making a lot of money. Joe B unquestionably (video recently re aired) when VP of the US threatened Ukraine to withhold a ton of money if they didn’t fire the prosecutor who was leading said investigation into the company his son worked for. So it is well within the current president’s duty to ask the now Ukraine Président to reopen that investigation. That Joe B has since decided to be a candidate for President… Read more »
Chris Christy made me laugh. He went on a panel on one of the news shows and said that the Dems were overreacting. He said that unless the transcript actually said, ‘I want you to do me a favor’ then it would not be quid pro quo and it would be nothing. The next day the transcript was released and ‘I want you to do me a favor’ was in it word for word. Of course, as Bill has said, there is no camel. No straw will break the back of the imaginary camel. As for your question, Pelosi knows… Read more »
Strider, you’re parroting the far left MSNBC talking points. Here is the exact wording from the transcript where the word “favor” is used: “ The President: I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike…” The “favor” had nothing to do with Biden. It had to do with the 2016 election tampering which was actually done by Democrats. And even that wasn’t a personal favor ask.… Read more »
Somebody’s parroting. Crowdstrike is a false flag as is the Biden investigation in Ukraine. Both of these have already been looked into and only Fox news hosts can find anything by quoting the President who is making this stuff up on the fly. He asked them to investigate Biden and his son on allegations he is making up. He is getting the attorney general into this on behalf of his campaign. He told the President of Ukraine to cooperate with Guiliani who has no official Government position, he is the President’s personal lawyer. I have never even seen an episode… Read more »
As far as I can see, Crowdstrike doesn’t have anything to do with Ukraine. Other than the president’s deluded ramblings, I don’t think anyone credible has suggested that the DNC hack had anything to do with Ukraine. Also as far as I can tell, Joe Biden’s son was never under investigation. The president simply used Crowdstrike as a segue to urge Poland to investigate Biden. To suggest the president is actually concerned about corruption in Ukraine is laughable. This is the guy who “fell in love” with Kim Jong Un and sides with Putin over his own country. Corruption is… Read more »
Strider, will you at least admit that you misquoted the “favor” part of the document? Can you at least admit that?
So you think, with a straight face, that Trump’s urging of Ukraine to investigate Biden is simply Trump’s effort to do due diligence in his role as protector of the Constitution and the rule of law. It’s OK that he urges Ukraine to coordinate with Rudy Guiliani, not a government employee but Trump’s personal lawyer? Why didn’t this come up before Biden got into the race and polls showed he could easily beat Trump? You really don’t think Trump is doing this for personal gain? Really? You must have a strong stomach to watch both MSNBC and Fox News. Other… Read more »
To me it appears that laws may have been broken with the assistance of persons in Ukraine in connection with the 2016 election (hence the reference to Crowdstrike). It would be appropriate for any such wrongdoing to be investigated, and recommending follow up with the AG is appropriate.
It also appears there may have been a crime committed by Biden’s son. It would be appropriate for this also to be investigated.
No one is above the law. If the Bidens committed crimes in the Ukraine, that should be determined by a full and complete investigation.
Louis that’s exactly correct. I’m at my house today and I’ve had two stations on back and forth. MSNBC and Fox News. There’s no arguing which way each leans. Trying to be as fair as I can be, Fix is just more balanced. They really try to be. I watched as they called on several current Dems and interviewed them and let them make their case. They had several true Dem political commentators on today. They let them make their cases. MSNBC truly is a hack network. The few times they have a R commentator on as a guest or… Read more »
“So will we see an investigation into Biden? Doubt it.”
Why not? Ukraine wants money, so they have incentive to do it. Republicans run the Senate, so they could do it. Barr will do virtually anything Trump tells him to, so he can do it.
The AG has appointed John Durham to look into Russian interference via the so-called “dossier” and the potential FISA abuses and other abuses in connection with the 2016 election.
I would be in favor of his scope of work being expanded, if necessary, to include illegal collusion with Ukraine.
But if people objected, I would be in favor of what was done last time. Have the AG appoint a special prosecutor to look into this. He would have the same type mandate and independence that Mueller had.
Interesting article and discussion. I’m new here, so can somebody point me to an earlier piece here that spells out the case for the President being a racist? I keep hearing this label declaimed as if it were self-evident; but it’s such a hideous label to hang on anybody that I need to see some equally strong evidence. Most everything that’s been offered up on mainstream news sites I’ve found to be taken out of context.
Advance thanks from a Hold-Your-Noser.
Is this what they call sea lioning?
Keith,
The article in question is on page 6 (the older posts). My own view is if Trump appears to be racist (even if he isn’t) it is in part because he considers white supremacists to be an important part of his base and panders to them. Incidents in his past such as discrimination lawsuits and the Central Park 5 issue give weight to the claim. If you go through the comments on that post, and this one, you will see that whether or not Trump is a racist is irrelevant.
Bill,
My dream ticket would be Rick Grimes and Sara Connor. Until then tough choices.
Great article thanks
woody
Better than Ren and Stimpy!