It was not a premise it was a question. So you answered it thanks. I was just curious because of your stances.
You Can't Be a Christian and Vote for Trump
- Thread starter Gubba Bump Shrimp
- Start date
It was not a premise it was a question. So you answered it thanks. I was just curious because of your stances.
I have a few thoughts as someone who has voted for both parties and doesn't feel like a member of either party. Just my opinions, take them or leave them
- The Presidency is more of a candidate contest than almost any other election. They get to set the agenda for the country.
- Voting for Congressional candidates is more about the party now due to polarization.
- State-level R and D parties vary across the country, and my vote would vary depending upon where I live. In MO, the R legislature is pushing for a few key things I disagree with (we don't need an income tax cut or right to work), so I feel obligated to vote for Koster to be a check on that
- My overall bias is that the current national Republican party is detached from reality and they are unworthy of government. The Dems aren't really what I want but the Rs are so bad that I can't really vote for their agenda due to their insistence on bankrupting the country to support welfare for the rich and the level of anti-intellectualism that runs through the party. I can site plenty of Dem policies that I disagree with, but they pale in comparison to the problems caused by these two core Republican philosophies that underlie much of their stated policy.
If the Rs were the party they should be, one that acted as a restraint on government but recognized that appropriately sized and targeted government action can help improve the lives of the average person, I'd be a member of it in a heartbeat.
A good example of this is current Republicans saying they want to get rid of the EPA instead of saying they want to make sure the EPA is focused on data-driven solutions that account for costs and benefits of government action.
He has to make up the damage he has caused with college educated women who live in metro areas. It is shocking how badly my Republican co-workers talk about him.
I don't agree with tax cuts for the rich, especially not right now while our deficit is so out of control. Now if we could ever get the deficit spending under control I am not against looking at some tax cuts, but I believe you pay your bills first and we owe some large bills and that can be laid at the feet of both parties. However when Bush took over he was set up pretty nice, but who saw 9/11 coming.
I don't agree with either party totally, I use to side more with the Republicans, but I think over the years they have started to think being conservative is just calling yourself a Christian. The Dems seem to take in anybody and stand with anybody who feels they are slighted just to increase their base. But if you look at their record they have done nothing for the middle class that is overall impressive.
I don't agree with either party totally, I use to side more with the Republicans, but I think over the years they have started to think being conservative is just calling yourself a Christian. The Dems seem to take in anybody and stand with anybody who feels they are slighted just to increase their base. But if you look at their record they have done nothing for the middle class that is overall impressive.
9/11 is a total copout for Bush on the budget. If you believe it is that important to increase defense spending to fund a war, be honest and fund it. Johnson raised taxes for two years to fund Vietnam instead of deficit spending to the hilt. Instead, Bush passed unaffordable large tax cuts and gutted the budget even further.
Bush's tax cuts are the single largest problem that our budget has had to deal with for the last 15 years. The US would have almost no budget deficit right now if they had never been enacted.
I agree the Dems have focused too much on the poor and the coalition of the aggrieved. Obama should have focused more on jobs.
Last edited:
I envision a more middle of the road economic approach than the libertarians. I believe there should be a Department of Education, for instance.
I tend to agree. Oversight and regulation isn't a bad thing, although I have warmed to the way Johnson describes 50 labratories discovering and implementing best practices.
I know that will lead to some states - Texas, Kansas for instance - taking liberties with history and science, but the intended idea, I believe, is a good one.
You guys keep acting like everything Trump says is not in jest. I guess you also think Hillary wants to raise taxes on the middle class because SHE SAID IT.
See the thing is, I'm comfortable paying taxes. My tax dollars pay for society.
It's a better deal than increasing spending and also getting a tax cut. Ultimately that only helps those who already have the means to help themselves.
Is that in jest? If not, what does it have to do with my post? Do you think Hillary was serious?
Wait, are you seriously claiming that every single thing Trump says is in jest?
Is that in jest?
Of course not! Do you really think Trump has the hots for his daughter?
Shoot Donald or one of his PACs ran an add that said she did so it has to be true because Donald never lies.
After reading the article and paying attention, she definitely says "aren't."
I dislike her as much as anyone, but weak attacks against her help her campaign more than they hurt it. She gets to play the victim and draw attention away from legitimate issues.
I dislike her as much as anyone, but weak attacks against her help her campaign more than they hurt it. She gets to play the victim and draw attention away from legitimate issues.
Just wait until you see Donald trump is calling Hillary unstable now. As if his campaign benefits from asking people to consider the stability of presidential candidates.
I have no clue what his campaign is doing.
I have no clue what his campaign is doing.
I'll go by my ears rather than politifacts agenda.
By the way, I know she has no plans to raise taxes on the middle class. Neither does Trump. Why is she even talking about it? It's not an issue in the campaign.
If she says aren't, then Trump is playing a video of Hillary saying they aren't going to raise taxes on the middle class. Why the concern?
I agree it is silly to claim she IS going to but she said she was.
It's the standard GOP M.O. to attack whatever doesn't fit their narrative. Now it's politifact's agenda....because facts are bad.
I guess his campaign thought she said "are" and got really excited about an opportunity to make an ad showing her in a negative light.
I thought she said "are" the first time I watched the video, too. It's kind of like when you hear the lyrics of a song one way until you actually learn the words, and then you hear it the right way.
But she definitely said "aren't."
Not to mention it doesn't actually matter either way given what was in the rest of the speech and her entire campaign.
Hillary Clinton is not running on a middle class tax increase
Hillary Clinton is not running on a middle class tax increase
I've never believed for a moment she was. It is a comparison of how her words are treated compared to Trumps. I seriously doubt Politifact has spent time analyzing what Trump really said......he has never wanted to ban all Muslims or kick out all immigrants as has been repeated ad nauseam.
At a December 2015 rally in Charleston, South Carolina, just a few days after the San Bernardino shooting, Trump told thousands of supporters:
"Donald J. Trump is calling for a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.
Those were his exact words.......just like Hillarys.
He later spelled out the details......details that make a LOT of sense to a LOT of people. But you Libs just can't help yourselves.
We live in a bizarre world where trump can say I never said xyz and people believe him even when presented with actual evidence.
It's not like trump just said that once. It is a core message of his campaign!
Even if you believe the caveats, it's not comparable. Clinton has not run on a middle class tax increase. Donald Trump is still running on a muslim ban (we are going to ban immigration from "terror states" is the same thing)
Last edited:
2012: unskew the polls
2016: Unskew the actual election results
The decline of the R Party is sad.
