Do Catholics still support Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter MamasBoy33
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JanSobieskiIII said:
I guess I’m an obstructionist then. I have no desire to accommodate or compromise with the left/establishment. They’ve been running the show for the better of a century in this country. Progressivism needs to be rolled back and defeated. Not compromised with.
Click to expand...
I agree that that progressivism is wrong and needs to be rolled back. I agree 100%. But, the gridlock we see now in Congress is from two sides that are not willing to move forward as a country. I am an ideologue myself (are we all?) but I understand that one needs to compromise.

We go a little to left, and little to the right, and we are moving forward. That’s the way we’ve always been.

Neither party really fits my agenda, although I do lean right.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, okay, the sitting president of the United States endorsed his primary opponent and didn’t even set foot in Alabama.
 
dvdjs said:
Nope that is not what quote said at all. And, should you read beyond avatar and quote, you will find that it is not what the article said. I am actually surprised that you missed the author’s point.
Click to expand...
Generally, people quote those parts of an article that they think presents the gist of the article. If you think otherwise in this case, then present the part that you think says something else.
 
The problem with the way compromise has worked in this country is “the left” gets a big chunk of what they want while the “the right” gives up a whole lot of what they claim to stand for and calls the left not getting everything they wanted a victory.

And then 10 years later or less they get the rest of what they wanted and a bit more.

I’m using a mile wide brush here obviously but that’s generally how it’s gone. The whole system is broken, in my opinion. That’s why I’m still a “fan” of trump despite having some misgivings about him. He’s at least disrupting the way the games always been played.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Generally, people quote those parts of an article that they think presents the gist of the article
Click to expand...
I quoted an important point from the article.
You missed it entirely. Sad.

If you think that the problem is the quote, then open the link, it is a quick read.
 
People in Alabama don’t have tv’s to see a rally in Pensacola, can’t possibly drive there, and I guess can’t read Twitter?
 
Ridgerunner said:
Generally, people quote those parts of an article that they think presents the gist of the article
Click to expand...
I quoted an important point from the article.
If you think that the problem is the quote, then open the link, it is a quick read.

But the quote, I think, is clear enough, and your “basically says” version is way off the mark.
Maybe give it another go.
 
This is your daily reminder that Donald J. Trump is not a racist, sexist or homophobe. He is the best president for minorities in nearly 10 years.
 
“We tend to think that because it is not okay to vote in favor of an intrinsic evil it must be okay to vote in favor of non-intrinsic evil”.

I like that the author gives justice to a more nuanced articulation of Pope Benedict but when it comes to voting we are often in a position of selecting the lessor of two or more evils and cannot help but to end up voting 'non-intrinsic evil"…
 
Shakuhachi said:
I like that the author gives justice to a more nuanced articulation of Pope Benedict
Click to expand...
He respects the depth of Benedict’s position, which goes far beyond the “5”, but has a proper understanding of intrinsic- and non-intrinsic evil.

The key idea is that we have responsibility for the moral consequences of our votes - in particular the evil that may come of our votes. Whether that emergent evil was in the category of intrinsic- or non-intrinsic does not change our responsibility.
 
Super Luigi, Some of the replies to your post confirm the fact that evidence has never been the strong suit of the left. Selective reading, relativism, and feelings are their strong suit. That’s fine, it’s still a free country. But Trump is clearly the man for the job this time around.
 
How do we know space aliens didn’t come down and program them to think they’d been sexually assaulted?

These sorts of questions are absurd. If Moore feels he has been slandered, he can sue some or all of the women, since they openly accused him. Of course, to do that would mean that activities currently shielded by a statute of limitations would end up being aired in open court, so I think it unlikely Moore is going to want to go within 100 miles of a civil suit.
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
The problem with the way compromise has worked in this country is “the left” gets a big chunk of what they want while the “the right” gives up a whole lot of what they claim to stand for and calls the left not getting everything they wanted a victory.

And then 10 years later or less they get the rest of what they wanted and a bit more
Click to expand...
Progressivism has been gaining ground in this country since 1912. The idea that government can do things better, and needs to be involved in every aspect of our lives, is somehow comforting to a large portion of Americans. I don’t know why.

This is a hard trend to reverse.
JanSobieskiIII said:
I’m using a mile wide brush here obviously but that’s generally how it’s gone. The whole system is broken, in my opinion. That’s why I’m still a “fan” of trump despite having some misgivings about him. He’s at least disrupting the way the games always been played.
Click to expand...
I think a true disrupter needs to understand the industry he is disrupting. Trump does not understand government at all. He’s just disrupting because he doesn’t know. He has no plan, just spur of the moment “look at me” antics.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top