Trump Thread Two

  • Thread starter Thread starter XndrK
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Here’s something kind of interesting at 538 entitled, Trump Is Driving Catholic Voters Toward Clinton:
Donald Trump has held onto the support of evangelical Christians even as he has screwed up the name of a book of the Bible, said he doesn’t feel he needs forgiveness for anything, and struggled to answer the question that Jesus posed to Peter: “Who do you say that I am?” But, according to a recent report by Pew, Trump’s doing terribly with Catholic voters, particularly those who are regular churchgoers.
Click to expand...
Catholics who attend Mass weekly have increased their support for the Democratic nominee by 22 percentage points relative to 2012. They support Hillary Clinton at about the same rate as fallen-away Catholics; even though among white, non-Hispanic Catholics, those who attend Mass less frequently are slightly more likely to be registered Democrats.
Click to expand...
In fact, Trump has done more to drive weekly churchgoers to the Democrats than Clinton has done to attract them. Evangelicals and Catholics who attend church regularly and favor the Democratic nominee consider Clinton a less appealing choice than Obama was.
Click to expand...
fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-driving-catholic-voters-toward-clinton/
 
Thorolfr said:
This morning Mr. Trump said, “I never met Putin. I don’t know who Putin is."

But then last November 10 in a GOP debate, Mr. Trump said about Putin:

“I got to know him very well because we were both on ‘60 Minutes,’ we were stablemates, and we did very well that night.”

How can we reconcile those two statements by Mr. Trump?

huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-putin-russia_us_5798e7b4e4b02d5d5ed3d2fc
Click to expand...
Pointless to try. I just hope we do not have to get used to it.
 
Thorolfr said:
Here’s something kind of interesting at 538 entitled, Trump Is Driving Catholic Voters Toward Clinton:

fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-driving-catholic-voters-toward-clinton/
Click to expand...
Ridgerunner points out here that White Catholics skew to Trump and Hispanic Catholics skew to Clinton: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=14041286&postcount=3

So how does that mean there is such a skew towards Clinton winning the overall Catholic vote? As this article on the Pew poll reports, "Pew estimates that Catholics make up 20 per cent of the electorate this year, 13 per cent being white, five per cent being Hispanic, and two per cent being “other.” catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/07/19/us-catholics-split-on-whether-to-vote-clinton-or-trump-research-finds/

In regards to the Pew poll, it would be interesting to find out the racial breakdown of their Catholic numbers, because it’s well known that Hispanics in general skew Democrat, are more likely to support Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump, so if the number of Hispanic Catholics that Pew polled were much higher in numbers than for other racial groups polled, some of their polling may not be overall representative of who Catholics are supporting in their entirety as in across race.

I know the Pew poll came out a bit later, but Zogby’s polling says Trump is winning with Catholics 49% to 37% in this Washington Examiner report from late June: washingtonexaminer.com/zogby-trump-winning-independents-middle-class-catholics-protestants/article/2595334

So two different polling agencies and differing numbers on who is winning support from
Catholics.
 
Thorolfr said:
This morning Mr. Trump said, “I never met Putin. I don’t know who Putin is."

But then last November 10 in a GOP debate, Mr. Trump said about Putin:

“I got to know him very well because we were both on ‘60 Minutes,’ we were stablemates, and we did very well that night.”

How can we reconcile those two statements by Mr. Trump?

huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-putin-russia_us_5798e7b4e4b02d5d5ed3d2fc
Click to expand...
These two statements are so easy to explain. He and Putin were interviewed one after another like stable mates and both of them did well. They didn’t talk to each other though. Everybody who watched 60 minutes knows exactly what trump meant.
If you vote hillary you don’t need to justify yourself at all. This kind of finding needles in a hay stack is laughable.

Remember the Bible says, there is no one righteous, not even one(Romans 3:10), but our church teaches Mary and Jesus are without sin, ever. This looks like blatant contradiction and is used against the Catholic Church by protestants, but we know as Catholics those two statements are not meant to contradict one another. Some are pulling the same trick on trumps words. Never mind the context. Just take his words and use them to suit their purposes.
 
queenofheartscv said:
These two statements are so easy to explain. He and Putin were interviewed one after another like stable mates and both of them did well. They didn’t talk to each other though. Everybody who watched 60 minutes knows exactly what trump meant.
If you vote hillary you don’t need to justify yourself at all. This kind of finding needles in a hay stack is laughable.

Remember the Bible says, there is no one righteous, not even one(Romans 3:10), but our church teaches Mary and Jesus are without sin, ever. This looks like blatant contradiction and is used against the Catholic Church by protestants, but we know as Catholics those two statements are not meant to contradict one another. Some are pulling the same trick on trumps words. Never mind the context. Just take his words and use them to suit their purposes.
Click to expand...
Let’s just put parts of the two statements together: I don’t know who Putin is…I got to know him very well." Does that make sense?

:rolleyes:
 
estesbob said:
I heard a Hillary operative interviewed and he claimed Hillary was going to take care of the Vets better than Trump. When he asked why nothing was done the last 8 years he had no answer
Click to expand...
Some of us vets would ask that of all the past administrations going back to the founding of this nation. Fair warning–you really don’t want to get the Vietnam Vets started on this one.
 
Thorolfr said:
Let’s just put parts of the two statements together: I don’t know who Putin is…I got to know him very well." Does that make sense?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
There is a lot we don’t know about Trump’s ties to Russia, but some of the media is trying to find and connect the dots. It doesn’t look good.
A quote in that piece from Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr. — who is also an executive with Trump’s business — makes clear how the company in 2008 sought business from wealthy Russians. “In terms of high-end product influx into the U.S., Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,” he said at a conference that year, according to news reports. “We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
Click to expand...
washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/27/the-trump-russia-money-question-in-24-steps/
 
ComplineSanFran said:
There is a lot we don’t know about Trump’s ties to Russia, but some of the media is trying to find and connect the dots. It doesn’t look good.

washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/27/the-trump-russia-money-question-in-24-steps/
Click to expand...
And what about this? There are claimed links between donations to the Clinton Foundation and approval to buy a Uranium company, check this out:

Clinton Foundation Linked To Russian Effort To Buy Uranium Company

npr.org/2015/04/23/401781313/clinton-foundation-linked-to-russian-effort-to-buy-uranium-company

According to the article, Bil Clinton got $500000 to give a speech in Russia and “the report links those payments to parties with an interest in getting the U.S. government to approve foreign ownership of some American uranium mines.”

In regards to the speaking fee, “That was paid by Renaissance Capital, an investment bank in Russia that has links to the Kremlin. And basically they invited Bill, and Bill gave the speech just after the Russians had announced their desire to acquire this 51-percent stake in this company, but before the U.S. government had signed off.”

The chairman, of what was presumably a Uranium company, donated millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation, which the Clinton Foundation “failed to disclose” and Hillary Signed a memorandum when joining the Obama admin that, “she would disclose all donations. The other part of it was that they wouldn’t take foreign donations while she was Secretary of State. And she’s now saying that they won’t take foreign donations if she becomes president”
 
_Abyssinia said:
And what about this? There are claimed links between donations to the Clinton Foundation and approval to buy a Uranium company, check this out:

Clinton Foundation Linked To Russian Effort To Buy Uranium Company

npr.org/2015/04/23/401781313/clinton-foundation-linked-to-russian-effort-to-buy-uranium-company

According to the article, Bil Clinton got $500000 to give a speech in Russia and “the report links those payments to parties with an interest in getting the U.S. government to approve foreign ownership of some American uranium mines.”

In regards to the speaking fee, “That was paid by Renaissance Capital, an investment bank in Russia that has links to the Kremlin. And basically they invited Bill, and Bill gave the speech just after the Russians had announced their desire to acquire this 51-percent stake in this company, but before the U.S. government had signed off.”

The chairman, of what was presumably a Uranium company, donated millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation, which the Clinton Foundation “failed to disclose” and Hillary Signed a memorandum when joining the Obama admin that, “she would disclose all donations. The other part of it was that they wouldn’t take foreign donations while she was Secretary of State. And she’s now saying that they won’t take foreign donations if she becomes president”
Click to expand...
Unlike Trump, Clinton at least does not openly promise benefits and concessions to Putin.
 
Unlike Trump, Clinton at least does not openly promise benefits and concessions to Putin.
 
JurisPrudens said:
Unlike Trump, Clinton at least does not openly promise benefits and concessions to Putin.
Click to expand...
Yes, better to keep business dealings with foreign investors shady and closeted.

Hey, here’s an idea. Why not consistently decry both, or acknowledge it realistically happens with most powerful politicians and is rather meaningless, rather look for a flimsy justification that knows else believes?
 
Thorolfr said:
Let’s just put parts of the two statements together: I don’t know who Putin is…I got to know him very well." Does that make sense?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You can get to know Putin by watching his interview on TV but not really know him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top