Trump v GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abynissa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
10gr8kids said:
Sorry to have upset you so much.

Of course we don’t have to agree, but if you want to promote Trump and his policies, shouldn’t we be free to post how we view the evidence, or lack of, of Trump’s qualifications?
Click to expand...
Hi 10gr8kids. I don’t want to gang-up on you, but I think you’re doing a slight injustice to queenofheartscv et al. They don’t want to block you from talking about you-know-who. Just the opposite, I would say.

I believe Dr. Carson had the right idea, as I said elsewhere:

I think his best recent contribution may well be “Can somebody attack me, please?” – not just because of good comedic timing and whatnot (which it did have), but because it may have opened people’s eyes to what’s going on.

(In case anyone missed that debate moment, Dr. Carson was poking fun at the fact that the moderators were allocating speaking time to candidates according to how much they were attacked by other candidates (giving him virtually none).)

Marco Rubio seems to have caught on. Influenced by Carson’s joke or not, I couldn’t say, but I know that yesterday he dared to challenge Dana Bash about the fact that she kept asking him question after question about Mr. T***p.
 
Peter_J said:
Hi 10gr8kids. I don’t want to gang-up on you, but I think you’re doing a slight injustice to queenofheartscv et al. They don’t want to block you from talking about you-know-who. Just the opposite, I would say.

I believe Dr. Carson had the right idea, as I said elsewhere:

I think his best recent contribution may well be “Can somebody attack me, please?” – not just because of good comedic timing and whatnot (which it did have), but because it may have opened people’s eyes to what’s going on.

(In case anyone missed that debate moment, Dr. Carson was poking fun at the fact that the moderators were allocating speaking time to candidates according to how much they were attacked by other candidates (giving him virtually none).)

Marco Rubio seems to have caught on. Influenced by Carson’s joke or not, I couldn’t say, but I know that yesterday he dared to challenge Dana Bash about the fact that she kept asking him question after question about Mr. T***p.
Click to expand...
Dr Carson is a beautiful mind. But sheez these moderators start off with questions like; Trump said this about Rubio and what do you think Mr Cruz? And yes I seen that with Dana also even Marco became exhausted with it and several times attempted to change the topic.
 
GaryTaylor said:
I think your a little confused how this goes. Hillary is the “enemy” and all is fair in love and war as a writer once penned the words.
Click to expand...
I don’t adhere to the teaching that all is fair in love and war. I think that the basic rules of morals and ethics should hold in all cases, including love and war.
 
GARYTALOR

I know what the GOP platform is, that doesn’t mean anyone who runs really and truly believes it. Some people do say what they think others want to hear in order to be more electable.

PATHFINDER,

I know that’s what you believe, I see a difference in someone trying to get a bill passed that will at least put a limit on abortions even though they may personally like something other, and someone who really doesn’t care about abortion at all.

I realize I may be wrong about Trump. I guess if he is elected we will be able to see whose right and whose wrong. I’ll admit I don’t like being wrong, but if Trump is elected, I’ll pray I am wrong and you all are right.
 
Peter_J said:
Hi 10gr8kids. I don’t want to gang-up on you, but I think you’re doing a slight injustice to queenofheartscv et al. They don’t want to block you from talking about you-know-who. Just the opposite, I would say.
Click to expand...
Hey Peter, I really don’t mind being ganged up on. 😃

The more people that are against me, the stronger my resolve to speak what I believe to be the truth.

As far as queenheart goes, I don’t think she is trying to keep me from talking about Trump. I think she just doesn’t like to have her points picked apart. But then I guess who really does?
 
Prominent Catholics call Trump “manifestly unfit to be president”
Trump poses “grave danger” to pro-life and pro-family causes, according to letter signed by three dozen Catholic leaders.
Click to expand...
Two of America’s most prominent Catholic conservatives have called Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump “manifestly unfit to be president of the United States” and have warned that his winning the Republican nomination would pose “grave danger” to pro-life and pro-family causes as well as to religious freedom and limited government.
Click to expand...
In their “Appeal to Our Fellow Catholics”—which was published today at National Review Online and which was signed by nearly three dozen Catholic professors, authors, and activists—Robert George and George Weigel say that while “no political party perfectly embodies Catholic social doctrine,” the Republican party has been an “imperfect…but serviceable” vehicle for “promoting causes at the center of Catholic social concern in the United States.” George and Weigel see those causes as imperiled by the prospect of Donald Trump as the party’s presidential nominee:
Click to expand...
[Trump’s] campaign has already driven our politics down to new levels of vulgarity. His appeals to racial and ethnic fears and prejudice are offensive to any genuinely Catholic sensibility. He promised to order U.S. military personnel to torture terrorist suspects and to kill terrorists’ families — actions condemned by the Church and policies that would bring shame upon our country. And there is nothing in his campaign or his previous record that gives us grounds for confidence that he genuinely shares our commitments to the right to life, to religious freedom and the rights of conscience, to rebuilding the marriage culture, or to subsidiarity and the principle of limited constitutional government.
Click to expand...
While acknowledging the appeal Trump’s campaign has for many Catholic voters, particularly those concerned about immigration, wage stagnation, and “stifling ‘political correctness,’” the letter’s authors state that “there are candidates for the Republican nomination who are far more likely than Mr. Trump to address these concerns, and who do not exhibit his vulgarity, oafishness, shocking ignorance, and—we do not hesitate to use the word—demagoguery.”
In addition to George and Weigel, the letter is signed by 35 other well-known conservative Catholics, including Ryan T. Anderson, Prof. Gerard V. Bradley, Mary Eberstadt, C.C. Pecknold, Robert Royal, and Edward Whelan.
Click to expand...
Heads up - more GOP establishment wonks out there making trouble.
catholicworldreport.com/Blog/4627/prominent_catholics_call_trump_manifestly_unfit_to_be_president.aspx
 
estesbob said:
Me too-but what if does come down to Hillary vs trump?
Click to expand...
You want my opinion? I honestly don’t know. I don’t think Trump is prolife but I definitely don’t trust Hillary re the Supreme Court. I don’t know if I won’t vote, or if I’ll vote for Trump or Hillary. A lot of it would depend on the general election campaigns. Frankly, I don’t think it would matter (1) because I am in a blue state and (2) Hillary will very likely beat him. She has her best shot against him of all the GOP candidates.

If you don’t want Hillary, don’t vote for Trump.
 
Tomdstone said:
I don’t adhere to the teaching that all is fair in love and war. I think that the basic rules of morals and ethics should hold in all cases, including love and war.
Click to expand...
Fair enough but its the truth as the more you love the more you hurt when that love is crushed. Hurt is first usually misunderstood and exhibited as anger and often as we see revenge. Doesn’t mean that the golden rule isn’t a universal teaching or that Love thy neighbor isn’t a par excellence in teaching. But man by large lives by fight and flight. We would like to think of ourselves as civil but war and killing in recorded history has no peace in fact statistically every 2-1/2 years and there is no reason the believe it will stop save the second coming of Christ.
 
estesbob said:
Me too-but what if does come down to Hillary vs trump?
Click to expand...
I think in being anti-amnesty, that is a plus for the pro-life stand until our brother and sister Catholics have more of a respect for the sanctity of life.
 
Path_Finder said:
I think in being anti-amnesty, that is a plus for the pro-life stand until our brother and sister Catholics have more of a respect for the sanctity of life.
Click to expand...
I lean towards open borders myself with no path for citizenship for those who come here illegally
 
10gr8kids said:
GARYTALOR

I know what the GOP platform is, that doesn’t mean anyone who runs really and truly believes it. Some people do say what they think others want to hear in order to be more electable.
Click to expand...
Sure they do but I do believe Trump is genuine. I believe Cruz the most in this area as I have watched him for years. He never wavers with religious freedom but even his stance on for example birth control has recently been all over the place. Its only goes to indicate the complexity of these issues. Its easy to talk the talk but as we see when under scrutiny its a little harder to walk the walk. They are all struggling with this, and rightfully so as all the people are at stake here, not just Christians.
 
I do need to say one thing on Kasich. I have criticized him in the past as being a soft social conservative - that is not correct. He has a great pro-life record. He has been soft on religious liberty protection with respect to defending traditional marriage.

I admit I am not a ‘single-issue’ pro-life voter. But if I were I sure as heck would not support Trump. Cruz, Rubio and Kasich are all much stronger here. I find the prolife support of Trump very odd indeed. And, again, he will probably lose, so to me this is a vote for Hillary.
 
That sounds like those who questioned Governor Romney’s pro-life values, that sure turned out well.

Anyway, helping out Sanger award winner Clinton is like helping out Obama who voted 4 times against the born alive infant protection act in Illinois. If this is where one’s priorities are, so be it. I think voting for the DNC is worse.

Trump is to be commended though for blocking what is likely to be a bunch of Clinton/Obama type voters but negating citizenship and the right to vote in some people’s eyes, make them like 2nd class citizens.
 
Path_Finder said:
That sounds like those who questioned Governor Romney’s pro-life values, that sure turned out well.

Anyway, helping out Sanger award winner Clinton is like helping out Obama who voted 4 times against the born alive infant protection act in Illinois. If this is where one’s priorities are, so be it. I think voting for the DNC is worse.

Trump is to be commended though for blocking what is likely to be a bunch of Clinton/Obama type voters but negating citizenship and the right to vote in some people’s eyes, make them like 2nd class citizens.
Click to expand...
What is wrong with supporting Ted Cruz?
 
Path_Finder said:
One might do well to look at the original statement I quoted, I don’t believe someone mentioned or was addressing Mr. Donald Trump in it so to me, this is a non sequitur. I believe it was saying something along the lines of the Republicans.
Click to expand...
OK, I understand your point. I am not countering it so much as applying the same logic to Trump (in this thread about Trump). If you judge politicians by their past actions, let’s look at Trump’s past actions. What do they tell you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top