This is a blog to discuss philosophy, chess, politics,
C. S. Lewis, or whatever it is that I'm in the mood to discuss.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Supporting Trump and summoning the White Witch
Gina Dalfonzo, a former writer for Charles Colson's Breakpoint, claims that Christians who support Trump are doing what Nikabrik was doing in summoning the White Witch to defeat the Telmarines.
This was written in early 2016, for perspective. At that point Cruz was still in the race, and a lot of Christians, particularly those going to church on a regular basis, tended to lean Cruz over Trump. The comparison in the article (up to the last paragraph, which is grounds for debate) is certainly valid up to the point that it became Trump vs Clinton, then it no longer would hold water.
"to the point that it became Trump vs Clinton, then it no longer would hold water"
Although I disagreed with almost everything Clinton said, and found her personally off-putting, in my worst nightmares I cannot imagine that a Clinton presidency would have been one tenth as awful as what we are dealing with now.
Honest question: Just what would have Clinton done as president that would have been so awful? The worst things I can think of pale in significance compared with Trump's actions.
I think the fact that they can't stop reliving he need to justify Trump by comparing him with Clinton as thorough she's still running shows they know what they did. They took the obvious greater of two evils and now must continue to pretend that it is the lesser.
"I think the fact that they can't stop reliving he need to justify Trump by comparing him with Clinton as thorough she's still running..."
I don't see Trump supporters reliving the campaign. Rather, I see Trump critics reliving the campaign. Trump supporters are simply responding to critics on their own grounds when they keep harping on 2016.
"...shows they know what they did. They took the obvious greater of two evils and now must continue to pretend that it is the lesser."
"Honest question: Just what would have Clinton done as president that would have been so awful? The worst things I can think of pale in significance compared with Trump's actions."
Hillary having the power to put justices on the Supreme Court is a nightmare that I'm thrilled will not happen. That alone is reason enough.
I do not want a progressive as president. While I did not vote for either of the candidates, had it been a legal requirement to vote, I would have voted against Hillary with a clear conscience (due to the legal requirement forcing me to vote). There are some progressive policies and ideas I think that should be tweaked rather than tossed, but by and large I think they are harmful to the country. That's what Hillary would have done.
"They took the obvious greater of two evils"
Yeah I'll bet if Trump was the Democrat nominee, with equivalent overtures to the progressive base, that you'd have rather had Ted Cruz in office than a Trump who would have a chance of implementing progressive goals and putting desired judges in federal courts. "Well Cruz will implement policies and nominate judges that will do incalculable harm to the country for years to come, while Trump will nominate progressives and at least has a chance of pursuing a progressive agenda, but I'm voting Cruz because at least he's not as personally flawed!" said no hypothetical progressive ever.
No, if I were given a choice between Mitt Romney and John Edwards, knowing what I know about Edwards, I would choose Romney. A corrupt candidate on your own side distorts and dilutes your message, and opens you up to backlash when the moral failures break down your party's administration. Cruz would be hard to take, since he is more extreme, but knowing what I know about Edwards' character, I would fear something like a post-Watergate backlash benefiting the right.
11 comments:
This was written in early 2016, for perspective. At that point Cruz was still in the race, and a lot of Christians, particularly those going to church on a regular basis, tended to lean Cruz over Trump. The comparison in the article (up to the last paragraph, which is grounds for debate) is certainly valid up to the point that it became Trump vs Clinton, then it no longer would hold water.
"to the point that it became Trump vs Clinton, then it no longer would hold water"
Although I disagreed with almost everything Clinton said, and found her personally off-putting, in my worst nightmares I cannot imagine that a Clinton presidency would have been one tenth as awful as what we are dealing with now.
Honest question: Just what would have Clinton done as president that would have been so awful? The worst things I can think of pale in significance compared with Trump's actions.
I think the fact that they can't stop reliving he need to justify Trump by comparing him with Clinton as thorough she's still running shows they know what they did. They took the obvious greater of two evils and now must continue to pretend that it is the lesser.
Thanks Legion. Your comments are sane and reasonable.
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2018/08/waiting-for-aslan.html
"I think the fact that they can't stop reliving he need to justify Trump by comparing him with Clinton as thorough she's still running..."
I don't see Trump supporters reliving the campaign. Rather, I see Trump critics reliving the campaign. Trump supporters are simply responding to critics on their own grounds when they keep harping on 2016.
"...shows they know what they did. They took the obvious greater of two evils and now must continue to pretend that it is the lesser."
Nice example of projection.
"Honest question: Just what would have Clinton done as president that would have been so awful? The worst things I can think of pale in significance compared with Trump's actions."
Hillary having the power to put justices on the Supreme Court is a nightmare that I'm thrilled will not happen. That alone is reason enough.
I do not want a progressive as president. While I did not vote for either of the candidates, had it been a legal requirement to vote, I would have voted against Hillary with a clear conscience (due to the legal requirement forcing me to vote). There are some progressive policies and ideas I think that should be tweaked rather than tossed, but by and large I think they are harmful to the country. That's what Hillary would have done.
"They took the obvious greater of two evils"
Yeah I'll bet if Trump was the Democrat nominee, with equivalent overtures to the progressive base, that you'd have rather had Ted Cruz in office than a Trump who would have a chance of implementing progressive goals and putting desired judges in federal courts. "Well Cruz will implement policies and nominate judges that will do incalculable harm to the country for years to come, while Trump will nominate progressives and at least has a chance of pursuing a progressive agenda, but I'm voting Cruz because at least he's not as personally flawed!" said no hypothetical progressive ever.
No, if I were given a choice between Mitt Romney and John Edwards, knowing what I know about Edwards, I would choose Romney. A corrupt candidate on your own side distorts and dilutes your message, and opens you up to backlash when the moral failures break down your party's administration. Cruz would be hard to take, since he is more extreme, but knowing what I know about Edwards' character, I would fear something like a post-Watergate backlash benefiting the right.
"said no hypothetical progressive ever"
I don't know whether or not I am a "progressive", but I would have voted for Ted Cruz over Trump in a heartbeat. No contest.
I might take Romney over Edwards or wrote-in. I would not vote for Edwards.
Anything like casumo mobile can be one of the most important in the area of gambling including the several accents here.
Post a Comment