[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]

Author Topic: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?  (Read 16852 times)

Jeff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #30 on: December 18, 2015, 12:37:59 PM »
Anyone who truly knows politics knows that Trump cannot possibly win the Republican nomination. Don't be fooled by early polls.  He doesn’t have a single endorsement from a governor or member of Congress, and those endorsements have historically been predictive of the eventual winner.

But he has damaged the Republican party for the general election, giving the Democrats a ton of ammunition against a party (for the most part) afraid to speak out against him.


Johnny

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 57
  • Gender: Male
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #31 on: January 09, 2016, 05:31:46 PM »
Why is no one talking about how Donald Trump is deliberately sabotaging it for the Republican party to win the presidency? I want to see a Republican in the white house for a change and he is hell bent on making us seem like immature morons, bent on temper tantrums and name calling, and who couldn't be trusted with the presidency? My friends think this is a good thing for conservatives  :o.

 Notice how the liberal media loves this?  They're all to happy to show Trump make a fool of himself day after day because they know in the end it will advance their agenda to convince the American public that Republicans have no intellect and have no answers to problems, just bravado. But what about us Republicans? Why are we piling on the wagon with this man? We have to get this clown out of the news if we ever expect to win the white house. We can't get anything done in Washington unless we do win the white house and we'll never win with the likes of Trump speaking day after day. Why we can't see the damage this man is doing I do not know.

Chicago Bear

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
  • Gender: Male
  • A Chicagoan Named Bear
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #32 on: January 10, 2016, 07:17:25 AM »
There's nothing anyone can do about Donald Trump's love for himself or his mouth.

James 3:8
"But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison."

 The allusion here seems to be comparing man's mouth and words to the biting power of a venomous snake. We can only hope this too will pass and someone more intelligent will prevail.

Either the Bible will Keep you from Sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible

George

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #33 on: January 10, 2016, 01:22:06 PM »
I know I'm not the only one here who likes Donald Trump.  :Say_what:

The rest of you are wearing this  :baghead: I suppose  :(

He's the only one who tells the truth.

Jesse

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 20
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #34 on: January 10, 2016, 03:46:03 PM »

I like Trump, I just wish he'd choose his battles. He just seems to say anything and worry about the consequences later.

Dryfus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • Gender: Male
  • Nothing without Proof
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #35 on: January 12, 2016, 09:50:58 AM »
 :ditto: I like Trump too
The whole world is a Stage

Larry

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 87
  • Gender: Male
  • Reformed & Reforming
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #36 on: January 20, 2016, 12:01:58 PM »
Here's yet another reason why the Republican party will not win the white house back from the Democrats, Sarah Palin endorses Donald Trump for president yesterday. Sarah is a pretty face, but she has nothing between her ears, and her family is a joke. Is this the best Republicans can offer? We most certainly are the gang that can't shoot straight. I'm afraid that the Democrats will not only win the presidency, but it will also bring in some key democratic wins in other areas on their coat tails. This could be a disaster for the party who had made such great wins in the house. What is wrong with us? Are we not really as smart as we think we are? Why would we hand the election over to the Democrats by showing how foolish we are?  Trump and Palin? :'(

Arnold

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
  • The Spirit is willing, but the Flesh is weak.
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #37 on: January 20, 2016, 04:17:04 PM »
He's better than Ms Clinton!

Betty

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 328
  • Obviously I'm a Novice
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #38 on: February 11, 2016, 10:39:29 AM »

>Who should we send to Washington in 2016?

Bernie Sanders!  At least he speaks for the people.

Shirley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Gender: Female
  • The Spirit of Christ
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #39 on: February 11, 2016, 12:10:38 PM »

>Who should we send to Washington in 2016?

Bernie Sanders!  At least he speaks for the people.

 :o  Betty, you even make liberal Christians seem conservative.

Dana Pescator

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 95
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #40 on: February 14, 2016, 11:07:48 AM »
 :Dueling: After seeing this last debate, any Christian who votes for Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders should just flat out stop calling themselves Christian. Because Donald is a lunatic who will destroy this country. And Sanders is a socialist who will do the same thing from the opposite direction. It's unbelievable that Trump may actually get the Republican nomination with the chaos he has caused the party. And that goes for the socialist Bernie Sanders also. These two should never be allowed to run for office because they have the common sense of a 6 year old. And the Christians who vote for them are morons as well.

Frankly, I want to see how these people do in the states that actually "represent" a cross section of all the people of this country. States that will actually determine who is President. From most important to least, these top 11 states are California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey. These states hold "all" the power. Forget, New Hampshire, Iowa and the backwoods south, they mean nothing in the big scheme of things. If Trump or Bernie wins these 11 states, then it's not only time to worry about the Party, but about the sanity of US citizens as a whole as well.  :head-smack:


John

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 536
  • Gender: Male
  • A man with God is always in the majority-John Knox
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #41 on: February 14, 2016, 02:23:08 PM »
Dana, it is always the Moderates that decide the election. The Socialist Left is entrenched in their Utopian worldview supposedly accomplished through 'free' handouts. Stealing working people's life work and energy to transfer it to a growing army of people who rely wholly on the State for sustenance, further destroys the moral fabric of the country. It is "if a man does not work he shall not eat", not "if a man does not eat he shall not work".

I think you will find that among Republicans there exists two opposing groups who dislike each other: the old-guard establishment and the young-Turk conservatives. The old-guard wants most of the same things the Left wants - but they want to control the levers of power. Their main goal is to grow government in favor of their special interests. The young-Turk conservatives want to re-establish the Constitution - remove burdensome laws and regulation, rid the country of excess taxation, establish a true Market Economy where the State does not interfere (which it did in the housing crisis - causing the housing crisis). They realize it is the government that is the problem, not the solution.  They believe in equality under the Law - a sovereign nation that protects its borders, a strong military that will not be used because it is so strong, power returned to the states, an end to the murder of babies, the end to a welfare state, an end to crony capitalism where the rich control access. The old-guard under the RNC will not support a boat-rocker. They fear the verbal assault from the Left - they only seek to maintain power and where they can consolidate power, they do not want controversy.

The mushy Middle. They are not sure if Socialism is all that bad in certain circumstances - it sound good, who is against giving a helping hand to the poor and minorities. They like some of the ideas of the Right - perhaps we should secure the border and perhaps we should control spending. But sitting on the fence, not having a strong understanding of the cause-and-effect result of these various policies (the media never connects  the dots between current events and past policy decisions that created the current horrible circumstances - for if the people knew they were being had, taken, and abused (ignored and taken for granted) it would be the end of the Left's Worker's Paradise scheme).  But the undecided Middle can be swayed either to the Socialist ideals or the Conservative ideals or the establishment Republican ideals - they just want to be wooed.

As you said, Trump is an empty suit - he knows next to nothing about the world stage or the Constitution, or how to solve issues facing the country. He has faith in his own greatness in his own pride in himself. That his ideas are incredibly amazing because they came out of his head, and therefore must be amazingly good. But his empty rhetoric is like candy to the mushy Middle (and some Blue-Dog Democrats) - it's simple, easy to understand (make America great again) boiled down to a bumper-sticker. Obama used the same device (Yes we Can!) to energize the Left and the Middle to great effect (with the help of a compliant media). On the other hand, Cruz and Rubio appear to make strong statements, have a bold, unwavering plan and are unabashed in the defense of their cause - which also attracts the rudderless, confused Middle.

In the end, the Left will vote for whomever is the most Socialist/Communist/Marxist ... the one able to convince the low-information voter that they will get the most free-stuff wins. Hilliary will likely be indicted and Biden/Warren ticket seems likely - else the Obama Justice Department will simply ignore her numerous felonies and lies, for the sake of the greater good of the Socialist struggle - which could happen.

The Republican Right will not have their preferred Establishment candidate in Bush, as he cannot inspire the Middle at all. So, they will converge on the least Conservative Republican, which appears to be Rubio. That endorsement will only be another nail in his coffin - the country is not looking for a good-ole-boy, business-as-usual candidate. They are angry (with good reason) at the RINO Republicans and Marxist Democrats - both of which do not speak for the average working American.

So, who can be elected? The media will support whomever comes out of the Democrat convention - Biden or Clinton.  If the other side can make the case, the Republican wins. I don't believe Bush or Trump have shown a propensity for sound arguments - they both are inarticulate. Trump's repetitive bumper-sticker one-liners will not carry him through the general election - and is preadolescent insults and personal attacks will not help him in the General. In the end,, it may be a battle between Biden and Trump - two equally unreliable candidates.

I would hope it would be Cruz against the Socialist machine - but there aren't that many Constitutional Conservatives left - unless a strong convincing argument can be given to the mush Middle. I think Cruz could do that - but it would be an uphill battle with everyone hurling insults the entire way. The media hates him. The Republican Establishment hates him. The Marxists hate him. Hollywood hate him. He would have to be Reagan-like to win (not sure he's in that category).

You are welcome to disagree - we'll find out soon enough which way it will go.

John
Si hoc signum legere potes, operis boni in rebus Latinus alacribus et fructuosis potiri potes!

Dustin

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 31
  • Gender: Male
  • My Grace Is Sufficient
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #42 on: February 14, 2016, 04:48:54 PM »
I'm voting for Rubio as he is the only one leading the pack who can win, Cruz is seen as a dictator and will likely give the Democrats a win and another court justice. The party needs someone who can win moderate votes. Cruz alienates too many people.

William B

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #43 on: February 15, 2016, 01:52:38 AM »
I'm voting for Rubio as he is the only one leading the pack who can win, Cruz is seen as a dictator and will likely give the Democrats a win and another court justice. The party needs someone who can win moderate votes. Cruz alienates too many people.

Dustin a John,
   I would agree that Rubio is the best candidate if the object is to beat the Democrats come November. If the object is to make a point about conservative ideology, then Cruz is the man. I for one would rather go Rubio than to see another Democratic President win the election. Cruz is simply too abrasive and divisive for most Americans the way the electoral college is set up. I'm not going to vote for someone just on principle if that means the Democrats will win.


Frank Mortimer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
Re: Who should we send to Washington in 2016?
« Reply #44 on: February 15, 2016, 05:36:54 PM »
I would hope it would be Cruz against the Socialist machine - but there aren't that many Constitutional Conservatives left - unless a strong convincing argument can be given to the mush Middle. I think Cruz could do that - but it would be an uphill battle with everyone hurling insults the entire way. The media hates him. The Republican Establishment hates him. The Marxists hate him. Hollywood hate him. He would have to be Reagan-like to win (not sure he's in that category).

You are welcome to disagree - we'll find out soon enough which way it will go.

John

John,   I disagree and lean towards Dustin's argument. Cruz will be divisive, in the party as well as in the general election. We have to keep in mind that it is the middle that  is going to sway the election to Republican or Democrat, and you can't alienate the middle, which is what I think Cruz would do. Standing for your core principles is one thing, getting elected is another. Cruz doesn't know how to downplay certain things until "after" he is elected. Then he can do whatever he wants. His mouth will get him in trouble. I'm not even saying I disagree with him, but you can't always say what you're thinking and be elected. That's Trump's problem, he thinks that because he says what many people are thinking, that will win the election. But it won't. Bottom line, Cruz doesn't play well with others. I don't think he knows how, and that is why I don't think he can win a general election. If he could put a lid on it until after the election, he might have a chance, but he can't on what he calls "principle."




 


[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]