Mueller investigation conludes that Trump is guilty!

[oxmixmudd]

That is pretty much what he meant by being "over-the-top"

As best I can tell Sparko, it only appears to be over the top because you don't really understand what Trump is. Why you don't get what he is is a mystery to me. And since almost none of you will engage in reasoned conversation over the issue and would prefer instead to just lob pejoratives at any that disagree with you, I will probably never understand why you don't get it.



Jim

[seer]

No, they should have much earlier dropped from a field of 17 look alikes and gone with one or two real contenders to Trump. Trump only won because his minority base was not split. IOW, there wasn't anything else like trump, so any GOP voter that liked him went with him. The other umpteen contenders split the remaining sane GOP voters and so Trump got the nomination. Once Trump was nominated then it launched into the much larger rock and hard place position that Hillary vs Trump presented. Trump could never have garnered a win had the competition not been so polarizing. Sanders would have sunk him. (So the Democrats do bear some of the blame here). Both parties failed America in 2016, but the GOP bears the greater burden. It is the GOP's fault that conflict defined the 2016 election. Trump should have never been on that ticket.

Listen Jim, unlike the Democrat primary the Republican primary was above board. You can not tell candidates to drop out just because someone you don't like may win. That is not how it works, and he did win close to 50% of the votes in the general election.

Not if we have earned that hatred by behaving contrary to Christs words, contrary to what our faith teaches!

Paul makes a very good point. If you break the law of the land, it is not persecution to be punished. It is because you broke the law of the land. When evangelicals do not show the love, mercy, and grace of Christ and instead show judgement and condemnation, then they EARN the hatred. It is not persecution in that case, and it is nothing to be proud of. When Christians rally behind idiot science both YEC and the anti-climate stuff, then they also earn the disdain of those that are educated. When Christians rally behind and support gross immorality, they earn public disdain. There is no glory in earning disdain. Augustine made this point long long ago:

We are not to put stumbling blocks before the Cross seer. We are not to make the Cross harder than it already is. When we directly violate the teachings of our Lord we can not claim persecution over its consequences. And we can not condemn those that rightfully found us to be hypocrites that proclaim mercy and moral purity while joining our selves to narcisists without an ounce of mercy.

You really don't think that Christians voting for Hillary who supported gay marriage and late term abortion is putting a stumbling block before the Cross? Jim your outrage is selective and biased.

One can say that about most anything anyone says. The trick is to look at what the basis of those opinions is. The facts, the realities that have formed them. And then to offer a well reasoned response.


Jim

Jim no one here thinks that you are objective on this issue.

[oxmixmudd]

Listen Jim, unlike the Democrat primary the Republican primary was above board. You can not tell candidates to drop out just because someone you don't like may win. That is not how it works, and he did win close to 50% of the votes in the general election.

20-40% of that almost 50% where anti-hillary votes, not pro-trump votes. Trump only won the primary because there were too many look-alikes running with a sane GOP platform and that allowed Trump to win on the leavings.

You really don't think that Christians voting for Hillary who supported gay marriage and late term abortion is putting a stumbling blocks before the Cross? Jim your outrage is selective and biased.

Many of those were anti-Trump votes because of the rock and a hard place position that the election was. When I speak of 'stumbling blocks' seer, I am speaking of the SUPPORT for trump by evangelicals over policies and actions CONTRARY to our faith both before and ESPECIALLY after the election. I am not talking about the rock and a hard place choice that the election itself presented.

Jim no one here thinks that you are objective on this issue.

I understand no Trump supporter thinks I'm objective on the issue. I'm not too worried about that. I am willing to hear any reasoned arguments against my own, and I am willing to discuss those arguments without calling the other person names every other paragraph - unlike most of the discussions here. But too large a percentage of the time the responses to my statements are not reasoned responses, they are pejoratives and thus are ignored.


Jim

[Sparko]

As best I can tell Sparko, it only appears to be over the top because you don't really understand what Trump is. Why you don't get what he is is a mystery to me. And since almost none of you will engage in reasoned conversation over the issue and would prefer instead to just lob pejoratives at any that disagree with you, I will probably never understand why you don't get it.



Jim

He is not the freaking antichrist which it looks like you are trying to make him out to be. Your post made him out to be the worst and most evil politician in the history of the country.

[seer]

20-40% of that almost 50% where anti-hillary votes, not pro-trump votes. Trump only won the primary because there were too many look-alikes running with a sane GOP platform and that allowed Trump to win on the leavings.

Jim, Trump played by the rules in the primary, unlike Hillary (which doesn't seem to bother you). And Trump's poll number are still running between 39-49 percent depending on the poll. Which I believe is higher than Obama's at this point.

Many of those were anti-Trump votes because of the rock and a hard place position that election was. When I speak of 'stumbling blocks' seer, I am speaking of the SUPPORT for trump by evangelicals over policies and actions CONTRARY to our faith both before and ESPECIALLY after the election. I am not talking about the rock and a hard place choice that the election itself presented.

Than that was my point a few posts back Jim. I rather support Trump than give it all over to the Democrats (which would happen) - whom I view as more wicked. It is his policies that I support not his flawed personality.

I understand no Trump supporter thinks I'm objective on the issue. I'm not too worried about that. I am willing to hear any reasoned arguments against my own. But most of the time the responses to my statements are not reasoned responses, they are pejoratives and thus are ignored.


Jim

Jim I'm sorry, you are just not reasonable on this issue.

[lilpixieofterror]

You guys are such a riot, you're willing to rationalize away anything if it's critical to your beliefs.

More looking into a mirror, Jimmy?

[lilpixieofterror]

I know you like to pretend Trump is 'just another corrupt politician', but he is much worse than that. There is no comparison between him and Obama, Hillary, Bush, Bush, Kasich, Dole, McCain, Clinton (bill) and the list could go on to include almost all who have served this country over the last 20 years. IF he was good for the country, IF he had a moral bone in his body, that could be good, we need some changes. But trump brings the worst of the worst in terms of his 'change' to the process, to the culture, to the rule of law. So while we needed change, we did not need it so bad as to choose Trump as the means to find it.

Jim

[Mountain Man]

I know you like to pretend Trump is 'just another corrupt politician', but he is much worse than that. There is no comparison between him and Obama, Hillary, Bush, Bush, Kasich, Dole, McCain, Clinton (bill) and the list could go on to include almost all who have served this country over the last 20 years. IF he was good for the country, IF he had a moral bone in his body, that could be good, we need some changes. But trump brings the worst of the worst in terms of his 'change' to the process, to the culture, to the rule of law. So while we needed change, we did not need it so bad as to choose Trump as the means to find it.

Wow... and not a hint of self-awareness...

[oxmixmudd]

Jim, Trump played by the rules in the primary, unlike Hillary (which doesn't seem to bother you). And Trump's poll number are still running between 39-49 percent depending on the poll. Which I believe is higher than Obama's at this point.

Of course it bothers me. It is not the topic of discussion, however. So - do I need to in each comment about Trump also create a paragraph or two about exactly what similar things I like or don't like about Obama or Hillary?

You see, it seems to me you can't evaluate Trump objectively because you have this huge chip on your shoulder about whether or not Hillary or Obama got away with something in the past. They are not president. Donald Trump is. I'm concerned about what Donald Trump is doing. Hillary and Obama aren't running the country right now. Trump is.

Than that was my point a few posts back Jim. I rather support Trump than give it all over to the Democrats (which would happen) - whom I view as more wicked. It is his policies that I support not his flawed personality.

And I personally believe Trump is worse for the country than the Democrats would be. Though not on all things. It's an overall thing. Trump is worse. And the fact he's not a Democrat does not make him any better.

Jim I'm sorry, you are just not reasonable on this issue.

Well we almost had a conversation. Really - I think all of you would be very surprised how things would go if you could stop calling names and actually just discuss the issues. But then again, when you stop calling your opponents names and actually listen to them, they start to appear a bit more human, and that kind of muddies things up a bit. It's not all nice and neat, all black and white, all good and evil. But really - give it a try.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

You know pix, I know you are an intelligent person. So I know you can and sometimes do say useful things, even insightful things. And I promise taht if you ever direct one of those smart, intelligent, insightful comments at me, I'll try to return the favor.




Jim

[rogue06]

Yet that did not stop Russian money from flowing in to their foundation: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.d331fc1d369a

Would you stop using right... wing... sourc... Oh. Never mind.

[seer]

You see, it seems to me you can't evaluate Trump objectively because you have this huge chip on your shoulder about whether or not Hillary or Obama got away with something in the past. They are not president. Donald Trump is. I'm concerned about what Donald Trump is doing. Hillary and Obama aren't running the country right now. Trump is.

No, I do not like the double standard.

And I personally believe Trump is worse for the country than the Democrats would be. Though not on all things. It's an overall thing. Trump is worse. And the fact he's not a Democrat does not make him any better.

So we disagree. The judges alone on the federal courts seals it for me, never mind his positions on business taxes, illegal immigration, trade, etc...

Well we almost had a conversation. Really - I think all of you would be very surprised how things would go if you could stop calling names and actually just discuss the issues. But then again, when you stop calling your opponents names and actually listen to them, they start to appear a bit more human, and that kind of muddies things up a bit. It's not all nice and neat, all black and white, all good and evil. But really - give it a try.


Jim

Jim I have always seen you as a human being, and I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts on many other issues. I just think that you have a real bias on this issue. And you have more than implied that we who support Trump are somehow bad Christians.

[seer]

Would you stop using right... wing... sourc... Oh. Never mind.

Well to Star the WP would be a right wing source...

[rogue06]

Well to Star the WP would be a right wing source...

Need I once again have to note that to him Joseph Stalin was a right winger? He is not exactly a credible determiner of what is right or left wing.

[lilpixieofterror]

You know pix, I know you are an intelligent person. So I know you can and sometimes do say useful things, even insightful things. And I promise taht if you ever direct one of those smart, intelligent, insightful comments at me, I'll try to return the favor.