I have seen what has happened with friends and neighbors since the first debate. Trump entered the first debate with a huge lead. The debate and the subsequent week-long fight with Miss Universe revealed him to be ignorant, undisciplined and probably insane to those who weren’t really paying attention before.
Young people I taught in Sunday School over the last twenty years rejected Trump at that time. The most serious and devout turned to McMullin. Others turned to Johnson. Older people began to fully understand that by nominating Trump, the Republicans had turned the election into a farce.
The last 12 days have revealed Trump to be a sexual predator and extremely mentally deranged. I don’t personally know anyone who has switched to Hillary, but people are completely appalled by the choice. One lady announced that her parrot is running and immediately drew support. In addition to Arnold Weaver, one of my friends has thrown his golden retriever into the race. Many, many are saying they are too disgusted to vote. This doesn’t bode well for our down ballot Republicans.
This generation is in for a rough ride.
A couple of days ago, Michelle said she is glad she is old.
Yeah. Barring some calamity, we are past that. But I weep for what America has become.
But my son, and his children are going about their lives, just as if everything is OK.
And for the time being, everything is OK. That’s all they can do.
Hillary will allow 300k Muslim refugees in. But only about 10k are terrorist. That’s only 3%. Most Muslims are peace loving, only about 5% want to kill us.
When you say “the most serious and devout” do you mean Christians?
Shouldn’t you be berating them about choosing a cult following Mormon? I mean really, how devout can they be if they’ll settle for the followers of a man who bastardized the snot of the Bible, and pretended to be a prophet, while preying on multiple women and the wives of others? Isn’t he what you now call a “sexual predator?”They might as well just vote for the tangerine guy. Same difference, right?
“When I read the Boston Globe column by Jeff Jacoby, a man whose work I have long respected, “How the Religious Right Embraced Donald Trump and Lost its Moral Authority,” gratuitous hatred came to mind. Just as there are pro-Trump people who expressed contempt for anti-Trump people from the very beginning — as an early anti-Trumper I can personally attest to this (even though I wrote repeatedly that if Trump won the nomination I would vote for him) — now some Never Trump people dismiss the decency and moral credibility of conservatives voting for Trump.
“In light of this, I would like to respond to Jeff Jacoby and to the editorial against Trump published last week in the important evangelical journal,
World. Unlike the Jacoby piece, which contained attacks on the moral credibility and decency of pro-Trump Christians — “Religious conservatives shed their principles, and thereby dismantled their influence. . . . Buried under the post-election wreckage will be the moral credibility of the religious right. . . . [Their] “hypocrisy . . . is orders of magnitude worse than the customary flip-flopping and sail-trimming of a presidential campaign” — the World editorial went out of its way to be gracious to those Christians still voting for Trump. For example: “We also value those who still plan to vote for Trump so as to vote for the Supreme Court.”
But the private Trump comments on groping women pushed World to call for Trump to resign and to call on Christians to withdraw support for Trump.
World: “If a person is unfaithful to his spouse, he’s also likely to be unfaithful to his country.”
I have heard this argument about the alleged connection between marital infidelity and infidelity to one’s country my whole life. And it has been false my whole life — as well as throughout history. There is no connection between marital fidelity and fidelity to country. Were the unfaithful Lyndon Johnson and John F. Kennedy also unfaithful to America?
Indeed, some of the world’s greatest leaders have been unfaithful to their wives. Some of the worst have been faithful. I wish there were a connection. Choices for leaders would then be much simpler. The only married candidates we would vote for are those we believe had never been sexually unfaithful.
The editors of World and Jeff Jacoby must think God was pretty flawed in “voting” for King David. King David did much worse than privately boast about women allowing him to grope them. He had a man killed so that his adultery with the man’s wife would not be exposed. And while God was angry at, and punished, the king, God still maintained David as king and gave him a central role in Jewish history. If God shouldn’t be ashamed for supporting King David, Christians shouldn’t be ashamed for supporting Donald Trump, given the far more corrupt and destructive alternative.
The “unfaithful to his wife means he will be unfaithful to the country” argument does not do honor to those fine people who make the argument. Because telling the truth is also a divine command.”
… If religion is diminished, Tocqueville explains, the successful perpetuation of American democracy would be imperiled. He acknowledges that religion and freedom have often been at war, but that in America they were successfully incorporated into one another and combined marvelously. He devotes many chapters throughout his work to exploring their relationship, but begins by sketching how the two elements complement one another.
Religion and freedom are in fact part of two different worlds: the moral world and the political world. The political world is described by Tocqueville as agitated, contested, and uncertain; the moral world is classified, coordinated, foreseen, and decided in advance. …
Denigrating those who have deeply held religious beliefs and championing a “Catholic Spring” to overcome “a middle ages dictatorship,” as Voices for Progress founder Sandy Newman wrote to Podesta, go well beyond offending the sensibilities of Catholics and others. It suggests a cynicism as well as a contempt for the intelligence of Americans and their ability to participate in politics. It also seeks to sever a tie that Tocqueville saw as necessary to the freedom of the American people, but those who make up the Progressive Left have never been concerned with freedom.
On the contrary, those on the left undermine the moral foundation and cultural underpinnings of the people. Tocqueville warns in the second volume of Democracy in America that in such a case the members of society suffer and freedom is at risk:
“When religion is destroyed in a people, doubt takes hold of the highest portions of the intellect and half paralyzes all the others. Each becomes accustomed to having only confused and changing notions about matters that most interest those like him & himself; one defends one’s opinions badly or abandons them, and as one despairs of being able to resolve by oneself the greatest problems that human destiny presents, one is reduced, like to a coward, to not thinking about them at all. Such a state cannot fail to enervate souls; it slackens the springs of the will and prepares citizens for servitude. Not only does it then happen that they allow their freedom to be taken away, but often they give it over.”
We are not only witnessing, but experiencing this very event of freedom being taken away as the Progressive Left increases the size and scope of government.
The UCSSB statement invokes the founding principle of our nation, the freedom of religion, but there is far more at stake regarding the future of the nation. Tocqueville saw that freedom and religion provided a basis for living and governing one’s private and public life. Successfully combined, they also meet the challenges presented by the worst features of equality and democracy. If freedom is lost, then the existence of religion is called into question; if religion is lost, then the perpetuation of freedom is called into question.
Tocqueville offers a candid assessment of the chances of one surviving without the other. “As for me,” he wrote, “I doubt that man can ever support a complete religious independence and an entire political freedom at once; and I am brought to think that if he has no faith, he must serve, and if he is free, he must believe.” The subversion by the Left not only imperils freedom of religion, but the exercise of all freedoms that we hold dear.
AJ, I read that Prager piece last night — he has offered some of the most impassioned defenses for voting for Trump (while not “liking” it) I’ve heard. I catch part of his show on most mornings during my drive in to work. He makes some valid points.
So do those refusing to vote for Trump.
It’s a horrible year with a horrible choice. I’m glad I’m not in a swing state.
If nothing else, Prager gives us some perspectives to ponder. I don’t fault either side (the never-trumps or the hold-the-nose and vote trump crowd), we all have wrestled through this difficult season and will do what we have to do.
“If God shouldn’t be ashamed for supporting King David, Christians shouldn’t be ashamed for supporting Donald Trump, given the far more corrupt and destructive alternative.” Way false analogy. David repented. And God can use anyone He wants, even a donkey. By the way, Trump didn’t really brag about women “allowing” him to grope them, but about getting away with it. Not sure it’s the same thing.
Here’s an honest question for those voting for the manure: Can you foresee a candidate so bad that you would have to vote third party or refrain from voting and leave the results to God. Let’s say, for example, that Stalin was running against Hitler, and you knew what they both would end up doing–would you feel the need to vote for “the lesser of two evils,” or would you say, “As much as I want to vote against both, voting means voting FOR one of these men, and I won’t do that”?
Let’s say, for instance, that the candidate running against Hillary were to say one of the following:
(1) Sharia law is actually a very good system, and my choice for attorney general has experience implementing it.
(2) To be honest, I understand why Hitler had to do what he had to do with the Jews. They were getting in the way of progress, and he was a smart man with an effective plan.
(3) On my watch, women wouldn’t be citizens anymore. Every man would be able to claim the women and girls he is responsible for. I don’t care if he lists them as daughters or lovers or just his property, but he’d have to claim them somehow. Any women not claimed by a man at the end of 90 days would then be auctioned off, probably in lots to make sure that the unfit would be claimed by somebody.
(4) Pro-slavery? Of course I’m pro-slavery. I just don’t think we should limit slaves to black people–let’s include those other lesser races, too.
(5) Abortion? I don’t care about that–it’s in the platform, though, and a lot of those Christians wanted it. But it isn’t going to matter much what they think, because once this election is over, they can go back to their churches and stay there, and leave the rest of us alone.
Is there any possible way that you can foresee saying, “We have two evil candidates, so evil that I cannot vote for either–it’s in God’s hands”?
I did misspell lava, didn’t I? Sorry.
AJ. my point exactly, however the smell from the manure could be attached to us for a while. But at least the right has the decency to be ashamed of our candidate. they have no problem at all with theirs.
“Here’s an honest question for those voting for the manure: Can you foresee a candidate so bad that you would have to vote third party or refrain from voting and leave the results to God. Let’s say, for example, that Stalin was running against Hitler, and you knew what they both would end up doing–would you feel the need to vote for “the lesser of two evils,” or would you say, “As much as I want to vote against both, voting means voting FOR one of these men, and I won’t do that”?”
——————————
Of course, but Trump isn’t that candidate. Playing Stalin/Hitler with any candidates currently running is a red herring. It’s useless to the debate. Neither are on par with such evil men, and you know that. Should it ever come to such a choice, folks like us will be too busy trying to stay alive. Voting at that point won’t be a pressing concern. Goodwin’s law clearly applies to such nonsense. Your argument is way better when you leave out the ridiculous Hitler comparisons/analogies.
Poor Marco. He completely misses the point. This is why he was so blind sided by Trump’s appeal. He’s clueless. He says he won’t speak on anything WikiLeaks related because it might be Republicans who are victims next. So he’ll ignore the corruption and fraud, but only because the Republican’s corruption and fraud might come out next. Cluelss.
Part of Trump’s appeal is that he is beholden to neither of these corrupt parties and their way of doing things. This just tells voters we’re right, and there’s little difference between parties. They’re both corrupt, just in different ways. Trump’s appeal is that he is not them, that he hijacked their nomination process to get here, and he could actually win, unlike the other 2 3rd parties. It really is that simple.
“Sen. Marco Rubio advised his fellow Republicans on Wednesday not to use revelations in WikiLeaks as political ammo against Hillary Clinton and other Democrats.
The Florida Republican said in a statement provided to Business Insider that he “will not discuss any issue” that has come to the public’s attention “solely on the basis” of hacked emails from Clinton campaign manager John Podesta or internal emails from the Democratic National Committee.
“As our intelligence agencies have said, these leaks are an effort by a foreign government to interfere with our electoral process and I will not indulge it,” Rubio explained.
Rubio, a member of the Senate Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees, added: “I want to warn my fellow Republicans who may want to capitalize politically on these leaks: Today it is the Democrats. Tomorrow it could be us.””
—————————-\
I hope they are next. Sunshine is a great disinfectant.
AJ, I appreciate your Mormon point.😀 My son shares your aversion to that religion. Just a couple of days ago he said that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were just 19th century Trumps, except that they formed a fake religion instead of a fake university.
Let me tweak KBell’s analogy. I would agree that Hillary is burning lava. However, I think the manure that is Trump is only a few inches deep. Beneath that manure is more burning lava. Hillary and Trump’s core values are the same. That is why neither has any problem with sexual assaults, lying, Planned Parenthood, entitlements, bribing politicians, Nancy Pelosi, etc.
I really don’t care if I go straight into the lava or slide through the manure first.
And looking at Hitler & Stalin is done, of course, in hindsight. (And our nation did side with one to defeat the other, though both were reprehensible in their own way.)
We can’t see into the future, we can only make an education decision on the information we have now about these candidates. Either one may turn out to be better or worse than we imagine.
We’re all doing the best we can with what is a depressing choice (and yeah, I still prefer Rubio, sorry AJ).
If Trump loses — and I suspect he will — there will be a mess to deal with on the conservative side of things. You can try to organize a new far right “niche” party out of all that, I suppose, but it won’t have wide enough appeal to win many (or any) elections.
Smartmatic, a U.K.-based voting technology company with deep ties to George Soros, has control over voting machines in 16 states including battleground zones like Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Other jurisdictions affected are California, District of Columbia, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, New Jersey, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin.
Its website includes a flow-chart that describes how the company has contributed to elections in the U.S. from 2006-2015 with “57,000 voting and counting machines deployed” and “35 million voters assisted.”
Historical note: The reason we sided with Stalin against Hitler is that Germany (Hitler) declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor. Despite our close ties to England, it is far from certain that the the US would have entered the European War if Germany had not declared war on the US.
Since I know that AJ loves Hitler analogies, let me suggest that the critical factor in determining whether the Republicans lose the Senate and House will be: Does Trump regain his composure and run through the finish line or does he continue to meltdown like Hitler in the Fuhrer Bunker in the Spring of 1945, lashing out at everyone while wallowing in self-pity.
Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was “contemptuous” toward security agents and even put officials traveling with her in “unnecessary danger” by pursuing a photo op for her “election campaign” in a risky area of Jakarta during a 2009 visit, according to a security agent interviewed by the FBI. The allegations surfaced in documents released Monday by the FBI in connection with the investigation into Clinton’s private email practices. Much of the documents center on internal disputes over email classification levels, but the interview with the unnamed diplomatic security agent offers a window into how her own detail viewed her actions early in her tenure
I’ll refer to part of the Prager article in NR a little more strongly than Cheryl (rightly) did: It’s amazing how often some example or other in the Bible is so poorly used by some of these Trump supporters. As Cheryl mentioned, David repented; but that’s putting it mildly! That instance of repentance is one of the most prominent *in the history of religion!* David *wrote Psalms* about the misery his sin caused! HELLO Dennis Prager!? The comparison to Trump, even with his apology after exposure of the tapes, is…what’s a stronger word that all-caps ABSURD?
I also agree with the point of Cheryl’s Hitler-Stalin analogy–there’s no need to dismiss it based on Godwin–but I actually think the analogy has further use regarding numerous GOP candidates going back a ways; our standard should be what the Bible calls for in political rulers, which, by the way, is NOT perfection (as is often suggested by those who dismiss concerns such as those I’m voicing here), but a credible profession to base one’s understanding of good law on the only “good law” ever communicated to mankind–the Bible.
Which is also why the Constitution was a failure out of the gate and other stuff, but that’s a dif subj, so whatevs!
Granddaughter, Becky (The Beck) came over to wish Elvera Happy BD. We started talking politics. I mentioned my mantra about Trump.
He doesn’t think the Iranians are our friends
He doesn’t think the police are our enemies.
She said, “And he doesn’t owe anyone anything.”
Good point.
Becky’s the one with the blog.
Ricky @ 1:52. Roosevelt would have found a way to get us into it.
We were already fighting German subs.
In early 1941, I was a kid living in a four story apartment. We lived on the fifth floor.
YES we did.
Anyhow, I have overheard sailors who lived there talking about warring with German subs. Charleston was a big destroyer base at the time. There is a memorial at the Battery (White Point gardens to strangers.) to a lost destroyer that was based in Charleston.
What to expect? More fireworks, of course, on both sides.
And:
_____________________________
Here’s what not to expect from the debate: Anything that will fuel a Trump comeback.
I think Americans have decided in sufficient numbers that Trump simply won’t do as president — he’s too vicious and unstable. Thus, even a performance in which Trump seemed decent and stable would probably come too late.
In any event, Trump shows no sign of wanting to put in such a performance, assuming that he’s capable of it. He relishes being unshackled. …
… I hope, at least, that the debate will entertain. But I plan to watch it sober, and therefore hold out little hope of being entertained.
_________________________________
Solar Pancake, I heartily disagree with you that one can only vote for candidates who are professed (and credibly professed) Christians; I don’t believe the Bible says anything of the sort, and it would mean that we just sit out nearly all elections for any office. In fact, since Trump “stole” our Christian who was running for governor, I’d probably need to sit this one out altogether.
But I do think a man with no scruples and only a bad reputation can’t even be trusted for small office, let alone for president. It would be nice if people with integrity all across the country would band together in this election and say no, neither one . . . but that’s probably putting a little credibility into the myth of the Moral Majority. (BTW, I am NOT saying no one of integrity will vote for Trump, just that it would be wonderful if everyone with integrity refused to vote for either of the candidates running, especially if they could then vote for someone who has character and integrity.)
AJ, I wasn’t saying that either of our candidates is as bad as those worst-ever extremes (though I wouldn’t bet on it that either wouldn’t be, given the opportunity and the right circumstances). I was just establishing a hypothetical, that it is at least theoretically possible to say neither is worthy of my vote.
I suspect this election will have a shockingly low voter turnout. When you’re going to the poll only to vote against the other guy, and your own guy is only fractionally better (and possibly no better at all), which is the situation people on both sides find themselves in, it’s sure easy not to bother to vote at all, especially if it ends up being inconvenient to vote (serious headache that day, stuff you have to get done at work, whatever).
We have more at stake on the state level to not go vote. The Governor has set up a new school district for underperforming schools to be under his authority. We plan to vote no on that. It’s a pretty big deal for our Republican Governor Deal. He has been a pushover regarding our religious freedom, too.
Art’s simple thought concerning the two main candidates:
Would you prefer to vote for a simple megalomaniac or a criminal megalomaniac?
He said that is what he concluded from the beginning of this matchup.
Which reminds me of my son’s solution:
1. Announce that the election has been delayed as both major parties have nominated criminals.
2. Put Hillary in jail for disclosing national security data. Put Trump in jail for sexual assault.
3. Let the parties select new nominees.
4. Have the election in late December.
I came across a statement quoted from “Michael Moore in Trumpland” that might explain why Trump still has so much grassroots support. It’s a little crass, but might be more accurate than not:
More serious is Moore’s discussion of why so many good people he knows in his home state of Michigan are voting for Trump even though they don’t like him.
“He is saying things to people who are hurting,” Moore says in the film’s most serious moments. “All they have left is the right to vote, and they see Trump as a human Molotov cocktail, a hand grenade thrown into a system that destroyed their lives.
It will be the biggest ‘f… you’ in recorded history. I get it.”
The trouble with grenades is they can injure indiscriminately…and they lack a plan for rebuilding. It’s hard to tell what we will get with a Trump presidency, but perhaps the demolition can be a prelude to becoming a sovereign country again. Hopefully.
I was mildly surprised when the guy who came over to take measurements for my new windows asked me, within moments after taking out his tape measure, who I was voting for. 🙂 I told him neither one, he didn’t share who he was voting for. I’m not used to strangers asking those things. 🙂
As I told you on the prayer thread this week has been mentally exhausting for me. Today hasn’t been a whole lot better except I did meet a friend for lunch. As I have been in my office working on packages this afternoon, Mr. P has been doing homework in the living room and has CNN on. (I really am stating to believe they should change their name to Clinton News Network) but I almost got tears in my eyes listening to it. The whole conversation has centered around the swing states who have swung more to Clinton, what Clinton will do, when she arrived in Las Vega, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton. The only time Trump was mentioned it was negative or how Clinton would beat him.. How did we end up here?
One of the fun things about this election is that I get to discuss it with my son five days a week at lunch. He sees it through 27 year-old eyes. Unlike me, he saw the appeal of Trump from the beginning and compared him to Obama. Both were telling people what they wanted to hear, and in both cases, the last thing people wanted to hear was the truth.
Travis said if this election really reflects the American people, Trump should win as he truly reflects the stupidity of the Kardashian/Idiocracy version of America.
Hillary is really a throwback to the corruption of Tammany Hall in New York, Richard Daley in Chicago or Lyndon Johnson.
Trump:
1. Appeared on Saturday Night Wrestling like the President in Idiocracy.
2. Appeared in porn movies like the President in Idiocracy.
3. Had his own idiotic TV show.
4. Was a professional con man.
5. Like the Kardashians, made his money by selling his name which was more infamous than famous.
6. Chronicled his amoral sex life on The Howard Stern Show.
7. Confessed to multiple sexual assaults while filming another silly TV show.
Trump represents modern America. He personifies it. Perhaps the Kardashians will endorse him tonight and he will win.
Our son is 27. I do not know who he will vote for, but I don’t think it will be Hillary or Trump. He use to wonder why I cared so much about politics and did not want to discuss it. Now, I don’t care so much about it, and he may care more. At least I know he thinks for himself or is swayed by his campus environment (at the least).
As for me, I just ate chili. I’m getting fired up to watch the debate, at least for a few minutes. Art is at choir practice. I love being able to say that again😊
Cheryl, when you say holding out for godly candidates would mean “mean that we just sit out nearly all elections for any office,” the obvious question is, “So?” That line of thinking demonstrates a weakness in our (Christians’) thinking about all sorts of current issues. It’s the kind of thinking that bases opposition to pro-homosexual laws on “natural law” and “tradition” and “it’s bad for kids” and what have you. There is always some counter. There is no *significant* difference between Trump and a Romney or McCain. Morally, even as regards their potential for political office, they all vary in essentially insignificant ways–they reject the Lordship of Christ, CONTRA scripture. Fine if you disagree the Bible doesn’t call for that–I think it clearly does and I don’t care about the ramifications that’s not our concern and ramifications are very often not what God calls his people to concern themselves with–but you (as in, Christians GOP voters) are simply splitting hairs to reject Trump on moral grounds, but not Romney, McCain, et al.
Ricky — I noticed Texas’s move to swing status a few days ago. Georgia and Arizona along with the mess in Utah make it a real interesting race. However, I think Silver is right in that Clinton will win by a greater margin but with an inefficient vote, just reducing the margin of defeat in the South. However, that doesn’t bode well at the district level.
When Ryan et al pulled away from Trump, it was more than his lack of self control rather they knew that he was putting the down ballot in jeopardy in places where he shouldn’t. Parties have excellent internal polls at the district and even the poll level which they don’t release and my guess is the news is far grimmer than the commercial national/state polls suggests. The real problem is not Clinton but rather the lack of enthusiasm for Trump in red states will result in a lower Republican turnout — hence Ryan et al made their move.
Manure vs lava??? Hitler vs Stalin?? Far too much hyperbole here. Although manure might a good description of Trump’s verbiage and moral character. Personally I see it as Berlusconi vs Merkel. Or to keep it in the US, its Huey Long vs Nixon.
Trump isn’t sniffing yet. Trumps’s hand gestures are annoying in a split screen — and they are small. I spoke too soon, he’s sniffing already. He’s starting to babble again….
Clinton’s views on gun control and abortion probably reflect the majority (about 55%). Clinton’s imagery on deportation is brilliant. She’s a bit stringent but if she was male people would say she was forceful but being a women she is judged differently.
Trump’s is trying to take control away from Wallace. And is beginning to lose his composure.
I get the idea that confident, smart women annoy Trump.
Hilary (and Rubio) are right — using wikileaks as a tool to undermine your political opponent is a dangerous precedent and will open the door to greater political manipulation by outside sources.
Nachos in the oven, watching the debate. Wallace is doing a good job (but I’ve always like him) — and I think the candidates also are more subdued tonight, they seem to be behaving better than they have in the past. The debate is more controlled. That helps.
Another annoying factor —- Trump refers to Clinton as “she” continuously whereas Clinton calls him Donald. My parents always told me that its more respectful to use proper names.
He did well or at least better than the first debate. However, I think the “such a nasty woman” interruption will be the morning lead and will bury him.
It is interesting that some will just see what they want to see…or hear….I heard Wallace trying to shut Clinton up when it was Trump’s opportunity to speak…she kept on, even as Trump and Wallace attempted to speak over her….go figure….
Wallace is a great moderator….better than the moderators of the two previous debates….
Clinton…well when her lips are moving……
And why would Trump state he will accept the results now when we have quite a few days before it all hits the fan? DNC corruption….it is a reality…let’s see how it plays out….and the stupid media is making a huge deal out of this one moment…
Solar Pancake, if the Bible told us (or suggested) that we could only hire, vote for, do business with Christians, then I would agree with you that it doesn’t matter if we never get to vote at all. But being sidelined for false, unbiblical grounds is pointless.
… This was not a great debate performance by any means; Trump’s discipline crumbled as he went along, and he did get sidetracked a few times. But he also didn’t go off-party-message sharply to the left or go down any rabbit holes as distracting as Alicia Machado. I
f you take as a given that Trump is losing this race and that the GOP just needed him not to drive down turnout, that’s a win. His answer on Hillary’s 30 years of failure was his best of the night, and her answer was prepared and premeditated yet unconvincing.
I doubt this debate helps Trump, but it may at least avert any further reasons for free fall. Hillary scored some serious debater’s points with Trump’s target-rich buffet of weaknesses, but only on a few occasions (notably her ire about sore losers, despite Al Gore’s status as America’s most famous election sore loser) did she show much genuine passion; her answers will read better on the page.
The real winner of the night was Chris Wallace, who kept the interruptions and editorializing to a minimum, asked some tough issue questions for both sides, and drew out answers that kept the focus on the candidates, not the moderator.
____________________________________
So I think that does it. This debate isn’t going to move the numbers much at all. Trump has already run off all those it was possible to run off. Hillary will win by about 7%, which is pretty amazing when you consider that she is the 2nd worst candidate ever to be nominated by a major party. The Republicans will also lose the Senate. Hopefully, they can hold on to the House, but that is no longer certain.
After McGovern was nominated in 1972 and again after Jesse Jackson started running for President, the Democrats changed their rules to prevent an idiot from being nominated. The Republicans now need to change their rules. No more open primaries. We need some Super Delegates. Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter probably need to be deported to Syria or Iraq.
Cheryl, the Bible calls for and allows for us to interact in various manner of ways with unbelievers. It doesn’t call for us, nor allow us, to make allies of and support God-hating men for political office. Not a difficult distinction here.
Wandering Views 
Nate Silver reports that Texas (along with many other conservative states) is now in play.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clintons-texas-opportunity-and-her-texas-problem/
I have seen what has happened with friends and neighbors since the first debate. Trump entered the first debate with a huge lead. The debate and the subsequent week-long fight with Miss Universe revealed him to be ignorant, undisciplined and probably insane to those who weren’t really paying attention before.
Young people I taught in Sunday School over the last twenty years rejected Trump at that time. The most serious and devout turned to McMullin. Others turned to Johnson. Older people began to fully understand that by nominating Trump, the Republicans had turned the election into a farce.
The last 12 days have revealed Trump to be a sexual predator and extremely mentally deranged. I don’t personally know anyone who has switched to Hillary, but people are completely appalled by the choice. One lady announced that her parrot is running and immediately drew support. In addition to Arnold Weaver, one of my friends has thrown his golden retriever into the race. Many, many are saying they are too disgusted to vote. This doesn’t bode well for our down ballot Republicans.
LikeLiked by 2 people
https://twitter.com/charlescwcooke/status/788350447211974656
You claim the election is rigged and bring the president’s half brother to a debate when you have no ideas.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jonah Goldberg has kept his sense of humor.
LikeLike
This is what Ben Carson said this morning on Morning Joe:
https://twitter.com/mmasoccerfan/status/786914239483183105
You can insult us, say we think we are better than others, say we think we are smarter than others, but this is the type of thinking that we reject.
LikeLike
This generation is in for a rough ride.
A couple of days ago, Michelle said she is glad she is old.
Yeah. Barring some calamity, we are past that. But I weep for what America has become.
But my son, and his children are going about their lives, just as if everything is OK.
And for the time being, everything is OK. That’s all they can do.
Hillary will allow 300k Muslim refugees in. But only about 10k are terrorist. That’s only 3%. Most Muslims are peace loving, only about 5% want to kill us.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Ricky, I see it, as I’m on a fence. On the left is burning larva, on the right, waist deep manure. The fence is sinking.
LikeLiked by 7 people
Ricky,
“The most serious and devout turned to McMullin.”
When you say “the most serious and devout” do you mean Christians?
Shouldn’t you be berating them about choosing a cult following Mormon? I mean really, how devout can they be if they’ll settle for the followers of a man who bastardized the snot of the Bible, and pretended to be a prophet, while preying on multiple women and the wives of others? Isn’t he what you now call a “sexual predator?”They might as well just vote for the tangerine guy. Same difference, right?
I think you need to have a talk with them. 😆
LikeLike
KBells,
Think of it this way….
If you choose the left, you get the burning lava that is Hillary.
If you choose the right, you get the manure that is Trump.
It’s an easy choice really. Manure washes off and leaves no permanent damage. Not so with lava, or larva.
🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
A response to Jeff Jacoby and World.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441163/pro-trump-christians-unfairly-criticized
“When I read the Boston Globe column by Jeff Jacoby, a man whose work I have long respected, “How the Religious Right Embraced Donald Trump and Lost its Moral Authority,” gratuitous hatred came to mind. Just as there are pro-Trump people who expressed contempt for anti-Trump people from the very beginning — as an early anti-Trumper I can personally attest to this (even though I wrote repeatedly that if Trump won the nomination I would vote for him) — now some Never Trump people dismiss the decency and moral credibility of conservatives voting for Trump.
“In light of this, I would like to respond to Jeff Jacoby and to the editorial against Trump published last week in the important evangelical journal,
World. Unlike the Jacoby piece, which contained attacks on the moral credibility and decency of pro-Trump Christians — “Religious conservatives shed their principles, and thereby dismantled their influence. . . . Buried under the post-election wreckage will be the moral credibility of the religious right. . . . [Their] “hypocrisy . . . is orders of magnitude worse than the customary flip-flopping and sail-trimming of a presidential campaign” — the World editorial went out of its way to be gracious to those Christians still voting for Trump. For example: “We also value those who still plan to vote for Trump so as to vote for the Supreme Court.”
But the private Trump comments on groping women pushed World to call for Trump to resign and to call on Christians to withdraw support for Trump.
World: “If a person is unfaithful to his spouse, he’s also likely to be unfaithful to his country.”
I have heard this argument about the alleged connection between marital infidelity and infidelity to one’s country my whole life. And it has been false my whole life — as well as throughout history. There is no connection between marital fidelity and fidelity to country. Were the unfaithful Lyndon Johnson and John F. Kennedy also unfaithful to America?
Indeed, some of the world’s greatest leaders have been unfaithful to their wives. Some of the worst have been faithful. I wish there were a connection. Choices for leaders would then be much simpler. The only married candidates we would vote for are those we believe had never been sexually unfaithful.
The editors of World and Jeff Jacoby must think God was pretty flawed in “voting” for King David. King David did much worse than privately boast about women allowing him to grope them. He had a man killed so that his adultery with the man’s wife would not be exposed. And while God was angry at, and punished, the king, God still maintained David as king and gave him a central role in Jewish history. If God shouldn’t be ashamed for supporting King David, Christians shouldn’t be ashamed for supporting Donald Trump, given the far more corrupt and destructive alternative.
The “unfaithful to his wife means he will be unfaithful to the country” argument does not do honor to those fine people who make the argument. Because telling the truth is also a divine command.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
How Hillary and Her Friends Imperil Religious Liberty
October 18, 2016 by Elizabeth Eastman
_______________________
… If religion is diminished, Tocqueville explains, the successful perpetuation of American democracy would be imperiled. He acknowledges that religion and freedom have often been at war, but that in America they were successfully incorporated into one another and combined marvelously. He devotes many chapters throughout his work to exploring their relationship, but begins by sketching how the two elements complement one another.
Religion and freedom are in fact part of two different worlds: the moral world and the political world. The political world is described by Tocqueville as agitated, contested, and uncertain; the moral world is classified, coordinated, foreseen, and decided in advance. …
Denigrating those who have deeply held religious beliefs and championing a “Catholic Spring” to overcome “a middle ages dictatorship,” as Voices for Progress founder Sandy Newman wrote to Podesta, go well beyond offending the sensibilities of Catholics and others. It suggests a cynicism as well as a contempt for the intelligence of Americans and their ability to participate in politics. It also seeks to sever a tie that Tocqueville saw as necessary to the freedom of the American people, but those who make up the Progressive Left have never been concerned with freedom.
On the contrary, those on the left undermine the moral foundation and cultural underpinnings of the people. Tocqueville warns in the second volume of Democracy in America that in such a case the members of society suffer and freedom is at risk:
“When religion is destroyed in a people, doubt takes hold of the highest portions of the intellect and half paralyzes all the others. Each becomes accustomed to having only confused and changing notions about matters that most interest those like him & himself; one defends one’s opinions badly or abandons them, and as one despairs of being able to resolve by oneself the greatest problems that human destiny presents, one is reduced, like to a coward, to not thinking about them at all. Such a state cannot fail to enervate souls; it slackens the springs of the will and prepares citizens for servitude. Not only does it then happen that they allow their freedom to be taken away, but often they give it over.”
We are not only witnessing, but experiencing this very event of freedom being taken away as the Progressive Left increases the size and scope of government.
The UCSSB statement invokes the founding principle of our nation, the freedom of religion, but there is far more at stake regarding the future of the nation. Tocqueville saw that freedom and religion provided a basis for living and governing one’s private and public life. Successfully combined, they also meet the challenges presented by the worst features of equality and democracy. If freedom is lost, then the existence of religion is called into question; if religion is lost, then the perpetuation of freedom is called into question.
Tocqueville offers a candid assessment of the chances of one surviving without the other. “As for me,” he wrote, “I doubt that man can ever support a complete religious independence and an entire political freedom at once; and I am brought to think that if he has no faith, he must serve, and if he is free, he must believe.” The subversion by the Left not only imperils freedom of religion, but the exercise of all freedoms that we hold dear.
___________________________________
LikeLike
AJ, I read that Prager piece last night — he has offered some of the most impassioned defenses for voting for Trump (while not “liking” it) I’ve heard. I catch part of his show on most mornings during my drive in to work. He makes some valid points.
So do those refusing to vote for Trump.
It’s a horrible year with a horrible choice. I’m glad I’m not in a swing state.
LikeLike
If nothing else, Prager gives us some perspectives to ponder. I don’t fault either side (the never-trumps or the hold-the-nose and vote trump crowd), we all have wrestled through this difficult season and will do what we have to do.
LikeLike
“If God shouldn’t be ashamed for supporting King David, Christians shouldn’t be ashamed for supporting Donald Trump, given the far more corrupt and destructive alternative.” Way false analogy. David repented. And God can use anyone He wants, even a donkey. By the way, Trump didn’t really brag about women “allowing” him to grope them, but about getting away with it. Not sure it’s the same thing.
Here’s an honest question for those voting for the manure: Can you foresee a candidate so bad that you would have to vote third party or refrain from voting and leave the results to God. Let’s say, for example, that Stalin was running against Hitler, and you knew what they both would end up doing–would you feel the need to vote for “the lesser of two evils,” or would you say, “As much as I want to vote against both, voting means voting FOR one of these men, and I won’t do that”?
Let’s say, for instance, that the candidate running against Hillary were to say one of the following:
(1) Sharia law is actually a very good system, and my choice for attorney general has experience implementing it.
(2) To be honest, I understand why Hitler had to do what he had to do with the Jews. They were getting in the way of progress, and he was a smart man with an effective plan.
(3) On my watch, women wouldn’t be citizens anymore. Every man would be able to claim the women and girls he is responsible for. I don’t care if he lists them as daughters or lovers or just his property, but he’d have to claim them somehow. Any women not claimed by a man at the end of 90 days would then be auctioned off, probably in lots to make sure that the unfit would be claimed by somebody.
(4) Pro-slavery? Of course I’m pro-slavery. I just don’t think we should limit slaves to black people–let’s include those other lesser races, too.
(5) Abortion? I don’t care about that–it’s in the platform, though, and a lot of those Christians wanted it. But it isn’t going to matter much what they think, because once this election is over, they can go back to their churches and stay there, and leave the rest of us alone.
Is there any possible way that you can foresee saying, “We have two evil candidates, so evil that I cannot vote for either–it’s in God’s hands”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I did misspell lava, didn’t I? Sorry.
AJ. my point exactly, however the smell from the manure could be attached to us for a while. But at least the right has the decency to be ashamed of our candidate. they have no problem at all with theirs.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Cheryl,
“Here’s an honest question for those voting for the manure: Can you foresee a candidate so bad that you would have to vote third party or refrain from voting and leave the results to God. Let’s say, for example, that Stalin was running against Hitler, and you knew what they both would end up doing–would you feel the need to vote for “the lesser of two evils,” or would you say, “As much as I want to vote against both, voting means voting FOR one of these men, and I won’t do that”?”
——————————
Of course, but Trump isn’t that candidate. Playing Stalin/Hitler with any candidates currently running is a red herring. It’s useless to the debate. Neither are on par with such evil men, and you know that. Should it ever come to such a choice, folks like us will be too busy trying to stay alive. Voting at that point won’t be a pressing concern. Goodwin’s law clearly applies to such nonsense. Your argument is way better when you leave out the ridiculous Hitler comparisons/analogies.
LikeLiked by 2 people
KBells,
It’s OK. 🙂
I knew what you meant, but it was funny when I read it. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Poor Marco. He completely misses the point. This is why he was so blind sided by Trump’s appeal. He’s clueless. He says he won’t speak on anything WikiLeaks related because it might be Republicans who are victims next. So he’ll ignore the corruption and fraud, but only because the Republican’s corruption and fraud might come out next. Cluelss.
Part of Trump’s appeal is that he is beholden to neither of these corrupt parties and their way of doing things. This just tells voters we’re right, and there’s little difference between parties. They’re both corrupt, just in different ways. Trump’s appeal is that he is not them, that he hijacked their nomination process to get here, and he could actually win, unlike the other 2 3rd parties. It really is that simple.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/tomorrow-it-could-be-us-marco-rubio-warns-republicans-not-to-take-advantage-of-wikileaks/ar-AAj8WBu?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=U142DHP
“Sen. Marco Rubio advised his fellow Republicans on Wednesday not to use revelations in WikiLeaks as political ammo against Hillary Clinton and other Democrats.
The Florida Republican said in a statement provided to Business Insider that he “will not discuss any issue” that has come to the public’s attention “solely on the basis” of hacked emails from Clinton campaign manager John Podesta or internal emails from the Democratic National Committee.
“As our intelligence agencies have said, these leaks are an effort by a foreign government to interfere with our electoral process and I will not indulge it,” Rubio explained.
Rubio, a member of the Senate Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees, added: “I want to warn my fellow Republicans who may want to capitalize politically on these leaks: Today it is the Democrats. Tomorrow it could be us.””
—————————-\
I hope they are next. Sunshine is a great disinfectant.
LikeLiked by 2 people
AJ, I appreciate your Mormon point.😀 My son shares your aversion to that religion. Just a couple of days ago he said that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were just 19th century Trumps, except that they formed a fake religion instead of a fake university.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I shall blame it on spell check.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Let me tweak KBell’s analogy. I would agree that Hillary is burning lava. However, I think the manure that is Trump is only a few inches deep. Beneath that manure is more burning lava. Hillary and Trump’s core values are the same. That is why neither has any problem with sexual assaults, lying, Planned Parenthood, entitlements, bribing politicians, Nancy Pelosi, etc.
I really don’t care if I go straight into the lava or slide through the manure first.
LikeLike
And looking at Hitler & Stalin is done, of course, in hindsight. (And our nation did side with one to defeat the other, though both were reprehensible in their own way.)
We can’t see into the future, we can only make an education decision on the information we have now about these candidates. Either one may turn out to be better or worse than we imagine.
We’re all doing the best we can with what is a depressing choice (and yeah, I still prefer Rubio, sorry AJ).
If Trump loses — and I suspect he will — there will be a mess to deal with on the conservative side of things. You can try to organize a new far right “niche” party out of all that, I suppose, but it won’t have wide enough appeal to win many (or any) elections.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From “Daily Caller” via Drudge:
Smartmatic, a U.K.-based voting technology company with deep ties to George Soros, has control over voting machines in 16 states including battleground zones like Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Other jurisdictions affected are California, District of Columbia, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, New Jersey, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin.
Its website includes a flow-chart that describes how the company has contributed to elections in the U.S. from 2006-2015 with “57,000 voting and counting machines deployed” and “35 million voters assisted.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/18/soros-connected-company-provides-voting-machines-in-16-states/#ixzz4NYQ1EvAy
LikeLiked by 1 person
Historical note: The reason we sided with Stalin against Hitler is that Germany (Hitler) declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor. Despite our close ties to England, it is far from certain that the the US would have entered the European War if Germany had not declared war on the US.
LikeLike
We’re in luck! Jonah Goldberg has written a humorous little article about the plain lava and the manure-covered lava:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441184/wikileaks-emails-hillary-clinton-revelations-presidency
LikeLike
Since I know that AJ loves Hitler analogies, let me suggest that the critical factor in determining whether the Republicans lose the Senate and House will be: Does Trump regain his composure and run through the finish line or does he continue to meltdown like Hitler in the Fuhrer Bunker in the Spring of 1945, lashing out at everyone while wallowing in self-pity.
LikeLike
From Drudge:
Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was “contemptuous” toward security agents and even put officials traveling with her in “unnecessary danger” by pursuing a photo op for her “election campaign” in a risky area of Jakarta during a 2009 visit, according to a security agent interviewed by the FBI. The allegations surfaced in documents released Monday by the FBI in connection with the investigation into Clinton’s private email practices. Much of the documents center on internal disputes over email classification levels, but the interview with the unnamed diplomatic security agent offers a window into how her own detail viewed her actions early in her tenure
LikeLike
I’ll refer to part of the Prager article in NR a little more strongly than Cheryl (rightly) did: It’s amazing how often some example or other in the Bible is so poorly used by some of these Trump supporters. As Cheryl mentioned, David repented; but that’s putting it mildly! That instance of repentance is one of the most prominent *in the history of religion!* David *wrote Psalms* about the misery his sin caused! HELLO Dennis Prager!? The comparison to Trump, even with his apology after exposure of the tapes, is…what’s a stronger word that all-caps ABSURD?
I also agree with the point of Cheryl’s Hitler-Stalin analogy–there’s no need to dismiss it based on Godwin–but I actually think the analogy has further use regarding numerous GOP candidates going back a ways; our standard should be what the Bible calls for in political rulers, which, by the way, is NOT perfection (as is often suggested by those who dismiss concerns such as those I’m voicing here), but a credible profession to base one’s understanding of good law on the only “good law” ever communicated to mankind–the Bible.
Which is also why the Constitution was a failure out of the gate and other stuff, but that’s a dif subj, so whatevs!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Granddaughter, Becky (The Beck) came over to wish Elvera Happy BD. We started talking politics. I mentioned my mantra about Trump.
He doesn’t think the Iranians are our friends
He doesn’t think the police are our enemies.
She said, “And he doesn’t owe anyone anything.”
Good point.
Becky’s the one with the blog.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Ricky @ 1:52. Roosevelt would have found a way to get us into it.
We were already fighting German subs.
In early 1941, I was a kid living in a four story apartment. We lived on the fifth floor.
YES we did.
Anyhow, I have overheard sailors who lived there talking about warring with German subs. Charleston was a big destroyer base at the time. There is a memorial at the Battery (White Point gardens to strangers.) to a lost destroyer that was based in Charleston.
LikeLiked by 3 people
One blogger’s view on what to expect — and not — from tonight’s debate:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/10/tonights-debate.php
What to expect? More fireworks, of course, on both sides.
And:
_____________________________
Here’s what not to expect from the debate: Anything that will fuel a Trump comeback.
I think Americans have decided in sufficient numbers that Trump simply won’t do as president — he’s too vicious and unstable. Thus, even a performance in which Trump seemed decent and stable would probably come too late.
In any event, Trump shows no sign of wanting to put in such a performance, assuming that he’s capable of it. He relishes being unshackled. …
… I hope, at least, that the debate will entertain. But I plan to watch it sober, and therefore hold out little hope of being entertained.
_________________________________
LikeLiked by 2 people
Solar Pancake, I heartily disagree with you that one can only vote for candidates who are professed (and credibly professed) Christians; I don’t believe the Bible says anything of the sort, and it would mean that we just sit out nearly all elections for any office. In fact, since Trump “stole” our Christian who was running for governor, I’d probably need to sit this one out altogether.
But I do think a man with no scruples and only a bad reputation can’t even be trusted for small office, let alone for president. It would be nice if people with integrity all across the country would band together in this election and say no, neither one . . . but that’s probably putting a little credibility into the myth of the Moral Majority. (BTW, I am NOT saying no one of integrity will vote for Trump, just that it would be wonderful if everyone with integrity refused to vote for either of the candidates running, especially if they could then vote for someone who has character and integrity.)
AJ, I wasn’t saying that either of our candidates is as bad as those worst-ever extremes (though I wouldn’t bet on it that either wouldn’t be, given the opportunity and the right circumstances). I was just establishing a hypothetical, that it is at least theoretically possible to say neither is worthy of my vote.
I suspect this election will have a shockingly low voter turnout. When you’re going to the poll only to vote against the other guy, and your own guy is only fractionally better (and possibly no better at all), which is the situation people on both sides find themselves in, it’s sure easy not to bother to vote at all, especially if it ends up being inconvenient to vote (serious headache that day, stuff you have to get done at work, whatever).
LikeLike
Becky’s intense dislike for Hillary has to do with the abortion issue.
I don’t follow that angle.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We have more at stake on the state level to not go vote. The Governor has set up a new school district for underperforming schools to be under his authority. We plan to vote no on that. It’s a pretty big deal for our Republican Governor Deal. He has been a pushover regarding our religious freedom, too.
LikeLike
Art’s simple thought concerning the two main candidates:
Would you prefer to vote for a simple megalomaniac or a criminal megalomaniac?
He said that is what he concluded from the beginning of this matchup.
LikeLike
Janice, Which one is which?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Which reminds me of my son’s solution:
1. Announce that the election has been delayed as both major parties have nominated criminals.
2. Put Hillary in jail for disclosing national security data. Put Trump in jail for sexual assault.
3. Let the parties select new nominees.
4. Have the election in late December.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I came across a statement quoted from “Michael Moore in Trumpland” that might explain why Trump still has so much grassroots support. It’s a little crass, but might be more accurate than not:
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-trumpland-review-20161018-snap-story.html
The trouble with grenades is they can injure indiscriminately…and they lack a plan for rebuilding. It’s hard to tell what we will get with a Trump presidency, but perhaps the demolition can be a prelude to becoming a sovereign country again. Hopefully.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was mildly surprised when the guy who came over to take measurements for my new windows asked me, within moments after taking out his tape measure, who I was voting for. 🙂 I told him neither one, he didn’t share who he was voting for. I’m not used to strangers asking those things. 🙂
LikeLiked by 3 people
As I told you on the prayer thread this week has been mentally exhausting for me. Today hasn’t been a whole lot better except I did meet a friend for lunch. As I have been in my office working on packages this afternoon, Mr. P has been doing homework in the living room and has CNN on. (I really am stating to believe they should change their name to Clinton News Network) but I almost got tears in my eyes listening to it. The whole conversation has centered around the swing states who have swung more to Clinton, what Clinton will do, when she arrived in Las Vega, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton. The only time Trump was mentioned it was negative or how Clinton would beat him.. How did we end up here?
LikeLiked by 1 person
One of the fun things about this election is that I get to discuss it with my son five days a week at lunch. He sees it through 27 year-old eyes. Unlike me, he saw the appeal of Trump from the beginning and compared him to Obama. Both were telling people what they wanted to hear, and in both cases, the last thing people wanted to hear was the truth.
Travis said if this election really reflects the American people, Trump should win as he truly reflects the stupidity of the Kardashian/Idiocracy version of America.
Hillary is really a throwback to the corruption of Tammany Hall in New York, Richard Daley in Chicago or Lyndon Johnson.
Trump:
1. Appeared on Saturday Night Wrestling like the President in Idiocracy.
2. Appeared in porn movies like the President in Idiocracy.
3. Had his own idiotic TV show.
4. Was a professional con man.
5. Like the Kardashians, made his money by selling his name which was more infamous than famous.
6. Chronicled his amoral sex life on The Howard Stern Show.
7. Confessed to multiple sexual assaults while filming another silly TV show.
Trump represents modern America. He personifies it. Perhaps the Kardashians will endorse him tonight and he will win.
LikeLike
Our son is 27. I do not know who he will vote for, but I don’t think it will be Hillary or Trump. He use to wonder why I cared so much about politics and did not want to discuss it. Now, I don’t care so much about it, and he may care more. At least I know he thinks for himself or is swayed by his campus environment (at the least).
LikeLiked by 2 people
Tychicus, Do you get these options in the Czech Republic?
LikeLike
Here it is:
LikeLike
Looks like a toss up, Ricky!
LikeLike
As for me, I just ate chili. I’m getting fired up to watch the debate, at least for a few minutes. Art is at choir practice. I love being able to say that again😊
LikeLiked by 3 people
Cheryl, when you say holding out for godly candidates would mean “mean that we just sit out nearly all elections for any office,” the obvious question is, “So?” That line of thinking demonstrates a weakness in our (Christians’) thinking about all sorts of current issues. It’s the kind of thinking that bases opposition to pro-homosexual laws on “natural law” and “tradition” and “it’s bad for kids” and what have you. There is always some counter. There is no *significant* difference between Trump and a Romney or McCain. Morally, even as regards their potential for political office, they all vary in essentially insignificant ways–they reject the Lordship of Christ, CONTRA scripture. Fine if you disagree the Bible doesn’t call for that–I think it clearly does and I don’t care about the ramifications that’s not our concern and ramifications are very often not what God calls his people to concern themselves with–but you (as in, Christians GOP voters) are simply splitting hairs to reject Trump on moral grounds, but not Romney, McCain, et al.
LikeLike
Michelle Malkin reminds us of a time when Debate was Great!
LikeLike
Ricky — I noticed Texas’s move to swing status a few days ago. Georgia and Arizona along with the mess in Utah make it a real interesting race. However, I think Silver is right in that Clinton will win by a greater margin but with an inefficient vote, just reducing the margin of defeat in the South. However, that doesn’t bode well at the district level.
When Ryan et al pulled away from Trump, it was more than his lack of self control rather they knew that he was putting the down ballot in jeopardy in places where he shouldn’t. Parties have excellent internal polls at the district and even the poll level which they don’t release and my guess is the news is far grimmer than the commercial national/state polls suggests. The real problem is not Clinton but rather the lack of enthusiasm for Trump in red states will result in a lower Republican turnout — hence Ryan et al made their move.
Manure vs lava??? Hitler vs Stalin?? Far too much hyperbole here. Although manure might a good description of Trump’s verbiage and moral character. Personally I see it as Berlusconi vs Merkel. Or to keep it in the US, its Huey Long vs Nixon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wallace is a good moderator at least so far……
Trump isn’t sniffing yet. Trumps’s hand gestures are annoying in a split screen — and they are small. I spoke too soon, he’s sniffing already. He’s starting to babble again….
Clinton’s views on gun control and abortion probably reflect the majority (about 55%). Clinton’s imagery on deportation is brilliant. She’s a bit stringent but if she was male people would say she was forceful but being a women she is judged differently.
Trump’s is trying to take control away from Wallace. And is beginning to lose his composure.
I get the idea that confident, smart women annoy Trump.
LikeLike
Trump said “bigly” 2x.
Hilary (and Rubio) are right — using wikileaks as a tool to undermine your political opponent is a dangerous precedent and will open the door to greater political manipulation by outside sources.
Clinton’s playing Trump like the first debate.
LikeLike
Huey Long vs. Nixon is a very good comparison.
LikeLike
Nachos in the oven, watching the debate. Wallace is doing a good job (but I’ve always like him) — and I think the candidates also are more subdued tonight, they seem to be behaving better than they have in the past. The debate is more controlled. That helps.
LikeLiked by 4 people
HRW, If you think confident, smart women annoy him, you should see what he thinks about chubby ones.
LikeLike
Clinton nailed the question on Trump’s character and women.
Ricky — smart and chubby would probably send him raving…….
LikeLiked by 1 person
Trump is lying through his teeth on his foundation — this opened the door to his taxes.
His constant talking over Clinton and his raising of his voice will solidify the female vote.
His “rigged” vote cry is dangerous — Al Gore accepted the 2000 election for the good of the republic and stability.
Wallace is really good and Trump is disrespecting him.
LikeLike
Wallace has been very good. Con men are tough to handle; tough to pin down; tough to keep from interrupting.
LikeLike
“Can I respond”
“Well no”
And Trump just kept talking…..wow….
Another annoying factor —- Trump refers to Clinton as “she” continuously whereas Clinton calls him Donald. My parents always told me that its more respectful to use proper names.
“such a nasty women” ….. wow who says that…..
LikeLike
Wallace is a class act.
Trump did well, but it’s late in the cycle and I have my doubts that it will matter much at this point.
Clinton was, well, Clinton. What can you say.
LikeLiked by 2 people
He did well or at least better than the first debate. However, I think the “such a nasty woman” interruption will be the morning lead and will bury him.
LikeLike
Trump did fine—subdued, but firm.
Clinton looked very nice–classy even. I love the winter white suit—much better than the ugly pantsuits she usually wears.
There. I managed to make a positive observation about both of them. And it didn’t kill me. :–)
Tomorrow, I’m planning to vote for Trump.
LikeLiked by 5 people
It is interesting that some will just see what they want to see…or hear….I heard Wallace trying to shut Clinton up when it was Trump’s opportunity to speak…she kept on, even as Trump and Wallace attempted to speak over her….go figure….
Wallace is a great moderator….better than the moderators of the two previous debates….
Clinton…well when her lips are moving……
And why would Trump state he will accept the results now when we have quite a few days before it all hits the fan? DNC corruption….it is a reality…let’s see how it plays out….and the stupid media is making a huge deal out of this one moment…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree Debra…the pantsuit was nice…there…I said something nice…not about her but what she wore 🙂
LikeLiked by 3 people
Solar Pancake, if the Bible told us (or suggested) that we could only hire, vote for, do business with Christians, then I would agree with you that it doesn’t matter if we never get to vote at all. But being sidelined for false, unbiblical grounds is pointless.
Go Cubs! 10-2 so far.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, nice outfit for Hillary.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/441233/trump-holds-line
_____________________
… This was not a great debate performance by any means; Trump’s discipline crumbled as he went along, and he did get sidetracked a few times. But he also didn’t go off-party-message sharply to the left or go down any rabbit holes as distracting as Alicia Machado. I
f you take as a given that Trump is losing this race and that the GOP just needed him not to drive down turnout, that’s a win. His answer on Hillary’s 30 years of failure was his best of the night, and her answer was prepared and premeditated yet unconvincing.
I doubt this debate helps Trump, but it may at least avert any further reasons for free fall. Hillary scored some serious debater’s points with Trump’s target-rich buffet of weaknesses, but only on a few occasions (notably her ire about sore losers, despite Al Gore’s status as America’s most famous election sore loser) did she show much genuine passion; her answers will read better on the page.
The real winner of the night was Chris Wallace, who kept the interruptions and editorializing to a minimum, asked some tough issue questions for both sides, and drew out answers that kept the focus on the candidates, not the moderator.
____________________________________
LikeLiked by 3 people
So I think that does it. This debate isn’t going to move the numbers much at all. Trump has already run off all those it was possible to run off. Hillary will win by about 7%, which is pretty amazing when you consider that she is the 2nd worst candidate ever to be nominated by a major party. The Republicans will also lose the Senate. Hopefully, they can hold on to the House, but that is no longer certain.
After McGovern was nominated in 1972 and again after Jesse Jackson started running for President, the Democrats changed their rules to prevent an idiot from being nominated. The Republicans now need to change their rules. No more open primaries. We need some Super Delegates. Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter probably need to be deported to Syria or Iraq.
LikeLike
Cheryl, the Bible calls for and allows for us to interact in various manner of ways with unbelievers. It doesn’t call for us, nor allow us, to make allies of and support God-hating men for political office. Not a difficult distinction here.
LikeLike
Ricky, I think we’ll see some changes in the way both parties choose their nominees after this election is put to bed.
The process on both sides left scores of upset party members in its wake and produced two extremely weak national candidates.
LikeLike