“In just a few days the American people will go to the polls and cast their votes to elect the 45th president of this United States. Despite our apprehensions or hopes for other options, there are only two viable candidates. The president-elect come November 8, or soon thereafter, will be either Hillary Clinton or Donald J. Trump. That is the hard, cold reality. It is time for Americans to face the facts, accept this, and deliberate on how they will fulfill their political duty.
When considering our options, we need to realize that we are not only electing two different individuals to lead the country, but an entire branch of government. The president doesn’t execute the laws of the land single-handedly. He appoints a plethora of cabinet members and department directors that do the day-to-day governing of a third of the government, the most powerful branch.
He or she will nominate secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, Education, Veteran Affairs, Homeland Security, the attorney general, etc. When we elect a president, we need to think of all these departments and how their work, and the regulations they pass, affects the area of the country they administer.
Both candidates will bring incredibly different people to head those departments and do the job of governing the nation. The outcomes of those choices will have radically different outcomes in the next four or eight years. We are not only choosing an individual but a team of people that share a particular ideology: conservative or liberal.”
———————-
“Making Hard Decisions Is What People of Character Do
I understand that hesitancy. It is hard to have people think that we somehow endorse a person speaking disrespectfully about women, or that we endorse someone with no moral scruples. But if the intention of our decision to support either candidate is with the best interest of the common good in mind, then we need not shy away from what others may think. The common good is more important than our image. The good of the nation is more important than our feelings towards a particular person.”
————————-
“Like every thought experiment, this one has its limitations. However, its main purpose is to show that given two unavoidable outcomes one has the moral duty to choose the one that will do the most good, or the least amount of harm. Given the unavoidable fact that either of the two nominees will be president, one has the moral duty to choose the one that will do the most good, or the least amount of harm.
In my own deliberation, I have come to conclude that despite his misbehavior Trump and his team will be better for the common good than Hillary and her team. However, I have written what I have above being careful not to push in any particular direction because I think this to be the deliberative process every citizen should go through regardless of whom he or she chooses in the end.”
Good article, AJ. I have tended to view voting mostly in a pragmatic way. But I know some who vote for third parties because they want those parties to be eligible for the public funding that can be available if the party gets 5% (or whatever the percentage is) of the vote.
The “Public” doesn’t have any money.
Our credit is maxed out.
Hillary is going to make college free.
Professors are going to work for love and respect.
Hillary will add to her personal cache.
In the past eight years we have doubled our debt and have nothing to show for it.
NOTHING
Hillary talks about repairing our infrastructure. Obama was going to do that.
What’s about our infrastructure?
NOTHING.
Strengthened our military?
Worse than before.
Made America respected in the world?
Obama draws a yellow line in the sand.
QoD.
Where did all that money go?.
Some is in the Clinton Foundation. Who knows where the rest is.
I know! It went to improve VA hospitals.
This isn’t as hard a decision as some are making it. In fact, it’s a pretty easy choice.
From Kim’s link above….
—————————-
“Do you believe the government is more capable of determining how your money should be used? Do you believe the government is better able to determine how your children should be educated? Do you believe the government should determine who can do business where and with whom? Do you believe a person should be given priority because of what they believe, what they are, or what they believe they are? If so, you must vote for her, for she has publicly promised to appoint judges who will open our borders, our bathrooms, and our wallets. She has promised laws to punish those who do not agree.
Or do you believe you can decide what’s best for your family? Do you believe that if you earn a certain amount of money you should be able to keep and reinvest the largest part of it to benefit those things you decide are important? Do you believe the government has been created to serve the people, not the other way around? If so, you must vote for him, for he has publicly promised to appoint judges whose rulings allow prosperity for those who work to deserve it.
These are but a few examples of the two pathways you will choose this Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Religious freedom, taxes and the economy, healthcare…in every category you examine, you’ll find drastic differences in the America that will be shaped by this election. Don’t be fooled—how you vote matters, because the Supreme Court matters.
So what kind of America will we have for the rest of our lives? This time, you actually get to choose.”
For me there is no logical coherent reason to vote for Trump, no matter your political or religious beliefs.
The notion that his team will be good abandons the Truman notion that the buck stops here (at his desk). Will he choose a good team? Will he dismiss them at the slightest hint of trouble? ( He went through three campaign managers) Will good people be willing to work for him? He has a history of short changing people and ignoring their advice. I’m sure his staff told him to stop tweeting at three a.m. In short he’s too unreliable to have or listen to a good team.
The Supreme Court is another argument that assumes Trump is trustworty and rational. He’s neither. And I also think the right overestimates the Court’s willingness to overturn 30-40 years of precedent and legislation.
Finally, there’s no eqivilancy or lesser of two evils here. Clinton is relatively normal centrist politician albeit female wherras Trump is everything Meyers said in my link; facing a fraud trail and a civil suit on underage rape, a bankrupt businessman who doesnt pay his own bills, a self confessed molestor and voyeur and the list goes on.
He has neither the temperment nor the experience to be President. Watching Clinton bait him on the debates, he not only took the bait he ran with it for a week on Twitter. My respect grew for Clinton esp given Trumps behaviour in the last two debates. I wont like most of her policies but she has intelligience, patience, tolerance, and nerves of steel. If you want America to stay great, the choice is obvious.
Bret Baier opened this past Wednesday night’s edition of Special Report with several scoops on the progress of the FBI investigations of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Baier slightly expanded on his scoops in an interview with Brit Hume on On the Record, the video and transcript of which are posted here. I posted the video of Baier reporting his scoops in “Analyze this.” Paul Mirengoff commented on Baier’s report in this post.
Baier has now backed off and clarified his report in significant respects (video below). …
______________________________
Its apparent to the Democrats that the FBI has been politicized. The timing was impeccable and the innuedo was on Republican message. But similar to the last 25 years of non Clinton scandals, there will be notjing there.
Hwesseli, while I respect your opinion, I am tired of people on the Left telling me why I MUST vote for Hillary and how stupid I am if I don’t.
Likewise, I am tired of people on the right telling me I MUST vote for Trump and how stupid I am if I don’t.
It is my vote and my decision. I lost two good friends over this election. One on the right and one on the left. I am an equal opportunity offender. In the past I have been able to rationally discuss the candidates with both Dems and Reps. This cycle has left everyone on any side unhinged.
I am weary of the election and cannot wait for it to be over.
My long post at 11:23 was an answer to the two links, not any commentators here.
Besides, I thought you were voting similar to DJ…leaving the top line blank as it really doesn’t matter in Alabama.
I think the whole world wants this election over. Of course the western world wants Clinton to win and things to have a semblance of normalcy and stability.
In the natural flow of things, the White House is ready for a change in party. After 8 years in one direction, the trend usually is to give the other side a whack at it. Another 4 years (on top of 8) will likely give rise to an even greater push in 4 years to oust the Democrats.
If I lived in a swing state, I’d have some more thinking to do — I have the luxury in a blue state of opting out of this one, though in many ways it goes against my natural instincts (politics in a fallen world gives us fallen and flawed candidates, I’m no longer shocked by this). 🙂
But ultimately our hope is in something more transcendent than all of this, of course, so come what may …
I watched All the President’s Men the other night, which I hadn’t seen in many years. Watergate and its exposure by Woodward & Bernstein was foundational and inspirational journalism in the years I was in college and was a “J” major. Interesting to watch and to be reminded of that era (and what was mildly amusing was how they still had dial-up telephones and typewriters “back” then 🙂 )
When Comey first spoke about the investigation into Ms. Clinton’s private emails and server I heard 3 things;
1. There will be no indictment of Ms. Clinton, this is a political matter.
2. These are the things that Ms. Clinton did and this is the law.
3. The public has a right to know what Ms. Clinton did and what the laws are. The public will decide whether they want her for President, not the courts.
Will Clinton post unflattering pictures of other leaders’ wives? Will she get in a lengthy weight discussion with Miss Universe? Will she cite The National Enquirer as a trusted source? Will she link an opponent to Lee Harvey Oswald?
Either way, I think we are going down the tubes. At least we can have some laughs. The Russians, Chinese and Iranians will really think Trump is funny.
Nothing more to say here.
I voted for Trump. Not that I like Trump.
But the Clintons are utterly corrupt. They leave chaos and ruined lives behind them and hopelessness ahead.
Meanwhile, they are enriching themselves.
Do you remember that they stole furniture out or the White House? (I think they had to return it.)
There is nothing they won’t do.
Nothing.
Of course, missing from the stolen furniture would have been the lamp that Hillary allegedly hurled across the room at Bill during the Monica travails. Secret Service said they heard it shatter, but we don’t know if it missed its mark completely. 🙂
Tychicus, This time I am actually watching Texas vs. Texas Tech. Your Longhorns are ahead, but Tech just scored while I was typing this sentence. Let’s go back and forth like the teams:
rw: The Washington Post – really? Mr. Milbank lost me within the first few lines with “Now that James B. Comey has dedicated the FBI to the election of Donald Trump…”
(I can’t believe that you actually have me defending Donald Trump!)
Remember how last week I said the liberal press “cried wolf” by attacking other Republicans and now no one will believe them about Trump. Bill Maher admitted that was true using those exact words.
Tom Nichols: “This fall, I had the chance to talk with ordinary citizens, students, journalists, and others in cities and towns in Central Europe. Almost all of them expressed the same fear: that America was going to elect Donald Trump and abandon them — our NATO allies — to the same fate Russia has inflicted on Ukraine, Georgia, and especially Syria.”
People here in Central Europe already felt abandoned when the Obama admin (w/Clinton as SoS) discarded existing plans to establish a missile-defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. Not near as bad as the Munich Agreement, but still pretty bad.
Yes, he does. I still feel really bad that Leaks hurt his knee that year against the Aggies. The medical technology wasn’t nearly as good back then and he was never the same.
Texas vs. Tech in Lubbock is a great game for fans. Four years ago I took a high school senior from my Sunday School out to tour Tech and go to the game. He loved it when the Tech fans, en masse, heckled the Texas punter during pregame warmups.
Yes, he did, and he is about to finish up there. His parents were splitting up his senior year, so he really didn’t have anyone to take him on college trips. I thought we could stay in my son’s (law school) house, but that weekend the law school house was full of Longhorns, so we stayed with my aunt.
Watch this weekend for the Democrats to be dragging people out of their houses to vote — they do have an aggressive “ground game” that paid off well for Obama. The Republicans seem to leave it on the honor system (maybe because GOP turnout is usually more reliable than the Democrats)
But there’s clearly some panic going on with the tightening polls.
Jon Ralston, the veteran Nevada political reporter, has been tweeting about massive turnout by Latino voters in Clark County (the Las Vegas area). He suggests that it may already be game over in Nevada, not just for Trump but perhaps in the important Senate race as well. …
____________________________
Nate Silver now gives the Republicans a 47.5% chance of holding on to the Senate. Real Clear Politics currently predicts the Republicans will have 52 Senators. When you consider the Republicans nominated the absolute worst person (Move over, McGovern!) ever nominated by a major party, we have a great deal to be thankful about.
1. Elect Hillary who will continue to take us steadily toward Socialist Sodom until 2020 when the Republicans will have a second chance to field a sane candidate against her;
2. Elect Trump who will deliver us immediately to “fabulous” Trump Socialist Sodom to the delight of Russia, Iran and the nation’s comedians; or
3. By divine miracle and the genius of Madison’s Elevtoral College have the election thrown into the House of Representatives who, in a burst of courage, select McMullin as President so that he and they can deal with 200 million ignorant and angry Democrats and Trumpkins.
There are actually conservatives who are voting for Clinton in order to stop Trump in the same manner that many of you are voting for Trump to stop Clinton. Here is a statement from one:
AJ, one link way up near the top said this: “Like every thought experiment, this one has its limitations. However, its main purpose is to show that given two unavoidable outcomes one has the moral duty to choose the one that will do the most good, or the least amount of harm. Given the unavoidable fact that either of the two nominees will be president, one has the moral duty to choose the one that will do the most good, or the least amount of harm.” (emphasis added)
Actually, one doesn’t have the “moral duty” to vote at all, or to vote for one of these two. I was perfectly content simply voting “no” (by leaving the presidential slot blank) and praying that God will somehow grant us mercy. I think either of these candidates is likely to die in his/her first term of office, and I think either candidate is likely to usher in complete chaos to our nation, and chaos that goes beyond our nation. If I’d had a good third-party choice, I’d have made it, mostly as a stronger “no” than just leaving the slot blank. But I comfortably left it blank, for the first time in my life.
If a doctor tells a husband whose wife is in labor, “Your baby is in distress, and either the baby or the mother will die. You need to tell us whose life to save,” he can say, “Save my wife” or “My wife said in this situation I need to save the baby, so that’s my choice”–or he can say, “Life and death is not in my authority. Do your best to save both, but I’m going to leave the results to God.” Any of those might be a morally defensible choice.
Have any of you seen the reports (from more emails released by Wikileaks) about Hillary supposedly having some connection to a couple of child sex traffickers (based in Haiti, I think), from several years ago? I haven’t read enough to know how accurate those reports are, or how much of an actual connection she had with them.
Of course, those on the far right are writing as if she knew full well what they were doing.
We have a friend whom Hubby knows (& I have met) from back when they were both with Hostess who is like a conservative version of YF. What sometimes makes my heart ache a bit at his stuff is that he is also a devout Christian, & should know better.
He has often posted things on Facebook that are not true (I have often googled the matter or quote to double-check my instinct), mostly about Hillary Clinton. He has posted “quotes” that have put her in any even worse light than she deserves, which she never said. A few times, I have pointed out that the quote or story was false, & shared something to back up my words, but he has never replied. I’ve also left gentle advice that we should double-check everything before posting, to avoid bearing false witness, but he obviously hasn’t taken my advice.
This morning I saw an article he shared about those emails from Wikileaks that I mentioned above. The breathless report even makes the damning accusation that she had two of these people extradited to the U.S.! Horrors!
Do they even know what being extradited means?! That was a good thing, not a bad thing. But it was worded as an accusation twice, as if Hillary having them extradited was a horrible thing to do.
It’s this hatred that so many people have for certain politicians, the kind that is willing & eager to share anything that shows them in a very bad light, that is quite dismaying to see, but especially when it comes from fellow believers.
Ricky, I won’t vote for Hillary because she (1) is a criminal and (2) is strongly pro-abortion.
But I’m not at all convinced that Trump is even a purer candidate (conservatively) or anything close to qualified. So I throw up my hands and say, “God, please give us mercy, and somehow get us out of this mess, if it be Your will. But I trust You, and Your will be done.” Sometimes that is all we can do. I think that it is “enough” when that is the case–most certainly it is not irresponsible or un-Christian.
I’ll be glad when Tuesday night is over, though I don’t think it really will be “over.”
I haven’t thought of voting third party as “morally superior”, but at least as morally acceptable as voting for either of the major party candidates. Very often I have read comments, or seen essays, that make it seem as if voting third party is useless, & even downright bad. In fact, those people often come across as feeling “morally superior”.
On this site I debate with people who think Trump is not as bad as Hillary and that all Christians and conservatives should vote for Trump. Elsewhere I debate with conservatives who think Trump is the bigger threat and that all conservatives should vote for Hillary. As AJ noted above, the decision for me was pretty easy:
1. I never, ever vote for any Democrat in a general election because on every major issue, the Democrats stand in opposition to what I believe is right.
2. Very early in the primary season, I decided that I would never, ever vote for Trump. There are two reasons:
A. Historically he has been a Democrat and on many issues that matter to me (Trade, entitlement reform, federalism, perversion, etc.) he is still basically a Democrat.
B. He has by far the worst character of any candidate ever to run for President. He is a con man, a narcissist, a serial adulterer, a world class liar, a megalomaniac, a mysoginist, an ignoramus and a sexual predator. You blend these traits together and you get the deranged lunatic two-time porn actor who sends 3:00 a.m. Tweets to a former Miss Universe falsely accusing her of being a porn star.
When no good 3rd party candidates emerged early on, I decided to support Arnold the Dog. My reasoning was simple. By nominating Trump, the Republicans turned the election into a farce. I will therefore treat the election as a farce and support a dog, who is far superior to Hillary and Trump.
Christian leaders had the opportunity [twice] to back a candidate of sterling character (Huckabee) who would lead the country in a healthier, less globalistic direction, but they chose to endorse Cruz instead.
And I do get the concerns about character; it’s always right to be concerned about the ideals and principles that guide a leader. But if the righteous will not lead in the right direction (and make no mistake: they are not), perhaps God is allowing us a less palatable instrument who will. It would not be the first time.
Debra, I want to understand what exactly you mean by “globalism” and what you see as unhealthy about this “globalism”.
When I think of globalism, I think about trade, multi-lateral agreements and the exchange of goods, services, ideas and values between nations. The unhealthy thing that has bothered me that has gone on for at least 25 years is that the US and its Western allies have exported and promoted abortion, perversion and radical feminism around the world. I fear God will judge us for that. He may be both judging us and correcting the problem by allowing us to elect Trump.
If Trump is able to curtail trade and pull the US out of its treaty obligations, the rest of the world will continue the free trade philosophy that has greatly reduced extreme poverty around the globe. However, the US would then become much more isolated, poorer, and our liberals would only promote abortion, perversion and radical feminism within our own borders.
I’m just praying the Lord will give us the president we need, not the one we deserve. I figure He can figure it out better than I can.
A curious position to be in, watching from the sidelines and just feeling so sad about the choice and about what my friends have revealed about themselves. Or have they?
I had just sent a message to a friend this morning pretty much saying what michelle said about feeling like I’m on the sidelines for this one — and feeling sad, at times distressed and depressed. (She’s not-very political Republican but voted for Hillary as she has an incredibly visceral reaction to Trump — I believe she said she’d “puke” if he wins.)
Either way, Wednesday morning will not be pleasant.
That’s a very insightful question, Ricky. “Globalism” and “anti-globalism” do have several different connotations that I am aware of—and they are not all equally good or bad as far as I can tell. The unhealthy export of perversions of all kinds does weigh on me. And I can’t reconcile those activities with some of our rhetoric about America’s ‘greatness’ in the world. I mean America is great to *me*. I will always be so grateful and thankful that I was born here and live here…and I have no desire to live anywhere else regardless of what governmental policies come and go, or what structure we have or who is elected or not. As far as I’m concerned, if it prospers then great, and if it’s going down, I’ll go down with the ship. I love this land for so many reasons I could only begin to articulate.
But I love it because it’s my country; and I fully expect that other people love their own countries too, and want the best for their countries just as I want the best for mine.
And it’s at this point I think globalism does us a disservice by trying to tell us that our economies are not a function of all of the things that make us US.
And that’s exactly what’s been happening. Globalists of all kinds have been erasing national boundaries for years—through policies, economic strategies, world agencies, and through globally-oriented, multi-national companies whose actions and influence in our own and foreign governments can neither be checked nor accounted for.
And further complicating this situation, I suspect that not every nation can sustain itself as a democracy. Some peoples have traditionally wanted strong kings or even dictators—and historically, that’s what they’ve had forever almost. I respect those boundaries. I respect the national boundaries of all nations (well, certainly the nations that God set the boundaries for Biblically) and their sovereignty or at least their right to sovereignty in theory. For example, I respect the sovereignty of Syria who does indeed have a leader that we are working hard to overthrow. I also I respect the boundaries of Mexico and Canada, our nearest and dearest friends and allies.
But, how can I credibly say I respect any other nation and their boundaries and their sovereignty, if I don’t act like I respect my own. Perhaps that is the energy that has moved Trump forward in spite of all conceivable odds to the contrary.
DJ – A friend on Facebook shared that video, & there’s a long comment thread on it, which I haven’t finished reading, parsing what the word “undocumented” means. One man is claiming that many American citizens who were born to illegals are currently undocumented, but can still vote since they are indeed citizens. Others are saying that the word is commonly used to refer to illegals, & that must be whom Obama was referring to.
I have little doubt that those on the left believe the voting rolls should be opened to all “residents.”
I had a call from a woman this week who said her husband is currently petitioning for his citizenship papers but has been here illegally with no visa, no papers, for 8 years. Yet, he received a ballot in the mail and she was stumped … Curious
For those yearning to go down memory lane on the eve of the election, Politico has compiled this list of the worst predictions for 2016:
1. Trump will not be the nominee
Predicted by: Almost everyone
2. Jeb Bush will be the nominee
Predicted by: The Washington Post, Politico Magazine, Rush Limbaugh and many, many more
3. Joe Biden will run
Predicted by: Bill Kristol (among others)
4. The 2016 Republican national convention will be brokered
Predicted by: John Kasich (among others)
5. Bernie Sanders won’t stand a chance at winning the Democratic nomination
Predicted by: Mark Halperin (et al)
Cruz was popular with mostly the far right, but he would not have gotten any traction (in my view) with anyone beyond that small subset of voters in a general election. He also had a pretty unappealing personal manner and some baggage in that area. I don’t think he would have been an effective nominee.
Our country desperately needs good leaders, sooner rather than later, if it is to get back on track. There appear to be none on the horizon, but perhaps in this vacuum God will show mercy and raise up a few.
Reading more of that thread I mentioned. One man has this perspective. . .
“All I saw was a politician sidestepping the meat of a question to deliver his own point. The questioner wants him to admit that you can become a citizen by imagining you’re a citizen, but she also wants to know if voting will attract attention to her illegal relatives. He carefully zooms in on the safe part. You’re a citizen, he asserts of her [which she is], and your presence at the poll is sacred. You and your family won’t be punished for voting. He completely ignores her desire to talk about the citizenship rights of illegals.”
1. I absolutely agree with you on Syria and you could have said the same thing about Iraq. Although Trump has been clumsy (and somewhat dishonest about his own prior positions) with his criticism of recent US foreign adventures, I think this is the most important substantive contribution he has made in the campaign. Ever since Little Bush invaded Iraq, conservative criticism of such aggressive adventurism has been muted. There were critics such as Dick Armey, Robert Novak and Pat Buchanan, but mainstream Republican policy has been blindly aggressive. If Trump has made Republicans more thoughtful and cautious about intervening in other countries, good for him.
2. You are also correct that many nations are not capable of self-government and many people in some of those nations are wise enough to know that self government would not work well in their own country. If this election does anything, it should make Americans humble themselves and question whether we are still capable of self-government. After all, we picked Hillary and Trump as our nominees.
3. Americans need a tough but fair comprehensive immigration plan which is enforceable and enforced. After much bluster in the primaries, Trump’s position is now virtually identical to those of his Republican opponents. We will see what happens on both the enforcement and legislative fronts.
The big question for Republicans and Americans is are we going to continue to be the world’s leader in promoting trade. If the answer is “yes”, then trade will allow our country to grow economically for a while even if our tax, energy, affirmative action and healthcare policies continue to be imbecilic. If the answer is “no”, the rest of the world will continue to grow economically, while the US declines. Then immigration will not be an issue. No one moves to a country where there are no jobs. Emigration will surge and a bankrupt US government will try to tax (confiscate) a portion of the assets of those trying to flee Socialist Sodom or Fabulous Trump Socialist Sodom.
Tychicus, I liked Cruz as much as you did and voted for him. However, in hindsight Walker, Jindal, or even Huckabee or Kasich would have been a better choice. Each of those men have been a successful governor of a state. They had to deal with Democrats and Trump-like Republicans as well as conservatives. They are better at working with people. They approved and administered a budget.
Cruz doesn’t work well with people. His positions are right and he has courage, but he sometimes lacks good judgment, as revealed by his dealings with Trump:
1. He kissed up to Trump early in the primaries.
2. He failed to challenge Trump to a fistfight when Trump insulted his wife.
3. There was no need for him to speak at the Trumpkin convention. He should have just stayed away from that terrible place as Kasich did.
4. Worst of all, he went crawling back to the lunatic. Hilariously, I think this happened the day before Trump’s obscene sexual assault confession tape was released.
As I pray for our country as we come to this election day, I wonder what is ahead. I cannot picture either of these candidates making a concession speech.
Jo, With that thought in mind, here are a couple more:
1. Nate Silver says that there is a 10% chance that Hillary wins the popular vote, but loses in the Electoral College. That would surely please our liberal friends. There is a much smaller chance of it going the other way, because Hillary is piling up huge margins in California, Illinois and New York while Trump’s spread in actual votes is smaller in his big states such as Texas.
2. Real Clear Politics currently shows the whole election depending on Florida again. They have Trump ahead in New Hampshire and other states, meaning that Trump would win the Electoral College 270-268 if he wins Florida. Can’t you see another 2 months of hanging chads, while in the background new Trump sexual assault victims emerge daily and Hillary’s maid testifies that she was in favor of sending help to the men in Benghazi, but that she was the only person at Hillary’s house who was reading the classified e-mails.
So the emails as I predicted were nothing. Comey needs to resign. Its unforgiveable to blow a call so badly so close to an election.
Cruz did endorse Trump a day before the tape yet he didnt rescind it. The actions of Cruz and other social conservatives does raise the question. Moving forward what happens to the social consevatives within the Republican? After all, the results will be similar to Romney or McCain, in an election whete they were mostly ignored.
I do not think Cruz would be a change in direction– just lipstick on the pig (pig being the policies–not Cruz)–cosmetic change. Many people speak as though electing a president of the other party is a major change in direction, and in past elections I have thought the same. I no longer believe that to be the case. We seem to have one big ‘Republicrat’ party, with various fringes on the sides…with the caveat that those ‘fringes’ seem to be representing more and more of the population.
Trump, on the other hand, represents real change in direction; and the change has already started to happen.
Ricky, the electoral college favors less populated states. A vote in Wyoming or New Hampshire is worth more than a vote in California or New York. Wyoming has one electoral vote per 200 000 vs California with one per 700 000. Hence its easier for a democrat to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college
DJ
Clinton will eke it out. The wildcard is the ground game. The republicans traditionally didnt need one but with Trump they do and Trump neglected to create one.
The comparision is worrisome for republicans. Trump holds a rally but has noone registering voteres etc. At a Clinton rally, local organizers complete voter registrations before, during and after a rally. Volunteers wander around the rally gathering info and registrations. How this translates will be interesting.
Nevada is revealing. Every hotel cleaning lady, porter, etc of Las Vegas has been registered and given a ride to an advance poll. This may save Nevada for Clinton
HRW, I thought of you and your explanation of the European rightist parties when I read the Applebaum article this morning before church.
If anybody thinks Trump is going to win, you need to convert your investments to cash on Monday, and then wait until you think the Trump Crash is over before getting back in the market. That is just good stewardship. A surprise Trump win will produce a black, black market on Wednesday, and the financial hit will affect markets all over the world.
Ricky @3:23 I think your 4th paragraph is a tad pessimistic. I’m hoping for a slower unwinding or re-alignment of our trade policies, which will avert predicted abject poverty and mass misery at home. But either way, that will probably not be entirely up to Trump.
Regarding immigration, I think Trump played this issue the way it needed to be played. Every time politicians (mostly Republican politicians) have promised to fix the immigration problem they have tried to make it acceptable to all sides by promising the ‘path to citizenship’. But when elected, they hand out H1-b’s like halloween candy, and do nothing at all about securing the borders, justifying their actions with phrases like “jobs Americans don’t want to do” and “jobs Americans are not qualified to do”. That’s phooey.
I would love to see a solid immigration policy that allows families to stay together and eventually become citizens. I wouldn’t even mind some kind of conditional amnesty. But we have a lot of internal housekeeping to do first. I think Trump would do the right thing there.
Debra, When Trump slaps his 35% tariff on imported goods, don’t you expect foreign nations to slap a similar tariff on our exports? Whammy! Millions of Americans just lost their jobs making those products and the trip to Best Buy, the grocery store and Walmart to buy imported items just got a lot more expensive. Consumers will have to cut back on other items to make ends meet and millions more will lose their jobs. The Smoot-Hawley tariff (the 1930s version of Trumpism) helped make The Great Depression such a memorable event.
A few facts on H1B visas and Americans not wanting to work. In recent years about 120,000 H1-B visas have been issued each year. That equals about .03% of the population. After 33 years, if the population did not otherwise increase, the H1-B program would increase the US population by a whopping 1%. Meanwhile each year, 2,500,000 Americans apply for disability benefits. 800,000 are approved for disability benefits. So even our government can tell that 1,700,000 of the annual applicants weren’t actually disabled. Working with these folks on a daily basis for 30 years, I can tell you that at least half of the ones that qualify for disability are not really unable to work. Divide 2,100,000 by 120,000 and you see that each year there are 17.5 Americans trying to get disability to avoid work for every 1 foreigner who obtains a H1-B visa.
Ricky, these numbers don’t say what you say they are saying: “Meanwhile each year, 2,500,000 Americans apply for disability benefits. 800,000 are approved for disability benefits. So even our government can tell that 1,700,000 of the annual applicants weren’t actually disabled.”
Actually, it’s well known that for some reason, people rarely qualify the first time they apply. When they apply again, frequently they qualify, and receive retroactive benefits. I have no idea what percentage of people on disability aren’t actually disabled, but I know people who are disabled and who have applied and been turned down. I also know people who are disabled, and on disability, but who have good days and bad days. They wouldn’t be going out in public on bad days, so whether they are actually disabled is likely not to be clear to the casual observer.
When I was a child, my parents spoke of someone they knew who laughed about getting on disability when he didn’t actually qualify. So I know it happens. But in my own experience, people are more likely to be disabled and not on disability than the other way around.
Cheryl, For almost 30 years I have worked on a weekly, and sometimes daily, basis with people who actually are disabled and with people receiving disability benefits. I have not yet met a person who is actually unable to do some type of job and met the prior (40 quarters) work requirement who was unable to receive Social Security Disability benefits. I am sure they are out there, but there aren’t that many. On the other hand, I constantly meet people who receive SSD who manage to perform all of the activities of daily living except for working.
Note my numbers cited above did not include the hundreds of thousands of people who each year begin receiving SSI benefits. These are people who did not work in 40 calendar quarters, so they are not eligible for Social Security Disability benefits. The percentage of SSI recipients who are actually disabled is much higher than the percentage of SSD recipients who are actually disabled, however I also routinely run into perfectly healthy people who are receiving SSI. I am certain the rest of you know many of these people as well. Their “disability” is often that they were horribly spoiled by one or both parents, never held a steady job, and always lived off one or both parents. This situation most commonly involves a mother and a son, but can sometimes be found in the Mother/daughter, father/daughter or even father/daughter flavors.
Cheryl, Please also note that in my initial statistics on SSD, the 800,000 new applicants who are approved each year includes those who were denied but won their case on appeal. My own experience over 30 years of talking to SSD applicants has been that when a truly disabled person applies for SSD, they are rarely initially denied. My conclusion has always been that of the hundreds of able-bodied persons I have met who are receiving SSD, many won their cases on appeal.
Cheryl, What you described above as “well known” is actually a well known myth. If you heard of someone getting retroactive SSD benefits, they didn’t just reapply after being turned down. They won their case on appeal.
When I first starting working in this field I also heard that well known myth about most disabled persons being initially turned down when they applied for benefits. I even repeated the myth to clients. However, over a period of years, I saw a consistent pattern of actual disabled people being immediately approved for benefits with no need for appeal or reapplication. At the same time I was constantly exposed to healthy persons on disability. My wife and son will tell you that I am not very observant, but even I can put two and two together if you show it to me enough times.
Wandering Views 
For your consideration…..
This man does a better job than I could of explaining where he/I are at in this election, and why I’m voting Trump.
http://thefederalist.com/2016/11/04/voting-third-party-not-morally-superior-just-escapism/
“In just a few days the American people will go to the polls and cast their votes to elect the 45th president of this United States. Despite our apprehensions or hopes for other options, there are only two viable candidates. The president-elect come November 8, or soon thereafter, will be either Hillary Clinton or Donald J. Trump. That is the hard, cold reality. It is time for Americans to face the facts, accept this, and deliberate on how they will fulfill their political duty.
When considering our options, we need to realize that we are not only electing two different individuals to lead the country, but an entire branch of government. The president doesn’t execute the laws of the land single-handedly. He appoints a plethora of cabinet members and department directors that do the day-to-day governing of a third of the government, the most powerful branch.
He or she will nominate secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, Energy, Education, Veteran Affairs, Homeland Security, the attorney general, etc. When we elect a president, we need to think of all these departments and how their work, and the regulations they pass, affects the area of the country they administer.
Both candidates will bring incredibly different people to head those departments and do the job of governing the nation. The outcomes of those choices will have radically different outcomes in the next four or eight years. We are not only choosing an individual but a team of people that share a particular ideology: conservative or liberal.”
———————-
“Making Hard Decisions Is What People of Character Do
I understand that hesitancy. It is hard to have people think that we somehow endorse a person speaking disrespectfully about women, or that we endorse someone with no moral scruples. But if the intention of our decision to support either candidate is with the best interest of the common good in mind, then we need not shy away from what others may think. The common good is more important than our image. The good of the nation is more important than our feelings towards a particular person.”
————————-
“Like every thought experiment, this one has its limitations. However, its main purpose is to show that given two unavoidable outcomes one has the moral duty to choose the one that will do the most good, or the least amount of harm. Given the unavoidable fact that either of the two nominees will be president, one has the moral duty to choose the one that will do the most good, or the least amount of harm.
In my own deliberation, I have come to conclude that despite his misbehavior Trump and his team will be better for the common good than Hillary and her team. However, I have written what I have above being careful not to push in any particular direction because I think this to be the deliberative process every citizen should go through regardless of whom he or she chooses in the end.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
LikeLike
Good article, AJ. I have tended to view voting mostly in a pragmatic way. But I know some who vote for third parties because they want those parties to be eligible for the public funding that can be available if the party gets 5% (or whatever the percentage is) of the vote.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The “Public” doesn’t have any money.
Our credit is maxed out.
Hillary is going to make college free.
Professors are going to work for love and respect.
Hillary will add to her personal cache.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In the past eight years we have doubled our debt and have nothing to show for it.
NOTHING
Hillary talks about repairing our infrastructure. Obama was going to do that.
What’s about our infrastructure?
NOTHING.
Strengthened our military?
Worse than before.
Made America respected in the world?
Obama draws a yellow line in the sand.
QoD.
Where did all that money go?.
Some is in the Clinton Foundation. Who knows where the rest is.
I know! It went to improve VA hospitals.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Andy Andrews is a local author. He lays out a good argument for voting for your lesser of two evils.
http://yellowhammernews.com/politics-2/andrews-trump-clinton-will-president-heres-decide-vote/?utm_source=boomtrain&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20160605&bt_ee=jEY09vCKnT38h4Vf%2FVouIjtaCYNTR5Pbn8O0gjRoxJqBfMt%2FEN4BE1KZFeyk25Ty&bt_ts=1478302562269
LikeLiked by 2 people
Good link Kim,
This isn’t as hard a decision as some are making it. In fact, it’s a pretty easy choice.
From Kim’s link above….
—————————-
“Do you believe the government is more capable of determining how your money should be used? Do you believe the government is better able to determine how your children should be educated? Do you believe the government should determine who can do business where and with whom? Do you believe a person should be given priority because of what they believe, what they are, or what they believe they are? If so, you must vote for her, for she has publicly promised to appoint judges who will open our borders, our bathrooms, and our wallets. She has promised laws to punish those who do not agree.
Or do you believe you can decide what’s best for your family? Do you believe that if you earn a certain amount of money you should be able to keep and reinvest the largest part of it to benefit those things you decide are important? Do you believe the government has been created to serve the people, not the other way around? If so, you must vote for him, for he has publicly promised to appoint judges whose rulings allow prosperity for those who work to deserve it.
These are but a few examples of the two pathways you will choose this Tuesday, November 8, 2016. Religious freedom, taxes and the economy, healthcare…in every category you examine, you’ll find drastic differences in the America that will be shaped by this election. Don’t be fooled—how you vote matters, because the Supreme Court matters.
So what kind of America will we have for the rest of our lives? This time, you actually get to choose.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
For me, Seth Meyers sums up the argument, if of course I could vote.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=9v97xH6Bof0
LikeLike
The Dems are also putting out the message that the Republican Machine is rigging the election.
LikeLike
For me there is no logical coherent reason to vote for Trump, no matter your political or religious beliefs.
The notion that his team will be good abandons the Truman notion that the buck stops here (at his desk). Will he choose a good team? Will he dismiss them at the slightest hint of trouble? ( He went through three campaign managers) Will good people be willing to work for him? He has a history of short changing people and ignoring their advice. I’m sure his staff told him to stop tweeting at three a.m. In short he’s too unreliable to have or listen to a good team.
The Supreme Court is another argument that assumes Trump is trustworty and rational. He’s neither. And I also think the right overestimates the Court’s willingness to overturn 30-40 years of precedent and legislation.
Finally, there’s no eqivilancy or lesser of two evils here. Clinton is relatively normal centrist politician albeit female wherras Trump is everything Meyers said in my link; facing a fraud trail and a civil suit on underage rape, a bankrupt businessman who doesnt pay his own bills, a self confessed molestor and voyeur and the list goes on.
He has neither the temperment nor the experience to be President. Watching Clinton bait him on the debates, he not only took the bait he ran with it for a week on Twitter. My respect grew for Clinton esp given Trumps behaviour in the last two debates. I wont like most of her policies but she has intelligience, patience, tolerance, and nerves of steel. If you want America to stay great, the choice is obvious.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The hazards inherent in the reporting biz:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/11/bret-baier-corrects.php
____________________________
Bret Baier opened this past Wednesday night’s edition of Special Report with several scoops on the progress of the FBI investigations of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Baier slightly expanded on his scoops in an interview with Brit Hume on On the Record, the video and transcript of which are posted here. I posted the video of Baier reporting his scoops in “Analyze this.” Paul Mirengoff commented on Baier’s report in this post.
Baier has now backed off and clarified his report in significant respects (video below). …
______________________________
LikeLike
Kim,
Its apparent to the Democrats that the FBI has been politicized. The timing was impeccable and the innuedo was on Republican message. But similar to the last 25 years of non Clinton scandals, there will be notjing there.
LikeLike
Hwesseli, while I respect your opinion, I am tired of people on the Left telling me why I MUST vote for Hillary and how stupid I am if I don’t.
Likewise, I am tired of people on the right telling me I MUST vote for Trump and how stupid I am if I don’t.
It is my vote and my decision. I lost two good friends over this election. One on the right and one on the left. I am an equal opportunity offender. In the past I have been able to rationally discuss the candidates with both Dems and Reps. This cycle has left everyone on any side unhinged.
I am weary of the election and cannot wait for it to be over.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Kim
My long post at 11:23 was an answer to the two links, not any commentators here.
Besides, I thought you were voting similar to DJ…leaving the top line blank as it really doesn’t matter in Alabama.
I think the whole world wants this election over. Of course the western world wants Clinton to win and things to have a semblance of normalcy and stability.
LikeLike
But what’s the fun in that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
In the natural flow of things, the White House is ready for a change in party. After 8 years in one direction, the trend usually is to give the other side a whack at it. Another 4 years (on top of 8) will likely give rise to an even greater push in 4 years to oust the Democrats.
If I lived in a swing state, I’d have some more thinking to do — I have the luxury in a blue state of opting out of this one, though in many ways it goes against my natural instincts (politics in a fallen world gives us fallen and flawed candidates, I’m no longer shocked by this). 🙂
But ultimately our hope is in something more transcendent than all of this, of course, so come what may …
I watched All the President’s Men the other night, which I hadn’t seen in many years. Watergate and its exposure by Woodward & Bernstein was foundational and inspirational journalism in the years I was in college and was a “J” major. Interesting to watch and to be reminded of that era (and what was mildly amusing was how they still had dial-up telephones and typewriters “back” then 🙂 )
LikeLiked by 3 people
When Comey first spoke about the investigation into Ms. Clinton’s private emails and server I heard 3 things;
1. There will be no indictment of Ms. Clinton, this is a political matter.
2. These are the things that Ms. Clinton did and this is the law.
3. The public has a right to know what Ms. Clinton did and what the laws are. The public will decide whether they want her for President, not the courts.
LikeLike
However, If you want comedy the choice is clear.
Will Clinton post unflattering pictures of other leaders’ wives? Will she get in a lengthy weight discussion with Miss Universe? Will she cite The National Enquirer as a trusted source? Will she link an opponent to Lee Harvey Oswald?
Either way, I think we are going down the tubes. At least we can have some laughs. The Russians, Chinese and Iranians will really think Trump is funny.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nothing more to say here.
I voted for Trump. Not that I like Trump.
But the Clintons are utterly corrupt. They leave chaos and ruined lives behind them and hopelessness ahead.
Meanwhile, they are enriching themselves.
Do you remember that they stole furniture out or the White House? (I think they had to return it.)
There is nothing they won’t do.
Nothing.
LikeLiked by 4 people
So is there something Trump won’t do? Anything at all? Yes, there is!
He has told us repeatedly that he will not sexually assault unattractive women.
LikeLike
I thought I read that the Clintons were only “mildly” corrupt. 🙂
So judgmental, Chas
LikeLiked by 1 person
Of course, missing from the stolen furniture would have been the lamp that Hillary allegedly hurled across the room at Bill during the Monica travails. Secret Service said they heard it shatter, but we don’t know if it missed its mark completely. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bill deserved that one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
hwesseli: Seth Myers left out more than a few reasons why Madame Corruption is the wrong choice for President (and this is from several months ago)…
https://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/39-reasons-a-hillary-clinton-presidency-would-be-catastrophe-for-america/
LikeLike
Tychicus, This time I am actually watching Texas vs. Texas Tech. Your Longhorns are ahead, but Tech just scored while I was typing this sentence. Let’s go back and forth like the teams:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-first-100-horrific-days-of-a-trump-presidency/2016/11/04/1abca4d2-a286-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Onside kick and a report on what Europeans think about the orange lunatic:
LikeLike
rw: The Washington Post – really? Mr. Milbank lost me within the first few lines with “Now that James B. Comey has dedicated the FBI to the election of Donald Trump…”
(I can’t believe that you actually have me defending Donald Trump!)
38-30 and counting…
LikeLiked by 1 person
This was witty:
“Trump’s relationship to the truth is on par with his relationship with women – opportunistic and abusive.”
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/how-can-americans-trust-donald-trump
LikeLike
Tech is driving.
LikeLike
This Is Great!!
Remember how last week I said the liberal press “cried wolf” by attacking other Republicans and now no one will believe them about Trump. Bill Maher admitted that was true using those exact words.
LikeLike
Tom Nichols: “This fall, I had the chance to talk with ordinary citizens, students, journalists, and others in cities and towns in Central Europe. Almost all of them expressed the same fear: that America was going to elect Donald Trump and abandon them — our NATO allies — to the same fate Russia has inflicted on Ukraine, Georgia, and especially Syria.”
People here in Central Europe already felt abandoned when the Obama admin (w/Clinton as SoS) discarded existing plans to establish a missile-defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. Not near as bad as the Munich Agreement, but still pretty bad.
45-30 and counting…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can’t believe Texas has a chubby running back (much too chubby for Trump) who is faster than Tech’s entire secondary. He has 311 yards rushing.
LikeLike
I saw Roosevelt Leaks run for 342 yards against SMU in 1973. I don’t want that record to be broken.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Foreman kind of runs like ol’ Roosevelt, doesn’t he?
LikeLiked by 1 person
In seeking to get the rushing record for Foreman, the ‘Horns have become too predictable on offense…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, he does. I still feel really bad that Leaks hurt his knee that year against the Aggies. The medical technology wasn’t nearly as good back then and he was never the same.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Texas vs. Tech in Lubbock is a great game for fans. Four years ago I took a high school senior from my Sunday School out to tour Tech and go to the game. He loved it when the Tech fans, en masse, heckled the Texas punter during pregame warmups.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Did that student end up going to Tech?
LikeLike
Yes, he did, and he is about to finish up there. His parents were splitting up his senior year, so he really didn’t have anyone to take him on college trips. I thought we could stay in my son’s (law school) house, but that weekend the law school house was full of Longhorns, so we stayed with my aunt.
LikeLike
I don’t think Charley Strong wants him to break the record either.
LikeLike
The “Horns are trying to hand this game to the Raiders…
LikeLike
This is a lesson for all non-Texans. Politics can be an interest, but football is our way of life.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Go Dodgers
LikeLiked by 2 people
Watch this weekend for the Democrats to be dragging people out of their houses to vote — they do have an aggressive “ground game” that paid off well for Obama. The Republicans seem to leave it on the honor system (maybe because GOP turnout is usually more reliable than the Democrats)
But there’s clearly some panic going on with the tightening polls.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Case in point:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/11/report-democrats-on-the-front-foot-in-nevada.php
___________________________
Jon Ralston, the veteran Nevada political reporter, has been tweeting about massive turnout by Latino voters in Clark County (the Las Vegas area). He suggests that it may already be game over in Nevada, not just for Trump but perhaps in the important Senate race as well. …
____________________________
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nate Silver now gives the Republicans a 47.5% chance of holding on to the Senate. Real Clear Politics currently predicts the Republicans will have 52 Senators. When you consider the Republicans nominated the absolute worst person (Move over, McGovern!) ever nominated by a major party, we have a great deal to be thankful about.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/senate/?ex_cid=2016-forecast
Now the only question is, will we;
1. Elect Hillary who will continue to take us steadily toward Socialist Sodom until 2020 when the Republicans will have a second chance to field a sane candidate against her;
2. Elect Trump who will deliver us immediately to “fabulous” Trump Socialist Sodom to the delight of Russia, Iran and the nation’s comedians; or
3. By divine miracle and the genius of Madison’s Elevtoral College have the election thrown into the House of Representatives who, in a burst of courage, select McMullin as President so that he and they can deal with 200 million ignorant and angry Democrats and Trumpkins.
LikeLike
There are actually conservatives who are voting for Clinton in order to stop Trump in the same manner that many of you are voting for Trump to stop Clinton. Here is a statement from one:
https://twitter.com/nickapappas/status/782584874096001024
LikeLike
AJ, one link way up near the top said this: “Like every thought experiment, this one has its limitations. However, its main purpose is to show that given two unavoidable outcomes one has the moral duty to choose the one that will do the most good, or the least amount of harm. Given the unavoidable fact that either of the two nominees will be president, one has the moral duty to choose the one that will do the most good, or the least amount of harm.” (emphasis added)
Actually, one doesn’t have the “moral duty” to vote at all, or to vote for one of these two. I was perfectly content simply voting “no” (by leaving the presidential slot blank) and praying that God will somehow grant us mercy. I think either of these candidates is likely to die in his/her first term of office, and I think either candidate is likely to usher in complete chaos to our nation, and chaos that goes beyond our nation. If I’d had a good third-party choice, I’d have made it, mostly as a stronger “no” than just leaving the slot blank. But I comfortably left it blank, for the first time in my life.
If a doctor tells a husband whose wife is in labor, “Your baby is in distress, and either the baby or the mother will die. You need to tell us whose life to save,” he can say, “Save my wife” or “My wife said in this situation I need to save the baby, so that’s my choice”–or he can say, “Life and death is not in my authority. Do your best to save both, but I’m going to leave the results to God.” Any of those might be a morally defensible choice.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Have any of you seen the reports (from more emails released by Wikileaks) about Hillary supposedly having some connection to a couple of child sex traffickers (based in Haiti, I think), from several years ago? I haven’t read enough to know how accurate those reports are, or how much of an actual connection she had with them.
Of course, those on the far right are writing as if she knew full well what they were doing.
LikeLike
We have a friend whom Hubby knows (& I have met) from back when they were both with Hostess who is like a conservative version of YF. What sometimes makes my heart ache a bit at his stuff is that he is also a devout Christian, & should know better.
He has often posted things on Facebook that are not true (I have often googled the matter or quote to double-check my instinct), mostly about Hillary Clinton. He has posted “quotes” that have put her in any even worse light than she deserves, which she never said. A few times, I have pointed out that the quote or story was false, & shared something to back up my words, but he has never replied. I’ve also left gentle advice that we should double-check everything before posting, to avoid bearing false witness, but he obviously hasn’t taken my advice.
This morning I saw an article he shared about those emails from Wikileaks that I mentioned above. The breathless report even makes the damning accusation that she had two of these people extradited to the U.S.! Horrors!
Do they even know what being extradited means?! That was a good thing, not a bad thing. But it was worded as an accusation twice, as if Hillary having them extradited was a horrible thing to do.
It’s this hatred that so many people have for certain politicians, the kind that is willing & eager to share anything that shows them in a very bad light, that is quite dismaying to see, but especially when it comes from fellow believers.
LikeLike
Ricky, I won’t vote for Hillary because she (1) is a criminal and (2) is strongly pro-abortion.
But I’m not at all convinced that Trump is even a purer candidate (conservatively) or anything close to qualified. So I throw up my hands and say, “God, please give us mercy, and somehow get us out of this mess, if it be Your will. But I trust You, and Your will be done.” Sometimes that is all we can do. I think that it is “enough” when that is the case–most certainly it is not irresponsible or un-Christian.
I’ll be glad when Tuesday night is over, though I don’t think it really will be “over.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
I haven’t thought of voting third party as “morally superior”, but at least as morally acceptable as voting for either of the major party candidates. Very often I have read comments, or seen essays, that make it seem as if voting third party is useless, & even downright bad. In fact, those people often come across as feeling “morally superior”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cheryl – I agree. The post-election time is going to be pretty contentious, too. November 9 is going to be crazy on social media!
LikeLike
On this site I debate with people who think Trump is not as bad as Hillary and that all Christians and conservatives should vote for Trump. Elsewhere I debate with conservatives who think Trump is the bigger threat and that all conservatives should vote for Hillary. As AJ noted above, the decision for me was pretty easy:
1. I never, ever vote for any Democrat in a general election because on every major issue, the Democrats stand in opposition to what I believe is right.
2. Very early in the primary season, I decided that I would never, ever vote for Trump. There are two reasons:
A. Historically he has been a Democrat and on many issues that matter to me (Trade, entitlement reform, federalism, perversion, etc.) he is still basically a Democrat.
B. He has by far the worst character of any candidate ever to run for President. He is a con man, a narcissist, a serial adulterer, a world class liar, a megalomaniac, a mysoginist, an ignoramus and a sexual predator. You blend these traits together and you get the deranged lunatic two-time porn actor who sends 3:00 a.m. Tweets to a former Miss Universe falsely accusing her of being a porn star.
When no good 3rd party candidates emerged early on, I decided to support Arnold the Dog. My reasoning was simple. By nominating Trump, the Republicans turned the election into a farce. I will therefore treat the election as a farce and support a dog, who is far superior to Hillary and Trump.
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 1 person
Christian leaders had the opportunity [twice] to back a candidate of sterling character (Huckabee) who would lead the country in a healthier, less globalistic direction, but they chose to endorse Cruz instead.
And I do get the concerns about character; it’s always right to be concerned about the ideals and principles that guide a leader. But if the righteous will not lead in the right direction (and make no mistake: they are not), perhaps God is allowing us a less palatable instrument who will. It would not be the first time.
LikeLike
And yes, I am saying that Trump is not only better than Hillary; he’s better than Cruz.
LikeLike
Debra, I want to understand what exactly you mean by “globalism” and what you see as unhealthy about this “globalism”.
When I think of globalism, I think about trade, multi-lateral agreements and the exchange of goods, services, ideas and values between nations. The unhealthy thing that has bothered me that has gone on for at least 25 years is that the US and its Western allies have exported and promoted abortion, perversion and radical feminism around the world. I fear God will judge us for that. He may be both judging us and correcting the problem by allowing us to elect Trump.
If Trump is able to curtail trade and pull the US out of its treaty obligations, the rest of the world will continue the free trade philosophy that has greatly reduced extreme poverty around the globe. However, the US would then become much more isolated, poorer, and our liberals would only promote abortion, perversion and radical feminism within our own borders.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m just praying the Lord will give us the president we need, not the one we deserve. I figure He can figure it out better than I can.
A curious position to be in, watching from the sidelines and just feeling so sad about the choice and about what my friends have revealed about themselves. Or have they?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The get-out-the-vote push is in full swing
“I can’t believe I heard what I just heard.”
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/11/analyze-this-20.php
LikeLiked by 2 people
I had just sent a message to a friend this morning pretty much saying what michelle said about feeling like I’m on the sidelines for this one — and feeling sad, at times distressed and depressed. (She’s not-very political Republican but voted for Hillary as she has an incredibly visceral reaction to Trump — I believe she said she’d “puke” if he wins.)
Either way, Wednesday morning will not be pleasant.
LikeLike
That’s a very insightful question, Ricky. “Globalism” and “anti-globalism” do have several different connotations that I am aware of—and they are not all equally good or bad as far as I can tell. The unhealthy export of perversions of all kinds does weigh on me. And I can’t reconcile those activities with some of our rhetoric about America’s ‘greatness’ in the world. I mean America is great to *me*. I will always be so grateful and thankful that I was born here and live here…and I have no desire to live anywhere else regardless of what governmental policies come and go, or what structure we have or who is elected or not. As far as I’m concerned, if it prospers then great, and if it’s going down, I’ll go down with the ship. I love this land for so many reasons I could only begin to articulate.
But I love it because it’s my country; and I fully expect that other people love their own countries too, and want the best for their countries just as I want the best for mine.
And it’s at this point I think globalism does us a disservice by trying to tell us that our economies are not a function of all of the things that make us US.
And that’s exactly what’s been happening. Globalists of all kinds have been erasing national boundaries for years—through policies, economic strategies, world agencies, and through globally-oriented, multi-national companies whose actions and influence in our own and foreign governments can neither be checked nor accounted for.
And further complicating this situation, I suspect that not every nation can sustain itself as a democracy. Some peoples have traditionally wanted strong kings or even dictators—and historically, that’s what they’ve had forever almost. I respect those boundaries. I respect the national boundaries of all nations (well, certainly the nations that God set the boundaries for Biblically) and their sovereignty or at least their right to sovereignty in theory. For example, I respect the sovereignty of Syria who does indeed have a leader that we are working hard to overthrow. I also I respect the boundaries of Mexico and Canada, our nearest and dearest friends and allies.
But, how can I credibly say I respect any other nation and their boundaries and their sovereignty, if I don’t act like I respect my own. Perhaps that is the energy that has moved Trump forward in spite of all conceivable odds to the contrary.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Debra: What makes Trump better than Cruz?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cruz was my third choice. Behind Scott Walker and Ben Carson.
LikeLike
Lock her up already!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/06/clinton-directed-her-maid-to-print-out-classified-materials.html
LikeLike
DJ – A friend on Facebook shared that video, & there’s a long comment thread on it, which I haven’t finished reading, parsing what the word “undocumented” means. One man is claiming that many American citizens who were born to illegals are currently undocumented, but can still vote since they are indeed citizens. Others are saying that the word is commonly used to refer to illegals, & that must be whom Obama was referring to.
LikeLike
I have little doubt that those on the left believe the voting rolls should be opened to all “residents.”
I had a call from a woman this week who said her husband is currently petitioning for his citizenship papers but has been here illegally with no visa, no papers, for 8 years. Yet, he received a ballot in the mail and she was stumped … Curious
For those yearning to go down memory lane on the eve of the election, Politico has compiled this list of the worst predictions for 2016:
1. Trump will not be the nominee
Predicted by: Almost everyone
2. Jeb Bush will be the nominee
Predicted by: The Washington Post, Politico Magazine, Rush Limbaugh and many, many more
3. Joe Biden will run
Predicted by: Bill Kristol (among others)
4. The 2016 Republican national convention will be brokered
Predicted by: John Kasich (among others)
5. Bernie Sanders won’t stand a chance at winning the Democratic nomination
Predicted by: Mark Halperin (et al)
There’s more at http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/2016-election-worst-predictions-230806
LikeLiked by 2 people
Cruz was popular with mostly the far right, but he would not have gotten any traction (in my view) with anyone beyond that small subset of voters in a general election. He also had a pretty unappealing personal manner and some baggage in that area. I don’t think he would have been an effective nominee.
Our country desperately needs good leaders, sooner rather than later, if it is to get back on track. There appear to be none on the horizon, but perhaps in this vacuum God will show mercy and raise up a few.
LikeLike
Reading more of that thread I mentioned. One man has this perspective. . .
“All I saw was a politician sidestepping the meat of a question to deliver his own point. The questioner wants him to admit that you can become a citizen by imagining you’re a citizen, but she also wants to know if voting will attract attention to her illegal relatives. He carefully zooms in on the safe part. You’re a citizen, he asserts of her [which she is], and your presence at the poll is sacred. You and your family won’t be punished for voting. He completely ignores her desire to talk about the citizenship rights of illegals.”
LikeLike
Thanks, Debra. I agree with many of your points.
1. I absolutely agree with you on Syria and you could have said the same thing about Iraq. Although Trump has been clumsy (and somewhat dishonest about his own prior positions) with his criticism of recent US foreign adventures, I think this is the most important substantive contribution he has made in the campaign. Ever since Little Bush invaded Iraq, conservative criticism of such aggressive adventurism has been muted. There were critics such as Dick Armey, Robert Novak and Pat Buchanan, but mainstream Republican policy has been blindly aggressive. If Trump has made Republicans more thoughtful and cautious about intervening in other countries, good for him.
2. You are also correct that many nations are not capable of self-government and many people in some of those nations are wise enough to know that self government would not work well in their own country. If this election does anything, it should make Americans humble themselves and question whether we are still capable of self-government. After all, we picked Hillary and Trump as our nominees.
3. Americans need a tough but fair comprehensive immigration plan which is enforceable and enforced. After much bluster in the primaries, Trump’s position is now virtually identical to those of his Republican opponents. We will see what happens on both the enforcement and legislative fronts.
The big question for Republicans and Americans is are we going to continue to be the world’s leader in promoting trade. If the answer is “yes”, then trade will allow our country to grow economically for a while even if our tax, energy, affirmative action and healthcare policies continue to be imbecilic. If the answer is “no”, the rest of the world will continue to grow economically, while the US declines. Then immigration will not be an issue. No one moves to a country where there are no jobs. Emigration will surge and a bankrupt US government will try to tax (confiscate) a portion of the assets of those trying to flee Socialist Sodom or Fabulous Trump Socialist Sodom.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tychicus, I liked Cruz as much as you did and voted for him. However, in hindsight Walker, Jindal, or even Huckabee or Kasich would have been a better choice. Each of those men have been a successful governor of a state. They had to deal with Democrats and Trump-like Republicans as well as conservatives. They are better at working with people. They approved and administered a budget.
Cruz doesn’t work well with people. His positions are right and he has courage, but he sometimes lacks good judgment, as revealed by his dealings with Trump:
1. He kissed up to Trump early in the primaries.
2. He failed to challenge Trump to a fistfight when Trump insulted his wife.
3. There was no need for him to speak at the Trumpkin convention. He should have just stayed away from that terrible place as Kasich did.
4. Worst of all, he went crawling back to the lunatic. Hilariously, I think this happened the day before Trump’s obscene sexual assault confession tape was released.
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 2 people
As I pray for our country as we come to this election day, I wonder what is ahead. I cannot picture either of these candidates making a concession speech.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Jo, With that thought in mind, here are a couple more:
1. Nate Silver says that there is a 10% chance that Hillary wins the popular vote, but loses in the Electoral College. That would surely please our liberal friends. There is a much smaller chance of it going the other way, because Hillary is piling up huge margins in California, Illinois and New York while Trump’s spread in actual votes is smaller in his big states such as Texas.
2. Real Clear Politics currently shows the whole election depending on Florida again. They have Trump ahead in New Hampshire and other states, meaning that Trump would win the Electoral College 270-268 if he wins Florida. Can’t you see another 2 months of hanging chads, while in the background new Trump sexual assault victims emerge daily and Hillary’s maid testifies that she was in favor of sending help to the men in Benghazi, but that she was the only person at Hillary’s house who was reading the classified e-mails.
LikeLike
So the emails as I predicted were nothing. Comey needs to resign. Its unforgiveable to blow a call so badly so close to an election.
Cruz did endorse Trump a day before the tape yet he didnt rescind it. The actions of Cruz and other social conservatives does raise the question. Moving forward what happens to the social consevatives within the Republican? After all, the results will be similar to Romney or McCain, in an election whete they were mostly ignored.
LikeLike
Anne Applebaum, a conservative historian/journalist, wrote an excellent article on international right wing populism and Putin’s role.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-is-a-threat-to-the-west-as-we-know-it-even-if-he-loses/2016/11/04/a8dc9100-a2cc-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, you guys have been busy. :–)
Tychicus–“What makes Trump better than Cruz?”
I do not think Cruz would be a change in direction– just lipstick on the pig (pig being the policies–not Cruz)–cosmetic change. Many people speak as though electing a president of the other party is a major change in direction, and in past elections I have thought the same. I no longer believe that to be the case. We seem to have one big ‘Republicrat’ party, with various fringes on the sides…with the caveat that those ‘fringes’ seem to be representing more and more of the population.
Trump, on the other hand, represents real change in direction; and the change has already started to happen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think it’s (almost) safe to say that Clinton will eek it out on Tuesday.
Lots of work ahead for the Republican party in the wake of this year.
LikeLike
Ricky, the electoral college favors less populated states. A vote in Wyoming or New Hampshire is worth more than a vote in California or New York. Wyoming has one electoral vote per 200 000 vs California with one per 700 000. Hence its easier for a democrat to win the popular vote and lose the electoral college
LikeLiked by 1 person
DJ
Clinton will eke it out. The wildcard is the ground game. The republicans traditionally didnt need one but with Trump they do and Trump neglected to create one.
The comparision is worrisome for republicans. Trump holds a rally but has noone registering voteres etc. At a Clinton rally, local organizers complete voter registrations before, during and after a rally. Volunteers wander around the rally gathering info and registrations. How this translates will be interesting.
Nevada is revealing. Every hotel cleaning lady, porter, etc of Las Vegas has been registered and given a ride to an advance poll. This may save Nevada for Clinton
LikeLike
Haha I think I spelled it eek 😬 on purpose
Sigh 😔
LikeLiked by 2 people
HRW, I thought of you and your explanation of the European rightist parties when I read the Applebaum article this morning before church.
If anybody thinks Trump is going to win, you need to convert your investments to cash on Monday, and then wait until you think the Trump Crash is over before getting back in the market. That is just good stewardship. A surprise Trump win will produce a black, black market on Wednesday, and the financial hit will affect markets all over the world.
LikeLike
Ricky @3:23 I think your 4th paragraph is a tad pessimistic. I’m hoping for a slower unwinding or re-alignment of our trade policies, which will avert predicted abject poverty and mass misery at home. But either way, that will probably not be entirely up to Trump.
Regarding immigration, I think Trump played this issue the way it needed to be played. Every time politicians (mostly Republican politicians) have promised to fix the immigration problem they have tried to make it acceptable to all sides by promising the ‘path to citizenship’. But when elected, they hand out H1-b’s like halloween candy, and do nothing at all about securing the borders, justifying their actions with phrases like “jobs Americans don’t want to do” and “jobs Americans are not qualified to do”. That’s phooey.
I would love to see a solid immigration policy that allows families to stay together and eventually become citizens. I wouldn’t even mind some kind of conditional amnesty. But we have a lot of internal housekeeping to do first. I think Trump would do the right thing there.
LikeLike
Debra, When Trump slaps his 35% tariff on imported goods, don’t you expect foreign nations to slap a similar tariff on our exports? Whammy! Millions of Americans just lost their jobs making those products and the trip to Best Buy, the grocery store and Walmart to buy imported items just got a lot more expensive. Consumers will have to cut back on other items to make ends meet and millions more will lose their jobs. The Smoot-Hawley tariff (the 1930s version of Trumpism) helped make The Great Depression such a memorable event.
LikeLike
Texans have retained their sense of humor.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A few facts on H1B visas and Americans not wanting to work. In recent years about 120,000 H1-B visas have been issued each year. That equals about .03% of the population. After 33 years, if the population did not otherwise increase, the H1-B program would increase the US population by a whopping 1%. Meanwhile each year, 2,500,000 Americans apply for disability benefits. 800,000 are approved for disability benefits. So even our government can tell that 1,700,000 of the annual applicants weren’t actually disabled. Working with these folks on a daily basis for 30 years, I can tell you that at least half of the ones that qualify for disability are not really unable to work. Divide 2,100,000 by 120,000 and you see that each year there are 17.5 Americans trying to get disability to avoid work for every 1 foreigner who obtains a H1-B visa.
LikeLike
Ricky, these numbers don’t say what you say they are saying: “Meanwhile each year, 2,500,000 Americans apply for disability benefits. 800,000 are approved for disability benefits. So even our government can tell that 1,700,000 of the annual applicants weren’t actually disabled.”
Actually, it’s well known that for some reason, people rarely qualify the first time they apply. When they apply again, frequently they qualify, and receive retroactive benefits. I have no idea what percentage of people on disability aren’t actually disabled, but I know people who are disabled and who have applied and been turned down. I also know people who are disabled, and on disability, but who have good days and bad days. They wouldn’t be going out in public on bad days, so whether they are actually disabled is likely not to be clear to the casual observer.
When I was a child, my parents spoke of someone they knew who laughed about getting on disability when he didn’t actually qualify. So I know it happens. But in my own experience, people are more likely to be disabled and not on disability than the other way around.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cheryl, For almost 30 years I have worked on a weekly, and sometimes daily, basis with people who actually are disabled and with people receiving disability benefits. I have not yet met a person who is actually unable to do some type of job and met the prior (40 quarters) work requirement who was unable to receive Social Security Disability benefits. I am sure they are out there, but there aren’t that many. On the other hand, I constantly meet people who receive SSD who manage to perform all of the activities of daily living except for working.
Note my numbers cited above did not include the hundreds of thousands of people who each year begin receiving SSI benefits. These are people who did not work in 40 calendar quarters, so they are not eligible for Social Security Disability benefits. The percentage of SSI recipients who are actually disabled is much higher than the percentage of SSD recipients who are actually disabled, however I also routinely run into perfectly healthy people who are receiving SSI. I am certain the rest of you know many of these people as well. Their “disability” is often that they were horribly spoiled by one or both parents, never held a steady job, and always lived off one or both parents. This situation most commonly involves a mother and a son, but can sometimes be found in the Mother/daughter, father/daughter or even father/daughter flavors.
LikeLike
Cheryl, Please also note that in my initial statistics on SSD, the 800,000 new applicants who are approved each year includes those who were denied but won their case on appeal. My own experience over 30 years of talking to SSD applicants has been that when a truly disabled person applies for SSD, they are rarely initially denied. My conclusion has always been that of the hundreds of able-bodied persons I have met who are receiving SSD, many won their cases on appeal.
LikeLike
If I have trouble going to sleep, I will type.
Cheryl, What you described above as “well known” is actually a well known myth. If you heard of someone getting retroactive SSD benefits, they didn’t just reapply after being turned down. They won their case on appeal.
When I first starting working in this field I also heard that well known myth about most disabled persons being initially turned down when they applied for benefits. I even repeated the myth to clients. However, over a period of years, I saw a consistent pattern of actual disabled people being immediately approved for benefits with no need for appeal or reapplication. At the same time I was constantly exposed to healthy persons on disability. My wife and son will tell you that I am not very observant, but even I can put two and two together if you show it to me enough times.
Now let’s see if I can go back to sleep.
LikeLike