I will not vote for trump

[Town Heretic]

[the President] proved that a lack of experience doesn't matter

Did he? I don't think it's always an issue. It's never been much of a consideration for me, though most politicians have tended to have a good bit of it by the time they arrive on a national stage. . . I suppose it depends on how adept a person is at finding common ground, or how big a margin of support he has in Congress. Or how we feel about the alternative.

remind us again town, which of the four candidates on the ballot in 2008 had executive experience?

Only two mattered and to most people who elected the President that consideration wasn't terribly important. I'm largely interested in how people who openly challenged on the point justify shedding the notion like an old coat in summer now.

 

[ok doser]

Only two mattered...

nice dodge


answer the question as asked or receive an F

 

[Town Heretic]

nice dodge

I'm not dodging an answer anyone who cares about the process already has in their noggin. That is, I don't assume people are ignorant of the outcome of that election or which candidate had the thing many made a point of espousing as a civic virtue...so speaking to that point is a bit pointless. Like telling people present in Dallas for Kennedy's last ride that the President was shot there.

There were two electable candidates for the office. The least experienced candidate won the field. No one is unclear about that outcome. But the people who made hay about experience were mostly found on the losing side and now those same people aren't making that same hay. I think that speaks to something. The easy answer is hypocrisy, but while it may be hypocritical by some lights and satisfy political opponents, I suspect it's mostly about something else. That's something worth considering.

answer the question as asked or receive an F

Discourse or even conversation isn't about dictating the form of an answer or about altering the focus of a consideration from the substantive to the obvious for the sake of what, exactly?

You get in your own way a good deal. It's too bad, because until you can master that you won't really be capable of sustaining the thing you keep saying you want.

 

[ok doser]

I'm not dodging an answer

of course you are - it's a simple question that can be answered simply

nobody is surprised that you are unable or unwilling to

Only one of the four candidates on the ballot in 2008 had executive experience. Which one was it? A. Bammy B. the old doofus who was running with bammy C. McCain D. Palin

 

[chrysostom]

The Republicans were put in power in 2010 to stop Obama and his plans, mainly Obamacare. They didn't. In 2014, the GOP was given an even larger majority including many state legislatures and governors. They did not stop Obama.

this is how an idiot thinks
-"the republicans were put in power in 2010"
-what were they supposed to do?
-did you forget obama got relected in 2012?
-how do you explain that?
-how do you explain 2014?
-you can't because you are an idiot and a trump chump
-the democrats stayed home in 2010 and 2014
-wake up
-there are not enough trump chumps around
-thanks to trump chumps hillary will be our next president

 

[Town Heretic]

of course you are - it's a simple question that can be answered simply

nobody is suurprised that you are unable or unwilling to

Let's see if that's an honest assessment. Here we go:

There were two electable candidates for the office. The least experienced candidate won the field.

Now unless you really don't know who the President is or for some reason suspect I don't, you've been answered. To suggest otherwise is dishonest.

On the question of why experience was so important to people in relation to the President but is suddenly not a drum to beat with Trump...

 

[LightSon]

Only two mattered and to most people who elected the President that consideration wasn't terribly important. I'm largely interested in how people who openly challenged on the point justify shedding the notion like an old coat in summer now.

...
On the question of why experience was so important to people in relation to the President but is suddenly not a drum to beat with Trump...

Many evangelicals (of my ilk) were opposed to Trump from the outset, and then Liberty University endorsed followed by Pat Roberson. Now that Mr. Trump is the presumptive nominee, I'm seeing even more evangelicals changing their tune. PureX cited this as well as a not-too-veiled indictment of evangelicals.
I'm an evangelical who does not care for Trump. It could be argued that I have no viable alternative and will surely waste my vote by not pulling the lever for Trump. I haven't moved into #NeverTrump land quite yet and this whole situation is very uncomfortable for me. I really do not know what I will do come November, but am praying for wisdom. Charles Spurgeon said, “Of two evils, choose neither.”

 

[ok doser]

you've been answered.

it's not an answer to the question as posed

to suggest otherwise is dishonest

 

[Town Heretic]

it's not an answer to the question as posed

That's just a way of saying I literally didn't answer you in the form you wanted, not that you didn't understand the answer. So what follows:

to suggest otherwise is dishonest

is a game. There wasn't a single thing in my answer that was less than honest...and this sort of play acting on your part, using whatever topic is handy to make some half...grab at attention so you can waste time is why I mostly don't and won't worry about conversation with you, why I don't entertain your threads or worry about your name calling anymore. My first response was substantive and aimed at real conversation. You turned it into a joke.

About says it.

 

[Town Heretic]

Many evangelicals (of my ilk) were opposed to Trump from the outset, and then Liberty University endorsed followed by Pat Roberson. Now that Mr. Trump is the presumptive nominee, I'm seeing even more evangelicals changing their tune.

People are entitled to change their minds, but I'd be curious about the why.

PureX cited this as well as a not-too-veiled indictment of evangelicals.

I was listening to a radio program a couple of weeks ago, a fairly right wing evangelical one, where the host was taking on that turn and shaking a public head at it. I found that encouraging.

I'm an evangelical who does not care for Trump.

Makes sense to me. If your political choices are closely aligned with your religious context then it's harder to understand how you'd feel any other way about it. This presumptive nominee is on the record saying some fairly profound things relative to his own context. When asked, after identifying as a Protestant, if he'd ever asked God for forgiveness...

"I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don't think so," he said. "I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don't bring God into that picture. I don't." 7/18/2015 CNN, "Trump believes in God..."

It could be argued that I have no viable alternative and will surely waste my vote by not pulling the lever for Trump. I haven't moved into #NeverTrump land quite yet and this whole situation is very uncomfortable for me. I really do not know what I will do come November, but am praying for wisdom. Charles Spurgeon said, “Of two evils, choose neither.”

The last time I voted for the lesser of two evils I didn't end up caring for the experience. I said, somewhere around here, that my thinking these days is you vote for someone you feel represents what's important to you and if enough people get tired of the circus and follow suit we just might get somewhere worth going.

 

[Nick M]

I suspect that'a a lot of it.

That is because you are not stupid like chrysostom. It is all of it.

 

[ok doser]

That's just a way of saying I literally didn't answer ...

the question that was asked



literally

 

[Nick M]

-"the republicans were put in power in 2010"
-what were they supposed to do?

Stop Obama. They have constitutional authority.

Section. 1.

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

 

[chrysostom]

-what were they supposed to do?

Stop Obama.

we got that part with your first post
-we still don't know how they were supposed to do that
-any ideas?

 

[ok doser]

we got that part with your first post
-we still don't know how they were supposed to do that
-any ideas?

impeachment would have been a good start

 

[Nick M]

impeachment would have been a good start

As indicated in my post.

 

[chrysostom]

impeachment would have been a good start

how did that work with clinton?

 

[chrysostom]

As indicated in my post.

we are still talking about 2010
-and
-you are suggesting impeachment while the democrats control the senate?
-maybe ok doser can help you out here

 

[ok doser]

how did that work with clinton?

was he able to cram "universal health care" through?

 

[kmoney]

More Trump confusion.
He says taxes on the wealthy might go up and now he's saying they won't go up from current rates, they just might go up compared to his original tax plan. :dizzy:

Seriously, how can anyone trust what he says? :liberals: