Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
And that's exactly the response from a lot of Christians I know and respect.
Your experiences seem similar to mine. I keep digging though. On this particular thought have you ever pointed out to them that ANY GOP Presidential option of the time would have gotten them the things they have today? Curious what their response was/would be. There are exactly ZERO unique positions he holds that I know of outside his position on immigration, so the question still remains "Why Trump?"Joe Bryant said:
We all should.....that's my hope anyway. I know plenty who voted for him who won't do it again.adonis said:
Thanks @The Commish I don't think many (or any) of my friends supported Trump in the Primaries.
We haven't talked about it much yet.
You guys ever talk about the morality part of all this?
Absolutely. That's a big part of it. It's actually usually a pretty healthy discussion.
Is West Tennessee more liberal? I thought the whole state was pretty conservative. Are there liberal pockets?
Yes. West Tennessee (Memphis) is generally more Democratic leaning. Middle Tennessee (Nashville) is more even and slightly more Republican leaning and East Tennessee (Knoxville) is more solidly Republican leaning.
Primarily for asking questions that shine light on the conflict between a person's personal desires vs what's best for everyone. People
around here all the time about "people who don't talk to their family who voted for Trump", but it goes both ways. I have "friends" who pretty much have nothing to do with me anymore because I won't make excuses for what I consider a morally bankrupt jerk.
Thanks. I do think there's some of the "we can disagree and still be friends".Primarily for asking questions that shine light on the conflict between a person's personal desires vs what's best for everyone. People
I'll be interested to see how this plays out for you during this next election. Reality is, followers of Christ have a choice to make before we even get to policy differences. I, personally, can't fathom anyone professing to put the health of the country ahead of their own personal desires voting for Trump. I've never held this position until Trump either. Every candidate prior to him, during my lifetime, has had some modicum of morality that one could point to in an effort to justify a vote. Trump does not...this is as black and white as it gets in our political system.
This reasoning kind of falls apart when any other Republican candidate who ran for the nomination in 2016 would have done those things - they would have appointed conservative justices and did everything they could to lower taxes.Joe Bryant said:
I'd be interested in their response to "Forget religion....take it completely out. Morality isn't unique to religion". The best person for the job is the ultimate goal. Their moral character (however you determine it) is the foundation. It's wild to read your experiences with your friends. You seem to have a good group of dudes. I'll say that my group most similar to what you describe isn't part of the group that have turned on me. We are still open and honest with each other. Most of them voted Trump for the "meh....he can't be any worse than what we have now" or the "lets shake things up!!!" varieties. To a man, every single one of them regret their decision. They won't be voting for Trump this time around. The only question to them is will they vote for the Dem candidate or third party. They want someone who isn't an establishment type and who isn't going to go crazy with programs. It's pretty much down to Mayor Pete and Klobuchar for them or they are voting third party.
For many people they just can't believe that a Democrat *GASP* might actually do a better job/not be the antichrist.
Meh...yes and no. We'd have the same problem with 3 or 4 or 5 parties.
This checks out. It’s hard for me to imagine voting for a Republican and I’m really lazy.
Seems to me, those things begin to be minimized with choice though, no? It's easy to be "anti group X" or "pro group Y"....if you're not one you're the other by default. That's not the case if you have multiple groups. There is no default other than the one you choose.
"Economic anxiety" was given as a reason for that specific demographic's support I believe.
The bold is where the Trump Presidency has been most damaging to me Joe. While I’ve long been a vocal liberal on these boards, I’m also a product of a rural Republican upbringing, and I know good people can disagree rationally.Joe Bryant said:
It really is an interesting thought exercise. I'd say you can take religion AND morality out of it. Say the future president has zero moral values. If he can get done what you want done, do you support him? Say you're a strong progressive and you know the presidential candidate is an awful human being. But he is effective and he can get universal health care done, get gun control done, and get immigration the way you want. Do you support him?The Commish said:
There you go. You do that thought experiment and you see why people vote for (to use your examples) repealing the individual mandate, defending the 2nd amendment and border security. It's kind of funny people pretend to assign much morality to politicians in the first place.
I don't think that's a hard question. The answer is: heck no!
That's not the point I'm trying to make though. Or the thought exercise I'm talking about. How about: If you knew the potential president had no moral character but you'd definitely get preserving the integrity of our democratic systems and institutions, preserving the constitutional framework that holds us together, and avoiding nuclear war, would you support him/her?
I don't think that question makes sense. Character and morality are the things that will cause a President to put country over party in order to uphold important norms, laws, and institutions.
Try it this way: If you could get the outcomes you wanted, whatever they were, would you support the president getting those outcomes if he had low moral character? He cheated on his wife, was mean to people, was arrogant or abrasive or the other things associated with low moral character.
A few things with this:
Thanks. No religious factor unless that's something important to you.
I don't care much about venereal peccadilloes or interpersonal abrasiveness if it doesn't keep someone from getting the job done. That's not the kind of moral character I had in mind for a politician. Some of the best football coaches may be jerks, and some of the best Presidents may be, too. That's fine. There are reports that Amy Klobuchar isn't always patient and gentle with her staffers. That reduces my support for her very little. (I also don't think Trump's serial sexual harassment, if we believe the reports, are anywhere near the top of the list of reasons to oppose him as a presidential candidate.)
No disagreement there.
I would not.
Because I believe the means is equally as important as the end.
hard to say, haven’t heard him talk much. but whatever he had, he compromised it three years ago.
Sorry, I thought their conservatism was based on religious views like anti abortion and Christianity will be banned from public. I think that was another poster saying that though, my bad.
She has the best defencive rankings. A lot of people think the defence is just about the d but it’s also about the fence. And a fence is really just a wall. So she’s going to make sure you get the best dewall (fence) to stream and you won’t have to pay any FAAB for it. No your neighbor and home-league commish Juan is going to pay for it. What do we want? A defence! Who’s going pay for it? Juan!
For me it's easy. The answer is no. I've said here many times morality comes before all else. Because, in my opinion, that's where this all goes off the rails. You have high moral people in office things get better by default. I would absolutely not vote for a morally bankrupt person even if they lined up perfectly with me politically.
