Stop Excusing Republicans Like Rubio For Supporting Trump Because Of A Stupid, Worthless Pledge

[sinkspur]

http://www.redstate.com/jaycaruso/2016/05/27/stop-excusing-republicans-like-rubio-for-supporting-trump/

Stop Excusing Republicans Like Rubio For Supporting Trump Because Of A Stupid, Worthless Pledge

By: Jay Caruso  |  May 27th, 2016 at 12:30 PM  |  18



So Marco Rubio is the latest Republican to suddenly reverse course on Donald Trump the “con-man” and “fraud” and throw in for the GOP nominee. It’s pretty pathetic to watch especially after Rubio was part of the #NeverTrump crowd until he wasn’t.


The worst part is, watching Rubio supporters and others taking up for him based on that stupid effing pledge everybody keeps referencing, is making me see red. Stop it. Stop trying to make it an act of principle on his part.

“Oh he’s honoring his word and that should be respected!”

Bullcrap.

The pledge isn’t worth a square of used toilet paper. Trump disavowed the pledge back in March. It’s a joke. It means absolutely nothing. And for people to try and pin this on Marco Rubio (or any GOP candidate for that matter) as some kind of badge of honor makes them just as bad Trump supporters who excuse anything he says or does.

Others have said he is doing it in part because he needs to preserve his political future. With whom? Trump supporters? The ones that called him “pool boy?” The ones who floated rumors of him having affairs and being gay? That ones that laughed when Trump called him “Little Marco?”

Have they forgotten how committed Rubio was to #NeverTrump? Look at some of what he said about Trump on Twitter:

 Follow
 Marco Rubio ✔ ‎@marcorubio
We are not going to turn over the conservative movement to a con artist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exjpmgHJJmE …
8:59 AM - 26 Feb 2016
  1,250 1,250 Retweets   2,309 2,309 like

 Follow
 Marco Rubio ✔ ‎@marcorubio
Friends don't let friends vote for con artists. http://rub.io/Q8FgGh
10:31 AM - 26 Feb 2016
Home - Marco Rubio
“I want you to know that I am the beneficiary of the best group of supporters, the hardest working people I have ever been associated with. I’m so grateful to you guys, thank you! Not just here in...
marcorubio.com
  1,837 1,837 Retweets   3,213 3,213 likes

 Follow
 Marco Rubio ✔ ‎@marcorubio
#TwoWordTrump: Con Artist.
12:58 PM - 2 Mar 2016
  3,778 3,778 Retweets   6,684 6,684 likes
 

 Follow
 Marco Rubio ✔ ‎@marcorubio
#NeverTrump. Agree?



Did that mean nothing? If he’s doing this because he’s planning to enter the race for the Senate in Florida (the filing deadline is June 24) then he is selling out his supposed principles for his political desires.

I am good at separating politics from other areas of my life but I have seen friendships destroyed during this election cycle with people who drew a line in the sand with Trump as they stood with Senator Rubio and other candidates.

For them just do an about face and then point to some insignificant “pledge” as a basis for doing so is an insult to the intelligence of the people who backed them to the very end.

It is a move that creates the very cynicism that led to a person like Donald Trump swiping the GOP nomination. And to fans of Ted Cruz, I warn against getting smug about this. The likelihood Ted Cruz does the same thing at some point is pretty high.

There is no excuse for it.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

It’s pretty pathetic to watch especially after Rubio was part of the #NeverTrump crowd until he wasn’t.

Saying that you don't want Trump to be the nominee is not the same as saying you will not support him against Hillary.  If someone said that they would not support Trump against Hillary, and is now reversing course, that's different.  But there are a lot of people -- not just politicians -- who as much as they cannot stand Trump, would still rather see him as President than Hillary.  That doesn't make them hypocrites.  It just means they are balancing the harms differently than you.

[sinkspur]

Rubio latched on to the TEA Party in 2010 as the vehicle to get elected, then grabbed onto immigration reform after the GOP autopsy said the party had to suck up to Hispanics,  and is now callously bending the knee to Trump to further his political career.  Trump, a man that Rubio said would be "dangerous" for America.

He might win in Florida again, but he's topped out.

[Bill Cipher]

Rubio is being a man of his word and has come to see the light.  Time to put up or shut up.  Good to see him putting up.

[geronl]

Rubio is being a man of his word and has come to see the light.  Time to put up or shut up.  Good to see him putting up.

Rubio put party over principles.

Deleted! DO NOT COMPARE MEMBERS TO KILLERS!

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Rubio latched on to the TEA Party in 2010 as the vehicle to get elected, then grabbed onto immigration reform after the GOP autopsy said the party had to suck up to Hispanics,  and is now callously bending the knee to Trump to further his political career.  Trump, a man that Rubio said would be "dangerous" for America.

He might win in Florida again, but he's topped out.

That may all be true, but that doesn't mean he went back on his non-existent word to not support Trump if he won the nomination.  Which was the point of the article.

[Bill Cipher]

Rubio put party over principles.

Standing by the party is a principle. 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I don't think the pledge should obligate anyone.  Generally pledges should be kept.  There are times when pledges cannot be kept because the circumstances and evidence has changed.  This is one of those rare times.

I agree -- I don't think candidates should be bound to that pledge given changed circumstances.  I just have a problem with the article claiming that Rubio is going back on a promise to never support Trump, because it's a promise he didn't make.  The #NeverTrump movement was inherently ambiguous during the primaries because for some, it simply meant that they'd support anyone other than Trump for the nomination.  For others, it meant they wouldn't support Trump even if he was the nominee.

[sinkspur]

Standing by the party is a principle.

You're no longer funny.  Drop the charade and come back to the land of the living.

[Bill Cipher]

You're no longer funny.  Drop the charade and come back to the land of the living.

Put away childish things and come into the light. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

I don't think the pledge should obligate anyone. 

Pledge:   A solemn binding promise to do, give, or refrain from doing something



http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pledge

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Pledge:   A solemn binding promise to do, give, or refrain from doing something



http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pledge

If you really want to take the position that a pledge should be honored regardless of unanticipated, changed circumstances, that's fine.  Can we just concede that there are a million hypotheticals that would cause you to back off that, or should I start posting them?

Here's a start:  A friend tells you that they want to tell you a secret, but you have to promise not to tell anyone else first.  You promise, then they reveal that they have an 11 year old girl handcuffed in their basement.  What does "honor" require at that point?

[Right_in_Virginia]

If you really want to take the position that a pledge should be honored regardless of unanticipated, changed circumstances, that's fine. 

Nothing's changed.  The primary candidates pledged to support the winner of the primaries, the nominee.  Everyone knew who those candidates were when they signed the pledge.  Case closed.  Honor your promise.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Nothing's changed.  The primary candidates pledged to support the winner of the primaries, the nominee.  Everyone knew who those candidates were when they signed the pledge.  Case closed.  Honor your promise.

Sure, everyone knew who those candidates were just as you knew your friend.  That hasn't changed.  What changed is that they engaged in conduct that you could not reasonably have anticipated at the time the promise was made.

So does the little 11 year old remains trapped in your friend's basement because you're going to "honor your promise"?  Or when, if ever, do you think it is okay to break a promise or pledge?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Sure, everyone knew who those candidates were just as you knew your friend.  That hasn't changed.  What changed is that they engaged in conduct that you could not reasonably have anticipated at the time the promise was made.

So does the little 11 year old remains trapped in your friend's basement because you're going to "honor your promise"?  Or when, if ever, do you think it is okay to break a promise or pledge?

You and I are just going to agree to disagree on this.  I won't split hairs to condone breaking a solemn, binding promise. 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

You and I are just going to agree to disagree on this.  I won't split hairs to condone breaking a solemn, binding promise.

There's no hair-splitting involved.  Either you believe that a promise can never be broken under any circumstances, or you believe there are circumstances that can justify it.  Just pick one.  You know why this matters, which is why you don't want to answer it. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

There's no hair-splitting involved.  Either you believe that a promise can never be broken under any circumstances, or you believe there are circumstances that can justify it.  Just pick one.

We disagree on this.  Always will.

Take your hair splitting to someone else.  Thanks.

[Mechanicos]

Conservatives honor keeping a man's word. Liberals have subjective ethics and attack a man for keeping his promise.
#neverTrump again arguing the Democrat's positions.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Conservatives honor keeping a man's word. Liberals have subjective ethics and attack a man for keeping his promise.
#neverTrump again arguing the Democrat's positions.

Okay, how about you?  Do you think a man must keep every promise he makes, regardless of circumstances?

I'd point out that this country was founded by a great many men who broke their oaths to England.  Remember?  They pledged their "lives, fortunes, and 'sacred honor'"

[Mechanicos]

Okay, how about you?  Do you think a man must keep every promise he makes, regardless of circumstances?

I'd point out that this country was founded by a great many men who broke their oaths to England.  Remember?  They pledged their "lives, fortunes, and 'sacred honor'"

I think an honorable man should not attack another man for keeping his word.

[Mesaclone]

There's no hair-splitting involved.  Either you believe that a promise can never be broken under any circumstances, or you believe there are circumstances that can justify it.  Just pick one.  You know why this matters, which is why you don't want to answer it.

Your simply using reductio ad absurdam....and that's a sure sign of someone seeking to excuse a gross lack of integrity. All the candidates knew Trump and were already engaged with him in the race, there were no massive unknown revelations or policy shifts remotely equivalent to the one in your silly scenario. They made the pledge, using your scenario, after the the person told you the full story. And in that case, there is no excuse for a man breaking his word...especially over hurt feelings or previously known policiy positions. Rubio is doing the honorable thing, because he is a man of good conscience.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I think an honorable man should not attack another man for keeping his word.

Generally, that is true.  I'd agree.  But that is not the same thing as saying that a man should always be condemned for breaking his word.  Facts and circumstances matter.

[sinkspur]

Your simply using reductio ad absurdam....and that's a sure sign of someone seeking to excuse a gross lack of integrity. All the candidates knew Trump and were already engaged with him in the race, there were no massive unknown revelations or policy shifts remotely equivalent to the one in your silly scenario. They made the pledge, using your scenario, after the the person told you the full story. And in that case, there is no excuse for a man breaking his word...especially over hurt feelings or previously known policiy positions. Rubio is doing the honorable thing, because he is a man of good conscience.

Trump takes back pledge to support GOP nominee

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/trump-takes-back-pledge-to-support-gop-nominee-221363#ixzz49t39kjyL

[Mechanicos]

Generally, that is true.  I'd agree.  But that is not the same thing as saying that a man should always be condemned for breaking his word.  Facts and circumstances matter.

Situational Morals? Really?

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Your simply using reductio ad absurdam....and that's a sure sign of someone seeking to excuse a gross lack of integrity. All the candidates knew Trump and were already engaged with him in the race....

I disagree with that.  Didn't the loyalty pledge come in the very first debate -- as the very first question?  They had no way of knowing ahead of time how he was going to behave in those debates.

....there were no massive unknown revelations or policy shifts remotely equivalent to the one in your silly scenario. They made the pledge, using your scenario, after the person told you the full story. And in that case, there is no excuse for a man breaking his word...especially over hurt feelings or previously known policy positions.

They could not possibly have known or predicted that Trump was going to toss the 11th Commandment out the window the way he did.  That was unprecedented.  I don't believe for a moment that any of those candidates thought that Trump would have retweeted that photo juxtaposing his wife and Cruz', or made the comments about Carson and pedophilia.  That's not reductio ad absurdam because it actually happened.

I would agree that policy disagreements generally are not enough.  But I think that for those candidates who were attacked on a personal level, I cut them slack on holding to that pledge.  Cruz, in particular.  It is one thing to swallow your own pride, accept an insult, and follow through.  It's something else entirely if somebody comes after your family.  Honestly, I think it would be dishonorable of Cruz to support Trump at this point, and that's not because I'm a fan of Cruz.  To me, the stuff directed at his wife and father went beyond all bounds of decency.

If you disagree, fine.  But I don't think my position is either absurd, or illustrative of someone with a "gross lack of integrity".