The Morality of Voting for Trump

[don-o]

The Morality of Voting for Trump

#NeverTrumpers fails to persuade as Dems focus on helping their candidate win

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/morality-voting-trump/

Knowing what we know about Hillary Clinton and her plans for America, and the importance of the Supreme Court, we conservatives have a moral obligation to both oppose her and support Donald Trump.

This is the sentiment I expressed on Sean Hannity’s television show Thursday that has sent some #NeverTrump conservatives into a tizzy. Ben Shapiro is the latest in a long line of mostly Acela-corridor Republicans who spend much of their days “see-I-told-you-so’ing” about Trump.
snip

3. Your vote is a moral instrument, not just an instrument of policy.
Yes, it is. Voting for Trump means that when your country had been in decline for almost two decades, and you had the chance to set the country on a different course, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you finally had the chance to end the corrupt and decadent Clinton machine, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to write in the history books that the country had rejected the last eight years of President Obama, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to save the First Amendment, and the Second Amendment, and to restore the proper checks and balances that are at risk from another Clinton administration, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to stand up to pro-China billionaires who make money off of a global system that is rigged in favor of a Chinese dictatorship, and rigged against the American worker, you took it.

Voting for Trump means saying yes to a 15 percent top corporate tax rate, which will boost American wages and jobs.

snip

On the other hand, not voting for Trump — and hoping that he loses — also represents a moral choice:

It means being worried every time you hear a story suggesting that Hillary still faces real hurdles before Election Day and could still lose this.

It means aligning yourself, at least temporarily, with left-wing nightmares Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and all the other radicals who want Trump to lose.

exc

[roamer_1]

The Morality of Voting for Trump

Wow. So let me get this straight:

The MORAL thing is to cast off Conservative principle, which in the case of social conservatism, defines morality, in order to vote for the immoral Republican candidate, because 'our' immoral candidate is better than that terribly immoral Hillary Clinton.

REALLY?

The rest is all turd polish - promising things out of 'our' immoral candidate  - Promises without a single_thing to qualify and secure them.
Of course they are unqualified and insecure... The candidate is without character, and untrustworthy... So what sells this pap?

[musiclady]

I see people working very hard to make what is blatantly immoral into something moral.

The mental gymnastics required to make this argument are breath taking.

Simone Biles get out of the way..........  the Trump crusaders are flipping and twisting even more than you can.....

Gold medals all around!!   

[roamer_1]

I see people working very hard to make what is blatantly immoral into something moral.
The mental gymnastics required to make this argument are breath taking.

Butt, butt, butt... I thought Trump has the Evangelicals 'all sewn up' ?!?!?!?!?!
Why then all this argument toward 'morality'?

[musiclady]

Butt, butt, butt... I thought Trump has the Evangelicals 'all sewn up' ?!?!?!?!?!
Why then all this argument toward 'morality'?

Only "evangelicals" who don't value morality and truth......... or who are "Christians" because it will make them prosper, and they get coffee and donuts during "worship."

[WhatWouldReaganDo]

This gets the point across: The Evangelical Case for Voting for David Duke

[roamer_1]

Only "evangelicals" who don't value morality and truth......... or who are "Christians" because it will make them prosper, and they get coffee and donuts during "worship."

Yep... I suspect that has been the case all the way along. I still have yet to find more than three people in my entire IRL network that are going to vote for Trump... Still within the MOE of *none*.

[roamer_1]

This gets the point across: The Evangelical Case for Voting for David Duke

LOL! Sarcastic, I think... Hard to tell these days... 

[geronl]

Nothing moral about empowering an immoral man.

[geronl]

Butt, butt, butt... I thought Trump has the Evangelicals 'all sewn up' ?!?!?!?!?!
Why then all this argument toward 'morality'?

Trump got curb stomped among church-going Christians in the primaries, it was the non-churched Christians who leaned to Trump.

[musiclady]

Trump got curb stomped among church-going Christians in the primaries, it was the non-churched Christians who leaned to Trump.

I think I can figure out why they're not going to church if they approved of Trump's lifestyle.....

[Oceander]

The moral claim on your vote is the claim on your conscience.  There is no moral obligation to vote for Donald Trump.  That is a specious, blasphemous argument.

[musiclady]

This article is a display of human effort to quiet a guilty conscience.  Be careful or that conscience, being seared, may stop working for you altogether.

There's a lot of that going on these days.

People who know better desperately trying to justify what cannot be justified.

[thackney]

Nothing moral about empowering an immoral man.

+1

[RoosGirl]

@don-o

Are you trying to convince us?  Trying to convince yourself?  Or just really enjoy the discussion of the topic?

[musiclady]

Yes.  A whole lot.  It wouldn't be so irksome if they didn't feel driven to force the rest of us to give our approval.  I refuse.

I think that's what bugs me most, too.

You can almost see the wheels turning in their minds (and hearts) as they try to make excuses for what they deep down know is wrong.

But when they push their mental gymnastics on us, and try to make us feel guilty for doing what they know THEY should be doing, and use it either to badger us, belittle us, or shame us into making their mistake, it gets wearisome.

[musiclady]

@don-o

Are you trying to convince us?  Trying to convince yourself?  Or just really enjoy the discussion of the topic?

Some of each??  ^-^

[jmyrlefuller]

Laura Ingraham is setting up a sort of strawman and false dilemma with this whole article. First off, she rewinds all the way back to the primary and accuses anyone who opposes Trump of being supporters of the Bush/Graham wing of the party.

No.

I want a conservatism like Ted Cruz's, that stands in the face of opposition and fights to the bitter end for important causes. I want one like Scott Walker's, who pushes through reforms and holds firm to them. I want a conservatism that pays more than lip service to limiting the size and scope of government and protecting the freedoms of its citizens, and not just those who invent rights for their own political expedience. Cruz's name was notably absent from the entire article. That's what's been missing from our leadership, and neither left-wing Democratic machine candidate Hillary Clinton nor billionaire playboy demagogue Donald Trump have it.

The only reason that Ingraham (who, while now bashing Bush, actually attended strategy meetings in the White House when he was President) is stumping for Trump is because of the R, and the false assumption that there are only the R and the D, and the R is always better than the D, no matter how horrendous. I mean, seriously. If you believe Donald Trump is going to make any effort toward conservatism, you are not paying attention. To us, the election is already lost, and the best—the BEST—we can hope for is a miraculous third-party surge that somehow puts Gary Johnson in and somehow he decides to listen to us; two long-shot premises at best.

[don-o]

@don-o

Are you trying to convince us?  Trying to convince yourself?  Or just really enjoy the discussion of the topic?

I prefer to discuss ideas, not motives.

[RoosGirl]

I prefer to discuss ideas, not motives.

Do not the motives lead to the ideas?

[kartographer]

The Morality of Voting for Trump

#NeverTrumpers fails to persuade as Dems focus on helping their candidate win

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/morality-voting-trump/

Knowing what we know about Hillary Clinton and her plans for America, and the importance of the Supreme Court, we conservatives have a moral obligation to both oppose her and support Donald Trump.

This is the sentiment I expressed on Sean Hannity’s television show Thursday that has sent some #NeverTrump conservatives into a tizzy. Ben Shapiro is the latest in a long line of mostly Acela-corridor Republicans who spend much of their days “see-I-told-you-so’ing” about Trump.
snip

3. Your vote is a moral instrument, not just an instrument of policy.
Yes, it is. Voting for Trump means that when your country had been in decline for almost two decades, and you had the chance to set the country on a different course, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you finally had the chance to end the corrupt and decadent Clinton machine, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to write in the history books that the country had rejected the last eight years of President Obama, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to save the First Amendment, and the Second Amendment, and to restore the proper checks and balances that are at risk from another Clinton administration, you took it.

Voting for Trump means that when you had the chance to stand up to pro-China billionaires who make money off of a global system that is rigged in favor of a Chinese dictatorship, and rigged against the American worker, you took it.

Voting for Trump means saying yes to a 15 percent top corporate tax rate, which will boost American wages and jobs.

snip

On the other hand, not voting for Trump — and hoping that he loses — also represents a moral choice:

It means being worried every time you hear a story suggesting that Hillary still faces real hurdles before Election Day and could still lose this.

It means aligning yourself, at least temporarily, with left-wing nightmares Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and all the other radicals who want Trump to lose.

exc

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes And clever in their own sight!

Woe to those who are heroes in drinking wine And valiant men in mixing strong drink,

Who justify the wicked for a bribe, And take away the rights of the ones who are in the right!

Isaiah 5:21 - 24

[Suppressed]

Doing something immoral (voting for Trump) to stop something immoral (Hillary) is not moral.

Voting for Trump means that when you finally had the chance to end the corrupt and decadent Clinton machine, you took it.

"Assassinating Hillary means that when you finally had the chance to end the corrupt and decadent Clinton machine, you took it." could be substituted, but that doesn't make it moral.

[don-o]

Doing something immoral (voting for Trump) to stop something immoral (Hillary) is not moral.

"Assassinating Hillary means that when you finally had the chance to end the corrupt and decadent Clinton machine, you took it." could be substituted, but that doesn't make it moral.

Doublepluswrong

[kartographer]

We were told by Trump that he didn't need our votes and he said it in no uncertain terms, so why all this 'pimping' after your master already declared he doesn't need nor want our votes? How can you back Trump when you don't even believe what he himself declared to be so?

[don-o]

We were told by Trump that he didn't need our votes and he said it in no uncertain terms, so why all this 'pimping' after your master already declared he doesn't need nor want our votes? How can you back Trump when you don't even believe what he himself declared to be so?

If your comment is addressed to me, I have one for you.

Can you discuss the issues without insulting people?