The (Current year) General Political/Salma Hayek discussion Thread Part V

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,417
    113
    Gtown-ish
    So Trump changed his ideology when? At the ripe old age of 60? He got a copy of 'the road to serfdom' for his 58th birthday and the rest is history. Or is it more likely he saw an opening as a Republican and his politics have followed what he needs to say to get elected.
    Some of this is obviously true. Trump isn’t particularly religious, but he played the part (poorly) during the campaign to pander especially to evangelicals. I wouldn’t say he’s not ideological though. Maybe one way to tell is what he seems to be able to talk about coherently. It was obvious he doesn’t know **** about Christianity. When he did speak about it, it was very simplistic. Vague. Some subjects be can talk about with more detail. Like he’s actually spent some time understanding it on a more nuanced level. He seems quite passionate about nationalism. And he can articulate his reasoning with the detail of a person who is passionate about it. I don’t doubt his America First platform is genuinely felt and idealistically based.

    Some things, pretty much the things he’s inconsistent on, I think he’s just pandering. It’s not really anything other politicians don’t do. But it seems worse when this president does it. Maybe it’s because he’s so lousy at hiding it, people are just amazed that anyone buys it. Seriously, how does any evangelical Christian believe Trump is one of them. Obama so fooled people into thinking he’s moderate, he convinced a number of INGO conservatives to vote for him. But by and large, people don’t go around accusing Obama of pandering. I guess because he’s so smooth at doing it.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    31,591
    113
    North Central
    Some of this is obviously true. Trump isn’t particularly religious, but he played the part (poorly) during the campaign to pander especially to evangelicals. I wouldn’t say he’s not ideological though. Maybe one way to tell is what he seems to be able to talk about coherently. It was obvious he doesn’t know **** about Christianity. When he did speak about it, it was very simplistic. Vague. Some subjects be can talk about with more detail. Like he’s actually spent some time understanding it on a more nuanced level. He seems quite passionate about nationalism. And he can articulate his reasoning with the detail of a person who is passionate about it. I don’t doubt his America First platform is genuinely felt and idealistically based.

    Some things, pretty much the things he’s inconsistent on, I think he’s just pandering. It’s not really anything other politicians don’t do. But it seems worse when this president does it. Maybe it’s because he’s so lousy at hiding it, people are just amazed that anyone buys it. Seriously, how does any evangelical Christian believe Trump is one of them. Obama so fooled people into thinking he’s moderate, he convinced a number of INGO conservatives to vote for him. But by and large, people don’t go around accusing Obama of pandering. I guess because he’s so smooth at doing it.

    I know a number of what you might call evangelicals, not a single one of them is deceived about Trump. They are much like many here, staunch supporters, because there is no other conservative choices and the other side is anti-religious.
     

    printcraft

    INGO Clown
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Feb 14, 2008
    39,790
    113
    Uranus
    None of which have to do with the post you quoted, including your "quote". The post was about relative voluntary sacrifice. You may wish to read the scripture (The poor widow's offering) mentioned above as an idea of what the post was about IMO.

    For the genesis of the discussion go back and look at post 661...
     

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    26,205
    149
    I know a number of what you might call evangelicals, not a single one of them is deceived about Trump. They are much like many here, staunch supporters, because there is no other conservative choices and the other side is anti-religious.
    ^This^

    It all boils down to two things for evangelicals. Who in their estimation is more apt at this point to support religious freedoms and the rights of the unborn?
     
    Last edited:

    Timjoebillybob

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Feb 27, 2009
    9,567
    149
    For the genesis of the discussion go back and look at post 661...

    Actually you would have to go back to at least 653 for the genesis of this part of the discussion. And no need to go back and look at post 661. I replied to it. See my reply (again) below.

    I'll have to disagree, the statement was that he wouldn't sacrifice any of his wealth, if by promising to donate his salary to charity which is what he is doing, he can claim that as a tax deduction for starters. Also if by promising and doing so helped him get elected, and him being President increases his wealth by more than his salary he's donating then he wouldn't be sacrificing any at all.

    Similar to how stores run sales with "loss leaders", they advertise certain items at or below their cost. By doing so they get people into the store who then purchase other items which more than make up for the loss on the loss leaders. They are not giving up their profits by selling some things at or below cost, they are increasing their profits by selling more of profit making goods. Do you think his golf club membership fee would have doubled in a year if he hadn't won or run? IIRC the occupancy rate of his hotel in DC has also increased quite a bit as well. Those are just two examples across his many businesses.

    And once again, nothing in the post you quoted had anything to do with your reply, talk about moving goalposts... Well actually more of a strawman.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    I know a number of what you might call evangelicals, not a single one of them is deceived about Trump. They are much like many here, staunch supporters, because there is no other conservative choices and the other side is anti-religious.

    They apparently are. "Evangelicals," have for as long as I can remember, talked about choosing candidates based on morality. Trump comes along, and that morality seems to have become flexible. Trump, is a philanderer, liar, disrespectful, arrogant, bully. His knowledge of Biblical thought seem pedestrian, if not poor. Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy, and Pride. Which trait, can't be used to describe trump?
    And I'd challenge your claim that the other side is anti-religious. That's not true at all. There are plenty of of STRONG Christians, as well as Jews, Muslims, and a a variety of other religions that identify with Trumperism, and still hold essentially the same moral traits as those on the other side.
     

    DoggyDaddy

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    73   0   1
    Aug 18, 2011
    113,115
    149
    Southside Indy
    They apparently are. "Evangelicals," have for as long as I can remember, talked about choosing candidates based on morality. Trump comes along, and that morality seems to have become flexible. Trump, is a philanderer, liar, disrespectful, arrogant, bully. His knowledge of Biblical thought seem pedestrian, if not poor. Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy, and Pride. Which trait, can't be used to describe trump?
    And I'd challenge your claim that the other side is anti-religious. That's not true at all. There are plenty of of STRONG Christians, as well as Jews, Muslims, and a a variety of other religions that identify with Trumperism, and still hold essentially the same moral traits as those on the other side.

    I don't know that Envy would apply. Envious of whom? Certainly not Sloth (laziness). I don't know enough about his eating habits to know if Gluttony applies, but he doesn't appear to be obese, so I would guess not.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,417
    113
    Gtown-ish
    I know a number of what you might call evangelicals, not a single one of them is deceived about Trump. They are much like many here, staunch supporters, because there is no other conservative choices and the other side is anti-religious.
    That was the point. Trump is so lousy at pandering one has to be extremely gullible to believe it’s sincere. Contrast that with Obama who convinced millions that he was a moderate.

    Incidentally, I do know evangelicals who, at least back then, believed that Trump was sincere about being a Christian. I don’t really think anyone believes that at this point.
     

    Timjoebillybob

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Feb 27, 2009
    9,567
    149
    I don't know that Envy would apply. Envious of whom? Certainly not Sloth (laziness). I don't know enough about his eating habits to know if Gluttony applies, but he doesn't appear to be obese, so I would guess not.

    What other reason than envy would account for his insecurity regarding crowd size at his vs Obama's inauguration? And gluttony applies to more than just being obese, it's over indulgence in food/drink/wealth items specifically those used as status symbols. I can definitely see the last applying.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,417
    113
    Gtown-ish
    ^This^

    It all boils down to two things for evangelicals. Who in their estimation is more apt at this point to support religious freedoms and the rights of the unborn?
    This is another one of those areas where I’m pretty sure Trump is pandering. I don’t really think Trump is anti-abortion himself. But running as a Republican he has to be anti-abortion to have any chance.

    Of course that means that it’s still an easy choice for anti-abortion voters. If that’s your primary motivation, you can vote for the sure thing (the one who promises to extend abortion even up until birth) or you can vote for the panderer who knows that his support base depends on him toeing the anti-abortion line.

    It’s similar to guns. I don’t think Trump is all that 2A friendly. But it’s less likely that Trump would sign any broadly meaningful gun legislation, notwithstanding his unconstitutional action to redefine “machine gun”. But with Democrats, some vowing to confiscate guns, while others chastise them, not for wanting to confiscate them, but for tipping their hand, it’s a sure thing. If Dems have both houses and the presidency, there will be another AWB.
     

    mmpsteve

    Real CZ's have a long barrel!!
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Nov 14, 2016
    6,118
    113
    ..... formerly near the Wild Turkey
    There's a big difference between personal sin and pure evil. Cheating on your wife versus knowingly pushing a whole nation towards utter destitution of socialism. One of these things is not like the other. California current situation is one good example. A state that once was golden, being pushed into total chaos. That's pure evil.

    .
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,417
    113
    Gtown-ish
    There's a big difference between personal sin and pure evil. Cheating on your wife versus knowingly pushing a whole nation towards utter destitution of socialism. One of these things is not like the other. California current situation is one good example. A state that once was golden, being pushed into total chaos. That's pure evil.

    .
    This sounds like a justification of your choices. Knowingly? They think they’re the moral ones. There’s really no such thing as collective “sins”. There are individuals participating with other evildoers, exercising their nature. It’s only collective in that we share the same nature, and have the same proclivities of self.
     

    Alpo

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Sep 23, 2014
    13,877
    113
    Indy Metro Area
    I don't know that Envy would apply. Envious of whom? Certainly not Sloth (laziness). I don't know enough about his eating habits to know if Gluttony applies, but he doesn't appear to be obese, so I would guess not.

    He's obese, dude. He isn't 6'-3" and he tips the scale close to 250.
     
    Last edited:

    mmpsteve

    Real CZ's have a long barrel!!
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Nov 14, 2016
    6,118
    113
    ..... formerly near the Wild Turkey
    This sounds like a justification of your choices. Knowingly? They think they’re the moral ones. There’s really no such thing as collective “sins”. There are individuals participating with other evildoers, exercising their nature. It’s only collective in that we share the same nature, and have the same proclivities of self.

    You over think everything J. Is the quote above not the definition of collective sin? As to justification of choices, it's a prerequisite for rational thought.

    .
     

    Jludo

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Feb 14, 2013
    4,164
    48
    Indianapolis
    He's obese, dude. He isn't 6'-3" and he tips the scale close to 250.

    Ha I think that's the gap between Americans perception of obesity and the actual medical definition. There's some wiggle room in the definition for nfl linebackers, not for 70 year olds who never exercise.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    The BMI thing is bogus.

    Well, a ton of Americans are obese, sure. But that "objective" measurement puts some people into the obese category that really aren't.

    But, it allows insurance companies to increase premiums/remove discounts.
     

    Jludo

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Feb 14, 2013
    4,164
    48
    Indianapolis
    The BMI thing is bogus.

    Well, a ton of Americans are obese, sure. But that "objective" measurement puts some people into the obese category that really aren't.

    But, it allows insurance companies to increase premiums/remove discounts.

    Ya its bogus if you're just doing mass/ height and the person is jacked. But it works if the person is just fat.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom