False dichotomy. We can be in favor of personal holiness and also human rights.
And yet, I don't choose Hillary. I think she's a liar, and corrupt, and her policies are pretty far from what I believe in.
Evan McMullin
- Thread starter Joe Bagadonuts
- Start date
False dichotomy. We can be in favor of personal holiness and also human rights.
And yet, I don't choose Hillary. I think she's a liar, and corrupt, and her policies are pretty far from what I believe in.
Facts are not important here. Just spin.
Red
Well-Known Member
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-19/utah-is-the-political-conscience-of-the-nation
"Just the reality of widespread disgust at Trump should make us realize that somewhere in this land, there are people who actually act on what they believe. For Trump to lose Utah would be a tiny sliver of moral redemption for the rest of us."
"Just the reality of widespread disgust at Trump should make us realize that somewhere in this land, there are people who actually act on what they believe. For Trump to lose Utah would be a tiny sliver of moral redemption for the rest of us."
Nested in the scriptural Mormonism of the Book of Mormon is a set of principles that basically asserts that personal holiness is the path to liberty, that the blessings of God will follow.
My problem with contemporary "Mormonism", if the LDS Church can be described by that at all, is the consistent evasion of that truth by policy and implementation of a substituted value in its place...... obedience to authority supplanting a critical thought path.
The result is pharisaical "righteousness" mistaken for real personal holiness.
I get it that most LDS people find Trump's manners or brash unpremeditated incoherent thoughts all inconsistent with the manners and culture of today's Mormonism. However, except for some elements of personal charisma, he is more like a Joseph Smith and other early Mormon leaders who said a lot of stupid stuff that nobody wants to acknowledge today.
Tonight Trump got booed at the big New York dinner where all the movers and shakers attend to have some fun with the Presidential candidates, for speaking the truth you cite once again.
I think this election is going to destabilize America long-term because the old guard establishment is pushing forward with an agenda for change that a critical mass of Americans are now seeing, and rejecting. Trump would have been a better choice for them. He would have worked with them while calming the unhappy village folk. Progressivism generally has favored gradual change, but the rising tide of informed objection has pushed it's proponents off their game, and Hillary represents a level of insult that Americans will not tolerate.
The LDS managers are standing wrong on this one, generally, by their tight association with the Progressive movement in stark hypocrisy with their stated non political pretensions. I'm just calling them out on it.
Whatever his failings, I have observed some things in his decisions during this campaign that I believe marks him as a sincere man who wants to change things for the better. Of course Smoot-Halley tariffs would be a mistake, and he needs to see the error of his thinking in that department. I think Trump is an actual American proponent who wants to see American Exceptionalism brought back. His economic package is like JFK's and Reagans. Everyone knows JFK had poor morals and fantastic women, but it was his American economic policies that made him popular, and successful.
I am just expressing my outrage at pious folk who would in a binary election choice throw Trump out because his morals might not be great, and let an alternative whose morals are truly despicable get elected.
OK, so I did my research on Evan McMullin, finally.
I retract the "nutjob" assessment.
However, my opinion remains that his policies constitute basically statist, progressive agenda views that the RNC "RINO" elitists of the Bush/McCain/Romney sort would pursue. This is a failure of the Republican Party to actually back their winning candidate. McMullin is not an "independent", just a front man for Romney, and insider attack on Trump from insider Republicans who don't want their own name on the line.
The problem with Trump, besides his easily-worked goofs and personal issues, is that he is, apparently, not going to run with the same old program. While he did check in with the Pres. of the CFR before running, and although he "knows the folks" who consider themselves the relevant power brokers, he is going to do things different.
We've never had a candidate who would stand up and speak the truth about corruption, lies, and insider backing for the anointed system candidates like Obama, Clinton, Romney, and McCain. I don't know what he could really do, but I think the personal attacks and smears ya'll have focused on are campaign diversions from his policy positions, which are substantial. Maybe not perfect, but a fresh breeze wafting over foggy bottom, and a little daylight coming in.
I retract the "nutjob" assessment.
However, my opinion remains that his policies constitute basically statist, progressive agenda views that the RNC "RINO" elitists of the Bush/McCain/Romney sort would pursue. This is a failure of the Republican Party to actually back their winning candidate. McMullin is not an "independent", just a front man for Romney, and insider attack on Trump from insider Republicans who don't want their own name on the line.
The problem with Trump, besides his easily-worked goofs and personal issues, is that he is, apparently, not going to run with the same old program. While he did check in with the Pres. of the CFR before running, and although he "knows the folks" who consider themselves the relevant power brokers, he is going to do things different.
We've never had a candidate who would stand up and speak the truth about corruption, lies, and insider backing for the anointed system candidates like Obama, Clinton, Romney, and McCain. I don't know what he could really do, but I think the personal attacks and smears ya'll have focused on are campaign diversions from his policy positions, which are substantial. Maybe not perfect, but a fresh breeze wafting over foggy bottom, and a little daylight coming in.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Sure, let's talk about Trump's policy proposals because that will be less stupid
And let's talk about how he would change the culture of, "corruption, lies, and insider backing", babe.
He has a magic wand. It's really small so that he can hide it in his tiny hands, but it's there and it has yuge powers that far exceed the simple powers of the POTUS.
And we're so dumb we're about to elect a person that doesn't even have a freakin' penis. Ugh!
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Yeah, It's so refreshing to hear a US presidential candidate speak the "truth" about Mexicans.
Maneesh
Well-Known Member
Well no one really knows the truth about mexicans bro. No one.
So here's my philosophical treatment of the "false dichotomy". By rules of logic, of course anyone can favor their notions of personal "holiness" or "political correctness", or "science" as guides to the general claim of being "right with the world" somehow, and include notions of human rights in some kind of fondly embraced values.
Jesus had one way of figuring all that, Stalin and other statists have all had theirs. Churches are in the business of selling prefab schema of various kinds for doing all that.
In my view, supporting a statist like McMullin is actually inconsistent with supporting human rights. Of course, I think Hillary is worse by times ten or something, and it's questionable whether Trump will actually do better. As Mark Levin would say, a populist with big ideas claiming vast management prerogatives is inconsistent with US Constitutional notions of limited governmental powers.
My insults above to the LDS "managers" goes to the same point. An authoritarian "Church" exacts its glory from imposing power on its followers invoking claims of exclusive channels of divine guidance. In my world view, a God who places practically infinite worth on human beings must respect human choice..... and provide a personal channel of guidance.... which is in line with the whole idea of innate human rights.
While the modern LDS Church has some roots in the past religious fashions of top-down management like prophets and priests and written scriptural texts, I howl at the modern LDS managers, as I term them excluding the nice personal figureheads who read their teleprompters at Conference nowadays, simply because they have the rule that "authorites" must submit their intended remarks to the review committee and let them revise, and then read what they are handed.
To me, this is "common core" leadership not directed by "God" in any meaningful way, but by managers seeking to achieve public acceptance. That a modern Church should have any kind of central authority is not uncommon, and probably is the fact of every organized religion, means that religions generally do not respect human rights much better than governmental authorities with all their dreams of making the world better somehow.
Romney, Reid, Hatch, Lee, Chaffetz, Bishop, and the air force representative from the Ogden area, are all authoritarian and favor managed human affairs more than human liberty or human rights. It goes with their religion and their sense of LDS community. It is of course a lot to ask Colton to endure my insults to such systems of values. I was sorta expecting my blurbs above to get trashed clear outta JazzFanz community.
Trump has won support from a fair cross section of the United States community by taking exception to the way things have been handled, and with ideas of how to change them. He is it seems his own kind of man. I don't worry about him becoming a Hitler because he is all about free enterprise and prosperity that will come from giving people more choice in their lives, more latitude in their work, and no preaching about personal affairs.
McMullan, like Romney and other Bush camp followers, and the Clinton camp followers, are basically saying we're doing fine and nothing needs to change.
Just put me down as one who has had enough of that old path.
If Hillary "wins", I think this country will shake itself loose of that old path once and for all. The need for change will become overwhelmingly obvious.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
It looks more and more like his critics are off their game. I don't actually think anyone in JF besides me will vote for Trump, and that's fine. Knock yourselves out being too good or too smart to do that. Hoot at the people who will vote for Trump if you like. Stand in line waiting for a doctor when you need one because doctors are quitting, and telling their kids don't ever be a doctor. Fork out your massive deductibles and exorbitant insurance costs as well. Enjoy the next four years just being irrelevant to our elected officials while people take their frustrations to the streets and riots become everyday commonplaces. You're too smart to be bothered with any of all that, and the hundreds of other public decisions that will follow from ideological imperatives instead of common sense.
Speak for yourself.
The silver lining of a McMullin candidacy in Utah (not voting for him, BTW), to me, is not the rejection of Trump by the state but, rather, a possible resounding rejection of Hillary Clinton, being the only state where she finishes third. That would indeed be something to be excited about. I realize that's probably not what you intend as you're extolling the virtues of a state influenced by religious and social issues that you'd otherwise look down on, but that's how I see it.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Clinton's numbers won't be overwhelmingly different in Utah if McMullin didn't exist. It's the GOP's candidate who McMullin will be taking votes from. Bill Clinton was third in '92 in Utah and no one cares about that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Utah,_1992
Jonah
Well-Known Member
For the first time in decades Utah’s electoral votes are realistically up for grabs. Trump, Clinton, and McMullin are all closely bunched together in recent polls. Nate Silver of 538 still has Trump as a big favorite (70 percent win probability), but that’s mainly because some of the older polls have not yet been phased out of his calculations.
Right now Trump and McMullin are co-favorites with Clinton an improbable long shot. She has to hope Trump and McMullin voters remain evenly split and enough Democrats turn out to give her a narrow win. If either Trump or McMullin gains momentum and breaks free from the other, it’s an easy win over Clinton.
The puzzlement is why Trump is still doing as well as he is with Utah Republicans. It’s not like he has a chance to win the election and Republicans have to reluctantly give him their vote to help keep Clinton out the the White House. The vote in Utah is about who gets our six electoral votes and not an actual choice for the next president. Everyone should feel free to vote their conscience. Conservatives can vote McMullin, liberals can vote Clinton, and the confused and paranoid can still vote Trump.
What McMullin offers Utah Republicans is an actual conservative they can feel good about voting for without all the nativist, misogynist and racist baggage Trump brings. A vote for McMullin is a vote for a sane direction forward and a Republican Party that can compete in future presidential elections. Trump is an albatross that needs a symbolic repudiation. Utah is in a unique position, if what’s widely regarded as the most conservative state in the union soundly rejects Trump, it will offer hope to conservatives all across the country and signal a first step away from the dark dystopian politics Trump is trying to impose on the Republican Party.
Right now Trump and McMullin are co-favorites with Clinton an improbable long shot. She has to hope Trump and McMullin voters remain evenly split and enough Democrats turn out to give her a narrow win. If either Trump or McMullin gains momentum and breaks free from the other, it’s an easy win over Clinton.
The puzzlement is why Trump is still doing as well as he is with Utah Republicans. It’s not like he has a chance to win the election and Republicans have to reluctantly give him their vote to help keep Clinton out the the White House. The vote in Utah is about who gets our six electoral votes and not an actual choice for the next president. Everyone should feel free to vote their conscience. Conservatives can vote McMullin, liberals can vote Clinton, and the confused and paranoid can still vote Trump.
What McMullin offers Utah Republicans is an actual conservative they can feel good about voting for without all the nativist, misogynist and racist baggage Trump brings. A vote for McMullin is a vote for a sane direction forward and a Republican Party that can compete in future presidential elections. Trump is an albatross that needs a symbolic repudiation. Utah is in a unique position, if what’s widely regarded as the most conservative state in the union soundly rejects Trump, it will offer hope to conservatives all across the country and signal a first step away from the dark dystopian politics Trump is trying to impose on the Republican Party.