Donald Trump has exposed 'evangelical' voters

[Danmark]

I was raised as an evangelical. I WAS an evangelical. It is clear that Trump is not an authentic evangelical; he knows next to nothing about the Bible and has lived and continues to live and promote a lifestyle that is antithetical to evangelical Christianity.
Yet he is doing very well, better than any other Republican candidate, among evangelicals.

My conclusion is that evangelicals care much more about secular politics than about true Christian values. Has Trump support among 'evangelicals' exposed the fact the 'evangelical voting block' is not based on Christian values, but on secular political values?

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 19 by Danmark]

Of course I don't read everything Trump said. Where did he say all that?

I think there is some onus on us to accept that anyone that is anti-Trump might be willing to use exaggeration.

Right now you are siding with a lot of vested interests on the left and the right that are keen to not discuss policy but to write ad hominems. I'm still trying to understand the policy reasons to be anti-Trump.

Fair enough.
I go mainly by what I've heard Trump himself say about deporting all Muslims, including U.S. citizens solely because of their religion; his statement that he will 'build a wall' and make Mexico pay for it. His personal attacks I have witnessed include disparaging people because they are disabled, or unattractive. He comes across to me as a classic narcissist. See page 9 of the DSM V:
http://www.psi.uba.ar/academica/carrera ... al/dsm.pdf

He's referred to U.S. citizens he'd like to shoot. He recently referred to a person at one of his rallies as "wanting to punch him in the face." He called Cruz a "pussy," using the cowardly dodge of quoting one of his supporters.

These are just some of the things I've heard myself. You can verify all of them and more online. I DO like the idea that he's self funding and claims he's not beholding to big business. Tho' this is not actually true.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/cont ... 23864&type

Bernie Sanders is the only candidate I know is not beholding to special interests and he has proved his character and values throughout his life. It's legitimate to disagree with his economics, but after a lifetime in politics, he's only accumulated about $500,000, about the same net worth as an average person of his age. Contrast that with Hillary's 22 million in speaking fees.

I combine that with his help the poor and middle class policies and record and ask "Why wouldn't a Christian vote for a guy like that?" He seems to both live and preach the life of a true 1st Century Christian. I've known missionaries like that, but no politicians.

[Danmark]

“Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed[a] thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.�
~ Luke 18:10-14

"The new Pope is a humble man, very much like me."
~ Donald Trump

[Elijah John]

Donald Trump would have been banned from this site a long time ago, but fortunately for him, the debate moderators in the media do not seem to care about personal attacks.

Trump would be an embarrasment to this nation if elected.

And to think he gets Evangelical support makes me think less of Evangelicals, (with some exceptions) not more of Trump.

[Danmark]

Donald Trump would have been banned from this site a long time ago, but fortunately for him, the debate moderators in the media do not seem to care about personal attacks.

Trump would be an embarrasment to this nation if elected.

And to think he gets Evangelical support makes me think less of Evangelicals, (with some exceptions) not more of Trump.

Exactly! Except... he is already an embarrassment to our country.

MIT professor and intellectual Noam Chomsky attributes Donald Trump’s success in the Republican presidential primary to “fear� and a “breakdown of society.�
....
Chomsky compared the political environment that’s allowed Trump to flourish to the 1930s, when the U.S. was in the Great Depression. “Objectively, poverty and suffering were far greater,� Chomsky said. “But even among poor working people and the unemployed, there was a sense of hope that is lacking now, in large part because of the growth of a militant labor movement and also the existence of political organizations outside the mainstream.�

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop- ... z41J0KEAPD

I put much of this to the fear mongering and demagoguery in the right wing media.

[Danmark]

It is depressing that this form of trumpian demagoguery has found such traction in the U.S. This is particularly alarming because the conditions here are nowhere near those of the 30's here and the 20's and 30's in Germany that gave rise to the tragic right wing movement epitomized in Hitler.

I think part of the problem is that America has yet to come to terms with the fact we are in an increasingly world economy where America no longer offers a huge advantage for laborers simply because they are Americans and because of a failure to understand the economies of European democracies sprinkled with a greater portion of socialism provide more upward mobility than America. The myth of American superiority is being challenged by facts.

[WinePusher]

You're way off here with your claim of [shouting] "FACTS."

No, actually you're way off here with all the misinformed claims you've been making about the recession and the recovery. You apparently have NOTHING to back up any of your claims.

You're also way off topic.

You're the one who brought up the economic recovery under Obama and further went on to assert that Obama should be praised for it, and that "GOP policies" were responsible for the great recession.

So please, don't accuse me of being off topic after your demonstrably false claims get demolished.

The topic is the demagoguery of Trump [which I admit is being rivaled by Cruz and Rubio] and how he has taken in gullible 'evangelicals' with his phony claims of being a 'Christian.' But Trump is in a class by himself. The parallels between him and and Adolf Hitler are frightening.

I don't disagree with any of this, and note that I also created a thread where I expressed concerns about Trump's Hitler like tendencies.

He's referred to U.S. citizens he'd like to shoot.

Yup, this is the quote that made me draw the Hitler comparison.

He recently referred to a person at one of his rallies as "wanting to punch him in the face."

So what? Ever been to a bar before? This is the way normal people talk, which is part of Trump's appeal. He doesn't act like some fake politicians who repeats lines given to him by pollsters. He talks like a normal person.

He called Cruz a "pussy," using the cowardly dodge of quoting one of his supporters.

Again, so what? In real life, people get called "pussies" all the time, either jokingly or seriously. Try going out to a bar one night and tell me how many curse words you hear.

It's legitimate to call out Trump on his insane policy proposals and his ACTUAL demeaning comments concerning women, Mexicans and Muslims, along with his dangerous positions on torture. But to get all offended just cause Trump said a few bad is just another example of the extreme political correctness and hypersensitivity that brought Trump to power.

[WinePusher]

I think part of the problem is that America has yet to come to terms with the fact we are in an increasingly world economy where America no longer offers a huge advantage for laborers simply because they are Americans and because of a failure to understand the economies of European democracies sprinkled with a greater portion of socialism provide more upward mobility than America. The myth of American superiority is being challenged by facts.

But as we have seen in this thread, NONE of your opinions on economic matters are backed up by facts.

You have no facts to back up your false claim concerning the causes of the great recession. You have no facts to back up your false claim that Obama should be praised for his recovery. And now, you have no facts to back up your false claim that European democracies offer greater mobility than America.

First, do you know what type of mobility you're talking about? Is it intragenerational mobility or intergenerational mobility? In the actual academic literature, researchers make a distinction between the two.

Second, if you actually look at the data and the literature, America has a high level of intergenerational mobility. I see you like to cite Robert Reich and I understand Reich says otherwise, but you should consider the fact that Harvard economists Raj Chetty and Lawrence Katz have actually done peer reviewed research proving Reich to be WRONG. It's kind of like how creationists will cite unqualified intellectuals to support their false claims, while at the same time ignoring all the actual peer reviewed research being done.

[Danmark]

I think part of the problem is that America has yet to come to terms with the fact we are in an increasingly world economy where America no longer offers a huge advantage for laborers simply because they are Americans and because of a failure to understand the economies of European democracies sprinkled with a greater portion of socialism provide more upward mobility than America. The myth of American superiority is being challenged by facts.

But as we have seen in this thread, NONE of your opinions on economic matters are backed up by facts.

On the contrary.
The study confirms previous findings that America’s social mobility is low compared with many European countries. (In Denmark, a poor child has twice as much chance of making it to the top quintile as in America.)
http://www.economist.com/news/united-st ... y-measured

As the study points out, Americans remain socially mobile, even tho' not as mobile as in Denmark. Yet Americans think things have gotten much worse.

This result has caused a huge stir, not least because it runs counter to public perceptions. A recent Gallup poll found that only 52% of Americans think there is plenty of opportunity for the average Joe to get ahead, down from 81% in 1998.
http://www.economist.com/news/united-st ... y-measured

[WinePusher]

On the contrary.
The study confirms previous findings that America’s social mobility is low compared with many European countries. (In Denmark, a poor child has twice as much chance of making it to the top quintile as in America.)
http://www.economist.com/news/united-st ... y-measured

I'd really like an answer to this question Danmark. Are you acquainted with ANY of the professional, academic literature on economic mobility or is everything you've been saying here based off of Robert Reich and popular, laymen articles? Here are some things you should know:

Comparative, cross country analysis of inter-generational economic mobility is regarded as useless by the profession because the models fail to correct for extraneous factors such as population size. Countries with higher populations will have more diverse demographics, while countries with smaller populations along with lower levels of multicultural infusion will have more of an exact demographic.

Notice that the value of all elasticities are heavily impacted by the total number of individuals in the market. The inter-generational income elasticity is not different. The more people that live in a country, the more erratic the inter-generational elasticity is going to be.

Thus, the size of the population is inversely correlated with aggregate inter-generational mobility, meaning that countries with smaller populations are expected to have above average mobility rates. This isn't due to any "socialist" policy, but rather the size of the population which is a largely exogenous (uncontrollable) factor.

So, have you ever taken the time to ask yourself why Denmark has an abnormally high level of mobility compared with not only the United States, but also other EUROPEAN countries like France and the UK? If you think that Denmark's success is due to "socialism" can you provide a coherent explanation of how socialism contributes to economic mobility and a means to test it?

[Danmark]

On the contrary.
The study confirms previous findings that America’s social mobility is low compared with many European countries. (In Denmark, a poor child has twice as much chance of making it to the top quintile as in America.)
http://www.economist.com/news/united-st ... y-measured

I'd really like an answer to this question Danmark. Are you acquainted with ANY of the professional, academic literature on economic mobility ...

Sorry WP, not going to play your teacher to student game along with its abusive nuances. Do you consider the Economist a left leaning rag and of no value?
"social mobility" is not synonymous with "economic mobility." Economists disagree. We have wide ranges from Reich to Milton Friedman to Keynes.

I am not an economist and am not going to travel down a path you want to set out, under your terms. I'm satisfied the article in the Economist, which you've ignored, sets out exactly what I claimed, that there is greater social mobility in Europe, and that Americans tend to misunderstand the fact they actually have NOT suffered a significant decrease in social mobility The demagogues like Trump have whipped them into a frenzy by their scaremongering.