I'm going to start this by noting that Trump has come out against the extreme pro-abortion amendment in FL. I'm going to hope that his change on this was due, in part, to the reactions of the pro-life community.
Having said that, I'm going to post a sampling of the responses to Trump's apparent shift away from his previous positions on abortion. I also have to note that Trump was the president who's done the most to advance the pro-fife cause in recent memory.
https://x.com/realjennaellis/status/1829627237164851426?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/megbasham/status/1829326742630085070?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/slowtowrite/status/1829636006414299588?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/mattwalshblog/status/1829500477333024845?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
The True test of someone's intelligence is whether or not they agree with you.
https://x.com/slowtowrite/status/1829279762495524932?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Why not set up an adoption system that allows the adoption of frozen embryos to prevent the accumulation of more frozen embryos?
https://x.com/pastor_gabe/status/1829369605149892893?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/slowtowrite/status/1829584524323242091?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/virgilwalkeroma/status/1829518058521542745?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/mattwalshblog/status/1829518389615997029?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/virgilwalkeroma/status/1829519690047078743?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/heckyessica/status/1829291929877762073?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/slowtowrite/status/1829319860549022082?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/thealannoble/status/1829328674274836566?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/conservmillen/status/1829312354515038555?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/jvanmaren/status/1829289414062936571?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/slowtowrite/status/1829291604517204431?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
https://x.com/slowtowrite/status/1829292219947516098?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
This is obviously just a sample. But these are all young, conservatives with a significant amount of influence in the conservative movement.
13 comments:
I was going to comment on each and every one of these fifteen tweets, but chose instead to begin posting responses directly to them. I started doing that about half-way through, and will be going back to do so with most of the first half. The second Walsh tweet and the tweet immediately following it are two with which I agree, so I'll likely not post there. We'll see if I get all of the 13 remaining. No promises.
Oh...one more thing. This is what must be done when one sees these "influencers" influencing in a less than beneficial way.
Another great argument which rebukes the notion single-issue pro-lifers must still vote for Trump...if they're truly pro-life:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/09/if_you_are_pro_life_or_pro_constitution_you_must_vote_for_trump.html
Sorry...I misspoke. It should read as follows:
Another great argument which rebukes the notion single-issue pro-lifers must still vote for Trump...if they're truly pro-life:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/09/if_you_are_pro_life_or_pro_constitution_you_must_vote_for_trump.html
I'm impressed that you've decided that you know what's best for others.
I guess you've reached the point where any criticism of Trump, no matter how justified or constructive, must be ignored or suppressed.
"I'm impressed that you've decided that you know what's best for others."
Thank you. I'm not impressed it took you so long to recognize that I do.
"I guess you've reached the point where any criticism of Trump, no matter how justified or constructive, must be ignored or suppressed."
I've neither ignored, sought to suppress or even criticized justified or constructive criticism of Trump, unless I'm somehow obliged to regard any criticism of him approved or shared by you as either justified or constructive. Is that the case?
The problem is that I think you really believe that you know what's best for everyone else and that you really think that everyone who disagrees with you for any reason is "stupid".
If you say so. The problem is that you seem to reserve to yourself the right to determine what criticism is "justified" when it comes to Trump. I don't particularly care what you as an individual choose to do or recognize, I do care when you try to impose your subjective, personal, crap on others with no justification for doing so.
The actual problem is that it is clear what the problem is in rejecting Trump over the issue of abortion and you prefer to want to focus on my stating that very real and obvious problem. To prevent a second four years of what the last four years have wrought via the previous rejection of Trump is indeed best for everyone and I would challenge you to argue against that fact. Have you been happy with high inflation, rising prices for damned near everything, higher crime and deaths resulting from it, constant spending on wars which more than likely wouldn't have taken place with a second Trump term and all the other crap we've had to endure as a result? Can you point out any freaking good which can make it all worthwhile?
There's absolutely nothing "subjective" about the reality of what transpired due to rejecting Trump in 2020 (either by legitimate election practices OR cheating) nor the likelihood that life will worsen all the more with Harris in the White House instead of Trump. Go ahead. Try and argue against that with any facts or evidence and THEN tell me about "subjective, personal crap". My justification is the evidence of the last four years, as well as your own insistence that Dems will work to implement abortion for all on a national level. So yeah...let's dump Trump and see how that won't happen.
I'm not arguing that 4 more years of Trump are unlikely to be "better" than 4 years of Harris. How much better and how better is defined are still a huge question, but I agree that even slowing the rate of decline is better. You are assuming that Trump can unilaterally fix all of the problems you enumerate, or that Trump will have enough support in congress to do so. To treat something that "likely wouldn't have happened" as if it's anything but a surmise seems less than helpful.
The problem you seem to have is your reflexive, knee jerk, assumption that there is no middle ground between electing Harris (with a congressional majority) and "dump Trump". That anything short of rabid, full throated, 100% agreement that Trump is right about everything, is "TDS".
But if that's where you want to live, don't let me stop you. If you want to see Trump's election as completely divorced from his actions, don't let me stop you.
You're playing games, here, Craig. I listed a number of issues by which anyone can easily determine how "better" is defined.
I "assuming" nothing. I don't "assume" state of the nation will improve with Trump in the White House and decline under Harris. It's a freakin' given. And while I also don't "assume" Trump can unilaterally fix "all" of the problems I listed. But he spent four years with even members of his own party failing to fully support his efforts and still he got so much done. You're right, however. I should not have said "likely wouldn't have happened", but I'm trying not to be the slavish Trumper as you seem to feel the need to regard me simply because I'm speaking on evidence-based probability. You clearly seem to want to ignore all of that and play "anything can happen". Well, duh. But it's not being honest. What's most likely given the last three presidencies?
Given the bad excuses people make for rejecting Trump, and the defending of the rejection of Trump as all Trump's fault, I take nothing for granted. It's no more intelligent than one insisting on voting for Harris because she's a woman. I expect better from all eligible voters. I have a right to. This is my country, and my progeny has to endure the consequences of such vapid considerations. THAT is where I live. I'm just not sure where the hell YOU live.
I'm not playing games. I'm pointing out that if Trump runs up a deficit that is $1,000,000 less than Biden/Harris he's done "better", but he hasn't really accomplished anything significant. Better is relative, and making rosy predictions about how much better seems foolish.
Unfortunately, it's not a "given". IF we lose control of both houses of congress, Trump's 2nd will be uneventful. What's "most likely" is that Trump should be somewhat "better" on some issues than Harris/Walz. But is a 5% "improvement" really something to get as excited about as you are? Noting the simple fact that a veto proof GOP majority in the legislature is not guaranteed, and that literally "anything" can happen, is just noting reality. How quickly you forget that during Trump's last term "anything" DID happen and we had freaking COVID to deal with. That Trump's response to COVID, and his reliance of Fauci wasn't particularly good, just makes the point more clearly.
Trump claims he'll end the war in Ukraine. OK, let's say that he stops military aid to Ukraine and Russia takes over. Well, that'd "end" the war, but is that really a success? (Don't misunderstand me, I think that the unaccountable billions we've wasted in Ukraine are a disgrace and should stop, but is a Putin victory really the end of the war that is the best option?)
The simple reality is that we don't know what Trump will do in his second term. We don't know, despite his recent statement, that he'll really hire the best possible people or follow their counsel if he does. We don't know what the legislature will look like. Acknowledging those facts is just simple pragmatism.
I get it, you think that virtually any reason for not voting for Trump is a "bad excuse" from your partisan/subjective viewpoint. Yet Trump's words and actions DO have consequences, and he SHOULD be held accountable for the consequences of his words and actions. This "blame everyone but Trump" if he loses is simply stupid. You can "expect better" all you want, but that doesn't mean that anyone who chooses otherwise is "stupid". If you're so worried about "vapid" considerations like softening his position on abortion, and what he and his campaign says, why not hold Trump to a higher standard, rather than blaming everyone else? Yes, the country does have to deal with the consequences of it's actions. Yet for some reason you don't seem to think that the consequences of Trump's words and actions should lead to his being held to account for them.
Strangely, because of my faith in YHWH and in the system our founders established, (I don't have faith in our system in the same way I have faith in YHWH) I remain convinced that we as a country can weather bad presidents, weather the unexpected, and eventually rebound. Where I "live" is with my primary citizenship in The Kingdom of YHWH, and in complete knowledge and trust that He is sovereign. I "live" in a place where I don't default to calling people with whom I mostly agree "stupid". I "live" in an imperfect world, deeply damaged by sin where the only True hope is Jesus. I "live" in the hope found in Jesus redemptive work on the cross, and in the knowledge that YHWH is sovereign. That there is a "time for" everything and every nation, and that the "time for" the US might be winding down.
I don't "live" where I must place all of my faith, hope, and trust in Trump as the only possible person who can "save" the US.
FYI, if "absolutists are stupid and hell" and you are an "absolutist", doesn't that lump you in with the rest of the absolutists?
Post a Comment