Why I Didn’t Vote for Joe Biden . . . or Donald Trump
Image
My absentee ballot went into the mail last week. It looked a lot like 2016’s ballot: conservative selections for various state and local positions, write-ins for President and Vice President of the United States.
I didn’t vote for Biden and Harris, because I believe they would be bad for the country. I didn’t vote for Trump and Pence, because I believe they’re also bad for the country. It’s not clear to me which would be worse, all things considered, but it doesn’t matter. Both major party tickets add up to “Absolutely no way do you get my vote”—not “maybe,” not “it’s a close call,” not “this is a tough decision”—just no. Emphatically, no.
I wrote in a couple of individuals who have demonstrated leadership ability, above-average wisdom, key conservative principles, and a sense of responsibility for their public discourse. They’ve also given me reason to believe that—if they were President and Vice President—they would see themselves as the leaders of the entire nation, not just those who already adore them.
They would attempt to persuade detractors rather than merely rouse their faithful and try to compel everyone else through policy.
So why didn’t I back one of the “electable” candidates? Several reasons.
1. I didn’t have to.
Much of the rhetoric on voting ethics assumes that no alternative exists to backing Trump-Pence or backing Biden-Harris. Actual ink on actual paper on the ballot I submitted proves that assumption is false.
Some object that failure to support Option A is defacto support of Option B. But a bit of reflection reveals that we don’t hold anything else in life to that standard, and rightfully so. Elections are not the exception.
I’m referring to the ethics of forced dilemmas—when someone wrongfully presents us with two bad options and insists we’re responsible for the outcome of whichever we choose. The truth is that the ones who created the dilemma are responsible, and no one else.
I had no hand in nominating Donald Trump. People with very different principles from me did that, and the national social cost of leaving voters with no suitable candidate to vote for is on their heads.
There is a third option. I took it. I don’t regret it.
2. It was not a “wasted” vote.
I realize that some are so focused on voting as a transaction (and on the immediate outcome of that transaction) that they can’t even begin to consider other factors. The fact remains, though, that as human beings, our principles, values and intentions play a huge role in the moral weight of our actions. We’re not machines, and our choices are more than mere math.
So a vote is an expression of beliefs and desires, regardless of how the electoral mathematics turns out. And for Christians, beliefs and desires matter—forever. It’s literally impossible to waste a vote, because votes are counted twice: once here below, as humans count, and once more above using a fundamentally different standard—just like everything else we do.
That said, for those who only see tangible, practical outcomes as real (an odd point of view for Christians!), I have arguments as well. Read on.
3. We won’t get a better result if we keep doing the same thing.
If you read the Federalist Papers and the views of many of the founding leaders of the nation, as well as the Constitution itself, it’s evident that there was a design they had in mind, and that design includes—ultimately depends on—the citizens choosing from among their own best and brightest to serve as the executive of the nation.
How did we get so far from that?
The answer is complex, but voting for candidates who fail the “basic leaderly character” test sure hasn’t helped!
I’m mainly talking to the “hold your nose and vote for Trump because he’s not Hillary and not Biden” crowd. Call me an idealist, but you’re going to develop a permanently sore nose if you keep making that compromise.
Moving past chronic rhinitis, consider what we know about political parties. They hate losing. When they lose, they reflect at least a little on why, and sometimes they learn and behave differently in the future. What the GOP needs is a lesson in the school of hard knocks. There’s no guarantee they’ll get the message—or that enough of them will get it to produce a better candidate in 2024, but if large numbers of GOP voters refuse to back Trump there’s at least a chance.
Rubber-stamping their abysmal candidates will never teach them to do better.
4. Government power doesn’t change minds.
Peter Drucker is credited with saying, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.” He wasn’t wrong. While who controls the reins of power is a huge factor in what life is like for us and our families, and a huge factor in shaping the future of the nation, it’s only huge until you compare it to the biggest factor: the reins of persuasion. What matters most is what millions of individual humans actually believe and value and do.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how persuasive is Donald Trump as a voice for conservative ways of thinking?
At a time when virtually everyone recognizes that the nation is “polarized” and not listening to reason, we elected a president who is the quintessential polarizer, who listens to no-one he doesn’t already agree with, and who mischaracterizes opponents’ viewpoints—as well as hard, verifiable facts—almost as often as he exhales.
He is the anti-persuader.
He speaks to the dazzled-and-delusional crowd who view him through near messianic lenses. He speaks to the hold-your-nose and back him because he’s not Hillary and not Biden crowd. To the rest of the nation, the people who are most essential in this culture war, his communications have less than zero persuasive value. He flings verbiage at the center and the left like a middle-schooler throws cow pies and rotten eggs at an enemy’s house.
So what Trump offers to public discourse isn’t merely a zero in the people-won-over column. He pushes undecideds further from the things we believe in and galvanizes the committed left toward increased opposition to much of what we hold dear. (The old adage was never more apt: “With friends like these, who needs …”)
People of the center or left who were once for something (increasing funding for police training and technology, for example) often decide they’re against it as soon as Trump begins vocalizing support.
We may have already lost the culture war. 2016 may have sealed that outcome. Regardless, I’m against the current course of anti-persuasion and voted accordingly.
5. Character is upstream of politics.
The office of President of the United States is one of such high stakes that candidates must be filtered by some character essentials before we even begin to consider their political views and agenda.
- What if war breaks out (from outside the nation or within it)?
- What if a far deadlier pandemic than COVID-19 sweeps the world?
- What if a series of other natural disasters of unusual scale strikes the nation?
- What if mob violence and riots occur in five or ten times the number of cities we saw in 2020?
In these situations, sober-minded, competent, big-picture, adult leadership matters far more than Democrat or Republican. Political philosophy matters in these situations, but philosophy can’t compensate for basic character and competence.
6. There must be trust.
I can’t trust Donald Trump. He’s not unique in that regard. I can’t find it in my heart to trust anyone who openly admires dictators, who has at any time in his adult life publicly bragged about groping women, who fires employees by Twitter and publicly shames people who have loyally stuck their necks out for him over and over again, who has made disrespect of any and all who differ from him the one enduring principle of his public life.
I also can’t trust people who display a fondness for conspiracy theories and for encouraging others to do same. I’m talking about narratives that are clearly contrary to verifiable facts. If you’re out of touch with reality, I might be your friend; I might be your relative; I might like you personally; I might love you as a fellow Christian or a part of my family. But I can’t trust you.
It’s not that I won’t or don’t want to. I can’t.
“Trust” is always a scoped term: Trust for what? Trust to do what? In this case, demagogs, bullies, narcissists, and fantasy-worlders can’t be trusted to make decisions for the good of the organizations they lead. Whether it’s U.S. President or president of the town glee club, they don’t get my vote.
Aaron Blumer 2016 Bio
Aaron Blumer is a Michigan native and graduate of Bob Jones University and Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). He and his family live in small-town western Wisconsin, not far from where he pastored for thirteen years. In his full time job, he is content manager for a law-enforcement digital library service. (Views expressed are the author's own and not his employer's, church's, etc.)
Agree. I, too, voted third party for the same reasons you explain.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Also agree. For me it is mostly point three. I understand why others don’t see it this way and I support their voting their conscience just as I have done. To me though, the Republican Party seems to nominate increasingly ridiculous (and liberal) candidates. I certainly understand the “yeah but the other guy” argument… but I no longer find it convincing. I’ve voted third party for the last few presidential elections and I’m content with it.
Like Aaron, I voted for neither Trump nor Biden. I’m tired of all the craziness. I chose instead to vote for Jo Jorgensen, the Libertarian presidential candidate.
The hardest part about writing that was keeping it down to a somewhat manageable size. There are so many reasons.
But I do want to tack on a couple more very briefly:
7. You can’t really separate policy agenda from basic leaderly character.
Can’t do it at any level of leadership and can’t do it at the Presidential level. I’m sure I’ll be characterized as saying a leader has to be exemplary in every way or that I’m expecting the President to be an exemplary Christian, or—and this has already happened before: of expecting the President to be Jesus.
These are straw men.
I use the phrase “basic leaderly character” intentionally. There are a handful of essentials that need to be there for any leadership role, and in many areas of life we don’t even try to argue that a leader’s agenda negates how he treats people, how he relates to factual information, or how well he actually leads, etc. We usually get that those go together in a single package. When elections roll around we switch gears and want to apply completely different rules to the leader of the most powerful nation on the planet. Doesn’t make sense to me.
34 You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. (Mt 12:34)
A man who says and tweets the kind of stuff Trump does is not a trustworthy human being. There’s chapter and verse.
8. Being anti-abortion doesn’t compensate for all the other stuff.
There are better ways to say it, I’m sure, but that’s the gist.
- Abortion needs to be opposed on many levels and the Presidential level is not the most important of them.
- A candidate’s anti-abortion stance doesn’t make him more trustworthy or less damaging in other areas that are just as important. Fetal lives matter, but so do adult lives, the lives of the elderly, the lives of the sick, the lives of young men sent to war, the lives of police officers, the list goes on.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Aaron, you said, “[I can’t admire someone] who has at any time in his adult life publicly bragged about groping women.” David?
Another day. And another TDS article at Sharper Iron. After Trump wins re-election (and I do very strongly believe that he will—my political evaluations are sometimes in error, but never in doubt) will you continue this trend, or will we finally get a break from the constant drumbeat? We get it. You don’t like Trump.
One serious question. You said you don’t know whether Biden/Harris would be worse for the country than Trump/Pence. Is that based on the assumption that Biden wouldn’t be able to actually get done the things he’s campaigning on doing? Or do you think what Trump has done—done, NOT said—in the past four years is more negative for the country than the opposite policies would have been? Or is there something else that leads you to the point of indecision?
Thank you! Points #7 and #8 are among the most important, I think. To them I would add the following:
- Christian testimony is more important than political outcomes.
It is undeniable that Christians had a great deal to do with the rise of Trump by their vocal support - even during the Republican primary. I believed this has destroyed the credibility of Christians and the resulting backlash from non-believers will erode what’s left of Christian moral influence. “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you” (Romans 2:24). I would rather face persecution than sacrifice the testimony of Christ for temporary political power.
- Truth matters.
Not only have many Christians publicly dismissed or explained away the legion of lies that Trump spreads daily, I have seen Christians share or otherwise promote blatant misinformation to promote Trump’s agenda with verifiably false accusations, intentionally misleading quotes ripped out of context, or just not telling the whole story. Do we not think the truth matters? What does it say about the agenda we are promoting if we feel we must use untruth or neglect fact checking to support it? If we can’t stand on truth we have nothing left to stand on.
Here’s where I’m at:
I think a godly, discerning Christian could vote for Donald Trump. But they should do so with their eyes open, knowing exactly what he is and what he is not.
I also think a godly, discerning Christian could vote third party/skip the top of the ticket. But they should also do so with their eyes open, knowing that their vote will not achieve objective results.
I don’t think a godly, discerning Chrsitian could vote for Joe Biden. Period.
Josh Stilwell, associate pastor, Alathea Baptist Church, Des Moines, Iowa.
….is that one candidate worships in Samaria instead of Jerusalem, the other worships Moloch. The sequence of sins of Israel clearly indicates that the latter is worse than the former. One doesn’t need to like the sins of Jeroboam to appreciate the fact that he’s not Ahab, no?
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
If I had to base it on the spirituality of the person, I wouldn’t have been able to vote for a candidate in my lifetime.
Hard to downplay the role of the president when it comes to abortion on a day when a third Supreme Court nominee of a first term President is confirmed and sworn in to serve. Most believe the Supreme Court is the key to overturning the legality of abortion, and clearly the president has an important role in selections. How different would the Supreme Court look if another candidate was elected in 2016? How different will it look in four years as a result of this election? Certainly abortion is not the only issue our country faces, and voting for life is not the only way to stand for life, but the role of the president as pertaining to abortion is definitely not worth downplaying.
Adam Breiner
[Bert Perry]….is that one candidate worships in Samaria instead of Jerusalem, the other worships Moloch. The sequence of sins of Israel clearly indicates that the latter is worse than the former. One doesn’t need to like the sins of Jeroboam to appreciate the fact that he’s not Ahab, no?
We do not have to vote for either Samaria or Moloch.
So, you’re offering “the way I see it…” and I’m offering 7 reasons (5 in the post, 2 in the comments). I find that interesting.
None of my reasons even come close to “He isn’t godly enough” or “He isn’t Christian enough” or “He isn’t spiritual enough” or whatever. Basic leaderly character isn’t the unique possession of any particular religion. It’s common grace ….and everything from Confucianism to the “enlightened self interest” of many atheists supports it—but mostly common sense.
As for Abortion & Court nominees, now there’s an argument.
But I have a counter. It’s not all that “hard” for a couple of reasons.
- Most of the reduction in abortions has happened and will continue to happen (if it does) at the level of “people changing their minds about it.”
- The second greatest reduction has been state level legislation… but it’s a big step down from number 1.
- Even if the Court overturns Roe v. Wade, it’s going to throw the matter back on hearts and minds and state laws.
- A new “conservative” (remember how often we’ve seen that label used on Justices who turned out to have different views than expected) judge only makes a difference if a majority in the Senate + Democratic President doesn’t pack the court. (A majority that, if it happens, is quite likely attributable to the President we’ve had the last four years.)
The prospect of court packing only intensifying the “culture eats policy” argument I’ve been making. If enough people want something, they’re going to find a way.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
While some argue over whether Trump is “nice” enough, read what the left is thinking about Amy Barrett’s nomination. Scroll down to the twitter captures… and these are the clean ones.
https://currently.att.yahoo.com/lifestyle/amy-coney-barrett-confirmed-s…
not in the Supreme Court, the Senate, the House, or the Presidency.
That said, I am not going to let the perfect be the harm of the good. Call that pragmatism if you want. Go ahead.
Leftists have a real agenda. Liberals have a real agenda. Maybe you shield yourself from them. I get a front-row seat every day on campus. It pains me that the majority view on campus now is that “focusing on the written word” is racist and white supremacist. That expecting a person to be accountable for their individual actions is white supremacy. That showing up on time and often is white supremacy. That reading and learning is white supremacy. But it is.
Wake up.
I listen to all the reasons for not voting for Trump, and they seem like grasping after straws, feeble attempts to rationalize a poor decision. I’m sorry, but not liking Trump is a sorry reason to not vote for him. It’s way too emotional and subjective, in spite of all the justifications to present it as an objective, principled choice. It betrays a weak understanding of how politics work in America.
There are two possible outcomes in this election—Trump or Biden. One of these two will win. If Trump loses, Biden wins. If Biden wins, the leftest, anti-God agenda will sweep in with a vengeance. The Supreme Court will almost certainly be expanded to neutralize Trump’s appointments. Religious liberty will be under attack with renewed energy. Higher taxes and thousands of regulations will be imposed. Socialistic solutions will be adopted which will make problems worse, not better. And everyone who refused to vote for Trump will bear some responsibility for these outcomes. That’s just the way it works, like it or not.
G. N. Barkman
To those who won’t vote for Trump or Biden: I understand your position & reasons. The problem you encounter is being consistent. Did you vote for Reagan, a divorced man whose second wife was involved in occultic activities while in the White House? Or Mitt Romney, a Mormon whose theology about Jesus Christ is blasphemy? I could point out other examples of Republican candidates and Presidents with deep flaws. Your decision may help you sleep better at night, but it won’t change the practical realities of politics. If you don’t like the candidates for political office, then run for office yourself. The solution, of course, is the gospel and that is our primary purpose. But since we live in a world characterized by Romans 1:16ff and 2 Timothy 3:1ff, and since in America we still vote for our political representatives, I choose to vote in a way that will actually make a political difference. I sleep just fine at night.
Wally Morris
Huntington, IN
Absent some miracle that no poll is even hinting at, it’s going to be either Biden or Trump. We need to understand that sometimes, our choice is indeed binary. We can pretend we’re not participating, but we are.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
The ability of Christian institutions to turn down employment based on LBGTQ lifestyle. (case currently making its way to the Supreme Court
Church tax exemption
Increase in globalism that is pro-state and anti-God.
Rise of Communist China as a threat. If you were for Reagan and the fight against the Soviet Union, how can you be ambivalent to the fight against the same thing in different form?
For those of you who feel compelled to stick with Trump, enjoy your stay on the plantation
[WallyMorris]To those who won’t vote for Trump or Biden: I understand your position & reasons. The problem you encounter is being consistent. Did you vote for Reagan, a divorced man whose second wife was involved in occultic activities while in the White House? Or Mitt Romney, a Mormon whose theology about Jesus Christ is blasphemy? I could point out other examples of Republican candidates and Presidents with deep flaws. Your decision may help you sleep better at night, but it won’t change the practical realities of politics. If you don’t like the candidates for political office, then run for office yourself. The solution, of course, is the gospel and that is our primary purpose. But since we live in a world characterized by Romans 1:16ff and 2 Timothy 3:1ff, and since in America we still vote for our political representatives, I choose to vote in a way that will actually make a political difference. I sleep just fine at night.
No I didn’t vote for Romney actually. Also it’s not just Trump’s character. For many of us, it’s his policies as well.
[G. N. Barkman]I listen to all the reasons for not voting for Trump, and they seem like grasping after straws, feeble attempts to rationalize a poor decision. I’m sorry, but not liking Trump is a sorry reason to not vote for him. It’s way too emotional and subjective, in spite of all the justifications to present it as an objective, principled choice. It betrays a weak understanding of how politics work in America.
There are two possible outcomes in this election—Trump or Biden. One of these two will win. If Trump loses, Biden wins. If Biden wins, the leftest, anti-God agenda will sweep in with a vengeance. The Supreme Court will almost certainly be expanded to neutralize Trump’s appointments. Religious liberty will be under attack with renewed energy. Higher taxes and thousands of regulations will be imposed. Socialistic solutions will be adopted which will make problems worse, not better. And everyone who refused to vote for Trump will bear some responsibility for these outcomes. That’s just the way it works, like it or not.
It isn’t “not liking Trump.” It’s disagreeing with his policies as well as not believing him to be a good leader. No emotion (I guess there is always some) involved here. I can go right down the line and explain where his policies are atrocious. Just as I can with Biden. Republicans complain about the leftward shift of America but they turn around and vote for more liberal presidents all the time. “Yeah but the other guy…” If anyone is being emotional it’s those that believe voting for Trump is the only way to stop our country from becoming socialist.
I can make the same argument that you are making pretty easily:
If you vote for Trump you will bear some of the responsibility for:
An out of control debt that our children will have to bear, The death of Yemeni people who are being slaughtered with the support of our country, American soldiers dying, Increased national polarization, jobs lost from tariffs which are the most backward and (Liberal!) foolish economic policy in existence, etc.
See scare tactics and guilt trips work both ways. People have a right to vote their conscience and for me that’s voting libertarian. I wish more Christians would get out of the ever plummeting neo-con political bubble and vote based on principle but they don’t. That’s ok. They don’t have to. Just as those that chose to vote for something other than “This candidate is slightly less ridiculous than the other guy” have a right to as well. It’s not binary.
[josh p]If you vote for Trump you will bear some of the responsibility for:
An out of control debt that our children will have to bear, The death of Yemeni people who are being slaughtered with the support of our country, American soldiers dying, Increased national polarization, jobs lost from tariffs which are the most backward and (Liberal!) foolish economic policy in existence, etc.
Government spending is completely determined by Congress. A president presents a budget proposal, but the only control he has over spending is to veto complete bills. Trump has proposed spending too much money for sure, but blame for the out of control debt lies at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Helping equip Saudi Arabia to defend itself against Iran-backed Yemeni terrorist attacks does not put blood on American hands. The blame for those deaths in Yemen lies in Tehran, not with Trump.
American soldiers are dying at a fraction of the rate they were under Bush 43 and Obama. Just 63 US soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan in the last four years compared to 210 in Obama’s last four years (and more than 1700 in his two terms). Trump is trying to withdraw from the endless wars, not continue them.
Trump is not the cause of polarization but a symptom of it. The fact that a large chunk of the country lost their ever loving minds along with the election of 2016 is on them, not Trump.
Job loss from tariffs? From COVID maybe, but prior to that employment was at record levels, with manufacturing jobs having made a huge comeback. Obama said there was no “magic wand” to get those jobs back, but it turned out that insisting on fair trade deals (that’s what tariffs are for) worked pretty well.
Josh, you’re going to have to do better than that to justify your raging case of TDS. Your list of complaints do not conform to reality.
….is the system we have now, the income tax. I don’t know why apparently both parties agree that it’s just to tax factory workers to pay for defense spending that keeps the sea lanes open for their competition, but that is the system we have today. Trump retaliating for unjust treatment is, in my mind, a big step forward. Even better would be a 10% revenue tariff and a fossil fuels tax (including a tax on imports to measure the impact of their fossil fuel use) combined with a massive income tax cut that would eliminate even more workers from the rolls of those liable to the income tax, IMO. There are a lot of reasons the Founders did NOT allow direct taxes, but did allow tariffs.
And if we want to talk about the consequences of out of control spending, consider the numbers that Nancy Pelosi was demanding for COVID funding, and consider the response of Biden to COVID, more or less “let’s give Democrats the wish list they’ve had for a long time,” combined with “we’ll tax the rich to make up the difference, never mind that experiences in Maryland and New Jersey indicate clearly that tax rate hikes on the rich can actually reduce revenues.”
I also tend to libertarianism, but I’m realistic enough to know that it is in effect something of a binary equation as long as we have “winner takes all” in elections. Libertarians would have a bigger say here if we had a parliamentary system; we don’t. Hence I tend to ally with those who are closest to my positions.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
[Robert Byers]Maybe you misunderstood my post but I was highlighting that the same “scare tactics” and “guilt trips” that are used to promote new-con politics can be used by conservatives and libertarians as well. Democrats do it all the time and republicans (rightly) criticize it. I was being intentionally fantastic just as the neo-cons are being. I do believe there is a problem with all of the things I cited though.
Government spending is completely determined by Congress. A president presents a budget proposal, but the only control he has over spending is to veto complete bills. Trump has proposed spending too much money for sure, but blame for the out of control debt lies at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Ok would you say Trump is helping or hurting the debt problem?
Helping equip Saudi Arabia to defend itself against Iran-backed Yemeni terrorist attacks does not put blood on American hands. The blame for those deaths in Yemen lies in Tehran, not with Trump.
They invaded Yemen. The Saudi’s are the aggressors. They have killed thousands of civilians. Please read up on this.
American soldiers are dying at a fraction of the rate they were under Bush 43 and Obama. Just 63 US soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan in the last four years compared to 210 in Obama’s last four years (and more than 1700 in his two terms). Trump is trying to withdraw from the endless wars, not continue them.
I agree that Trump is better than both Bush and Obama here. I commend him for it. I wish he would do much better still.
Trump is not the cause of polarization but a symptom of it. The fact that a large chunk of the country lost their ever loving minds along with the election of 2016 is on them, not Trump.
I didn’t say that he was although I think he contributes with his asinine texts and general posture.
Job loss from tariffs? From COVID maybe, but prior to that employment was at record levels, with manufacturing jobs having made a huge comeback. Obama said there was no “magic wand” to get those jobs back, but it turned out that insisting on fair trade deals (that’s what tariffs are for) worked pretty well.
Again, please read up on Tarrifs and “fair trade”. This is one thing that conservatives used to be in unanimous agreement over but they have now accepted the democrat (Bernie Sanders was the other outspoken tarrif supporter in ‘16) position. There are many factors that determine the unemployment rate.
Josh, you’re going to have to do better than that to justify your raging case of TDS. Your list of complaints do not conform to reality.
Use the “TDS” label all you want. It’s childish and shows that you aren’t trying to hear the other side.
I don’t know how anyone can read my 5 reasons and see them as
not liking Trump
Well, it’s true that I don’t like him, but that’s hardly the point. I don’t like cancer, but that doesn’t have much to do with why I’m against it. I don’t like snake venom or auto accidents or nightmares either. But I could list many reasons for not liking them, and it would be a bit obtuse to dismiss them all as, “I don’t see how not liking snake venom is a good reason to avoid it.”
But, honestly, I wasn’t planning to convince anyone by posting the article. By now, almost nobody is wrestling with what to think of Mr. Trump or of whether he deserves a vote.
I do like to be understood if I can, though.
So, I suggest this exercise that may help with that:
- Look at each of the reasons I provided for not voting for Trump
- One at at time, ask, if this were true would it count as a reason to vote for Trump or as a reason not to?
- Is it probably true? What factors make it more or less likely to be true?
I refer everyone to a writer who, minus a bit of profanity, has said it all better than I possibly could. But I guess all he’s really saying is that he doesn’t like Trump :-D
There’s more to citizenship than voting, and partisanship is not patriotism. If casting a vote is all you have in you, then, fine — by all means, do what you believe to be best. But consider the possibility that the duty of the patriot in these times is not to choose one pack of jackals because it looks a little less hungry and vicious than the other pack of jackals but to oppose these jackals — these demagogues, profiteers, and hangers-on, these greasy little salesmen trying to sell you something that is already yours — and to insist that the free and self-governing men and women of this struggling republic deserve better than what is on offer. We can have better than what we have had because we can be better than what we have been.
What is called for right now is not more idolatry of the presidency or a rousing chorus of “Happy Days Are Here Again!” but prayer and penance, intelligence and application.
And so much more where that came from.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Joshp has helpfully turned this discussion in the proper direction. It’s not about Trump being a deplorable jerk. (I fully agree.) It’s about policies, not personalities. What policies will guide our nation over the next four years? If you are truly convinced that the policies of Biden and the progressive left are better for our country, you should vote for Biden. If you believe the policies of the past four years have been better for our nation, you should vote for Trump.
Does Trump the man deserve our support? No, not in my opinion. Do the policies Trump espouses deserve our support? Yes, in my opinion. He not only declares his support for solid policies (as have so many others), but has proven he will actually enact them. His determination to do what he says is an amazing game changer in Washington. His ability to enact much of his agenda against such incredible opposition is virtually unprecedented. That’s what I support, not the flawed man but the proven actions. That’s why I think Christians should pull the lever for Trump.
G. N. Barkman
[T Howard]For those of you who feel compelled to stick with Trump, enjoy your stay on the plantation
Interestingly, one of the big reasons I pulled the lever for Trump in 2016 (and almost certainly this year) is because I felt that there was at least a hint of a chance that in the case of serious misconduct, many Republicans in the Senate would vote to remove him from office. So I feel less locked in with Trump than I did with Bush, and definitely far less locked in than I would with any Democrat. Let’s face facts; known corruption on the part of Hilliary Clinton and Joe Biden at the beginning of their candidacies (Benghazi, server, easy jobs for Hunter, etc..) didn’t torpedo them in the primaries.
Moreover, Trump has brought in something very important for the Republican Party; an awareness of the importance of the interests of working people. There has always been the argument that conservative policies are in fact better for the working people, and I’ve largely agreed, but Trump ups the ante by pointing out the disadvantages suffered by workers (blue and white collar) due to relatively unrestrained immigration (illegal and legal) and imports. The increase in the portion of immigrants in our country has gone down a LOT since Trump was inaugurated, hundreds of miles of fence have been built or improved, and selective tariffs have led to far better trade agreements with many countries.
It’s not perfect—I’d (again) favor a good revenue tariff that would restore trade to its proper place of “things we cannot easily and economically make in our country” (and which would put a real hurt on Maersk, but I digress), and I’d love to see immigration law followed at least to the point of “showing serious criminals the door and doing basic health checks on all immigrants”, but it’s a start, and a good one, and I hope this degree of populism takes hold in the GOP.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
I fully agree with separating personalities from policies. It’s another thing to separate character from policy.
It can be done to a point. There’s never been a perfect leader of anything, US Presidents, and OT kings included. But the writers of the books of the Kings and Chronicles took pains, inspired by the Spirit, to help us see that some, on the whole “did what was right in the eyes of the Lord” while others did not. And story after story drives home the lesson that the character of the king has consequences.
Then you have the book of Proverbs.
Then you have all the NT calls to identify those who are good examples and follow them.
Scripture is not warm to the idea that only a leader’s agenda matters.
So the claim that we can help people gain positions of enormous power based only on their policy agenda and nothing else is a claim with a very heavy burden of proof. But my ears are open: let’s hear a biblical—or even a ‘wisdom of experience’—case for “only the agenda matters in leadership.”
This is what I’m referring to when I talk about how many seem to want to apply different rules to the highest office in the land than they do to any other leadership position there is. … or maybe it’s just different rules for politicians?
I don’t see why there should be different rules at all. If anything, those tasked with governance should be held to higher standards.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
What this boils down to, it seems to me, is the very subjective decision as to when the “bad character line” is crossed. Up to a point, it’s not disqualifying. Past a certain point, and it is. So how does one know exactly when the line is crossed? One can give all sorts of objective sounding arguments for why his decision that the line is crossed is the correct one, but someone else can equally claim a different evaluation. Some believe the line was crossed with a previous candidate that you considered acceptable. Others believe the line has not yet been crossed with Trump. It’s way to subjective to be so dogmatic about Trumps disqualification.
I saw a post on FB earlier this morning that went something like this: “My vote is not a Valentine professing my love for a particular candidate. My vote is a strategic chess move to counter the advancement of a dangerous attack upon the Constitution.” That’s my thinking as well.
G. N. Barkman
Yes, character matters. Prove to me Trump’s character flaws. Don’t quote gossip columns masquerading as news or political reporting. Facts. What is Trump’s character like? Do you know? Have you met him? Have you talked to him?
People say he lies. About what? Most of things people classify as lies are very subjective. The political things people say he lies about are commonly disagreed on. They called Bush a liar too. Remember that? As for the personal things, do you know to say he is lying. Nope.
Divorce? Yep. How many in your church are? You still preach and care for them. His books and personal life. He is a worldly man, no doubt about it. His comments, in particular the one he said with the interviewer Bush that was revealed before the 2016 election. Well, worldly men are scumbags. Yep, I said it. If you are a man who hangs out with unsaved men, you are going to hear things like Trump said over and over again. I spent 4 years in the Marine Corps. You think those guys are angelic honorable knights? Does any of this excuse his behavior? No. It just reveals that it is common place.
They said Abraham Lincoln was a liar and worse.
And here is the kicker. What is Obama like? Do you know? No you do not. How do you know he and Chuck Schumer didn’t get together and tear one up when Michelle was away? Affairs. Common in DC and you know it. Did Obama respect “flyover country”? Not at all. Did he release the power of the federal government on his enemies? Yes. Obama lied early and often about the Affordable Care Act. No fact checker ever looked into him.
So, character? At least face reality before you act like Trump is any different than any unsaved man with power.
I don’t believe we should punish the country because Republicans can’t offer a better candidate than Trump. By refusing to vote for Trump and therefore helping Biden become President, the result will be that the entire country will be punished as “progressive” ideology exerts control. Biden himself will be a figurehead. If you don’t like the candidates political parties offer, then run for political office yourself.
Wally Morris
Huntington, IN
Thanks for the healthy for the most part discussion (the plantation comment was beneath our commitment to treat one another in love)
Observation: I am 67 and have yet to see a sinner refuse Christ because of how I voted. To claim that my vote keeps a lost person from Christ is a false narrative IMO. Romans 1:16 is the confidence of all Gospel preachers. We preach Christ.
I remember growing up in America when folk did not disclose for whom they voted. The voting booths were private for a reason.
We must all answer to God for all of our actions. I am comfortable in answering for mine and do not judge you for how you vote.
I am prepared to live for Christ next week as well as today.
Some of us have not been sufficiently enlightened. In any event, I will vote for life. I won’t vote for someone who thinks there are more than two genders or that abortion is family planning. I also won’t waste my vote on someone who doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in you know where to win. Whoever wins, may it be by a wide margin.
Yes, character matters. Prove to me Trump’s character flaws. Don’t quote gossip columns masquerading as news or political reporting. Facts. What is Trump’s character like? Do you know? Have you met him? Have you talked to him?
It’s amazing to me that anyone asks a question like this.
All you need is his Tweets (see Luke 6:45) though there is much, much more.
His bragging about womanizing is available in recorded form.
His attendance at parties hosted by Jeff Epstein is in photographs.
There are many many interviews.
There are his actions toward Jeff Sessions and others who have been loyal to him. There is audio recording of his quite recent shabby public treatment of Martha McSally, who has also gone to sometimes excess in her loyalty to him.
Examples of one form of disrespect or another toward his fellow human beings — while in the role of U.S. President — are literally legion.
Examples of his narcissism are all over his public statements multiple times per week for the last 4 years (not to mention decade’s worth before that). He’s a self-obsessed braggart if there ever was one.
Examples of his penchant for distorting facts, exaggerating, etc., are just as numerous.
I was going to write a post once on “Evidence of Trump’s Unleaderly Character” but it the subject matter proved too immense for anything less than a 10 part series. I wasn’t going to put myself through that, and it’s too obvious to be worth the effort anyway.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Aaron’s list of President Trump’s character flaws is a good summary of the President’s character problems. A similar list of Joe Biden’s character flaws would not be hard to assemble either. Which illustrates the problem we face in representative democracy: making a decision from poor choices. For this election, many of us decided to not ignore personal character but to look at other important decision factors, mainly stated policy goals of the candidates. So our choices with the two major political parties are two character-impaired (to put it mildly) candidates, one of whom has stated political and moral policy goals which align more with certain Biblical values. The decision then depends on whether we can overlook character problems in the hope of realizing certain political and moral policy goals, understanding that politics is not the ultimate answer to anyone’s problems but that politics is a necessary and important element of maintaining a stable and decent society. (The irony of decent/good policy goals promoted by people with less than decent character is not lost on me.) Some Christians have decided that the character flaws are too great to allow them to vote for either candidate. Others have decided those character flaws are not yet to the level of not voting for anyone. I suspect that we are getting closer to the time when the candidates problems are so great that even laudable policy goals cannot outweigh a candidates’ character problems. Some have decided that time is now. Others have decided that time is not yet.
Wally Morris
Huntington, IN
Most of that list is called opinion. You act like it is fact independent of perspective.
One thing for the record, I believe Trump disavowed Epstein years ago.
it appears that Aaron prefers four years of Democratic progressive policies, which are an aggressive attack on Biblical morality, religious freedom, common decency, law and order, constitutional government, economic freedom, and much more.
G. N. Barkman
[G. N. Barkman]it appears that Aaron prefers four years of Democratic progressive policies, which are an aggressive attack on Biblical morality, religious freedom, common decency, law and order, constitutional government, economic freedom, and much more.
Would encourage people to read the article and see if this is a fair summary of what I would “prefer.”
There is no good ‘next four years’ on the table. The question is, how to we get better options in 2024?
“Democratic progressive policies, which are an aggressive attack on Biblical morality, religious freedom, common decency, law and order, constitutional government, economic freedom, and much more.”
My central claim is that having an anti-persuader in office ‘championing’ these causes sets them back significantly in the most important front of this culture war: the hearts and minds of Americans. I provided reasons for why I believe this to be the case… and there are more reasons than are listed here.
But I would encourage readers to interact with the reasons. I have not simply stated my opinion. I’ve supported it. So… it isn’t persuasive to caricature it as “Aaron prefers…[something I clearly don’t prefer: see third sentence of the article] ” and simply state a different opinion. I made case. Take a look at the case.
[Mark_Smith]Most of that list is called opinion. You act like it is fact independent of perspective.
One thing for the record, I believe Trump disavowed Epstein years ago.
Seriously, you’re going to claim that all Trump’s tweets are my opinion? That he fired Sessions by way of public humiliation is my opinion and not a documented fact? That he publicly bragged about groping women… you’re saying the recording doesn’t exist? That he was pubicly rude to Martha McSally at a recent rally isn’t on record from multiple eyewitnesses? His admiration of dictators isn’t in writing in the transcripts of multiple interviews? His recent repeated claims that the latest COVID surge is a media ploy didn’t actually happen?
I really have nothing to say to those who are going to dismiss hard facts with a wave of the hand as mere “opinion.”
[WallyMorris]Aaron’s list of President Trump’s character flaws is a good summary of the President’s character problems. A similar list of Joe Biden’s character flaws would not be hard to assemble either. Which illustrates the problem we face in representative democracy: making a decision from poor choices. For this election, many of us decided to not ignore personal character but to look at other important decision factors, mainly stated policy goals of the candidates. So our choices with the two major political parties are two character-impaired (to put it mildly) candidates, one of whom has stated political and moral policy goals which align more with certain Biblical values. The decision then depends on whether we can overlook character problems in the hope of realizing certain political and moral policy goals, understanding that politics is not the ultimate answer to anyone’s problems but that politics is a necessary and important element of maintaining a stable and decent society. (The irony of decent/good policy goals promoted by people with less than decent character is not lost on me.)
It’s not just irony. It’s self-defeating. “Watch us uphold Christian values in conspicuously unChristian ways” is not a winning long-term strategy. How could it possibly be? But even if we could establish that it “works,” it isn’t right. … which we’re supposed to value more than ‘effectiveness,’ are we not?
[Steve Davis] Some of us have not been sufficiently enlightened.
When I encounter this argument—the “this candidate is horrible so we have to defeat him by voting for the other one and nothing else matters, simple as that” argument—I always wonder what they think is going to happen culturally long-term. It’s especially odd to see this argument come from people who are usually very culturally aware.
So how do they see the cultural impact of 4 more years of Trump?
- Culture (beliefs and values/hearts and minds and the free actions that flow from them) doesn’t matter as long as we can pass good laws?
- Trump is having no significant negative effect on the American culture?
- The culture declines faster with the left in the Presidency than it does with an anti-persuader in the Presidency?
I’d be interested in hearing how centrists can be won over to conservative/Christian/traditional ways of thinking under a Trump presidency.
I’d also be interested in hearing how conservative principles win long-term through laws and courts over a public that believes the opposite on nearly every point. How’s that going to work?
So many are thinking only in coercive terms and not at all in persuasive terms. … and many of them are normally very smart people. I wish they would explain to me how this strategy (a) can possibly work or (b) how it can possibly be right, even if it could “work.”
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
The rate of decline in public morality under the most recent Democratic administration was astounding. The declared intentions of many Democrats is even more frightening. I don’t think the nation can rebound from four more years of Democratic leadership. Trump’s achievements, particularly in appointing judges who honor the Constitution, is a serious game changer, as the Left fully understands. That is why they are making plans to undo these gains. Four more years of Trump would preserve these gains, expand them, and make reversing them much more difficult. If Biden wins, I’m afraid any chance of retaining the basics of the US Constitution will be forever lost. The stakes are too high to concede the election to Biden and hope for better in 2024. By the time the Democrats have packed the Supreme Court, created additional Federal Courts, admitted DC and Puerto Rico as solidly Democratic States, 2024 won’t even matter. Our last opportunity to undo the Democrat’s damage is now. Only the election of Donald Trump can defeat these plans. That’s why I cannot understand anyone intentionally yielding the election to Biden. If he wins, I’m afraid America, as we have known it, will be gone forever.
Why do I say that Aaron “prefers” the Democrat’s progressive agenda? Because his strategy, if followed by enough evangelical Christians, will concede the election to Biden by default. That is the inevitable and practical result of refusing to support Trump. Only the election of Trump can defeat the election of Biden. I’m afraid many Christians are going to watch the destruction of America over the next four years in disbelief, especially when they realize that they are partially to blame.
G. N. Barkman
Aaron: There is no good ‘next four years’ on the table.
This is the point you have misunderstood all through this.
There is no perfect ‘next four years’ on the table. But there is a relatively good option.
“Did what was right . . ” - sounds like policies. Not to say character is irrelevant, but do/did/done is an expression of action.
[Aaron Blumer]Steve Davis wrote:
Some of us have not been sufficiently enlightened.When I encounter this argument—the “this candidate is horrible so we have to defeat him by voting for the other one and nothing else matters, simple as that” argument—I always wonder what they think is going to happen culturally long-term. It’s especially odd to see this argument come from people who are usually very culturally aware.
So how do they see the cultural impact of 4 more years of Trump?
- Culture (beliefs and values/hearts and minds and the free actions that flow from them) doesn’t matter as long as we can pass good laws?
- Trump is having no significant negative effect on the American culture?
- The culture declines faster with the left in the Presidency than it does with an anti-persuader in the Presidency?
The context that I was not “sufficiently enlightened” was the description of (some of ) Trump’s supporters as dazzled and delusional. I do not think I am either. I also think my cultural awareness contributes to my perspective that I will not be complicit in supporting perhaps the most left-wing ticket in history, either with my vote or a wasted vote, with the possibility that Biden does not finish his term and Harris becomes president. Biden was in Philly and made it clear he will reverse much of the good policy Trump has advanced and remove protection for so-called religious discrimination for those who do not support the LGBTQ+ agenda, same-sex marriage, abortion, transgenderism, etc. I will not be complicit in advancing this evil.
We can only guess at the cultural impact of 4 more years of Trump. I don’t know what will happen culturally long-term if Trump or Biden wins. Neither does anyone else. So why speculate? The influence of Trump’s personal character flaws pales in comparison to the harm done to our society in the advancement of an evil agenda. I am less concerned about Trump’s bad personal influence on culture that Biden’s official evil policy influence on our nation. Are people more arrogant, more narcissistic, greater liars, more intemperate in speech, etc. than 4 years ago? If they are we cannot blame Trump. Trump wears his depravity on his sleeve at times yet has attempted to accomplish what he promised in 2016. One instance, seen from my work as addiction therapist in prisons and with ex-felons- criminal justice reform. Trump did more in his term than Obama and Biden in 8 years. So yes, I want more of that. Let us not pretend that depravity is not pervasive and penetrating with or without Trump. If Biden wins, we might have Trump’s judicial appointees to thank for slowing the official advancement of evil. It is all going to collapse in the end. As a nation we deserve the judgment of God. In his mercy he withholds wrath. There is no hope for our nation apart from the gospel of Jesus Christ. But out of love for my neighbor, the unborn, and my grandchildren I will do what I can to slow the spread of gangrene.
[Dan Miller]Aaron: There is no good ‘next four years’ on the table.
This is the point you have misunderstood all through this.
There is no perfect ‘next four years’ on the table. But there is a relatively good option.
Yes there is always a “relatively good,” because bad things are seldom precisely equal. In this case, it’s not at all obvious that the one ‘good’ so many think is “better” would actually be better. … at any rate, as I’ve already explained and supported, there are more than two options and the third is far “better” than either of the other two—for specific reasons I’ve outlined.
Let me boil it down another way: If Biden win’s, conservatism and traditional Christian values lose on the policy front. If Trump wins, they lose—at an accelerating rate—on the culture front. Is policy more powerful than culture? I have argued it is less powerful and that Trump is a clear negative on the cultural front. Nobody’s given me any reason to reconsider that.
It’s true, to Greg’s point, that the culture declined morally during previous Democratic administrations. But let’s observe also, please, that it has been declining pretty steadily since at least the 1960s. Decline is likely regardless, for deeper reasons than Presidents, but none of this changes the fact that in Trump we have an “evangelical morality spokesman” who wins over nobody, turns off many of the ambivalent, and galvanizes the far left. He is making it far worse than it would otherwise be on the cultural front—which we all have good reasons to view as the most important front.
To Steve’s point…
I also think my cultural awareness contributes to my perspective that I will not be complicit in supporting perhaps the most left-wing ticket in history, either with my vote or a wasted vote, with the possibility that Biden does not finish his term and Harris becomes president.
I have argued that there is no such thing as a wasted vote and there can’t possibly be.
- Am I incorrect that how God weighs a vote matters?
- Am I incorrect that He does indeed weigh all of our actions, voting included?
- Am I incorrect that His evaluation matters more than the Electoral College’s?
Secondly, Steve goes on to suggest we don’t know what another 4 yrs of Trump will do. I think it’s quite obvious what it will do, in general. It will continue to plague the nation daily with ever-deteriorating public discourse, increased personal fights (because, for Trump, it’s always personal) rather than rational policy debates, and more and more people turned against the beliefs and values we’d all like to see gain some ground.
But to attempt, once again, to focus on the arguments…
- am I incorrect that culture is more powerful than policy? Why or why not?
- am I incorrect that Trump is good at rousing his base but doesn’t even seriously attempt to persuade any who aren’t part of that base? Why or why not?
I could go on, but it’s all the article. There are reasons there. There’s little value in repeatedly saying “I disagree on the conclusion,” but not getting into the whys and wherefores.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[Aaron Blumer]Would encourage people to read the article and see if this is a fair summary of what I would “prefer.”
It is a very fair summary of what WILL result from your advice and example if enough people follow it. You may not “prefer” it, but it is the completely foreseeable and unavoidable result of your position if your position succeeds. And therefore it is not out of line to call you to account for it.
Thank you Steve Davis for your clear and reasoned thinking!!!!!! Dave Doran just wrote a piece on his facebook alerting us to the house bill on equality pushed by the entire demoncratic party. Dave has always been very careful in the political arena, yet he felt this bill to be important enough to write about. Biden, Harris, Pelosi, AOC, the Squad, Schumer and nearly the entire dem party will be in favor of this travesty. Trump and the republicans for the most part will oppose it. Biden himself personally endorsed the transgender surgery and medications for an 8 year old boy on ABC, national television. Child abuse of the worst order, but what else do you expect from someone who approves of murdering children up the 9th month and beyond if they happen to survive and forcing all tax payers to pay for it. Both Biden and Trump have serious character issues. With Biden/Harris, however, you get bad character and bad policy.
Pastor Mike Harding
Aaron continues to insist that his position is more objective and therefore more correct, and yet apparently fails to realize that nearly all his assertions are actually quite subjective. For example, he assumes that God disapproves of a vote for Trump, but approves of a vote for a third party candidate, or no vote at all. And how does he know this? It seems more likely to me that God approves of a vote for Trump, as the only meaningful way to endeavor to defeat Biden and the incredibly anti-Christian Democratic agenda. That’s my opinion. His is the opposite, and that is the epitome of subjective reasoning. There is no objective way to determine which opinion is correct. He assumes that Trump’s faults, which are indeed huge, are more damaging to our country than the vicious assaults upon everything moral and Biblical by the Left. And how does he know this? It is strictly a subjective opinion. My opinion is the exact opposite, but I know mine is subjective whereas Aaron seems to believe his is objective. Furthermore, he laments the unwillingness of anyone to debate his assertions, and apparently sees that as evidence that these opinions are unassailable. As I see it, they are undebatable in the sense that they are too subjective to allow for factual debate. How does one debate another’s subjective opinion?
I can only pray that, in the mercy of God, a sufficient number of Christians will reject Aaron’s reasoning, which is promoted by a number of prominent Evangelicals, and cast their vote for the only choice which will impede the Left’s dangerous assault upon all things Biblical. That’s my opinion.
G. N. Barkman
How about everybody just:
- Votes
- Makes sure to not tell other Christians who they must vote for
- Advocates for future kingdom values in this present evil age as best we can, even though the specifics will look different
- Stop being alarmist about the political opinions other Christians hold
- Worship the Lord
- Repeat forever
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
I struggle to completely understand and/or answer the assertion that culture is more important than policy. I don’t know if it’s because the words culture, policy, and power can be defined differently, or something else. I also question whether policy and culture are the right words to use.
But I’ll offer two thoughts;
First, when I read Romans 13, I understand the role of government pertaining more to policy than to culture. But I would use the word authority instead of policy. All that being said, a godly government would have godly policy in spite of an ungodly culture. And in fact, the government exists to exercise authority, make policy which upholds what is good and punishes what is evil. In this sense (if I’m making any, lol) authority/policy is of utmost importance.
Second, every political party represents a culture, so to speak. One candidate held the majority of votes in 2016, but that candidate lost. Trump lost the popular vote, but was elected. In that case, policy (electoral college) mattered. And further, in spite of millions more voting for a party (different culture) in 2016, there’s a reason why the Democrats want the White House back so bad and that would pertain mostly to policy.
Adam Breiner
I think that Aaron’s position (and by the way, thanks for sharing and provoking thought), comes down to his point about culture versus policy. As stated previously, I think that the role of the government is one of authority and policy. And thus, I vote foremost with that in mind, not culture.
I do believe that the government has been established by God in order to exercise authority. The authority of government is to be exercised in the establishment and enforcement of policy which upholds what is good and punishes what is evil, regardless of culture. As far as the government goes, Policy > Culture.
I vote then, in faith, for government officials that I believe will establish and enforce policies which uphold what is good and punish what is evil. Have I ever known anyone that is 100% perfect in upholding what is good and punishing what is evil? No. And I’ve never met anyone who is perfect in any God-ordained institution such as the church, the family, or the government. Yet, I do not overlook or dismiss sin in the church, the family, or the government. But I must find a way to go forward in spite of it.
There are a host of questions we could ask in discerning what is a godly church and family. But that is for another time. When it comes to governing officials, I believe there are at least a few questions that we should ask;
First, are they upholding what is good and punishing what is evil? Second, are they seeking to establish and enforce policies that uphold what is good and punish what is evil. Third, (which arises as a result of the current political situation), are they seeking to establish and enforce policies in alignment with personal immorality?
What is so interesting about the current situation is the conflict between the personal immorality of the President and the numerous cases in which I would say he upholds what is good and punishes what is evil. For instance, the President has been accused of rape. Rape is clearly sin and clearly illegal. Whether the allegations are true or not, I have not heard the President ever promote a policy for the legalization of rape. Even more interesting, for all of the immorality in our culture, the culture rightly condemns rape. Amen!
I believe that the President is prideful, but I do not believe that he is making pride the law of the land.
I believe that the President is immoral, in many cases, but I do not believe that he is making immorality the law of the land.
I think there are several matters, such as life, law, and liberty, in which the President is upholding what is good and punishing what is evil and establishing policy that does the same.
I did attend a Trump rally this past Saturday, but hopefully you can tell that I’m not dazzled-and-delusional. After all, I was called deplorable a few years ago, but I don’t think that characterizes me either.
Adam Breiner
[Jim Welch]Thanks for the healthy for the most part discussion (the plantation comment was beneath our commitment to treat one another in love)
Not really. The arguments made in favor of trump on this thread demonstrate that many here are wed to the Republican party, no matter who the party puts up for president. The republican party knows this is true for many (most?) evangelicals, and has capitalized on this for years. Same thing is true with the Democrats and African Americans.
Time to break the bonds of slavery, my brother.
Discussion