Trump and Carson: Evangelicals' incredible two headed transplant

I have to be honest. Bob Jeffries always makes me cringe when he is representing Christ on TV. so, I go into the article a little biased. At the same time, while I have concerns about Dr. Carson’s readiness, I cannot understand how believers can get behind Mr. trump. He is absent every major virtue I want to see in a man.

Pretty sure I would vote Hillary over Trump. I don’t know of a scenario where I would vote Trump. Maybe if he was running against Putin…

GregH, another option, if you cannot pull the lever for Trump is to vote third party or not vote at all on the presidental line of the ballot. I cannot imagine any scenario whatsoever where I would vote for Hillary Clinton as she is woefully inadequate to be our leader. She failed in her marriage, she accomplished nothing as senator from NY, and she failed miserably at Secretary of State.

I am also not a fan of Trump. However, I do not see Trump getting the nomination in the end. Only once in the history of the Republican Party did the party select a non-politician to be their nominee (Wendall Willkie). Trump has already started to drop in the polls, especially in the first caucus state, IA, where Ben Carson now leads.

The race is currently on a trajectory that seems to favor Marco Rubio winning the nomination.

Also, I would point out that Hillary Clinton doesn’t at all seem to be a good fit for millennial generation voters who are open to considering either major party candidate. Millennials deconstruct, and start over. They hate hypocrisy, and disapprove of corruption. Hillary on the other hand is from the generation that celebrated corruption and embraced hypocrisy. She is an anachronism—ill-suited for the times.

The Republican Party would be wise to nominate someone who is everything Hillary is not, so there is a clear contrast. Time will tell what happens, but I am pretty sure it will not be Mr. Trump.

…as a footnote to my comment, I would point out that while Grant and Eisenhower did not hold prior elected office, both were successful retired war generals who regularly interacted with sitting US presidents, so they had some experience in the political realm.

But a retired brain surgeon or a real estate tycoon as nominee would be highly unusual. Some may suggest that we need the unusual in order to get a good leader. We do need a good leader, and just because there is distaste for Washington out there doesn’t mean it is impossible to get a good leader who comes from the ranks of those with political experience. It seems to me to be a far greater gamble to pick a nominee whose lack of experience at running a campaign is exposed during the summer months leading up to the election next year—after it is too late to pick someone else.

Also, read Carson’s bio information. He is a 7th day Adventist. He stopped being a Republican back in the 1990s, taking offense at the GOP’s impeachment of Pres. Clinton. He only became a Republican again in 2014, so he could setup a run for the high office.

[GregH]

Pretty sure I would vote Hillary over Trump. I don’t know of a scenario where I would vote Trump. Maybe if he was running against Putin…

I’m not at all motivated about Trump. He would be one of (if not ‘the’) last choice I would have for the nomination. But compared to Hillary, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat. He certainly is no *less* trustworthy than she is, and along with what Jim said above about his business experience, I absolutely love that he doesn’t kowtow to the press. He says some things that are clearly outrageous, but he also says some things that many are thinking but won’t put into words. Either way, I like the fact he doesn’t back down every time someone takes offense.

However, as others have pointed out, there are better candidates, and one of them will likely be the eventual choice. At least I hope so!

There’s no way Trump will be the nominee. 1) When it comes down to actually caucusing or voting for him in the primaries, many who say they supported him won’t be able to actually go through with it. Sober minds will prevail. 2) Even if he does have enough votes to be a threat for the nomination, the Republican party establishment will do everything within their power to make sure he isn’t the nominee, because they know if he is then say hello to President Hillary.

I align the most with Cruz but if he gets the nominee it will also be Pres. Hillary because Cruz is just not likeable to the average person. Of those with a chance to win both the Republican nomination and the general election, I hope it’s Rubio.

You used “tea party” in a very pejorative way. Can you please outline what is so bad about the “tea party” in your opinion?

“Ben Carson has seized the national lead from Donald Trump in a new poll, in a development sure to force the billionaire businessman to modify his well-polished campaign stump boast that he’s “leading every poll.”

Released ahead of Wednesday’s third Republican presidential primary debate, the CBS News/New York Times Poll showed Carson leading nationally with 26 percent, to Trump’s 22 percent.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/27/carson-takes-lead-from-trump…

Why are you using all caps?

When it comes to selecting a nominee to run for president, the history of both the Republican Party and Democrat Party is dominated by candidates who have had prior elected experience. By my count, Republicans have nominated 11 sitting presidents running for re-election; 3 sitting presidents who were elected vice-president, but ascended to president due to a vacancy; 2 sitting vice-presidents; 8 who were a governor, 6 senators; 2 who served in the US House; and 2 retired war generals.

Democrats have nominated 10 sitting presidents running for re-election; 1 former president; 2 sitting presidents who were elected vice-president, but ascended to president due to a vacancy; 6 vice-presidents; 12 governors; 8 senators; 2 who served in the US House; and 2 war generals.

In other words, there is a long history of political parties nominating experienced candidates who have gone through the rigors of campaigns and won elected office. The exception being retired war generals whose popularity came from leadership on the battlefield.

However, there are 4 examples, from 1904 through 1940 where a candidate emerged and was nominated who had no prior elected service. Democrats nominated Alton Parker, a NY judge who lost in a landslide to Teddy Roosevelt. In 1908 Taft was Roosevelt’s hand-picked successor, and though he never had been elected, he had substantial political experience, all in appointed positions. Even so, his 4 year presidency has been deemed by many as a disappointment. Herbert Hoover was the Secretary of Commerce, but never had been elected to anything prior to his presidential run. He of course won, but had a miserable 4 years. Finally, in 1940, Democrat turned Republican Wendell Willkie, a corporate lawyer, ran against FDR on the no-third-term platform and was soundly defeated.

So before anyone makes the quick decision to excitedly get on board with either Carson or Trump, men who have had no prior elected experience, at least consider the history of how effective such a candidate has been in the past.

Many are gravitating towards Mr. Trump because he helps them vent their anger. Trump is someone who is willing to overturn tables and throw chairs. But even though that feels good just under 100 days prior to the IA caucus, it doesn’t mean Trump is a good choice to defeat Hillary. In fact, close inspection of the general election matchup polls, both nationally and in key swing states, reveals Trump doing much more poorly against Hillary than many of the GOP candidates with elected experience.

Carson is a nice man. On that point most agree. But again, he has no electoral experience. If his desire is to leave the medical profession and take up politics, then he should run for congress, and if successful there, then look onward and upward. But again, with no experience at running for office, the news media and the Hillary campaign machine would make a meal out of Dr. Carson.

If some Republicans on the street think these two are the best chances to beat Hillary, I would humbly submit that they are wrong and need to start paying more attention to things.

I haven’t fully made up my mind, though I am a voter on March 1 - Super Tuesday. Of course by then the selection of candidates will be smaller than it is now. The Republicans started with 17 options. Perry and Walker have already dropped out.

Of the 15 who remain, Pataki, Gilmore, Graham, Santorum and Jindal receive 0 or 1% consistently in the polling. They are non-factors. Of this bunch I probably like Jindal the best, but none of these are going to come to life and most of these are probably just trying to raise their profile to get a cabinet position in the new administration.

So that leaves 10 that may be on the ballot when I vote:

As we said, Trump and Carson have no political experience. Neither does Fiorina, though she did run for senate and lost.

So looking at the remaining 7, and the amount of political experience:

BUSH: 8 years FL Governor; 1 year FL Secretary of Commerce.

RUBIO: 4 years U.S. Senator from FL; 2 years Speaker of the FL House of Representatives; 9 years member FL House of Representatives.

CRUZ: 3 years U.S. Senator from TX; 5.5 years Solicitor General of TX.

HUCKABEE: 10.5 years AR Governor; 2.5 years Lt. Gov. from AR

PAUL: 5 years U.S. Senator from KY

KASICH: 5 years OH Governor; 18 years U.S. House Representative; 3 years OH state senate

CHRISTIE: 6 years NJ Governor; 7 years U.S. Attorney for the district of NJ.

However, Huckabee, Paul, Kasich and Christie are all between 2 and 4% in the polling, so it remains to be seen if any of them will make a serious run, or if they will drop out prior to Super Tuesday.

Of course years of experience is not the only consideration, but given the fluid nature of the race, I will not make my final decision until just before March 1 when I vote.

I would also add, that Jeb Bush would be in a difficult place as nominee due to his last name and relation to the “Bush Dynasty.” Mrs. Clinton would have her team write ads linking Jeb to George on all the things from George Bush’s presidency perceived by independents as negative.

Christie would be a hard sell in the general election due to his consistently high unfavorable numbers. Maybe he can rebound, but yes, as a more moderate Republican he might struggle to keep the conservative portion of the Republican Party on board.