Robert Jeffress: "For Christians not to enthusiastically vote for #Trump, to me, is morally inexcusable."

No. Goodbye.

Jeffress is apparently unaware that almost nobody with principles is “enthusiastic” about Trump. The constant refrain I hear from the more sane (definitely not enthusiastic) supporters is “He’ll help with Supreme Court” and variations of “We know what Hillary will do, but maybe Trump will do better.”

Two facts bury these arguments:

a. A man with the character of Trump cannot be trusted to even try to appoint better justices. Men way better than him have tried and failed.

b. We do know what Trump will do. He has already done it and will continue to do it: he will destroy what little principle and credibility is left to any evangelicalism or conservatism that is associated with him. Already mostly complete. Presidency seals it instantly.

Winning elections is a means to an end, not an end in itself. If we betray everything we believe in to “win,” we have done something worse than losing.

He might find some parallels between Israel’s choice and the current political situation.

¹ “Ah, stubborn children,” declares the Lord,
“who carry out a plan, but not mine,
and who make an alliance, but not of my Spirit,
that they may add sin to sin;
² who set out to go down to Egypt,
without asking for my direction,
to take refuge in the protection of Pharaoh
and to seek shelter in the shadow of Egypt!
³ Therefore shall the protection of Pharaoh turn to your shame,
and the shelter in the shadow of Egypt to your humiliation.
⁴ For though his officials are at Zoan
and his envoys reach Hanes,
⁵ everyone comes to shame
through a people that cannot profit them,
that brings neither help nor profit,
but shame and disgrace.”

And why should I care about what he thinks politically?

Jeffress pastors First Baptist Dallas Texas, the church W. A. Criswell pastored for many years.

Like many Christians, Southern Baptists are also divided about Trump. I suspect Jeffress is speaking as much to fellow Southern Baptists as well as to others, since some prominent Southern Baptists have expressed serious reservations about Trump.

I’ll be pulling the lever for Drumpf, but not enthusiastically, and the biggest reason I’ve got is that most of the Senate already hates his guts and will not hesitate to throw him out on the curb if (when?) he misbehaves in an impeachment conviction. Sad to say, there are at least 34 Democrats in the Senate who will fail to do the same for Hilliary. Hence Drumpf is the safer choice.

At least 42% of the electorate will be voting for Trump. I don’t begrudge their choice, but would take issue on some of the reasons why they are doing so.

The impeachment argument that Bert makes is one that I believe is flawed. He could be impeached, but I don’t think it’s likely, and a lot events will have to line up for things to get to that point. All in all, I don’t think congressional Democrats will mind that much if he is in office. I submit the following reasons:

1) The man is fundraising and campaigning gold for Democrat candidates. If Trump is elected, the 2018 midterms will be a Democrat wave as they will ride voter’s distaste for Trump up and down the ticket. There are a number of Democrat held Senate seats that could be competitive with a Clinton presidency. They will not be competitive with a Trump presidency. Among them are Bill Nelson (FL), Claire McCaskill (MO), Bob Casey (PA), Tim Kaine (VA).

2) Trump has bluster but no convictions. He has no charm or charisma. He will not be able to work the press or to influence dialog on any issue. He will either be a sock puppet for token Republican causes or waffle and embrace whatever political decision will be best for him. This means he will be easy to manipulate or use as a strawman. It’s a win-win for Democrats.

3) Since Trump will not be able to affect change, all the current Washington constituencies get the status quo. That’s good for them, and good for the incumbents. Who votes for incumbents? Those who most benefit from the current political largesse and favoritism.

There are no moral or ethical values in Washington that cannot be overlooked with the right political motivation. Impeachment will require a Justice Department investigation, and Trump will nominate Justice Department leadership who will be sympathetic for him, and for the above reasons, the Democrats will not push too hard for impeachment. Furthermore, if Trump is impeached, congressional Democrats get Mike Pence, who would be orders of magnitude worse for them to deal with. No way will impeachment be at the top of their agenda.

If we exegete his sentence, isn’t he actually just referring to those Christians who are already planning to vote for Trump, and then judging them by whether or not they they are voting for him enthusiastically?

;)

John Lee, agreed that a Trump ouster is unlikely….the key issue there is that I do have evidence that Republicans will unite against a criminal President (that’s why Nixon resigned), but Democrats will not (Clinton impeachment). So I can rephrase my argument for voting for someone I consider morally flawed as “it’s possible Trump could be ousted if need be, but almost impossible that Clinton would be.”

And if you inferred that I’m saying that Democrats will support for criminals as long as there is a “d” after their name, yes, that is correct at certain levels.

Convergence!