Skip to main content

William M. Briggs The Farcical Evangelical ‘Betrayal’ Argument Against Trump.."answer to an article by Ed Feser"

The Farcical Evangelical ‘Betrayal’ Argument Against Trump...

You’ll recall last week we gave arguments why Christians could vote for Trump (blog/Substack), in answer to an article by Ed Feser. Here, from a thread I did on Twitter, is an amplification of why the idea of only voting for Trump in swing states is suboptimal.


The Farcical Evangelical ‘Betrayal’ Argument Against Trump

Potential difficulties of voting for a write-in candidate in Blue states and barely voting for Trump in Swing states. We all take it as granted that no Reality-loving person can vote for the left.

1) Blue state rulers will go more blue, encouraged that Trump, who espouses some right-wing ideas, is more unliked than he actually is. Unless write-in candidates get an overwhelming number of votes (they won’t), rulers will ignore the numbers.

2) A bare Trump victory in Swing states will have to be more than bare, given how common the left cheats (“fortifies”). And this election there are more potential swing states than typical.

3) A bare popular vote victory in Swing states again encourages the left, or leads them to dispute the election (“Russian interference!”, “Days of rage”, etc.).

4) Voting for a write-in might cause Trump to lose the overall popular vote, which though he wins the Electoral College, again encourages the left in ways we have already seen.

5) A “landslide” Trump win discourages the left, and the many GOP members who wish they could be Democrats, or are in spirit. A landslide can drive them somewhat right, at least for a time.

6) The right sitting out, or protest voting, in the hope it will punish the GOP and cause them to reform their ways won’t work. Many in the GOP are Never Trumpers. Leaders will see they lost some on the right, but will conclude that they (a) the lost were Never-Trumpers themselves, or that (b) the lost will have no choice but to vote them in future, even with the flawed platform. They will say “We will fix the platform after you elect us.” Which, of course, they will not.

(7; There was no 7. I forgot 7. Math is hard.)

8) A better idea is to reject as forcefully as possible the left’s candidates, and then encourage Trump to see the light (he has become more right through time), or to create a new party.

9) Besides the other obvious reasons for Trump over the others, do not forget that Trump, for no sane or good reason, drives the left mad. The more their madness is exposed, the better it is for us.

10) The more real votes Trump gets, the harder the left has to cheat, if it is determined to fortify the election to completion. And the harder it cheats, the more it is obvious it has cheated, which weaknes their authority.

And here is Ed’s response.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...