DiscussMormonism.com

I think you have to do something of a moral dance to balance support of Donald Trump with being a moral person. You remember the 'character counts' mantra? Polls find fewer and fewer Republicans think morality is a important factor in politics. Here's GOP Chairperson, Ronna McDaniel, telling you what the GOP position is now:

Ronna McDaniel wrote:You could be the nicest, most moral person in the world. I don’t want you to be the president because I want to make sure you’re aligned with my politics.

Ronna's Grandfather George, when he ran for President in 1968 said:

We need leadership that can elevate religion and morality to their position of paramount importance and thus eliminating growing selfishness, and immorality, and materialism. We must end the spirit of “anything goes,” and restore the importance and quality of our personal lives.

Which begs the question: How much immorality should we tolerate in a President if he is aligned with our politics? Someone today said the GOP is morally bankrupt, but that's okay.

Trump is really good at dealing with bankruptcies.

MeDotOrg wrote:Someone today said the GOP is morally bankrupt, but that's okay.

Trump is really good at dealing with bankruptcies.

Trump made the American people pay for his previous bankruptcies; he’ll do the same with this one.

There is no Moral Majority to be found within the ranks of his supporters, but then again, there never was one of much consequence within the ranks of Republicans of past days, either.

So what you're saying is that Trump's full or partial ownership in over 500 successful companies pales in comparison to the maybe 15 businesses that went bust...that 98% success rate just ain't cutting it for you guys - got it!

You can tell something is very much amiss when conservative religionists fall all over themselves praising an amoral President, just because they agree with his policies and hatreds.

subgenius wrote:So what you're saying is that Trump's full or partial ownership in over 500 successful companies pales in comparison to the maybe 15 businesses that went bust...that 98% success rate just ain't cutting it for you guys - got it!

Yes. Simple math and common sense is what you’re eschewing.

Being added as a partial owner conveys nothing about the business smarts of someone, especially if that business originated with another family member.

Then there’s the question of type and scale. What is the businesses ‘product’? Is one business or the other a shell company, or an LLC designed for tax purposes, or to distribute income? I suppose that one could try to take the approach you’re taking in treating the total number as if they all are akin to a mom and pop business, but that would indicate a significant ignorance of business practices in general on your part. Right? ; )

Finally, there’s the issue of his having written off over 960 million dollars in losses, to have Joe Average American cover his ‘success’ at losing money. Are you suggesting that this number represents only 2% of the worth of his business activity?

With all this, I’m pretty sure that you know that your position is willfully dishonest. I mean, it’s either that, or you are experiencing a bad case of basic business ignorance. Which one should I place my bets on?

moksha wrote:You can tell something is very much amiss when conservative religionists fall all over themselves praising an amoral President, just because they agree with his policies and hatreds.

These are fearful, angry people. Afraid that brown people will ‘take their job’, afraid that a poor person will ‘get something’ that their tax dollars helped to provide. Angry that a transsexual person somewhere might ‘get’ to use a different restroom or that a lesbian might be ‘allowed’ to marry someone of the same sex. Afraid that other folks will come to scientific or logical conclusions that differ from what they want to believe their religion tells them to believe. Angry that they aren’t wealthy, and believing that everyone else with less to their name than themselves is to blame.

These are people whose most important joy comes from participating in any mechanism that will deny others of something that isn’t ‘deserved’, because those others aren’t the right income level, or color, or sexual orientation, or religion.

It’s a weird way to go through life, but there seems to be plenty of folks afflicted like this.

moksha wrote:You can tell something is very much amiss when conservative religionists fall all over themselves praising an amoral President, just because they agree with his policies and hatreds.

nope, its just laughable when posters such as yourself fall all over themselves promoting the illusion of morality only to rely upon it for political condemnation.

subgenius wrote:

moksha wrote:You can tell something is very much amiss when conservative religionists fall all over themselves praising an amoral President, just because they agree with his policies and hatreds.

nope, its just laughable when posters such as yourself fall all over themselves promoting the illusion of morality only to rely upon it for political condemnation.

OK, then you should totally ridicule yourself and abandon your claimed principled ‘high ground’ by actively supporting and promoting the morally bankrupt adultuter in the White House, because what’s important here is that he might get to install a judge that will rule against a transgender bathroom request somewhere.

This speaks to your nature. Run with it.

canpakes wrote:

subgenius wrote:nope, its just laughable when posters such as yourself fall all over themselves promoting the illusion of morality only to rely upon it for political condemnation.

OK, then you should totally ridicule yourself and abandon your claimed principled ‘high ground’ by actively supporting and promoting the morally bankrupt adultuter in the White House, because what’s important here is that he might get to install a judge that will rule against a transgender bathroom request somewhere.

This speaks to your nature. Run with it.

cool how you literally repeat "morally bankrupt" from a "morally absent" position....your redundancy is amusing, but your logic is circular.
But please, educate me on where i claim "high ground" and where you can claim anyone other than yourself as being morally anything.

subgenius wrote:

canpakes wrote:OK, then you should totally ridicule yourself and abandon your claimed principled ‘high ground’ by actively supporting and promoting the morally bankrupt adultuter in the White House, because what’s important here is that he might get to install a judge that will rule against a transgender bathroom request somewhere.

This speaks to your nature. Run with it.

cool how you literally repeat "morally bankrupt" from a "morally absent" position....your redundancy is amusing, but your logic is circular.
But please, educate me on where i claim "high ground" and where you can claim anyone other than yourself as being morally anything.

So you’re good with voting for the repeat adulterer and porn star fondler?