2020 Presidential Election

The place for measured discourse about politics and current events, including developments in science and medicine.
Post Reply
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46098
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

On Friday, White House chief of staff Mark Meadows rebuked FBI Director Christopher Wray for saying that while there was occasionally isolated vote corruption, historically there has been no "coordinated national voter fraud effort in a major election, whether it's by mail or otherwise."
Meadows said of Wray on "CBS This Morning": "Perhaps he needs to get involved on the ground and he would change his testimony on Capitol Hill."
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/25/politics ... index.html

Let that sink in a bit. This is not only the head of the FBI that we are talking about, but Trump's own hand-picked appointee to replace the fired James Comey.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
River
bioalchemist
Posts: 13431
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:08 am
Location: the dry land

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by River »

I'm not sure what to say. Sending a subordinate to talk smack in public about someone else you hired is not the behavior of a competent manager.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46098
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

Not that I think this will matter at all, but 18 Revelations From a Trove of Trump Tax Records
■ Mr. Trump paid no federal income taxes in 11 of 18 years that The Times examined. In 2017, after he became president, his tax bill was only $750.

■ He has reduced his tax bill with questionable measures, including a $72.9 million tax refund that is the subject of an audit by the Internal Revenue Service.

■ Many of his signature businesses, including his golf courses, report losing large amounts of money — losses that have helped him to lower his taxes.

■ The financial pressure on him is increasing as hundreds of millions of dollars in loans he personally guaranteed are soon coming due.

■ Even while declaring losses, he has managed to enjoy a lavish lifestyle by taking tax deductions on what most people would consider personal expenses, including residences, aircraft and $70,000 in hairstyling for television.

■ Ivanka Trump, while working as an employee of the Trump Organization, appears to have received “consulting fees” that also helped reduce the family’s tax bill.

■ As president, he has received more money from foreign sources and U.S. interest groups than previously known. The records do not reveal any previously unreported connections to Russia.

It is important to remember that the returns are not an unvarnished look at Mr. Trump’s business activity. They are instead his own portrayal of his companies, compiled for the I.R.S. But they do offer the most detailed picture yet available.

Below is a deeper look at the takeaways. The main article based on the investigation contains much more information, as does a timeline of the president’s finances. Dean Baquet, the executive editor, has written a note explaining why The Times is publishing these findings.

The president’s tax avoidance

Mr. Trump has paid no federal income taxes for much of the past two decades.

In addition to the 11 years in which he paid no taxes during the 18 years examined by The Times, he paid only $750 in each of the two most recent years — 2016 and 2017.

He has managed to avoid taxes while enjoying the lifestyle of a billionaire — which he claims to be — while his companies cover the costs of what many would consider personal expenses.

This tax avoidance sets him apart from most other affluent Americans.

Taxes on wealthy Americans have declined sharply over the past few decades, and many use loopholes to reduce their taxes below the statutory rates. But most affluent people still pay a lot of federal income tax.

In 2017, the average federal income rate for the highest-earning .001 percent of tax filers — that is, the most affluent 1/100,000th slice of the population — was 24.1 percent, according to the I.R.S.

Over the past two decades, Mr. Trump has paid about $400 million less in combined federal income taxes than a very wealthy person who paid the average for that group each year.

His tax avoidance also sets him apart from past presidents.

Mr. Trump may be the wealthiest U.S. president in history. Yet he has often paid less in taxes than other recent presidents. Barack Obama and George W. Bush each regularly paid more than $100,000 a year — and sometimes much more — in federal income taxes while in office.

Mr. Trump, by contrast, is running a federal government to which he has contributed almost no income tax revenue in many years.

A large refund has been crucial to his tax avoidance.

Mr. Trump did face large tax bills after the initial success of “The Apprentice” television show, but he erased most of these tax payments through a refund. Combined, Mr. Trump initially paid almost $95 million in federal income taxes over the 18 years. He later managed to recoup most of that money, with interest, by applying for and receiving a $72.9 million tax refund, starting in 2010.

The refund reduced his total federal income tax bill between 2000 and 2017 to an annual average of $1.4 million. By comparison, the average American in the top .001 percent of earners paid about $25 million in federal income taxes each year over the same span.

The $72.9 million refund has since become the subject of a long-running battle with the I.R.S.

When applying for the refund, he cited a giant financial loss that may be related to the failure of his Atlantic City casinos. Publicly, he also claimed that he had fully surrendered his stake in the casinos.

But the real story may be different from the one he told. Federal law holds that investors can claim a total loss on an investment, as Mr. Trump did, only if they receive nothing in return. Mr. Trump did appear to receive something in return: 5 percent of the new casino company that formed when he renounced his stake.

In 2011, the I.R.S. began an audit reviewing the legitimacy of the refund. Almost a decade later, the case remains unresolved, for unknown reasons, and could ultimately end up in federal court, where it could become a matter of public record.

Business expenses and personal benefits

Mr. Trump classifies much of the spending on his personal lifestyle as the cost of business.

His residences are part of the family business, as are the golf courses where he spends so much time. He has classified the cost of his aircraft, used to shuttle him among his homes, as a business expense as well. Haircuts — including more than $70,000 to style his hair during “The Apprentice” — have fallen into the same category. So did almost $100,000 paid to a favorite hair and makeup artist of Ivanka Trump.

All of this helps to reduce Mr. Trump’s tax bill further, because companies can write off business expenses.

Seven Springs, his estate in Westchester County, N.Y., typifies his aggressive definition of business expenses.

Mr. Trump bought the estate, which stretches over more than 200 acres in Bedford, N.Y., in 1996. His sons Eric and Donald Jr. spent summers living there when they were younger. “This is really our compound,” Eric told Forbes in 2014. “Today,” the Trump Organization website continues to report, “Seven Springs is used as a retreat for the Trump family.”

Nonetheless, the elder Mr. Trump has classified the estate as an investment property, distinct from a personal residence. As a result, he has been able to write off $2.2 million in property taxes since 2014 — even as his 2017 tax law has limited individuals to writing off only $10,000 in property taxes a year.

The ‘consulting fees’

Across nearly all of his projects, Mr. Trump’s companies set aside about 20 percent of income for unexplained ‘consulting fees.’

These fees reduce taxes, because companies are able to write them off as a business expense, lowering the amount of final profit subject to tax.

Mr. Trump collected $5 million on a hotel deal in Azerbaijan, for example, and reported $1.1 million in consulting fees. In Dubai, there was a $630,000 fee on $3 million in income. Since 2010, Mr. Trump has written off some $26 million in such fees.

His daughter appears to have received some of these consulting fees, despite having been a top Trump Organization executive.

The Times investigation discovered a striking match: Mr. Trump’s private records show that his company once paid $747,622 in fees to an unnamed consultant for hotel projects in Hawaii and Vancouver, British Columbia. Ivanka Trump’s public disclosure forms — which she filed when joining the White House staff in 2017 — show that she had received an identical amount through a consulting company she co-owned.

Money-losing businesses

Many of the highest-profile Trump businesses lose large amounts of money.

Since 2000, he has reported losing more than $315 million at the golf courses that he often describes as the heart of his empire. Much of this has been at Trump National Doral, a resort near Miami that he bought in 2012. And his Washington hotel, opened in 2016, has lost more than $55 million.

An exception: Trump Tower in New York, which reliably earns him more than $20 million in profits a year.

The most successful part of the Trump business has been his personal brand.

The Times calculates that between 2004 and 2018, Mr. Trump made a combined $427.4 million from selling his image — an image of unapologetic wealth through shrewd business management. The marketing of this image has been a huge success, even if the underlying management of many of the operating Trump companies has not been.

Other firms, especially in real estate, have paid for the right to use the Trump name. The brand made possible the “The Apprentice” — and the show then took the image to another level.

Of course, Mr. Trump’s brand also made possible his election as the first United States president with no prior government experience.

But his unprofitable companies still served a financial purpose: reducing his tax bill.

The Trump Organization — a collection of more than 500 entities, virtually all of them wholly owned by Mr. Trump — has used the losses to offset the rich profits from the licensing of the Trump brand and other profitable pieces of its business.

The reported losses from the operating businesses were so large that they often fully erased the licensing income, leaving the organization to claim that it earns no money and thus owes no taxes. This pattern is an old one for Mr. Trump. The collapse of major parts of his business in the early 1990s generated huge losses that he used to reduce his taxes for years afterward.

Large bills looming

With the cash from ‘The Apprentice,’ Mr. Trump went on his biggest buying spree since the 1980s.

“The Apprentice,” which debuted on NBC in 2004, was a huge hit. Mr. Trump received 50 percent of its profits, and he went on to buy more than 10 golf courses and multiple other properties. The losses at these properties reduced his tax bill.

But the strategy ran into trouble as the money from “The Apprentice” began to decline. By 2015, his financial condition was worsening.

His 2016 presidential campaign may have been partly an attempt to resuscitate his brand.

The financial records do not answer this question definitively. But the timing is consistent: Mr. Trump announced a campaign that seemed a long shot to win, but was almost certain to bring him newfound attention, at the same time that his businesses were in need of a new approach.

The presidency has helped his business.

Since he became a leading presidential candidate, he has received large amounts of money from lobbyists, politicians and foreign officials who pay to stay at his properties or join his clubs. The Times investigation puts precise numbers on this spending for the first time.

A surge of new members at the Mar-a-Lago club in Florida gave him an additional $5 million a year from the business since 2015. The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association paid at least $397,602 in 2017 to the Washington hotel, where it held at least one event during its World Summit in Defense of Persecuted Christians.

In his first two years in the White House, Mr. Trump received millions of dollars from projects in foreign countries, including $3 million from the Philippines, $2.3 million from India and $1 million from Turkey.

But the presidency has not resolved his core financial problem: Many of his businesses continue to lose money.

With “The Apprentice” revenue declining, Mr. Trump has absorbed the losses partly through one-time financial moves that may not be available to him again.

In 2012, he took out a $100 million mortgage on the commercial space in Trump Tower. He has also sold hundreds of millions worth of stock and bonds. But his financial records indicate that he may have as little as $873,000 left to sell.

He will soon face several major bills that could put further pressure on his finances.

He appears to have paid off none of the principal of the Trump Tower mortgage, and the full $100 million comes due in 2022. And if he loses his dispute with the I.R.S. over the 2010 refund, he could owe the government more than $100 million (including interest on the original amount).

He is personally on the hook for some of these bills.

In the 1990s, Mr. Trump nearly ruined himself by personally guaranteeing hundreds of millions of dollars in loans, and he has since said that he regretted doing so. But he has taken the same step again, his tax records show. He appears to be responsible for loans totaling $421 million, most of which is coming due within four years.

Should he win re-election, his lenders could be placed in the unprecedented position of weighing whether to foreclose on a sitting president. Whether he wins or loses, he will probably need to find new ways to use his brand — and his popularity among tens of millions of Americans — to make money.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
River
bioalchemist
Posts: 13431
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:08 am
Location: the dry land

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by River »

Yeesh. I somehow managed to avoid the news all day and take a look to find Armenia and Azerbaijan are fighting and that our President who sold himself to voters in 2016 as a business genius is financially compromised. Good lord, what an astronomic sum. More than the annual revenue of a mid-size company, actually. How did the Times get this information?
When you can do nothing what can you do?
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6804
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Dave_LF »

Trump's campaign is missing an obvious opportunity here. He should have just agreed to leave Ginsberg's replacement for the winner of the election. His support among evangelicals is still strong, but it's not as strong as it was in 2016, and believing that the only way to get another anti-abortion judge on the bench is to vote for Trump would have been just the thing to get the wavery ones back on his side.

Unless he feels that having another judge who would rule "why yes, you may steal the election!" is more important.
User avatar
River
bioalchemist
Posts: 13431
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:08 am
Location: the dry land

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by River »

I'm not sure a man who lets himself get personally on the hook for hundreds of millions thinks that strategically Dave. People around him might, and sometimes pull it off if he doesn't manage to torpedo their designs with Twitter blather or other stupidity.
When you can do nothing what can you do?
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6804
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Dave_LF »

I'm pretty sure he doesn't. And probably anyone around him who can has been fired by now. Still thought I might as well point it out. For one thing, it might be wise for the Democrats to just let it go ahead before the election if they've concluded it's inevitable. Which is what the law prescribes anyway, if that's still worth anything. We all remember Garland, but playing tit-for-tat will just have the effect of enshrining Republican misbehavior as precedent, which is something I very much do not want to see.
User avatar
elengil
Cat-egorical Herbitual Creativi-Tea
Posts: 6248
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Between the Mountains and the Sea

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by elengil »

Dave_LF wrote:, but playing tit-for-tat will just have the effect of enshrining Republican misbehavior as precedent, which is something I very much do not want to see.
This is what I was trying to get at in my little thought-dump from... I dunno, last week or something? Time has no meaning anymore.

I don't want the race to the bottom to be the new norm, where either side says "Well they did something bad, so we'll do something worse just to get back at them." At the same time, while misbehavior can be shunned by one side, that alone does not seem enough to keep the other side from doing it anyway, which just leaves the behaving side at a constant disadvantage.

We need to enshrine *behavior* in laws that can't easily be dismissed and twisted toward misbehavior! That is what I truly want to see. All these 'norms' and 'rules' and 'precedents' that seem to be cast off the minute they are inconvenient need to be strengthened in law instead of abandoned entirely.
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.

"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6804
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Dave_LF »

elengil wrote:I don't want the race to the bottom to be the new norm, where either side says "Well they did something bad, so we'll do something worse just to get back at them." At the same time, while misbehavior can be shunned by one side, that alone does not seem enough to keep the other side from doing it anyway, which just leaves the behaving side at a constant disadvantage.
I do think some sort of "punishment" is warranted, but tit-for-tat is a crude way of meting one out even when this and that aren't against the letter or spirit of the law. I don't have a specific suggestion, but it seems like a big group of people who've made their careers in politics would be able to come up with something.
User avatar
Cerin
Posts: 6384
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:10 am

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Cerin »

Dave_LF wrote:Trump's campaign is missing an obvious opportunity here. He should have just agreed to leave Ginsberg's replacement for the winner of the election. His support among evangelicals is still strong, but it's not as strong as it was in 2016, and believing that the only way to get another anti-abortion judge on the bench is to vote for Trump would have been just the thing to get the wavery ones back on his side.
If Trump did not take the opportunity to fill the seat, it would equal a promise broken (many people voted for him expressly because of his promise to appoint conservative judges); it would be perceived as a monumental betrayal and would be enough to substantially cut into his base support, imo.
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46098
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

From a strategic point of view, I agree with Cerin about the above.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6804
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Dave_LF »

Ok; so you say you want to do it, you tried to do it, except those mean ol' Democrats got in the way and wouldn't let you. Double win. I suppose theoretically, that could be exactly what he's up to. The Democrats certainly appear prepared to walk right into that trap, if it exists.
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46098
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

Speaking as "the Democrats" designated representative™, I would gladly walk into that "trap".
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
Dave_LF
Wrong within normal parameters
Posts: 6804
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:59 am
Location: The other side of Michigan

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Dave_LF »

IMO, if the Democrats have a reason to believe they can actually block this nomination, then they should go ahead and fight it. But if it's a lost cause, they might as well let things go forward now to kill it as an election issue. Unless, of course, they think they can turn out more votes with "help us block this judge" than Trump could via "help us confirm her."
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46098
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

There really isn't anything "the Democrats" can do to block the nomination. All that they can really do is point out how utterly unfair and against precedent it is (there has never been a Supreme Court nominee confirmed anywhere close to this close to a presidential election in our nation's history). And point out how important it is to take back the presidency and the Senate to balance out the 6-3 conservative majority in the court. Based on fundraising numbers at least (which is the only objective standard that we can look at at this point), this is likely to be a successful strategy for "the Democrats".
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
Cerin
Posts: 6384
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:10 am

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Cerin »

Dave_LF wrote:Ok; so you say you want to do it, you tried to do it, except those mean ol' Democrats got in the way and wouldn't let you.
I don't think this works, because it's been widely reported that there is nothing the Democrats can do to block the nomination.

I think a confirmation works as an issue for both sides; it will buoy the right and fire up the left. There could be a retirement in the near future, as well, so a confirmation now doesn't kill the issue for the right.

cross post with V
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
User avatar
Voronwë the Faithful
At the intersection of here and now
Posts: 46098
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Voronwë the Faithful »

Again, I agree with Cerin. When Justice Ginsburg first passed away I saw it as mostly a motivating factor to the "the Democrats". I have since come to realize that that was willfully over-optimistic.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
User avatar
RoseMorninStar
Posts: 12880
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 11:07 am
Location: North Shire

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by RoseMorninStar »

I used to consider myself very much middle of the road politically, but the road has changed. All of the things I once admired about the Republican party has fallen by the wayside. There are pitifully few John McCain's left. Environmental issues, which have long been of paramount importance to me, were initiated by Richard Nixon (a Republican) with the formation of the EPA in 1970. Under more recent Republican administrations and particularly under the Trump administration, we have seen protections erode at an incredible pace even as the situation on our planet becomes dire. I consider environmental protections to be one of if not the greatest 'pro-life' issue.  I am fairly fiscally conservative but the last several Republican administrations have been anything but. They have racked up incredible debt, compared to their Democratic counterparts. It is a National security issue. Wealth inequality, the economy, and our debt tends to do better under Democratic presidents.

My neighbor used to tell me the Republicans were the party of 'grown-ups' but I have seen such a lack of responsibility, decency, honesty, integrity, and just plain kindness, that rings hollow.  Those virtues have been replaced with blatant and profuse lying, dishonesty, dirty dealing, bullying, name-calling, a lack of fair play/compromise/give & take for the good of all from the current president and the Republican Congress. It is simply appalling. The Republican party, lead by Trump, has become the party of bigotry, racism, cronyism, self-dealing and of division/divisiveness. It is not an administration that cares for the poor and those in need, which is a marker of civilization (and I'll add it should give those who call themselves 'Christians' and believe Trump is their 'Savior' pause). It has not upheld E pluribus unum, or 'Out of Many, One' but has divided us into either red OR blue, not purple. And the 'blues' are not equals in Trump's country.  Trump's party is one of tearing down, not building up. It is one of destabilization which leaves our country vulnerable. Trump has filled the White house with sycophants whom he expects pledges of loyalty to him personally, not the country or the constitution, as it should  be. He has dismissed anyone (experts in their respective fields) who do not bolster his incompetent and uninformed/misinformed view which is laser focused on 'what is good for Donald Trump'. All this not to mention their embrace of wacky conspiracy theories and peddling in misinformation. While I never considered myself a Republican (nor do I consider myself a Democrat) I am not alone in condemning this president for his behavior and lack of accountability to the nation. There are many who were stalwart conservatives/Republicans who have said 'enough is enough' and acknowledge the downward spiral this administration has taken the party. It is no longer 'Republican' but 'Trumpism'. Trump may be able to con and use the Evangelicals to his purpose which evidently fits with their false god/gospel of prosperity and if he is their 'Savior' that will be theirs to account for. 

Stuart Stevens wrote a good op-ed in the NYT on the subject: I Hope This Is Not Another Lie About the Republican Party

Another good piece from NPR, host Terry Gross interviews author Sarah Posner: 'Unholy' Examines The Alliance Between White Evangelicals And Trump
My heart is forever in the Shire.
User avatar
Cerin
Posts: 6384
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:10 am

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Cerin »

RoseMorninStar wrote:Trump may be able to con and use the Evangelicals to his purpose <snip>
Trump isn't conning evangelicals, Trump is doing things as President that matter to evangelicals, principally -- choosing conservative judges they hope will overthrow Roe v. Wade, which they see as opening the door to the murder of 70 million human beings (an evil that eclipses character flaws), and supporting freedom of religion causes involving the LGBTQ agenda, which goes directly against scriptural statements about marriage and gender. Another thing evangelicals put tremendous store in is the fact that an acknowledgement of the Creator appears in the Declaration of Independence, and they appreciate Trump's willingness to stand up for the goodness of our founders and founding in the face of the critical theory onslaught. Now perhaps you see all this as conning, but I'm drawing a distinction between conning and actions taken. It is not difficult to understand why evangelicals support Trump -- he's done more in support of the causes they care about than any one else you could mention.
Avatar photo by Richard Lykes, used with permission.
User avatar
elengil
Cat-egorical Herbitual Creativi-Tea
Posts: 6248
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:45 pm
Location: Between the Mountains and the Sea

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by elengil »

Cerin wrote:
RoseMorninStar wrote:Now perhaps you see all this as conning, but I'm drawing a distinction between conning and actions taken.
I agree that he isn't actually conning people in this particular regard, he is doing a lot of what he is expected to do as a Republican based on their (modern) historic support for evangelical principles. I think where I depart from this is that Republicans in general seem to be 'conning' in that they state one thing but often do another. Republicans want to ban abortions for everyone except *their* mistresses is a good example of "do what I say, not as I do" morality of politicians in regard to claimed religious-based beliefs being turned into laws.

Still not a conn if you are getting what you asked for, just more hypocrisy from those who will gladly push an agenda for votes while having directly conflicting personal actions. But evangelicals often don't ask for moral righteousness from their representatives so long as they push for the 'right' laws. To me that does directly conflict with scripture which often speaks about the righteousness of rulers and/or the failing of having righteous rulers.
and supporting freedom of religion causes involving the LGBTQ agenda, which goes directly against scriptural statements about marriage and gender
[/quote]

Scriptural statements of belief by definition have no place in 'freedom of religion' causes. LGBTQ causes don't care what a religious scripture says because our laws are not based on Christianity but on a founding principle enshrined in the Constitution that says there is no established religion that everyone must follow. Evangelicals are free to believe it, they are free to abstain from what they believe is wrong, but they are not free to use law to enforce their views on others - the very definition of "shoving their religion down the throats" of people who don't share those beliefs and have zero reason to abstain from what another person's religion forbids.

Just as Christians have zero reason to abstain from pork or alcohol, and no law should be proposed to attempt to prevent them based on what other religions believe. That is not to say there may be perfectly good arguments for why something should or should not be allowed, but basing those arguments solely on anyone's scripture is to say the First Amendment doesn't apply "to us."
The dumbest thing I've ever bought
was a 2020 planner.

"Does anyone ever think about Denethor, the guy driven to madness by staying up late into the night alone in the dark staring at a flickering device he believed revealed unvarnished truth about the outside word, but which in fact showed mostly manipulated media created by a hostile power committed to portraying nothing but bad news framed in the worst possible way in order to sap hope, courage, and the will to go on? Seems like he's someone we should think about." - Dave_LF
Post Reply