While I realize this post is virtually moot now since the election is upon us, Nathan Akin posted part 2 of his series only today. Thus, I thought I'd put this brief critique up.
After considering the chief concerns #NeverTrump advocates like Akin have listed in campaigning against Trump and for 3rd party/write-ins, I feel even more confident I chose well in my decision. I only pray if and/or when Trump loses the presidency, and we hand off this country's political destiny to Hillary Rodham Clinton, I will be able to put out of my mind and heart that #NeverTrumpers played a decisive role in getting her elected.
Election 2016 Thoughts – Part Two:
Trump Support Could Hurt Our Gospel Witness: A Critique
In Election 2016 Thoughts – Part One, Baptist21 contributor, Nathan Akin, listed five reasons why a 3rd candidate vote for president in the 2016 election is not in vain. I posted a brief but thorough response to Akin's view. In Akin's sequel, he insists that supporting Donald Trump as president could hurt our gospel witness. Below is my even briefer response to Akin's sequel.
Nathan Akin: Why supporting Donald Trump for President hurts our gospel witness
Before listing his reasons a Trump vote could hurt our gospel witness, Akin makes a
disclaimer concerning his view. "I am sharing my views with conviction but that does not mean I think you are crazy or do not have a valid argument if you disagree." He alludes to the provocative rhetoric he says comes from both sides of the issue (presumably #NeverTrump advocates on one side and Trump voters on the other), and mentions he'll deal with the rhetoric later in the article. Akin is grieved for the lack of charity and feels some blame himself.
First, Akin asserts that Trump could hurt our gospel witness. Citing Paul's concern in Galatians 2:4-5 about "false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus" and his apostolic response "to them we did not yield in submission…so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you," Akin concludes: "Paul is clearly concerned that the gospel might be preserved from error." In addition to Galatians, Akin cites 1 Corinthians 5:1 in which the Apostle admonishes the Corinthians in morally tolerating a sexual deviant in the fellowship. Akin then concludes: "Paul is horrified that the Corinthian Church overlooks and therefore implicitly condones sinful behavior, not even tolerated by pagans, precisely because it hurts their gospel witness in the world." Hence, Trump hurts our gospel witness.
Second, it is possible to forgive someone and at the same time not see them as fit to be president. Contra Trump voters who argue we are not electing a pastor but a president, we may forgive Trump for his immoral deeds but forgiveness does not mean he still qualifies to be president any more than forgiving a pedophile qualifies him to be a children's worker. "I think we vote for values and character and leave the results in God's hands."
Third, Akin queries where supporting Donald Trump will lead and concludes "this election has given even more credence to the adage that evangelicals are in the Republicans pocket."
Finally, Akin concludes after all is said, Jesus Christ will still be on the Throne after Election Day. Laying aside "apocalyptic lenses" which too often cloud clear judgments, the present election remains "important and will have ramifications for years to come." Christ's kingdom remains unmoved. "We, above all people, should not fret at what happens on Election Day because we know one day there will no longer be two parties or even a president, but simply a King and Kingdom where peace, justice, and righteousness reign!"
Evaluation
First, Akin offers two biblical texts he believes supports his claim that supporting Donald Trump for president could hurt our gospel witness. And while I think it's proper to seek biblical support for one's approach in engaging the town square, specifically in this case, electing officials to serve the town square, I find Akin's choice of texts entirely vacuous. In both the Galatians and Corinthians' passages, Paul was specifically dealing with internal church affairs not town square officials. Note Akin's frustration toward Trump voters: "This has been one of the more mind-boggling arguments I have observed about this election. Many are saying we are not electing a pastor-in-chief and that everyone deserves forgiveness." Does it occur to Akin that one reason Trump voters might be making this argument is because #NeverTrump advocates like him wrongly exploit biblical texts specifically concerning the internal affairs of the church to make a case against voting for a particular candidate for office in the town square?
What is more, Akin borders on being completely irresponsible in his citing of Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 5:1: "It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has ahis father's wife." Akin interprets this verse to depict the Apostle's horror that "the Corinthian Church overlooks and therefore implicitly condones sinful behavior, not even tolerated by pagans, precisely because it hurts their gospel witness in the world." The context makes it clear Paul's concern was definitively not because their tolerance hurt their gospel witness. Rather, Paul's concern was the church not the world—those within the body of Christ, not those outside the body of Christ: "Do you not know that ca little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough?" (v.6).
Neither the Corinthians nor the Galatians passage says anything at all concerning how believers are to elect officials to town square office. Hence while it's honorable to want Scripture to substantiate one's position, both those who support Trump and those who are #NeverTrump must employ sober principles of biblical interpretation when they cite the Bible.
Second, what's forgiveness got to do with electing a candidate to public office? I don't have to forgive Donald Trump of anything for the simple reason Donald Trump has not sinned against me (so far as I know). Again, the subtle assumption of dealing with church issues or issues between Christian and Christian is running on Akin's backburner here. Why would Donald Trump or any candidate for public office in the town square require my forgiveness before he or she could be elected to town square office? On the other hand, is Donald Trump a felon? Is he a criminal? Is he a racketeer? Has he committed treason? These questions are pertinent because they reflect criminality not personal forgiveness which, by the way, is a heart issue not a political one.
Additionally, Akin strangely claims that "we [should] vote for values and character and leave the results in God's hands." First, while "values and character" as a criterion to judge whether a candidate receives our vote cannot and should not be dismissed, we must ask, whose values and character? According to Akin's view, values and character always seem to apply either to the candidate, the voter, and/or the voter's community's interests exclusively. Thus, Donald Trump's character matters; how the voter looks to others matters; and the voter's community perception matters. What's wrong in this picture?
One thing is, the stark absence of concern for the polis at large. What's best for the country? Another thing is the obsession with "how we'll look to others." Frankly, this is the concern of puberty not maturity. Third, this is a very selfish position. Fourth, in the end, it's a contradictory position. Consider: if one really does "leave it in God's hands," then why would one be concerned about whether voting for Trump could hurt one's witness? Vote your conscience and leave it in God's hands.
Akin also suggests that the present election gives more credence that evangelicals are in the Republicans pocket. Why would voting for Trump lend credence to Republican loyalty? Donald Trump is the bane of Republican party leaders. He is the most divisive candidate in the Republican party to arise in my lifetime and is often depicted as destroying the Republican party. He represents a groundswell of grassroots Americans including Republicans, estranged Democrats, Independents, and never-before-voters. To suggest evangelicals are for Trump because they're in the pocket of the established Republican party is either uninformed, misinformed, or dishonest. Evangelicals have made it clear why they are voting for Trump and no reason they often cite has ever implied it's because they're loyal to Republicans. Akin and others should either produce evidence for this assertion or stop citing it as reason evangelicals are voting for Trump.
In summary, Akin offers little to support his contention that voting for Donald Trump could hurt the church's gospel witness, and virtually nothing in response to reasons commonly cited by evangelical Trump voters.
Though I've already cast my vote for Trump and could do nothing about it anyway, I feel even more confident in my vote after reading Akin's case against it.
Nathan Akin and pals obviously have a completely different understanding of the gospel than some of us who are a little older. Wonder how these guys feel about putting their kids and fellow church members unde the heels of an HRC presidency and hung upon the horns of their "witness".
Remember reading in the Old Testament about some of the people of God who were so far gone they were willing to allow their own children to fuel sacrificial fires on the altars of Moloch. I pretty much see this never-Trump mentality as the same thing from both a political and spiritual perspective.
The statment about Trump being "the most divisive candidate to arise in his lifetime" demonstrates just how short and short-sighted the life of one Nathan Akin has been to this point.
They've made the term "gospel" a gloss-over phrase for both spiritual and cultural idolatry. Looks like the pox of stupidity has landed first upon their own houses.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.08 at 08:02 AM
This is what happens when the youth group runs the church.
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.08 at 08:29 AM
"We, above all people, should not fret at what happens on Election Day because we know one day there will no longer be two parties or even a president, but simply a King and Kingdom where peace, justice, and righteousness reign!" (Nathan Akin)
Well, Brother Akin, in the meantime you live in a place called America. Christians should not only fret, but fret to the point of a burden to pray as we ought to move God's hand in the affairs of this great nation. We will never make America great again until we make it good again. And the nation will never be good again until the Body of Christ, in its multiplied manifestations, stands in unity in the public arena to take back ground we have surrendered to the enemy. The Republican Party, while it still exists, provides a glimmer of hope in that regard.
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.08 at 08:39 AM
Well said, Max....or at least the current platform of the "Republican" party offers a glimmer of hope.
Academic tenure needs to be reconsidered and abolished in a lot of schools these days both public and private.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.08 at 11:37 AM
I've come to realize that what has me fully and finally separated from what was once was a home with and a desire to "be" Southern Baptist are "NeverTrumpers, ERLC, seminary presidents and convention "leaders".
I believe the 2016 US presidential election has done more to irreparably divide the SBC's remaining faithful than the CR debacle or post CR squandering of millions.
"Come together in Unity" with those who for the sake of limelight, cultural and political perversion of the gospel and self-promotion have called into question the very faith of those Baptists and other Christians who disagree?.....FAT CHANCE.
I'd rather picnic lunch under a huge oak tree with a pack of rabid skunks.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.08 at 11:54 AM
Is this Akin related to the seminary president who's omnipresent with his jewels of twittered wisdom?
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.08 at 03:51 PM
Can't figure out whether this Nathan Akin feller is more committed to the Bible or the piece of garbage 2000 BFM. Doesn't matter, still out to lunch.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.08 at 03:53 PM
It is possible that Trump support could hurt someone's witness. I think the one's who will hurt the worst is those who have in the past asserted or implied we are electing a "pastor-in-chief" and have now reversed course to cry that doesn't matter. Even that can be mitigated by admitting one's past view was wrong and needed correcting. I think it is also important for Trump supporters to be precise in what they mean. Awhile back I heard someone say that Trump was the "pro-marriage" candidate. Now I understood that what was meant was more that he will not actively promote the LGBT agenda, but to call a thrice-married philanderer a "pro-marriage" candidate is laughable.
On the other hand folks can approach it like one guy in our church emphasized -- yes, Donald Trump is an old reprobate, but his presidential policies will not actively undermine or attack Christian principles on issues like abortion and so forth. We know Hillary Clinton will be active in her opposition to conservative Christian principles, because she has said so.
Posted by: Robert Vaughn | 2016.11.08 at 04:28 PM
Trump and brave Americans win! Moral cowards calling themselves Evangelicals who could not vote, lose.
Posted by: Alex Guggenheim | 2016.11.09 at 06:56 AM
I've never been more proud of stupid white people than I am this morning.
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.09 at 09:42 AM
I spent most of the day trying to vote. And not because of lines. It was chilling. I don't know how wide spread the problem was but I do know there were many such problems in several precincts in one end of town. And I doubt if others so affected went to the trouble to vote that I did, culminating in talking to a judge. I have voted at the same precinct since 1998. Poof. Between this past May primary and yesterday, I disappeared?
The precinct where I voted in the primary had no record of me at all. The poll workers looked like deer in headlights because evidemtly there were so many like this. Had I not chased my vote down, I would not have been able to. I ended up at a precinct with a line of people like me who chased their vote. How many did not? I have lodged an official complaint but our SofS had Clinton in to campaign for her.
So, are our institutions just corrupt or inept or some of both?
Or, did the Russians do it?
It was a chilling feeling folks not having a vote.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.09 at 10:24 AM
Lydia asks "So, are our institutions just corrupt or inept or some of both?"
Yep, just like the American church. As the church goes, so goes the nation. My questions this morning: What will it take to change things in both? Is this election God's blessing or judgment on America? What will it take to get the church to 'really' pray as it ought?
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.09 at 10:35 AM
Lydia asks "did the Russians do it?"
My dear Lydia, in your case, Al Mohler did it! ;^)
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.09 at 10:38 AM
Has Akins' guy Mullen conceded yet? :o)
Max, what shocked me were the good old melting pot voters!! Hillarys message of" Aryan Nationalist Trump voters" ignored the fact that the diversity of our nation are worse off, too, financially under the establishment. Including republicans. Obama ruled by Exec order when he could not get votes which they were all but silent about.
Hillary did not even have the class to leave her hotel room to speak to her supporters. Such an oligharcical entitlement mentality. The Clintons got their many millions out public service selling access to our system. I hope their olgharical reign is over.
The message last night was pretty stark. Trump won pretty much despite official Republican Party pushback on him until the last few months. Even the the Wall Street crony fascist vultures were having a good cry. Life was good for them under the establishment. Now is the time to buy!
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.09 at 10:41 AM
Lydia: So, are our institutions just corrupt or inept or some of both?
Having worked as an election judge for many years, I'd say it is more inept than corrupt -- the results of heavy-laden bureaucracy (and in the case of us poll workers, people who only do their jobs once or twice a year). I remember when I first moved to where I have now been for 30+ years, no one in the courthouse (at least that I talked to) could tell me where I was supposed to vote!
Since I've quit, electronic voting has become the norm, which may open the way for new problems, hacking, corruption, et al. When I was a judge the mail ballot was the main source of fraud, imo. Not sure it is anymore.
Posted by: Robert Vaughn | 2016.11.09 at 10:52 AM
Russell Moore's jewel of wisdom for the day poses the question of what we as "the church" should do with each other now.
I have a question? After being told nothing by Moore during this entire election cycle other than President elect Trump is a vile and unfit human being for the office, along with more personal charges like I/We forfeit our claims to Christ's kingdom by supporting Donald Trump (not to mention verbal exclusion from a class labeled as evangelicals)..Can somebody explain to me what Russell Moore's understanding or definition of the true "Church" really is.
When things get in a pickle again, don't really like the idea of what's supposed to be your brother pulling the pin on a handgrenade and leaving it with you while he exits the fox-hole. Unity with that kind of element is not worth the effort.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.09 at 03:22 PM
I believe during recent SBC controversy resolutions it was called "marginalizaton"?
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.09 at 03:24 PM
Scott, Hopefully the SBC will marginalize the ERLC and get out of the political lobbying business by defunding it.
This election was NOT about republican-democrat. It was about the republican/democrat establishment, the Facistic crony elite Wall Street bank establishment, the elite lobby class and the media elite establishment that keeps telling anyone who disagrees with establishment policy they are homophobes and racists and Islamophobes. The DNC talking points.
Most of us still don't think Trump is the answer to all that ails us. But we gotta start somewhere. And he will be watched like a hawk by everyone in those categories and analyzed until they can convince enough minorities they were wrong not to vote or for how they voted.
They were not expecting the college educated to vote for Trump. They were expecting big African American turn out because even Obama warned them the election was about his legacy. They did not know that many Latinos want "legal" immigration are very family centered.
The lines have changed while they were playing from old playbook.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.09 at 05:26 PM
Lydia wrote "They were not expecting the college educated to vote for Trump."
The college-educated, who also have common sense (not all of them do), voted for Trump in my area. Just because someone is not college-educated doesn't mean he is not smart. Hillary found that out yesterday; she must have had a college-educated campaign team.
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.09 at 05:56 PM
Max => Great comment!
Scott => I like my tenure.
Posted by: JND | 2016.11.09 at 06:36 PM
Max,
I read that a Yale (Econ!) prof gave students the option to take an exam today or not and it would not count against them. This is because he heard from many students who were too upset about the election to concentrate on a test. Such elite special snowflakes our institutions are producing. Sounds like YRR pastors.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.09 at 06:40 PM
I started to read this, and I appreciate your work, but at this point, I don't give a fig.
These guys believe they kept their skirts clean. I am happy that they found a way to participate.
But their relevance is fading in the rear view mirror.
Posted by: Louis | 2016.11.09 at 07:10 PM
True dat Louis
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.09 at 07:30 PM
Lydia wrote "I read that a Yale (Econ!) prof gave students the option to take an exam today or not and it would not count against them. This is because he heard from many students who were too upset about the election to concentrate on a test."
Southern Seminary probably gave their students the same option! Those poor seminarians who were spurred on by Mohler and Moore to spit up on a Trump presidency were probably too sick to show up to class. On the other hand, millions of folks in fly-over Americana are not upset and for the first time in recent memory are concentrating on the future. Across the amber waves of grain, purple mountain majesties and fruited plain, we woke up this morning to rejoice that God had shed His grace on us. From sea to shining sea, the real America outside of Bubbleville and Louisville is rejoicing if you have ears to hear.
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.09 at 08:40 PM
I bet Moore is plotting ways to get media bookings. Wonder what he will come up with next to get attention?
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.09 at 10:04 PM
Lydia, my advice to both Americans and Southern Baptists in the face of calls for "unity", "reconciliation" is a little dark.
Listen to em, but keep em at arm's length until you can get something constructive accomplished...both for the country and "The Kingdom".
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.10 at 03:27 PM
Hey Lydia:
Did you notice the latest gems from Miller at Voices. He's no longer "divorced" from the Republican party, he's separated and looking on like he was a UN monitor, until his worldview is considered. Threatens Trump with lack of support if he remains insensitive to Miller's social progressive/liberal agenda for country and Southern Baptists.
Funny thing is, #NeverTrump is now and always has been an insignificant spec on the complexion of America for this entire political cycle.
So for Miller to level threats about what the voting populace will do or not do depending on how Trump deals with "Never Trump" issues is laughable. These guys couldn't even put their finger on the collective conscience of the country anywhere near in the ballpark. Their numbers before and after election do no merit consideration of their...."concerns/complaints".
You would expect more from "pastors" who are supposedly "in touch" with their people.
Obviously not.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.10 at 03:36 PM
"Seperated" rather than "divorced" is characteristic I've seen over and over again with this guy. Mildly interpreted it could be referred to in Las Vegas as "hedging your bets".
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.10 at 03:37 PM
Given the current vilification of terms and the political agendas behind such vilification, does the term "nativism" now translate as the same definition with "patriotism" from bygone decades?
If so "nativism" ain't so bad.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.10 at 03:40 PM
Scott, speaking of the UN, wouldn't it be nice to see some brakes put on there? Especially their cozy relationship with the Obama Administration and Catholic charities in NOT properly vetting refugees. Looks like the ERLC wanted a piece of that money machine as a UN NGO.
Miller fancies himself an SBC establishment elite. The big boys use him to carry messages to the peasants.
Yes, I am mean. Ironically, his long time bellicose style reminds me of Trump without the gravitas and sincerity. Miller really thinks he is balanced and fair on all issues. I think his title went to his head.
I am sure The Donald is quaking in his boots over Miller's proclamation.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.10 at 04:44 PM
When the establishment hanger on's use Nativist it is code for "you are like the Aryan Brotherhood who want to kill people of color".
Kind of like their code for the word, Grace.
It's an insult.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.10 at 04:49 PM
At least thabiti anyabwile, their TGC buddy, had the nerve to tell people vote for Hillary. Moore did not dare for obvious reasons but thought his tactics would help her.
But I figured out why they preferred Hillary. She is the CJ Mahaney of the political elite when it comes to protecting and promoting predators. She even protected Weiner since 2011.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.10 at 05:13 PM
Scott writes "... does the term "nativism" now translate as the same definition with "patriotism" from bygone decades?"
I wish America's first immigrants had established a nativist policy of favoring native inhabitants as opposed to immigrants. If they had, they may have been more friendly to my ancestors, the Cherokees.
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.10 at 07:16 PM
Lydia:
I don't think Trump sees much contemporary need for or ongoing good by continued involvement with UN. He's already articulated such. Hope he quietly but forcefully puts the brakes on some of this stuff.
Spoken like a true "nativist" huh? :)
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.11 at 09:03 AM
Southern Baptists now need an unlikely champion from its ranks to step forward with a rally cry:
"MAKE THE SBC GREAT AGAIN!"
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.11 at 09:29 AM
MAX: at this point, might be better to go with a different "handle" and start from scratch. Some houses are beyond rehabilitation.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.11 at 10:09 AM
It's the economy, in my book. And frankly, foreign policy fits in that category. I am nativist enough to believe that seeking stability for your family is a good thing. I like what Dennis Miller said, " It should be hard to get into this country but easy to start a small business. Now, it is the opposite"
They can start with H1b visas. Big conglomerates are using them to keep from paying social security on employees. Crony Fascism.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.11 at 11:31 AM
Lydia wrote "They can start with H1b visas."
The H-1B provision was intended to temporarily employ foreign workers in "specialty" occupations. That word has now been redefined to mean whatever you want it to mean ... sort of like theology.
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.11 at 12:34 PM
Here's another "nativist rant" along the lines of Lydia's good point about the economy. There is a preferred status of those presently gaining access to the country for the purpose of starting small business...coming over with suitcases of cash while the guy trying to LLC can't get the banks to talk about it.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.11 at 01:27 PM
Perhaps another topic for another day or post might be how to interpret and understand the labels "misogynist" and "racist" in light of the recent election and early reaction to it.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.11 at 01:31 PM
Oh...almost left out "xenophobic". That one always reminds me of the tinkling of a xylophone.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.11 at 01:32 PM
The dad of one of my daughter's friends is an international recruiter for a multinational. He explained to me how it works and also how the IT workers he specifically recruits from places like India and Pakistan are no more qualified than Americans. And guess who else is making a ton of money from it? Lawyers..
95 million Americans of working age are unemployed. 8 thousand Americans in my city alone are waiting for subsidized housing due to the economy. But Federal subsidized housing going to refugees. (they never admit this) and of course it is "hate" to relay facts. Oh and xenophobia, too. I say, let them call us names. They cant discuss policy and the implications.
8 years of Obama has turned us into a Banana Republic. With Hillary's-- pay to play -- I cringe to think what favors she owed to dictators.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.11 at 06:29 PM
You need to be preaching to Russ Moore and Alan Cross, Lydia. Whether they believe in lady preachers or not👍 They want to see more church dollars spent on holding the floodgates open....all the while, early returning SBC missionaries perhaps among current unemployed.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.11 at 07:53 PM
"They want to see more church dollars spent on holding the floodgates open....all the while, early returning SBC missionaries perhaps among current unemployed."
It's telling, isn't it? They throw their own under the bus then call us haters for wanting to close the floodgate. Just like our corrupt government.
People never learn. At some point, a new breed will do the same to them. They modeled it as ok.
I am trying to picture anti Hillary protestors wielding bats, causing destruction and intimidation. The left would demand Martial Law.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.11 at 08:58 PM
Well, can't say I'll lose any sleep if police give rowdy anti-Trump protesters the beatings their parents never did.
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.12 at 08:53 AM
Scott wrote "Well, can't say I'll lose any sleep if police give rowdy anti-Trump protesters the beatings their parents never did."
From the looks of them on TV coverage, most don't look like they are tax-paying citizens yet. I like how Seattle police handled the young whippersnappers. The police chief shouted through a mega-phone "Attention ALL protestors. You are under arrest. Please stand where you are until the police can process you." They ran like hell!
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.12 at 12:17 PM
Obama is squandering any legacy he is concerned about by not speaking out on rioters. He is leaving it too long. These are people who adore him.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.12 at 01:07 PM
LOL, Max, maybe their organizers, handlers and George Soros didn't promise to post bail as a perk of their "conscientious objection".
Posted by: Scott Shaver | 2016.11.12 at 05:49 PM
Lydia writes "Obama is squandering any legacy he is concerned about by not speaking out on rioters."
Yes, POTUS needs to intervene as well as Hillary - that's what leaders are supposed to do, but they won't ... they are running out of opportunities for crowds to be on their side. The Obamas will be living in DC until Sasha graduates from high school, renting a mansion a couple miles from the White House. The last President who hung around DC after passing the POTUS baton was Woodrow Wilson. I suspect he will use his time there to twist a few arms to protect his fleeting legacy. The only thing with his name affixed to it - Obamacare - will most likely be Nobamacare by mid-2017. Congressional actions plus executive orders will erase most of his eight years, as America moves on down the road with another POTUS and closer to the wrath that has been stored up against it.
Posted by: Max | 2016.11.12 at 09:06 PM
Max, I know people who are 60 who are desperately trying to meet Obamacare premiums. And their Deductables are outrageous. Why? Because they are self employed with few options in this state. And they have to prove to the IRS they bought health insurance. It is hard enough to have a small business in this country as it is. Most people are worker drones for multinationals in bed with gov. Or gov workers. It really is Fascism. The WS bankers loved Obama and Hillary.
It is so much easier to control people when they are desperately trying to make it. Unlike our lawmakers who are protected and take care of themselves first while regulating us to death and taking away our choices and then censoring speech. Evidently, in their world, words they don't like are worse than killing people who disagree.
The democrats have been playing a game for a long time and many believed they are the party of the little guy and the oppressed when truth is they are the establishment elite loved by multinational conglomerates whose path is made clear by the political elites. The republicans should have been fighting this but elections take money. They were also feeding at the trough.
Obama is not going anywhere. His ego won't let him stop defending his legacy. His Hillary stump speeches were about him and his legacy! . I think the next move might be DC. Statehood.
I hope everyone realizes there are not enough police to deal with massive protests. They are baiting so when Trump is inaugurated the National Guard has to be called in. Soros does not give up and has endless supply of funds for this after pillaging other country's currencies. We already know about Creamer at Democratic strategies and the supposedly pro Trump paid agitators at rallies starting fights. That man visited the WH over 300 times during the campaign. . The deception is deep. I also remind myself daily that almost half of voters preferred a criminal public servant who is above the law. This is far from over. We actually have many citizens who believe in a two tiered justice system. Scary.
Posted by: Lydia | 2016.11.13 at 07:48 AM