[RunItUpTheGut]

I found it funny that Bloomberg was considering a run as an independent. Most dems know Burnie could never be president but they hate hillary so much they only have the other option. It would be a landslide of epic proportion if Bloomberg enters and steal dem votes from bernie.
I'm with Hoot. Once hillary is indicted, which is looking likely, I guarantee they fill the gaps with Biden or somebody else.

[RunItUpTheGut]

None of the other republicanside will leave the race to help cruz or Trump because they all hate both of them.
Everyone else SHOULD drop out, but there's to much ego and money on the table for that to happen.
Jebs campaign may be the worst campaign ever. Most blown money for return. What a horrible waste.

[Hoot Gibson]

None of the other republicanside will leave the race to help cruz or Trump because they all hate both of them.
Everyone else SHOULD drop out, but there's to much ego and money on the table for that to happen.
Jebs campaign may be the worst campaign ever. Most blown money for return. What a horrible waste.

Jeb's effort has a good chance of becoming the textbook example of how not to run a campaign.

I spend a lot of time observing and debating politics but this campaign has been the most discouraging ever for me. It has been a campaign of one sideshow after another. Trump is the beneficiary of millions of dollars of free publicity from Fox News and Fox is reaping millions in higher ad revenues.

I am becoming very skeptical that there is any real bad blood between Roger Ailes and Donald Trump. This latest incident strikes me as a win-win for both men. As I write, Greta is starting yet another Fox show focusing on The Donald.

[Demarcus ware]

Jeb's effort has a good chance of becoming the textbook example of how not to run a campaign.

I spend a lot of time observing and debating politics but this campaign has been the most discouraging ever for me. It has been a campaign of one sideshow after another. Trump is the beneficiary of millions of dollars of free publicity from Fox News and Fox is reaping millions in higher ad revenues.

I am becoming very skeptical that there is any real bad blood between Roger Ailes and Donald Trump. This latest incident strikes me as a win-win for both men. As I write, Greta is starting yet another Fox show focusing on The Donald.

I've often wondered this same thing. My only question is if you was against someone then why on earth would you give them that much airtime? It's not just an occasional mention either, it's from daylight to dark coverage of one man. Lol

[RunItUpTheGut]

If FOX really disliked the Donald, they would not be giving him free air time.
He is a ratings hit. Some people don't like that fact.
However, the same people who say that were the same people voting for Obama on nothing more than the star factor he created.

I love it when I see a liberal on the internet bash Trump for not having experience and not connecting with politics. Its those same jackasses who voted a community organizer who never had a job into the Whitehouse twice in the last 8 years.

[TheRealThing]

If FOX really disliked the Donald, they would not be giving him free air time.
He is a ratings hit. Some people don't like that fact.
However, the same people who say that were the same people voting for Obama on nothing more than the star factor he created.

I love it when I see a liberal on the internet bash Trump for not having experience and not connecting with politics. Its those same jackasses who voted a community organizer who never had a job into the Whitehouse twice in the last 8 years.

You have everything about right. But FOX doesn't like Trump, they do however love the ratings and money he brings their way. :Thumbs:

[Hoot Gibson]

You have everything about right. But FOX doesn't like Trump, they do however love the ratings and money he brings their way. :Thumbs:

If Fox did not like Trump, they would not be giving him so much free publicity. Trump has received some very softball interviews from Fox. Nobody is forcing Trump to appear on Fox and he has probably appeared there more than all of the other candidates combined. Certainly, far more than any single one of his opponents.

Fox has been very, very good to Trump. Rupert Murdoch is not conservative and neither are his very liberal children. Anybody else who had flip-flopped positions and made all of the outrageous statements that Trump has made would have been crucified by the media, but not Donald Trump. We have had seven years of a whiny liberal in the White House. I want to celebrate the end of that string.

[TheRealThing]

If Fox did not like Trump, they would not be giving him so much free publicity. Trump has received some very softball interviews from Fox. Nobody is forcing Trump to appear on Fox and he has probably appeared there more than all of the other candidates combined. Certainly, far more than any single one of his opponents.

Fox has been very, very good to Trump. Rupert Murdoch is not conservative and neither are his very liberal children. Anybody else who had flip-flopped positions and made all of the outrageous statements that Trump has made would have been crucified by the media, but not Donald Trump. We have had seven years of a whiny liberal in the White House. I want to celebrate the end of that string.

We see this thing from different perspectives. FOX has a gaggle of contributors and anchors on BOTH networks who slam and mock "the Donald" continually. We've already discussed those on FOX News who with the notable exception of Hannity and Bill O'Reilly, have really taken things to Trump. Chris Stirewalt, and Megyn Kelly and a host of others have feasted on Trump since the first debate on the parent network.

Over on Fox Business, Dagen McDowell, Charlie Gasparino, (and again a host of others) who are in orbit around Neil Cavuto, never pass up an opportunity to make Trump look as absurd and petty as possible. And BTW, I haven't heard much on the order of praise for Cruz either. Now Rubio, there you have a likely darling of Roger Eugene's eyes.

But I'm with you about liberals, though I might choose a different adjective to describe them. Words like say treasonous, or sublimely naïve for starters, to head up a possible list. I'm just not going to declare the enemy of my enemy, my friend quite yet. :biggrin:

[Hoot Gibson]

To spare my friends on BGR most of my Trump bashing, I have been spending the past few days building up my small Twitter following (only 16 followers at this time). So far, the two best known people who have begun following me are Dr. Everett Piper, President of Oklahoma Wesleyan University and Jonathan Hoenig of capitalistpig.com and a panelist on Fox News Channel's Cashin' In (a regular panelist), Your World with Neil Cavuto, and Red Eye.

Dr. Piper wrote an article today that appears on thefederalist.com, which I encourage everybody who still support Donald Trump to read. I had not heard of Dr. Piper but my wife remembered him as the author of "This is Not a Day Care. It’s a University!" which he wrote during the recent turmoil at the University of Missouri.

I have always been skeptical of Twitter but after immersing myself in it during our 30 inch snow storm, I confess that I am amazed at the amount of information available there. Not just information, reliable information tweeted by some very smart people. Of course, most of what gets tweeted is garbage, but what I like is that I have a great deal of control over what kind of information I see. If you have not given Twitter a fair trial, I encourage that you give it a try.

An Evangelical Leader Explains Why Donald Trump Won’t Be Invited To Speak At His University

I refuse to let my desire to win “trump” my moral compass. I will not sell my soul or my university’s to a political process that values victory more than virtue.

JANUARY 28, 2016 By Everett Piper

On January 18, Jerry Falwell, Jr. welcomed Donald Trump to Liberty University to speak in the school’s chapel. (Editor’s note: after this post was originally authored, Jerry Falwell, Jr. officially endorsed endorsed Donald Trump.)

As the college president who wrote the “this is not a daycare” article that received so much national attention recently, I have been asked by the media if I would be next: Will I be inviting Mr. Trump to Oklahoma Wesleyan University to speak in our chapel service?

My answer has been simple and brief. No, I will not.

[TheRealThing]

To spare my friends on BGR most of my Trump bashing, I have been spending the past few days building up my small Twitter following (only 16 followers at this time). So far, the two best known people who have begun following me are Dr. Everett Piper, President of Oklahoma Wesleyan University and Jonathan Hoenig of capitalistpig.com and a panelist on Fox News Channel's Cashin' In (a regular panelist), Your World with Neil Cavuto, and Red Eye.

Dr. Piper wrote an article today that appears on thefederalist.com, which I encourage everybody who still support Donald Trump to read. I had not heard of Dr. Piper but my wife remembered him as the author of "This is Not a Day Care. It’s a University!" which he wrote during the recent turmoil at the University of Missouri.

I have always been skeptical of Twitter but after immersing myself in it during our 30 inch snow storm, I confess that I am amazed at the amount of information available there. Not just information, reliable information tweeted by some very smart people. Of course, most of what gets tweeted is garbage, but what I like is that I have a great deal of control over what kind of information I see. If you have not given Twitter a fair trial, I encourage that you give it a try.

There are men and women in this world for whom I have tremendous respect. But I cannot say I agree with them on everything. There will always be areas or issues of certain dispute between even the best of friends, and no one is immune. Even the Apostles disputed among themselves on occasion.

You and I have agreed on far more than we have ever disagreed. But, vive la difference! I respect your considered opinion with regard to Donald J Trump. My insights into the matter take me to different conclusions but, I'll tell you what I really think. The art of apologetics in laying out our case on the issues tends to clarify said case much more concisely than in the absence of viable challenge. Especially when that challenge is offered as respectably as yours usually are.

You should not feel that you can't state your case for fear of offending anybody, least of all me. :biggrin:

[TheRealThing]

Not that any more evidence was necessary to give validation to the viewpoint as held by those who believe the media is at war with Donald Trump, but this is what Megyn Kelly said about Mr Trump after the debate:

"The Kelly File host and Trump have been in a longtime feud, which ultimately led him to opt out of the debate, instead choosing to address a veterans’ rally at nearby Drake University where he raised money for Wounded Warriors. But after the debate, candidate Ted Cruz revealed on-air that Kelly referred to Trump as Voldemort, the main villain from the Harry Potter franchise.

“Well, you know, you were joking just before we went on air that it was sort of like Voldermort, He Who Must Not Be Named,” Cruz mentioned while in a post-debate interview with Kelly.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/bias-meg...ra-debate/

[TheRealThing]

To spare my friends on BGR most of my Trump bashing, I have been spending the past few days building up my small Twitter following (only 16 followers at this time). So far, the two best known people who have begun following me are Dr. Everett Piper, President of Oklahoma Wesleyan University and Jonathan Hoenig of capitalistpig.com and a panelist on Fox News Channel's Cashin' In (a regular panelist), Your World with Neil Cavuto, and Red Eye.

Dr. Piper wrote an article today that appears on thefederalist.com, which I encourage everybody who still support Donald Trump to read. I had not heard of Dr. Piper but my wife remembered him as the author of "This is Not a Day Care. It’s a University!" which he wrote during the recent turmoil at the University of Missouri.

I have always been skeptical of Twitter but after immersing myself in it during our 30 inch snow storm, I confess that I am amazed at the amount of information available there. Not just information, reliable information tweeted by some very smart people. Of course, most of what gets tweeted is garbage, but what I like is that I have a great deal of control over what kind of information I see. If you have not given Twitter a fair trial, I encourage that you give it a try.

I might have to get on board with Twitter, though I generally resist anything that smacks of social media. And I just want to say that I would never intentionally offend you or your wife so, if Dr Piper is someone admired in your household, or if his faith is similar to your own, just know that my post is meant dispassionately.

I read the article you cited. Dr. Piper had quite a long laundry list of grievances against Donald Trump. Now, on a side note, I am certain that should Trump not win the Presidency, neither will he be launching a series of evangelical crusades ala Billy Graham, LOL. But, you can take my word on this one thing. Any man of God worth his salt, is pretty cautious about character assassination especially when the particulars cited, which in this case were intended to validate Piper's scathing rebuke of Trump, are in dispute.

Many have stood up to defend Trump with regard to his supposedly having callously offended the handicapped NY Times reporter. Did he do it, or if so was it done knowingly? You couldn't prove it by me nor could you I suspect, by Mr Piper. Without belaboring this thing too much in taking his points or charges one by one, an awful lot of the items on the good doctor's list are demonstrably arguable. I have heard the following verse misinterpreted and misapplied many times in the past, I am happy therefore to use it in it's correct context and application in this case. Matthew 7:1 (KJV)
V1 "Judge not, that ye be not judged." According to this verse we are "not to judge the inward motives of others in the sense of condemning them" ---J Vernon McGee We don't know their motives or the intent of their heart. Nor do we know that God has given up on them or that they will not come to a saving knowledge of Him.

If Mr Trump has yet to find salvation, and I suspect that could be possible, the child of God is to pray for him, email him, write him letters, call him, or help him find his way to the Lord in any way he can imagine. But Mr Trump is not applying for a job as Rector-in-Chief, he's running for President. And if we're not going to get all up on our high horses and spew all manner of indignation over the activities a couple of the Presidents of recent times, why all of a sudden are we castigating Trump who at least has pledged his loyalty to Christian tenets? In any case, it is possible to be a conservative without being a Christian. Now, I'll grant you. In my view it is impossible for a Christian to vote for candidates who openly support gay rights and abortion on demand, and think he will not suffer loss for having done so. None the less, Dr. Piper more or less wrote off "the Donald" as having a reprobate mind and I refuse to believe that he doesn't know better.

So here's the way I see this thing. If I had to face my Lord for either asking Mr Trump to speak in my University Chapel, or if I wrote an article which virtually puts Mr Trump in the company of the eternally damned to answer for, I'd have him in my Chapel. And I just could not help but wonder, would Dr. Piper feel as strongly about all of this if he had entertained Mr Trump for lunch and a visit to his campus? That is one invitation that very likely did not go out.

The one line of Dr. Piper's tongue lashing that got my attention goes as follows: "I refuse to let my desire to win “trump” my moral compass. I will not sell my soul or my university’s to a political process that values victory more than virtue."

If one Mr Trump had not come along we'd still be up to our eyes in that sticky morass known as political correctness because no Church leaders I know have had the courage to confront it. He (Piper) and everybody else who stands the moral high ground, (or just think they do), owes the awakening completely to Trump. And since we live in the last days I thought just one more Scripture reference as it would apply to political correctness, which denies the sovereignty of God and elevates men, would be apt. Revelation 3:16 (KJV)
V16 "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." Fence straddling political speech, what are we to do with it, right? At any rate, murdering the messenger seems to be an ongoing fault of the Orthodoxy, does it not?

[Hoot Gibson]

I might have to get on board with Twitter, though I generally resist anything that smacks of social media. And I just want to say that I would never intentionally offend you or your wife so, if Dr Piper is someone admired in your household, or if his faith is similar to your own, just know that my post is meant dispassionately.

I read the article you cited. Dr. Piper had quite a long laundry list of grievances against Donald Trump. Now, on a side note, I am certain that should Trump not win the Presidency, neither will he be launching a series of evangelical crusades ala Billy Graham, LOL. But, you can take my word on this one thing. Any man of God worth his salt, is pretty cautious about character assassination especially when the particulars cited, which in this case were intended to validate Piper's scathing rebuke of Trump, are in dispute.

Many have stood up to defend Trump with regard to his supposedly having callously offended the handicapped NY Times reporter. Did he do it, or if so was it done knowingly? You couldn't prove it by me nor could you I suspect, by Mr Piper. Without belaboring this thing too much in taking his points or charges one by one, an awful lot of the items on the good doctor's list are demonstrably arguable. I have heard the following verse misinterpreted and misapplied many times in the past, I am happy therefore to use it in it's correct context and application in this case. Matthew 7:1 (KJV)
V1 "Judge not, that ye be not judged." According to this verse we are "not to judge the inward motives of others in the sense of condemning them" ---J Vernon McGee We don't know their motives or the intent of their heart. Nor do we know that God has given up on them or that they will not come to a saving knowledge of Him.

If Mr Trump has yet to find salvation, and I suspect that could be possible, the child of God is to pray for him, email him, write him letters, call him, or help him find his way to the Lord in any way he can imagine. But Mr Trump is not applying for a job as Rector-in-Chief, he's running for President. And if we're not going to get all up on our high horses and spew all manner of indignation over the activities a couple of the Presidents of recent times, why all of a sudden are we castigating Trump who at least has pledged his loyalty to Christian tenets? In any case, it is possible to be a conservative without being a Christian. Now, I'll grant you. In my view it is impossible for a Christian to vote for candidates who openly support gay rights and abortion on demand, and think he will not suffer loss for having done so. None the less, Dr. Piper more or less wrote off "the Donald" as having a reprobate mind and I refuse to believe that he doesn't know better.

So here's the way I see this thing. If I had to face my Lord for either asking Mr Trump to speak in my University Chapel, or if I wrote an article which virtually puts Mr Trump in the company of the eternally damned to answer for, I'd have him in my Chapel. And I just could not help but wonder, would Dr. Piper feel as strongly about all of this if he had entertained Mr Trump for lunch and a visit to his campus? That is one invitation that very likely did not go out.

The one line of Dr. Piper's tongue lashing that got my attention goes as follows: "I refuse to let my desire to win “trump” my moral compass. I will not sell my soul or my university’s to a political process that values victory more than virtue."

If one Mr Trump had not come along we'd still be up to our eyes in that sticky morass known as political correctness because no Church leaders I know have had the courage to confront it. He (Piper) and everybody else who stands the moral high ground, (or just think they do), owes the awakening completely to Trump. And since we live in the last days I thought just one more Scripture reference as it would apply to political correctness, which denies the sovereignty of God and elevates men, would be apt. Revelation 3:16 (KJV)
V16 "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." Fence straddling political speech, what are we to do with it, right? At any rate, murdering the messenger seems to be an ongoing fault of the Orthodoxy, does it not?

I do not know that much about Dr. Piper. However, I am almost certain that he occupies higher moral ground than Donald Trump. Unless he has recently disposed of some assets, Trump still derives an impressive income from strip clubs. He supports and has attempted to use eminent domain to acquire private property for private gain. There are many very successful businessmen, including the Koch brothers, who have never contributed money to Pelosi, Reid, the Clintons, Schumer, and other extreme left wing politicians. Those donations were not necessary to do business in New York City, but that is Trump's lie and he is sticking with it.

I could flood you with examples of immoral and inappropriate behavior by Donald Trump but the evidence from reliable sources is readily available to you if you care to look. It is appropriate to judge people on their past behavior when selecting a president. Otherwise, we would always elect a president for making the most impressive campaign promises.

Actions matter much more than promises to me and I just do not see how Trump's past behavior makes it likely that he will hold himself to many campaign promises that deviate from his past positions. If I am wrong about him, then so be it, but Trump has done nothing to earn my trust. In fact, his bullying and boasting diminishes my trust and respect for Trump on an almost daily basis.

At this time, I believe that there are two great men running for president, Ted Cruz and Dr. Ben Carson. I would probably support Santorum if he became the nominee but neither he nor Carson have much of a chance of beating Trump, Cruz, or Rubio.

Donald Trump has fallen from second to last on my list of potential GOP nominees. There is nothing that he can do to change my assessment, because whatever he says or does before the general election will be said or done in pursuit of an enormous amount of power. If Trump's presidential actions match his words of the next few months, then I will reconsider in the 2020 campaign. Until then, I consider Trump the most dangerous candidate in the race, excluding Hillary Clinton.

I would ask everybody to think about Trump's claim that because he is at least partially self financing his campaign, he does not owe "special interests" anything, unlike his GOP rivals. Consider how many $billion of loans that George Soros and the largest U.S. banks made to Trump's companies. Think about how much of an issue Trump has made over the loans that Cruz took out against his stock holdings to help finance his Senate campaign compared to the leverage that the big financial institutions hold over Trump.

Trump boasts of how his political donations bought favors from Pelosi, Reid, McConnell, Boehner, and a long list of other politicians. There is no reason to believe that President Trump would not continue to buy influence with taxpayer money. He is not a small government Republican and will use our money to make his deals. Trump supported TARP, the bailouts, and the Bush/Obama stimulus spending.

I don't trust Trump and I am surprised that any conservatives do. I would never have believed that any politician could be more divisive than the Clintons and Obama, but the number of conservatives who despise Trump is growing every day. He is going to have a very difficult time rebuilding all of the bridges that he has already burnt.

The overwhelming majority of religious leaders who have endorsed a candidate for president have selected Ted Cruz. In fact, Trump personally and dishonestly attacked Bob Vander Plaats, leader of The Family Leader, because he endorsed Cruz over Trump. As a presidential candidate, Trump is being judged on his record and an unusually large number of fiscal and social conservative Republicans say that they will never vote for Trump.

I think Trump can win without much conservative support because of the weak competition that he would face from Democrats but this election should have been an easy win for Republicans. Trump is making it more difficult than it should have been with his extremely divisive campaign tactics.

As far as offending my wife or me with your comments, I am more worried about offending you and my other friends on BGR. That is why I choose not to post more about Trump's disgusting past. Dr. Piper stands with the majority of religious leaders in this country in believing Trump is not fit for office. Hosting Trump in a college chapel to speak to his university students would be as inappropriate as hosting Obama in a chapel. There are more appropriate venues on campuses for controversial characters to address students.

[TheRealThing]

I do not know that much about Dr. Piper. However, I am almost certain that he occupies higher moral ground than Donald Trump. Unless he has recently disposed of some assets, Trump still derives an impressive income from strip clubs. He supports and has attempted to use eminent domain to acquire private property for private gain. There are many very successful businessmen, including the Koch brothers, who have never contributed money to Pelosi, Reid, the Clintons, Schumer, and other extreme left wing politicians. Those donations were not necessary to do business in New York City, but that is Trump's lie and he is sticking with it.

I could flood you with examples of immoral and inappropriate behavior by Donald Trump but the evidence from reliable sources is readily available to you if you care to look. It is appropriate to judge people on their past behavior when selecting a president. Otherwise, we would always elect a president for making the most impressive campaign promises.

Actions matter much more than promises to me and I just do not see how Trump's past behavior makes it likely that he will hold himself to many campaign promises that deviate from his past positions. If I am wrong about him, then so be it, but Trump has done nothing to earn my trust. In fact, his bullying and boasting diminishes my trust and respect for Trump on an almost daily basis.

At this time, I believe that there are two great men running for president, Ted Cruz and Dr. Ben Carson. I would probably support Santorum if he became the nominee but neither he nor Carson have much of a chance of beating Trump, Cruz, or Rubio.

Donald Trump has fallen from second to last on my list of potential GOP nominees. There is nothing that he can do to change my assessment, because whatever he says or does before the general election will be said or done in pursuit of an enormous amount of power. If Trump's presidential actions match his words of the next few months, then I will reconsider in the 2020 campaign. Until then, I consider Trump the most dangerous candidate in the race, excluding Hillary Clinton.

I would ask everybody to think about Trump's claim that because he is at least partially self financing his campaign, he does not owe "special interests" anything, unlike his GOP rivals. Consider how many $billion of loans that George Soros and the largest U.S. banks made to Trump's companies. Think about how much of an issue Trump has made over the loans that Cruz took out against his stock holdings to help finance his Senate campaign compared to the leverage that the big financial institutions hold over Trump.

Trump boasts of how his political donations bought favors from Pelosi, Reid, McConnell, Boehner, and a long list of other politicians. There is no reason to believe that President Trump would not continue to buy influence with taxpayer money. He is not a small government Republican and will use our money to make his deals. Trump supported TARP, the bailouts, and the Bush/Obama stimulus spending.

I don't trust Trump and I am surprised that any conservatives do. I would never have believed that any politician could be more divisive than the Clintons and Obama, but the number of conservatives who despise Trump is growing every day. He is going to have a very difficult time rebuilding all of the bridges that he has already burnt.

The overwhelming majority of religious leaders who have endorsed a candidate for president have selected Ted Cruz. In fact, Trump personally and dishonestly attacked Bob Vander Plaats, leader of The Family Leader, because he endorsed Cruz over Trump. As a presidential candidate, Trump is being judged on his record and an unusually large number of fiscal and social conservative Republicans say that they will never vote for Trump.

I think Trump can win without much conservative support because of the weak competition that he would face from Democrats but this election should have been an easy win for Republicans. Trump is making it more difficult than it should have been with his extremely divisive campaign tactics.

As far as offending my wife or me with your comments, I am more worried about offending you and my other friends on BGR. That is why I choose not to post more about Trump's disgusting past. Dr. Piper stands with the majority of religious leaders in this country in believing Trump is not fit for office. Hosting Trump in a college chapel to speak to his university students would be as inappropriate as hosting Obama in a chapel. There are more appropriate venues on campuses for controversial characters to address students.

You're not going to offend me I assure you. We both may find ourselves back on the same side of things before we could have guessed. My point about Piper was that the article you cited refers to him as an Evangelical leader of the Wesleyan Church. All I'm saying is that men of such cloth don't take the time to attack individuals. In fact, it is in the failing of the Church in which men have been encouraged to live openly and unashamedly in a fashion contrary to the dictates of our Lord.

Therefore, had Dr. Piper invited Trump to a one on one, and then come away satisfied that he was every bit the scoundrel he painted him in his article. Then it might have born more fruit. But I know what Dr. Piper's calling is, it is to evangelize folks like and maybe particularly Donald Trump. Not single them out as he has done. On the one hand Church leaders fear and complain about being shut out of the political arena by the state, and then they do things like Piper did. It seems like a clear case of a preacher stepping outside his charter to me. BTW, has Dr. Piper published anything critical in scope about Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama?

And obviously, the face on which the whole article was presented has two sides. Donald Trump nor any subordinate, as far as I could determine, has ever approached Piper to ask if Donald could speak at Wesleyan University. None the less, that scenario was used as a vehicle to deliver his review of the person of Mr Trump anyway, which was his true intent.

[Hoot Gibson]

You're not going to offend me I assure you. We both may find ourselves back on the same side of things before we could have guessed. My point about Piper was that the article you cited refers to him as an Evangelical leader of the Wesleyan Church. All I'm saying is that men of such cloth don't take the time to attack individuals. In fact, it is in the failing of the Church in which men have been encouraged to live openly and unashamedly in a fashion contrary to the dictates of our Lord.

Therefore, had Dr. Piper invited Trump to a one on one, and then come away satisfied that he was every bit the scoundrel he painted him in his article. Then it might have born more fruit. But I know what Dr. Piper's calling is, it is to evangelize folks like and maybe particularly Donald Trump. Not single them out as he has done. On the one hand Church leaders fear and complain about being shut out of the political arena by the state, and then they do things like Piper did. It seems like a clear case of a preacher stepping outside his charter to me. BTW, has Dr. Piper published anything critical in scope about Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama?

And obviously, the face on which the whole article was presented has two sides. Donald Trump nor any subordinate, as far as I could determine, has ever approached Piper to ask if Donald could speak at Wesleyan University. None the less, that scenario was used as a vehicle to deliver his review of the person of Mr Trump anyway, which was his true intent.

Dr. Piper, as president of a Christian university, has an obligation to look out for the interests of the students with whose welfare he is charged. He did not say that he would not welcome Trump to the campus. What he said was that he would not provide the chapel as a venue for Trump to deliver a political message.

BTW, are you aware that Trump told a reporter, "I am Presbyterian Protestant. I go to Marble Collegiate Church," and Marble then released a statement that Trump was not an "active member?" Trump seems to have much in common with Bill Clinton. I hate to see politicians mischaracterize their religious practice for political gain. Especially when that same politician has questioned the sincerity of both Ted Cruz's and Ben Carson's religious beliefs.

I am concerned that so many Republicans who were troubled by Obama's associations with people like Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dorhn, Louis Farrakhan, Marshall Davis, Rashid Khalidi, and many other shady characters, are showing very little interest in learning about Trump's shady associates.

In September 2015, Trump explained that he wants to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a single payer healthcare plan. In other words, what Trump is proposing is to have the government put the private sector out of the medical insurance business. Trump expressed support for Obamacare in one of his books. Yet, today Trump is touring Iowa calling Cruz a liar for saying that Trump supported Obamacare. Why are Trump supporters ignoring his plan to impose a Canadian style nationalized healthcare system to replace Obamacare?

Hopefully, Cruz will win Iowa Monday night and buy some time for people to tire of Trump's childish behavior and learn more about his record before he locks up the nomination. If not, it is very possible that Trump will lose the general election to a very weak Democrat candidate. Polls indicate as many as 50 percent of the Republicans who are opposed to Trump would and not support him in the general election. I am sure that most of those voters will change eventually support Trump but what if 20 percent of Republicans refuse to vote for Trump in the general election? It could happen and I believe that it is likely to happen if Trump is the nominee.

According to a recent Gallup poll, Trump has the highest unfavorable rating (60%) since polling began in 1992 - higher than Hillary Clinton and much higher than Bernie Sanders. Ben Carson has the lowest unfavorable rating since 1992 and Sanders, Cruz, and Rubio also have unfavorables that rank among the lowest four during the past 24 years. Trump's unfavorable rating is double Carson's and it is Trump's own fault. You cannot run an unscrupulous campaign for the nomination without giving any thought about the campaign's effect on the general election if you are your party's nominee.

Eventually, Trump will pay the price for his sleazy campaign. It is much harder to raise a candidate's favorable ratings than it is to run a reasonably clean campaign to avoid cannibalizing your own popularity ratings. Trump is lucky that he did not run in 2012 because Obama would have destroyed him in the general election.

[TheRealThing]

Dr. Piper, as president of a Christian university, has an obligation to look out for the interests of the students with whose welfare he is charged. He did not say that he would not welcome Trump to the campus. What he said was that he would not provide the chapel as a venue for Trump to deliver a political message.

BTW, are you aware that Trump told a reporter, "I am Presbyterian Protestant. I go to Marble Collegiate Church," and Marble then released a statement that Trump was not an "active member?" Trump seems to have much in common with Bill Clinton. I hate to see politicians mischaracterize their religious practice for political gain. Especially when that same politician has questioned the sincerity of both Ted Cruz's and Ben Carson's religious beliefs.

I am concerned that so many Republicans who were troubled by Obama's associations with people like Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dorhn, Louis Farrakhan, Marshall Davis, Rashid Khalidi, and many other shady characters, are showing very little interest in learning about Trump's shady associates.

In September 2015, Trump explained that he wants to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a single payer healthcare plan. In other words, what Trump is proposing is to have the government put the private sector out of the medical insurance business. Trump expressed support for Obamacare in one of his books. Yet, today Trump is touring Iowa calling Cruz a liar for saying that Trump supported Obamacare. Why are Trump supporters ignoring his plan to impose a Canadian style nationalized healthcare system to replace Obamacare?

Hopefully, Cruz will win Iowa Monday night and buy some time for people to tire of Trump's childish behavior and learn more about his record before he locks up the nomination. If not, it is very possible that Trump will lose the general election to a very weak Democrat candidate. Polls indicate as many as 50 percent of the Republicans who are opposed to Trump would and not support him in the general election. I am sure that most of those voters will change eventually support Trump but what if 20 percent of Republicans refuse to vote for Trump in the general election? It could happen and I believe that it is likely to happen if Trump is the nominee.

According to a recent Gallup poll, Trump has the highest unfavorable rating (60%) since polling began in 1992 - higher than Hillary Clinton and much higher than Bernie Sanders. Ben Carson has the lowest unfavorable rating since 1992 and Sanders, Cruz, and Rubio also have unfavorables that rank among the lowest four during the past 24 years. Trump's unfavorable rating is double Carson's and it is Trump's own fault. You cannot run an unscrupulous campaign for the nomination without giving any thought about the campaign's effect on the general election if you are your party's nominee.

Eventually, Trump will pay the price for his sleazy campaign. It is much harder to raise a candidate's favorable ratings than it is to run a reasonably clean campaign to avoid cannibalizing your own popularity ratings. Trump is lucky that he did not run in 2012 because Obama would have destroyed him in the general election.

I'm not saying that there is not a wealth of negative information floating around on the internet about Donald Trump. One of Trump's most staunch critics is Glen Beck, who I believe made a hard right into the twilight zone when he was converted to Mormonism. The true story of how the leader of the Mormon faith, Joseph Smith, came to his divine revelations is a bit of an eye opener to say the least.

From my perspective, most of the Trump flak is unsubstantiated and unfair. Like you I can name those of seedy repute who are known cohorts of Mr Obama. I can't seem to name any for Trump though, and if he is or will in fact, push for a single payer health care system why has Cruz not taken him to task? I mean, it is certainly not for lack of opportunity, as it has been flame on between them since the end of the bromance. I have seen charges made online that suggest Trump will try to initiate a single payer system, but I've yet to see anything credible to substantiate that. At any rate, revelations of that sort are what the primary season is all about. One would have thought a Jeb Bush or a Mike Huckabee would have brought all this to light by now.


Dr Piper is the one who initiated this whole deal of reaching out from obscurity and the innards of Wesleyan's ivy covered and hallowed halls to diminish Trump. So protecting his students was a non factor. He wanted to slam 'the Donald' and he did, just as sensationally as his imagination would permit.

None the less if what you say is true, the rest of the field has an obligation to reveal things like that to the public.

[Hoot Gibson]

I'm not saying that there is not a wealth of negative information floating around on the internet about Donald Trump. One of Trump's most staunch critics is Glen Beck, who I believe made a hard right into the twilight zone when he was converted to Mormonism. The true story of how the leader of the Mormon faith, Joseph Smith, came to his divine revelations is a bit of an eye opener to say the least.

From my perspective, most of the Trump flak is unsubstantiated and unfair. Like you I can name those of seedy repute who are known cohorts of Mr Obama. I can't seem to name any for Trump though, and if he is or will in fact, push for a single payer health care system why has Cruz not taken him to task? I mean, it is certainly not for lack of opportunity, as it has been flame on between them since the end of the bromance. I have seen charges made online that suggest Trump will try to initiate a single payer system, but I've yet to see anything credible to substantiate that. At any rate, revelations of that sort are what the primary season is all about. One would have thought a Jeb Bush or a Mike Huckabee would have brought all this to light by now.


Dr Piper is the one who initiated this whole deal of reaching out from obscurity and the innards of Wesleyan's ivy covered and hallowed halls to diminish Trump. So protecting his students was a non factor. He wanted to slam 'the Donald' and he did, just as sensationally as his imagination would permit.

None the less if what you say is true, the rest of the field has an obligation to reveal things like that to the public.

We all have an obligation to educate ourselves before casting votes. Ted Cruz has been making the case against Trump, although he has been running a very positive campaign. Aside from Jeb Bush's feeble attempts to return Trumps endless string of personal attempts with insults of his own, most of the other candidates have been busier attacking each other than making the case against Trump, Hillary, and Bernie.

Dr. Piper has the same right to engage in public debate over the directions of our country as any other American citizen. There is a long tradition of religious leaders participating in the selection of presidents. Dr. Piper did nothing more than write an article explaining his opinion of Trump speaking places of worship. I just offered his article as an example of the widespread opposition to Trump in religious circles.

You seem to think that most of the criticism against Trump consists of rumors and innuendo. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although I had planned not to share the mountain of documentation against Trump, much of which consists of Trump's own admissions, I will create a new thread and document the reasons that I will never, ever trust Trump or cast a vote in his favor in any election. If I help one voter from making the mistake of voting for such a potential tyrant, then it will be worth my time.

[TheRealThing]

We all have an obligation to educate ourselves before casting votes. Ted Cruz has been making the case against Trump, although he has been running a very positive campaign. Aside from Jeb Bush's feeble attempts to return Trumps endless string of personal attempts with insults of his own, most of the other candidates have been busier attacking each other than making the case against Trump, Hillary, and Bernie.

Dr. Piper has the same right to engage in public debate over the directions of our country as any other American citizen. There is a long tradition of religious leaders participating in the selection of presidents. Dr. Piper did nothing more than write an article explaining his opinion of Trump speaking places of worship. I just offered his article as an example of the widespread opposition to Trump in religious circles.

You seem to think that most of the criticism against Trump consists of rumors and innuendo. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although I had planned not to share the mountain of documentation against Trump, much of which consists of Trump's own admissions, I will create a new thread and document the reasons that I will never, ever trust Trump or cast a vote in his favor in any election. If I help one voter from making the mistake of voting for such a potential tyrant, then it will be worth my time.

To your last comment about Dr Piper. I respectfully disagree as God's leaders are called to emulate the standard of behavior demonstrated by the Lord when He walked this earth. The Paul Simon song entitled "Slip Sliding Away," contains a lyric of which I am particularly fond. In that lyric he spoke of a man he once knew from his home town who, "wore his passion for his woman like a thorny crown." Forgive me, but being a Christian is not a prerequisite for becoming President of the United States. And Dr Piper's display of righteous indignation (his own thorny crown) was couched in a scenario that on it's face may have seemed somewhat noble. However, it is my contention that since he was not approached by Trump about the possibility of addressing the students there at Wesleyan, his transition or justification for summing up the motives of Mr Trump were put forth in a somewhat disingenuous manner. But hey, it's not like I am advocating to have him burned at the stake or anything.

Not really. Cruz is a world class debater and very nearly a genius. I would have thought that if there were any viable cannon fodder out there. That he, or one of the others in the field would have touched off the gun powder by now.

[Hoot Gibson]

To your last comment about Dr Piper. I respectfully disagree as God's leaders are called to emulate the standard of behavior demonstrated by the Lord when He walked this earth. The Paul Simon song entitled "Slip Sliding Away," contains a lyric of which I am particularly fond. In that lyric he spoke of a man he once knew from his home town who, "wore his passion for his woman like a thorny crown." Forgive me, but being a Christian is not a prerequisite for becoming President of the United States. And Dr Piper's display of righteous indignation (his own thorny crown) was couched in a scenario that on it's face may have seemed somewhat noble. However, it is my contention that since he was not approached by Trump about the possibility of addressing the students there at Wesleyan, his transition or justification for summing up the motives of Mr Trump were put forth in a somewhat disingenuous manner. But hey, it's not like I am advocating to have him burned at the stake or anything.

Not really. Cruz is a world class debater and very nearly a genius. I would have thought that if there were any viable cannon fodder out there. That he, or one of the others in the field would have touched off the gun powder by now.

Have you even watched Ted Cruz's ads, which consist mostly of Donald Trump expressing his views in his own words? The material that I have posted and will continue posting in the "The Case Against Donald Trump" thread is what I learn from Ted Cruz, his campaign, and his supporters on Twitter. Cruz is doing his job of exposing Trump as the dishonest liberal that he is, but he cannot force people to listen.

Cruz is helping drive Trump's unfavorable numbers to record levels (60 percent) by repeating and compiling Trump's inconsistent, vague, and illogical policy positions. If you read through Trump's own Twitter tweets, I think that you will agree that he is one obnoxious human being. He is his own worst enemy. There is no way that a political candidate can call so many people who disagree with him or endorse another candidate liars, losers, corrupt, failures, etc. and not pay a price at the ballot box. When a candidate has an unfavorability rating higher than Hillary Clinton, who has 150 FBI investigators investigating her for dozens of possible felonies, there is a real problem.

Trump is not a conservative and the policies that he has supported in the past have not been much different than those of Obama. It does not make much difference if the next president is a liberal Republican or a liberal Democrat, the country cannot afford to make either mistake. Trump's promise of building a wall and banning Muslims from entering the country were nothing but political stunts to get attention. The biggest problem with Trump is that he has has no moral compass and his previous choices in life shout that fact to all who will listen.

[TheRealThing]

Have you even watched Ted Cruz's ads, which consist mostly of Donald Trump expressing his views in his own words? The material that I have posted and will continue posting in the "The Case Against Donald Trump" thread is what I learn from Ted Cruz, his campaign, and his supporters on Twitter. Cruz is doing his job of exposing Trump as the dishonest liberal that he is, but he cannot force people to listen.

Cruz is helping drive Trump's unfavorable numbers to record levels (60 percent) by repeating and compiling Trump's inconsistent, vague, and illogical policy positions. If you read through Trump's own Twitter tweets, I think that you will agree that he is one obnoxious human being. He is his own worst enemy. There is no way that a political candidate can call so many people who disagree with him or endorse another candidate liars, losers, corrupt, failures, etc. and not pay a price at the ballot box. When a candidate has an unfavorability rating higher than Hillary Clinton, who has 150 FBI investigators investigating her for dozens of possible felonies, there is a real problem.

Trump is not a conservative and the policies that he has supported in the past have not been much different than those of Obama. It does not make much difference if the next president is a liberal Republican or a liberal Democrat, the country cannot afford to make either mistake. Trump's promise of building a wall and banning Muslims from entering the country were nothing but political stunts to get attention. The biggest problem with Trump is that he has has no moral compass and his previous choices in life shout that fact to all who will listen.

I finally did see a sound bite with Cruz saying a one liner, "A vote for Trump is a vote for ObamaCare." But his point was not at all developed.

[Demarcus ware]

Ladies and Gentlemen, Today is the day we've been waiting for. To me, this presidential race is between two people. Trump and Cruz. I do think Sanders will be on the Dem side due to Clinton's legal problems she is facing and her usual meltdown in elections. Watching the news this morning, one of the republican heads in Iowa was saying he thinks the turnout will be historical. He also went on to say that alot of Democrats and Independents are/have changed so they can vote republican. Now, take that with a grain of salt because it was a Republican talking but if it's going to be a big turnout then this race will be tight, with a slight favorite to Trump. Turnout is key here.

[TheRealThing]

Ladies and Gentlemen, Today is the day we've been waiting for. To me, this presidential race is between two people. Trump and Cruz. I do think Sanders will be on the Dem side due to Clinton's legal problems she is facing and her usual meltdown in elections. Watching the news this morning, one of the republican heads in Iowa was saying he thinks the turnout will be historical. He also went on to say that alot of Democrats and Independents are/have changed so they can vote republican. Now, take that with a grain of salt because it was a Republican talking but if it's going to be a big turnout then this race will be tight, with a slight favorite to Trump. Turnout is key here.

I'm glad it's time to vote. Already there has been far more voter interest this election cycle than in 2012 and we've only just arrived at the Iowa Caucuses.

Not that I believe the effort is in anyway viable, but as late as this morning Fox News anchor-ettes were still in there pitching against Trump in offering caucus goers a reasonable excuse to stay home, the coming snow front. A false alarm which BTW, has been consistently challenged over the course of the past two days by Fox's own weather forecast for Iowa this evening. And that said snow storm will actually be getting to Iowa after the caucuses are over.

The thinking is that Trump supporters are mostly first-time lightweights who are not serious or informed voters, and who will therefore stay home at the first drop of a snowflake.

[Demarcus ware]

I'm glad it's time to vote. Already there has been far more voter interest this election cycle than in 2012 and we've only just arrived at the Iowa Caucuses.

Not that I believe the effort is in anyway viable, but as late as this morning Fox News anchor-ettes were still in there pitching against Trump in offering caucus goers a reasonable excuse to stay home, the coming snow front. A false alarm which BTW, has been consistently challenged over the course of the past two days by Fox's own weather forecast for Iowa this evening. And that said snow storm will actually be getting to Iowa after the caucuses are over.

The thinking is that Trump supporters are mostly first-time lightweights who are not serious or informed voters, and who will therefore stay home at the first drop of a snowflake.

I've seen alot of reports that say there will be a lot of first time voters because of the excitement around the two parties, from what i've seen, they are mainly for Trump and Sanders. If that's the case, and they actually show up, then Cruz and Clinton could see trouble tonight.

[TheRealThing]

I've seen alot of reports that say there will be a lot of first time voters because of the excitement around the two parties, from what i've seen, they are mainly for Trump and Sanders. If that's the case, and they actually show up, then Cruz and Clinton could see trouble tonight.

This has all been a nightmare for the Dems. If Sanders pulls out a win tonight he's already got New Hampshire in the bag. Camp Clinton is in full on panic mode by all reports, and well they should be. It's possible that Obama is stalling any meaningful statement regarding Hillary's legal disposition until after New Hampshire. At that point, and if she is 0 for 2, the announcement of indictment might be somewhat easier, who knows. At that point it will be time for Uncle Joe, another loon to be sure, to step up and remove all doubt as to his tenuous grasp on reality, LOL.

But, I believe you are exactly right. There does seem to be a lot of excitement and many new voters to go with it. If nothing else, the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries will serve to filter out much of the wild eyed speculation of which we have been inundated in the last couple of months with regard to whom people will support. Hopefully, we'll see a sort of reset, or flush, and reliable reporting will replace unreliable what ifs. I haven't been very tolerant of network news of late. I mean, if we're going for entertaining fiction, I rather watch a movie. :biggrin:

[RunItUpTheGut]

I can't listen to Beck. Guy sounds like a complete nut job especially with the Mormon garbage.

[RunItUpTheGut]

It's to close to election time for people to care what somebody digs up. It's not really going to matter at this point. It's already election day in Iowa and those voting for trump will do so and not change there minds.

[Demarcus ware]

^^^ Agree