Trump and Evangelical religion pro's and con's. Should Religion even be involved in the election?

[ding]

Guaranteed. Capitalism is dead, socialism is rising.

I can hardly wait for the predictable surprises.

 

[daveman]

You can't have capitalism without enough wage labor. Advanced automation and artificial intelligence is going to eliminate most jobs, hence no paying consumers or not enough of them = no market or not a large enough market worth investing in. The future is socialism.

Sounds like Utopia!

 

[daveman]

I can hardly wait for the predictable surprises.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Is your head exploding yet?

Discussion is not about anybody’s head, exploding or being calm. I understand - you’re stuck.

 

[ding]

Discussion is not about anybody’s head, exploding or being calm. I understand - you’re stuck.

You're an idealist. Of course your head explodes.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Sounds like Utopia!

Utopia is perfection, and that doesn't exist. I would say it's much better than what we have today. It's also scientific. That said, if you have to choose between dystopia or utopia, always choose utopia. So if that's the polemic directed at me, one of my responses is, "So what?", OK it's "utopia". Do you prefer dystopia? More drudgery and scarcity?

Today we live in a utopian society, when you compare how people lived 200, or 300 years ago. We have electricity, plumbing, and toilets that flush the dangerous excrement into sewers with chemically treated water, to eliminate diseases. We have AC, keeping us cool in the summer, and good heating in the winter. We have refrigerators full of food and washing machines that wash our clothing and clean our dirty utensils in the kitchen (women don't have to spend all day by the riverside, striking articles of clothing against the rocks, manually washing the dirty laundry). We can hop on our motorized vehicles and drive across the state in a few hours. If we have a medical emergency, we can call an ambulance.

We're living in a special time in history. Our ancestors lived an austere, hazardous, life. You would die from an infection from a small cut on your arm, or from a trivial urinary tract infection that today can be quickly cured with antibiotics. People were dying left and right, from diseases and injuries that today are easily resolved, without a problem. Bara bing, bara boom, you take a few pills and that's it, the infection is gone.

Saying that what I presented earlier is unreasonably "utopian" is a bit subjective and shortsighted. We're entering into a very unique and special era in human history, that allows communities, and nations, to mass produce all of the goods and services that people consume, without much human labor, if at all. Can you imagine, having these intelligent robots:

​

Working 24/7, extracting raw materials from the mines, then processing those materials. Transporting them to storage facilities, where they're stored until the automated factories need them, for the production of goods. Fully automated distribution warehouses and store outlets where people go to purchase these products that are now, unlike in the past, dirt cheap, due to the amount of available products. Eventually, we'll get rid of markets altogether, because they'll become completely useless and obsolete.

The whole logistical infrastructure, data collecting, and accounting is handled by intelligent robotics and artificial intelligence. Never in the history of man, has there been this level of sophistication and automation in production technology. So utopia is perhaps an accurate description of where we're heading when we compare that to where we are now. The average Joe forty years from now will enjoy the standard of living of people today who earn a million yearly. That's where advanced automation and artificial intelligence could potentially lead us, or we will plunge into a dystopian, techno-feudalistic nightmare.

I prefer libertarian, democratic socialism, where you and I and our loved ones, our friends, own all of the intelligent robots and artificial intelligence collectively, together, and we also own all of the nation's natural resources and the mines, factories, all of the facilities and resources of production. It's our commonwealth, it's yours, it's mine. We own our personal property, as individuals, like our homes, smartphones, vehicles..etc, but as far as the means of production or those properties that used to be for-profit, engaged in commerce, become publicly owned, and the commonwealth of the American people.

That's a future worth striving for. Not a future where the current capitalist wealthy class, which now owns all of the resources of production, ends up owning all of the robots and artificial intelligence, all of the natural resources, mines, factories..etc and we the people are unemployed or underemployed, living on a government handout because we can't support ourselves. The capitalists don't need to purchase our labor power anymore, paying us a wage. Those days are over, due to advanced automation and artificial intelligence, so what we need to do is through our government take ownership of the means of production. Private property i.e. properties used to exploit human labor for a profit, becomes publicly owned.

You and I continue to own our homes, and our personal belongings, including our land and gun collection. Individuals can own personal property, for their own personal use, but not private property or the means of mass production. That is in the hands of the democratic, republican state. Democratic because the people rule and a republic because we're not a monarchy but a constitutional-based nation, that respects the rule of law. Utopia, OK, sounds good. I'll accept that.

 

[daveman]

Utopia is perfection, and that doesn't exist. I would say it's much better than what we have today. It's also scientific. That said, if you have to choose between dystopia or utopia, always choose utopia. So if that's the polemic directed at me, one of my responses is, "So what?", OK it's "utopia". Do you prefer dystopia? More drudgery and scarcity?

Today we live in a utopian society, when you compare how people lived 200, or 300 years ago. We have electricity, plumbing, and toilets that flush the dangerous excrement into sewers with chemically treated water, to eliminate diseases. We have AC, keeping us cool in the summer, and good heating in the winter. We have refrigerators full of food and washing machines that wash our clothing and clean our dirty utensils in the kitchen (women don't have to spend all day by the riverside, striking articles of clothing against the rocks, manually washing the dirty laundry). We can hop on our motorized vehicles and drive across the state in a few hours. If we have a medical emergency, we can call an ambulance.

We're living in a special time in history. Our ancestors lived an austere, hazardous, life. You would die from an infection from a small cut on your arm, or from a trivial urinary tract infection that today can be quickly cured with antibiotics. People were dying left and right, from diseases and injuries that today are easily resolved, without a problem. Bara bing, bara boom, you take a few pills and that's it, the infection is gone.

Saying that what I presented earlier is unreasonably "utopian" is a bit subjective and shortsighted. We're entering into a very unique and special era in human history, that allows communities, and nations, to mass produce all of the goods and services that people consume, without much human labor, if at all. Can you imagine, having these intelligent robots:

​

Working 24/7, extracting raw materials from the mines, then processing those materials. Transporting them to storage facilities, where they're stored until the automated factories need them, for the production of goods. Fully automated distribution warehouses and store outlets where people go to purchase these products that are now, unlike in the past, dirt cheap, due to the amount of available products. Eventually, we'll get rid of markets altogether, because they'll become completely useless and obsolete.

The whole logistical infrastructure, data collecting, and accounting is handled by intelligent robotics and artificial intelligence. Never in the history of man, has there been this level of sophistication and automation in production technology. So utopia is perhaps an accurate description of where we're heading when we compare that to where we are now. The average Joe forty years from now will enjoy the standard of living of people today who earn a million yearly. That's where advanced automation and artificial intelligence could potentially lead us, or we will plunge into a dystopian, techno-feudalistic nightmare.

I prefer libertarian, democratic socialism, where you and I and our loved ones, our friends, own all of the intelligent robots and artificial intelligence collectively, together, and we also own all of the nation's natural resources and the mines, factories, all of the facilities and resources of production. It's our commonwealth, it's yours, it's mine. We own our personal property, as individuals, like our homes, smartphones, vehicles..etc, but as far as the means of production or those properties that used to be for-profit, engaged in commerce, become publicly owned, and the commonwealth of the American people.

That's a future worth striving for. Not a future where the current capitalist wealthy class, which now owns all of the resources of production, ends up owning all of the robots and artificial intelligence, all of the natural resources, mines, factories..etc and we the people are unemployed or underemployed, living on a government handout because we can't support ourselves. The capitalists don't need to purchase our labor power anymore, paying us a wage. Those days are over, due to advanced automation and artificial intelligence, so what we need to do is through our government take ownership of the means of production. Private property i.e. properties used to exploit human labor for a profit, becomes publicly owned.

You and I continue to own our homes, and our personal belongings, including our land and gun collection. Individuals can own personal property, for their own personal use, but not private property or the means of mass production. That is in the hands of the democratic, republican state. Democratic because the people rule and a republic because we're not a monarchy but a constitutional-based nation, that respects the rule of law. Utopia, OK, sounds good. I'll accept that.

Except throughout history, socialism has not improved conditions for the average person. Never. Not long-term.

And no, your version won't be any better.

 

[Papageorgio]

Trump has been "using" the Evangelicals and quoting God as a way to get elected. and recently with the attempted assassination attempt he experienced, according to Trump, God is watching out for him and that is the reason why he was not killed. In addition, Megan Kelly tried to confirm that by making the case that Trump was shot at 6:11pm and that is meaningful on a biblical basis............In reading Ephesian 6:11 where it says "Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes." Megan Kelly says that it means that Trump has the "full armor of God" on his side and the Democratic "devils" were the ones trying to kill him.

Nonetheless, this video makes the very good case that the opposite meaning is most likely to be the case, quoting other 6:11's verses in the Bible. See this and have a good laugh



I have 2 questions for you:

1) "Should Trump be using God and Religion to win the presidency"?
2) "Knowing who Trump is and hearing the above video, should the Evangelicals be supporting Trump"?

No more or less than Presidents did in the past.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You're an idealist. Of course your head explodes.

Expecting a sitting United States president who loses the presidential election for a second term to respect the outcome of that election is not idealism. I’m thinking about my grandkids not having the western liberal democracy that I inherited from America’s greatest WWIi generation since the founding.

 

[daveman]

Expecting a sitting United States president who loses the presidential election for a second term to respect the outcome of that election is not idealism. I’m thinking about my grandkids not having the western liberal democracy that I inherited from America’s greatest WWIi generation since the founding.

They're a lot more likely to have it with Trump being the next President than they are with Harris.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

No more or less than Presidents did in the past.

You’re whataboutism is based on what?

Clinton and Obama never. Your suggestion is absurd.

Trump as a kind of Messiah is a new phenomenon. Carter never pandered to evangelicals in the way that Don Trump does

 

[NotfooledbyW]

They're a lot more likely to have it with Trump being the next President than they are with Harris.

The Democratic Party never put an anti-democracy disaster in the White House, who tried to overturn an election and has been indicted for it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

They're a lot more likely to have it with Trump being the next President than they are with Harris.

My granddaughters will not have reproductive freedom if Trump wins and ends up getting to appoint two or three more justices to the Supreme Court.

Harris will guarantee her the the basic human right to have control over her own body and keep the fucking Texans and Floridians and Louisianans and white Christian evangelist politicians out of her uterus. It is none of their damn business..

 

[NotfooledbyW]

They're a lot more likely to have it with Trump being the next President than they are with Harris.

“Who ever heard, you get indicted for interfering in a presidential election where you have every right to do it, you get indicted and your poll numbers go up? When people get indicted, their poll numbers go down," Trump said.​

​

​

Do you think Saint_Daveman that Harris has a right to interfere in the election and try to overturn it if she loses?

 

[ding]

Expecting a sitting United States president who loses the presidential election for a second term to respect the outcome of that election is not idealism. I’m thinking about my grandkids not having the western liberal democracy that I inherited from America’s greatest WWIi generation since the founding.

More woah is me?

 

[daveman]

The Democratic Party never put an anti-democracy disaster in the White House, who tried to overturn an election and has been indicted for it.

Really? Trump wanted to ensure our elections are free, open, and honest.

Democrats fought him every step of the way, and are still fighting against it.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Except throughout history, socialism has not improved conditions for the average person. Never. Not long-term.

And no, your version won't be any better.

Socialism or primitive tribal communism, was where humanity started and where it will end as well, in the future. The socialism of the future will be high-tech and will provide for all of our needs. Your claim that socialism doesn't work is wrong, being that there are many forms of socialism, including those that exist today in Western Europe.

Moreover, your reasoning is flawed, because just because a system of production supposedly didn't work in the past, doesn't imply or demand that it won't work in the future. So if conditions weren't good for socialism in the past, but they are now or in the future, then socialism will work, and it won't just function, but it will be the optimal and necessary mode of production.

Capitalism, wasn't the primary system of production before 220 years ago, it was chattel slavery and feudalism. Capitalism and capitalists, didn't replace chattel slavery, feudalism and monarchal aristocracy, until the material conditions were present. Technology had to exist to allow capitalism to replace slavery and feudalism. The industrial revolution with its powerful, wealthy industrialists, didn't exist until conditions allowed them to flourish and dominate in the area of mass production.

Furthermore, you also conveniently ignore the fact that every country or society that has outwardly, openly declared itself to be a socialist or communist state has been attacked and sabotaged by capitalist-led powers, like the United States. Both the Soviets and National Socialist Germany were attacked, militarily and financially by the United States and its allies. After WW1, the US along with Britain, France, and 10 other countries, invaded Soviet Russia with over a quarter million troops. The foreign forces fighting alongside the so-called "white armies" against the socialist red army, numbered over 200 thousand. The pro-tsarist, white army, numbered about 300 thousand fighters.

So that's how the Soviet Union was born. It came into being, through years of fighting powerful enemies, and it only had about ten years of actual peace, in its history in the 1930s, and even then it was relative peace, because there were domestic enemies that were committing acts of terrorism, sabotage..etc, to derail the young Soviet nation. If it wasn't fighting a hot war it was in a cold war, struggling to survive.

National Socialist Germany, Hitler's Third Reich, raised Germany from economic ruin in the early 1930s, turning Germany into the fastest-growing economy in the world. Germans enjoyed the highest standard of living in Europe until Hitler made the disastrous decision to invade Soviet Russia, another socialist country. WWII in Europe was mainly a war between socialists. Marxists vs National German Socialism.

Given all of the aforementioned facts, your claim that socialism never works is ridiculous.

 

[daveman]

“Who ever heard, you get indicted for interfering in a presidential election where you have every right to do it, you get indicted and your poll numbers go up? When people get indicted, their poll numbers go down," Trump said.​

​

​

Do you think Saint_Daveman that Harris has a right to interfere in the election and try to overturn it if she loses?

If she has reason to think the election was not free, open, and honest, of course.

But "the Democrat didn't win!!" is not evidence of a stolen election.

 

[dblack]

Really? Trump wanted to ensure our elections are free, open, and honest.

LOL - uh. No. Trump wanted to win.

 

[daveman]

Socialism or primitive tribal communism, was where humanity started and where it will end as well, in the future. The socialism of the future will be high-tech and will provide for all of our needs. Your claim that socialism doesn't work is wrong, being that there are many forms of socialism, including those that exist today in Western Europe.

Moreover, your reasoning is flawed, because just because a system of production supposedly didn't work in the past, doesn't imply or demand that it won't work in the future. So if conditions weren't good for socialism in the past, but they are now or in the future, then socialism will work, and it won't just function, but it will be the optimal and necessary mode of production.

Capitalism, wasn't the primary system of production before 220 years ago, it was chattel slavery and feudalism. Capitalism and capitalists, didn't replace chattel slavery, feudalism and monarchal aristocracy, until the material conditions were present. Technology had to exist to allow capitalism to replace slavery and feudalism. The industrial revolution with its powerful, wealthy industrialists, didn't exist until conditions allowed them to flourish and dominate in the area of mass production.

Furthermore, you also conveniently ignore the fact that every country or society that has outwardly, openly declared itself to be a socialist or communist state has been attacked and sabotaged by capitalist-led powers, like the United States. Both the Soviets and National Socialist Germany were attacked, militarily and financially by the United States and its allies. After WW1, the US along with Britain, France, and 10 other countries, invaded Soviet Russia with over a quarter million troops. The foreign forces fighting alongside the so-called "white armies" against the socialist red army, numbered over 200 thousand. The pro-tsarist, white army, numbered about 300 thousand fighters.

So that's how the Soviet Union was born. It came into being, through years of fighting powerful enemies, and it only had about ten years of actual peace, in its history in the 1930s, and even then it was relative peace, because there were domestic enemies that were committing acts of terrorism, sabotage..etc, to derail the young Soviet nation. If it wasn't fighting a hot war it was in a cold war, struggling to survive.

National Socialist Germany, Hitler's Third Reich, raised Germany from economic ruin in the early 1930s, turning Germany into the fastest-growing economy in the world. Germans enjoyed the highest standard of living in Europe until Hitler made the disastrous decision to invade Soviet Russia, another socialist country. WWII in Europe was mainly a war between socialists. Marxists vs National German Socialism.

Given all of the aforementioned facts, your claim that socialism never works is ridiculous.

"No, really, guys, when WE'RE in charge, it'll work great! Pinkie swear!"