- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
The Fans Loved It!
We're totally fucked.
Where's the beef?
80% of voters may be nominally Christians, but they are for the most part normal, secular people trying to live their lives here on earth in a secular country, not obsessed with religious evangelism. Cruz's wild-eyed preacher persona is going to turn a lot of them away. Few voters want someone who comes across as a fanatic of any kind. He may be appealing to the evangelicals, but that's it..
The statistics don't support each other.
He's still a Republican. Hillary is still a Democrat. Figure it out for yourself.
Both parties pay lip service to religion but generally don't embrace an evangelicalism like a demagogic preacher.
... wow, the all got ME fooled, then!
I've learned over long experience to simply say, "Don't tell me, show me."
Christians are supposed to keep their mouths shut.
Well, not me either.
Freedom!
Have a nice Easter, by the way.
Do I get to cut people's heads off?
Look out for those fanatical Christians everyone!
They will purge you of your sins!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AscpkPTq...
Same goes to whoever gave you the +1.
Hey, someone who can see sarcasm gave me a +1 too. How about that?
If this is a place to put down religion, afraid I'm a misfit. You do not tell me how to think.
I am dino.
Hear me roar!
I could go on, but would rather not hijack the post.
It was not possible for a philosophy of primitive mysticism to lead to a country establishing the right to the pursuit of one's own happiness here on earth with spectacular improvements in science and human progress under capitalism, all in in a relatively brief period, and it is not possible to defend that now from an intellectual outlook of primitive mysticism. The cultural dominance of Christianity kept the western world in squalor and misery with essentially no progress for over a millennium.
... Believers in 'some kind of Supreme Being,' but not necessarily JC and his troupe.
ah, whatever....
WH creep=in=Chief?
He seems to have developed his style deliberately, just when we need the opposite: someone who can lead with rational explanation.
That is the creepiness he is exuding, despite the fact that behind it he is an intelligent man who understands and supports Constitutional principles better than most of them, but you have to wonder if he is stable and consistent enough to credibly act on them.
Maybe Scott Walker if I had to pick a favorite.
He is campaigning to be the "lesser" of two EVILs.
At the time of an election one can only try to stop the worst, when there is a significant difference, from among the choices we are in fact limited to and which cannot be changed. But there is much, much more to do the rest of the time.
I completely disagree that one should vote for evil. Both Dem and Rep has proven to be far worse than promised and the GOP continue to rely on voting for the lesser of two evils to keep them in power. GOP is a fraud in my view because they pretend to be anti-state. If you continue to waste your vote on one of two evil choices there will never be anything but evil choices with a realistic chance to win.
Look at results and voting for the lesser of two evils has proven repeatedly to be disasterous for liberty. Continuing to do so after looking at results is an irrational waste.
We are discussing in this thread Ted Cruz's choice to launch his campaign in the Republican primary with a deliberate diversion into frenzied religion.
I will not refrain from speaking what I believe is right regardless of your wishes.
Ted Cruse is running for POTUS as a Republican, the statist party that lies about that fact. History shows how well the GOP has grown the state and destroyed the Bill of Rights and pandered to large corporate looters. I invite you to state the record and prove the value of voting for the GOP.
Your repetitive accusations are unresponsive, off topic and offensive.
You have given no facts to support your position.
Or are we not supposed to ask?
Either the tv networks will expose their game and lower costs, or candidates will not enrich the biased bastards with funds from honest people.
More likely government would force their media toys to give free time to candidates, but that would likely be equal time, and even that is better than the current idiotic system. Open the door to lots of candidates, and loose the dogs of war.
You see: peterchunt and I (and others) would vote for him based on his actual agenda; most people vote based on emotion. Therefore, the segment of the population he needs to 'win' is the emotionally connected segment, not the rationally analytical portion of the country. So this is possibly a canny beginning to a successful campaign:
You come out with a strong emotional appeal to acquire the support of the Christian community, and then you propose conservative financial and political policies to be the viable alternative to Hillary for the non-religious conservatives. OK, this does meant that you probably have to be anti-abortion...the Christian community will not tolerate any other stance. I can live with that for a few years if it means getting rid of the EPA (as 'too being expensive to maintain'), Common Core, HIPAA, ACA, Article 21, etc.
Jan, willing to segue on intersection between anti and pro abortion policies
If I was running for POTUS, I would avoid all mention of religion because I think it has little to do with doing the job of POTUS. I would concentrate on actions demonstrating that I acted in a way that proved I could be trusted to do the job of POTUS. Part of that would be to prove my ethics and my philosophy. That philosophy would either prove or disprove my acceptability to someone who is religious. If being the same religion as a voter is the most important criteria to a voter then that voter would not be the target for my ad.
Clearly I will not be selected by the GOP as their candidate in this timeline.
If he were nominated to the Supreme Court and started emphasizing religion instead of the Constitution it would be a big problem for a lot of people.