Jump to content
IGNORED

For whom will the Duggars vote?


doggie
 Share

Recommended Posts

Now that heir last ditch hero cruz is history what are they going to do? man their heroes are all shot down by the devil called trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they'll vote for Trump, because good Republicans tend to fall in line. They voted for the McCain/Palin ticket, despite Palin being a woman, right? I'm sure they'll find some reason to vote for Trump, like saying he's a Cyrus-type figure meant to restore America (i.e., a non-believer who ends up doing god's will). But if Trump is too godless and licentious, maybe the Duggars can back the Prohibition Party, which seems like the only political party conservative enough for them (their slogan even mentions "character"):

http://www.prohibitionparty.org/

Fun fact: the Prohibition Party is the USA's oldest continuous third party.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A third party might have a chance this time, though probably not the prohibition party.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably only the Liberatian party of the Third Parties that would stand a chance.

 

 

 

Allthough the good thing about Trump is that the late night shows & SNL should have plenty of good materials in the next couple of months.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What every other conservative who claims to be horrified by Trump's rise and screaming #NeverTrump will do...vote for Trump.

  • Upvote 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lascuba said:

What every other conservative who claims to be horrified by Trump's rise and screaming #NeverTrump will do...vote for Trump.

I don't see that happening, at least with many of the people I know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the Constitution Party?  They're a bunch of tax hating theocrats, so it would fit in with the Duggars' views.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The evangelicals and conservative Catholics I know are already trying to "baptize" Trump. By "baptize" I mean turn him into a Christian of some sort it their minds. I saw one post yesterday about how his children have campaigned with him so he "has Christian family values". I got a comment deleted  on that one (they probably just want to stay in the will). 

I don't know that people like the Duggars will go that far, but I predict that we will see a lot of Republican evangelicals who have been against him start to make justifications like that.     

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's always a number of fringe candidates... I could see them supporting one of those if the Trump backlash keeps going on. But if the sort of media they (and their supporters) follow starts to christen Trump as a Christian values politician, I'm sure they'll get behind that. I don't know how exactly they'd justify stuff like his multiple marriages that go against their faith, but I'm sure they'd come up with some reasoning. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching At Midnight on Comedy Central, and they asked what is Ted Cruz (aka the Zodiac Killer) going to do now that he's dropped out of the race. One comedian responded, "He's going to start a cult with the Duggars." I loved it.

  • Upvote 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see the Duggars going third party because JB loves being connected within the Republican Party. He likes to think of himself as a bigwig (and he was in Arkansas).

They will suck it up, vote Drumpf, and make vague, patronizing statements that they will "pray for him". They certainly aren't going to vote for the woman (hillary) or the socialist jew (bernie)

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5.5.2016 at 8:03 AM, kjmackin said:

Probably only the Liberatian party of the Third Parties that would stand a chance.

 

 

 

Allthough the good thing about Trump is that the late night shows & SNL should have plenty of good materials in the next couple of months.

The Libertarian party? You mean the party that endorsed gay rights in their very first platform in 1972? Who had an openly gay man as their first candidate running for president in 1972? And who has been fighting for gay marriage since 1976?

The Duggars are the pure antithesis of what Libertarianism is about.

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sundaymorning said:

The Libertarian party? You mean the party that endorsed gay rights in their very first platform in 1972? Who had an openly gay man as their first candidate running for president in 1972? And who has been fighting for gay marriage since 1976?

The Duggars are the pure antithesis of what Libertarianism is about.

I think the Duggars, like many fundies, would claim that they are libertarians in the sense that they believe in less regulation for businesses and that capitalism is the "godliest" economic system. This is largely due to the legacy of the Cold War and the fact that Billy Graham in particular preached about the joys of capitalism and why unions were bad to eager Southern Christians in the 1950s (there's a good book about this subject but the name escapes me at the moment). However, at the same time the Duggars will protest businesses they don't approve of, like liquor stores and abortion facilities, which indicates that they don't really believe in the free market like they claim, because they only want "godly" businesses to operate.

  • Upvote 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An alternative candidate will almost certainly run.  Too many Republicans can't stomach Trump and won't vote for Clinton which makes it more likely that they won't show up at the polls at all.  This would have a devastating effect on many Republican congressional and local candidates.

Unfortunately for them, with an early convention this year, there isn't much time for someone to get much momentum going, but I can't see the anti-Trump right-wing not finding someone to run.  This will ensure an even bigger victory for Clinton, but would surely help other Republican races.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh I could see them staying home and telling the kids to pray for America and to let God decide. 

  • Upvote 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/5/2016 at 10:12 AM, louisa05 said:

The evangelicals and conservative Catholics I know are already trying to "baptize" Trump. By "baptize" I mean turn him into a Christian of some sort it their minds. I saw one post yesterday about how his children have campaigned with him so he "has Christian family values". I got a comment deleted  on that one (they probably just want to stay in the will). 

I don't know that people like the Duggars will go that far, but I predict that we will see a lot of Republican evangelicals who have been against him start to make justifications like that.     

Donald Trump, Married Three Times, But ALWAYS to Women! 

  • Upvote 29
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cleopatra7 said:

I think the Duggars, like many fundies, would claim that they are libertarians in the sense that they believe in less regulation for businesses and that capitalism is the "godliest" economic system. This is largely due to the legacy of the Cold War and the fact that Billy Graham in particular preached about the joys of capitalism and why unions were bad to eager Southern Christians in the 1950s (there's a good book about this subject but the name escapes me at the moment). However, at the same time the Duggars will protest businesses they don't approve of, like liquor stores and abortion facilities, which indicates that they don't really believe in the free market like they claim, because they only want "godly" businesses to operate.

Well, everybody can call themselves libertarian, just like everybody can claim that they are a Christian. But I'd say those who know just a little bit about the libertarian movement and philosophy would never ever consider the Duggars to be anything close to libertarians.

The thing that many people (including those tea party morons) don't understand is that just not liking the current government and their policies doesn't make you a libertarian.

Libertarianism isn't just about economical, but also, and that is equally important, about personal freedom. Those two go hand in hand.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Sundaymorning said:

Well, everybody can call themselves libertarian, just like everybody can claim that they are a Christian. But I'd say those who know just a little bit about the libertarian movement and philosophy would never ever consider the Duggars to be anything close to libertarians.

The thing that many people (including those tea party morons) don't understand is that just not liking the current government and their policies doesn't make you a libertarian.

Libertarianism isn't just about economical, but also, and that is equally important, about personal freedom. Those two go hand in hand.

Most American conservatives seem to believe in a strange mix of theoretical economic libertarianism and social authoritarianism, which leads to some odd choices, as you mentioned. Capitalism tends to undermine "traditional values" and agrarian elites which is why European conservativism has traditionally not been a fan of capitalism. This tendency was what Frederick Hayek was responding to in "Why I am Not a Conservative," which must be very confusing for Americans who think that the American political spectrum is universal. This is also why Benedict XVI had some very harsh words about capitalism in his 2009 encyclical "Caritas in Veritate" which lead conservative Catholic writer George Weigel tried to attribute those passages to lingering liberation theologians in the Curia, because the idea that one can be very conservatove, anti-communist, but ambivalent about capitalism makes no sense from an American conservative perspective.

In my experience, real (I.E., consistent) libertarians tend to be such purists that they tend to vote for the Libertarian Party rather than compromise with either party. I once had an economics professor like this who always voted Libertarian. He also believed that almost everyone was a Marxist, including the humanities professors at the college I was attending, Charles Dickens, Plato, Aristotle, and the Pope (it would have been John Paul II at the time). I guess when you're that much of a libertarian, anyone who's not is Marxist by default.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sundaymorning said:

Libertarianism isn't just about economical, but also, and that is equally important, about personal freedom. Those two go hand in hand.

Not really

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fundie Bunny said:

Not really

They most certainly do, in theoretical libertarian philosophy anyway, and also in reality. If you try to take one away, you will always heavily impair the other, even if that wasn't your original intention. And if you look around how things end when governments take away one (or both) from the people, it's very clear that it really isn't a good idea.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the Duggars think this deeply about politics. All they care about is being anti-choice.

I doubt they will vote this election as there is no "acceptable" candidate to them and since no one wants a Duggar endorsement, there is no point voting. I never thought the Duggars truly cared about politics, just about how it could make them appear important and as a big political asset. 

I can guarantee you that no Duggar even knows what a Libertarian is, if they have even heard of it. 

  • Upvote 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cleopatra7 said:

Most American conservatives seem to believe in a strange mix of theoretical economic libertarianism and social authoritarianism, which leads to some odd choices, as you mentioned. Capitalism tends to undermine "traditional values" and agrarian elites which is why European conservativism has traditionally not been a fan of capitalism. This tendency was what Frederick Hayek was responding to in "Why I am Not a Conservative," which must be very confusing for Americans who think that the American political spectrum is universal. This is also why Benedict XVI had some very harsh words about capitalism in his 2009 encyclical "Caritas in Veritate" which lead conservative Catholic writer George Weigel tried to attribute those passages to lingering liberation theologians in the Curia, because the idea that one can be very conservatove, anti-communist, but ambivalent about capitalism makes no sense from an American conservative perspective.

In my experience, real (I.E., consistent) libertarians tend to be such purists that they tend to vote for the Libertarian Party rather than compromise with either party. I once had an economics professor like this who always voted Libertarian. He also believed that almost everyone was a Marxist, including the humanities professors at the college I was attending, Charles Dickens, Plato, Aristotle, and the Pope (it would have been John Paul II at the time). I guess when you're that much of a libertarian, anyone who's not is Marxist by default.

Libertarianism has many different schools of thought which often don't see eye to eye, and one of the big controversies discussions between the different groups is how "pure" or "consistent" you should be, and how much you can compromise. I'm also considered not really a libertarian by some hard-core ones, cause I'm basically a minarchist, which some already think doesn't belong in to "real" libertarianism.

I'm very pragmatic in the sense that I always vote, and I vote for the party which has some chances to actually win some seats, and which is the most likely to actually fight for a little bit of freedom for the general population. I'm not fooling myself that there will be some kind of revolution, I would actually already be very glad if the rampant bureaucracy would get a bit trimmed. That would already be a huge success. Unfortunately, it continues to sprawl everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share




  • Recent Status Updates

    • mango_fandango

      mango_fandango

      It’s always so freaking annoying when you’re supposed to have a phone call at a certain time and it never comes…
      · 0 replies
    • Cartmann99

      Cartmann99

      Can we please do fall now?

      · 0 replies
    • meep

      meep

      I HATE MICROECONOMICS. That is all. 
      · 5 replies
    • PinkGreyBrown

      PinkGreyBrown

      LOL, I read the Bible an awful lot for someone who's a hard-materialist atheist. But, then, I was raised culturally Christian, & US culture is so deeply steeped in Christianity, it's difficult to escape it.
      I like the Bible websites, tending to like the gateway one better than the hub one, for usability reasons. I really like that they have all the versions, all the different books, & all the commentaries. I did buy a Bible, in college lol, a big fat scholastic bible with all the books & a ton of footnotes. I started an atrocity project with it long ago & it's full of post-its.
      I've definitely developed a preference in versions, liking the NIV best so far, it's marvelously clear & the least disappointing when I dig into the depths. The KJVs are muddled & difficult to understand. Recently I've gotten to thinking that's why all these my-own-private-patriarchal-cult & grifters & et al like the KJVs so much, cuz they're a more obscure version that requires more 'explaining', is more open to interpretation. In addition to the obvious historical reasons why, like feeling all connected to the Pilgrim eras, & sounding all Shakespearean.
      I mostly end up reading the Bible as a fact-checking exercise, wondering what the verses & chapters say, the verses that people will have in their bios or social media postings. Tho' I do a fair amount of wondering why people think a thing that ostensibly has Biblical roots, digging around that.
      Fwiw.
      · 1 reply
    • louisa05

      louisa05

      Second grade defeated me today. Worst class ever. 
      · 2 replies
    • PinkGreyBrown

      PinkGreyBrown

      This first-name-prevalance tool is one of my favorite websites ever. Sadly US-specific but nonetheless fascinating for nerds like me.
      · 1 reply
    • feministxtian

      feministxtian

      I hate English class. That is all.
      · 2 replies
    • 47of74

      47of74

      Did whatever I had change my personality at all?  Maybe a good thing if it makes my asshole tolerance even lower than before.
      · 0 replies
    • 47of74

      47of74

      Hey LinkedIn, do yourself a favor and learn how to read the fucking room already. 
      · 0 replies
    • Smash!

      Smash!

      Just started with Couch 2 5k. How I missed running!
      · 3 replies
  • Recent Blog Entries

×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.