Three excuses for evangelicals trying to defend their Trump support

Trump Playboy

If you haven’t listened to Donald Trump’s 2005 remarks with Billy Bush about women, please don’t. It’s not worth hearing. The media is making a big deal about it. We were going to mention it on the front page of this site, but after emails noting that even Drudge couldn’t hide from the story, I realized we needed it to be the top story even if we don’t think it should be.

Keep in mind that I’m not suggesting his remarks were not infuriating or clear evidence that he doesn’t deserve the vote of Bible-believing Americans. I didn’t want to lead with it because it’s not really news. If you’re someone who is aware of his documented history of misogyny, marital strife, and anti-Biblical business sins like eminent domain or strip clubs in his casinos, then you shouldn’t be surprised that he feels that he can get away with anything with women. He believes he can grab their genitals and nothing will happen to him. He knows this because that’s how he’s lived his life. If you can accept that and still vote for him, that’s your right. I won’t.

If you accept him for what he is, own up to it. Don’t redirect with weak excuses. No, other true Christian men in general do not do or say those things. No, claiming that Bill Clinton is worse doesn’t make Trump’s actions more palatable. No, he isn’t suddenly a righteous man after six decades as a pig.

There are other excuses floating out there, but those three are the biggies that I’ve seen so far. Does that mean that we should all vote for Hillary? Of course not. I won’t be voting for her, either. With a month to go, I’m still trying to find the right person to vote for just like so many in America. I’ve spoken to several third party candidates and at this point I’m still looking. I might end up voting for one of them. I might vote for someone I haven’t spoken to, yet (looking at you, Evan McMullin). I might not vote for President at all. However, I know with 100% certainty I won’t vote for either of the major party candidates because they don’t deserve my vote.

Some will quote Bible verses knowing I’m a believer in the Word. Before you say something about being without sin before casting the first stone, it’s important to understand both the context as well as the intent. I’m not casting this stone at Trump. I’m pointing the way for fellow believers. This election is important, but that doesn’t mean that we must obey the mandate of the two-party system and obey the unofficial-yet-often-invoked binary choice rule. My vote will be principled as it always has been, which means that if neither candidate in the binary choice achieves a standard of principles that I hold for them, I don’t have to give either of them my vote. Keep in mind that I’m not looking for a righteous person; there is none righteous, no, not one. However, even my relatively low standards allowed me to vote for George W. Bush. He had his challenges, but he’s way ahead of Trump or Clinton on the righteousness scale.

Americans of faith can use whatever excuses they want in order to justify their vote for Trump, but know this: you own it whether he wins or loses. Don’t try to make your vote seem any more righteous by making excuses.

JD Rucker

JD Rucker is Editor of this site as well as Soshable, a Federalist Christian Blog. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, and co-founder of the Federalist Party. Find him on Twitter or Facebook.

  1. I agree. I’m not voting for either one of them for the same reasons. I don’t care which private corporation (party)they belong to, I want a constitutional president.

  2. Some of the Christian faith have actually said that God has chosen Donald for this moment in time. If that is true then I am sure the return of Jesus is near.

  3. totally agreed.

    Evangelicals have known all they need to know about Trump before this came out. This is not a surprise to anyone with any degree of sense, Christian or no.

    BTW, You should also look at Darrell Castle in his own words. He’s not flashy, but seems like a good constitutional option. Some of his ideas on trade I’m not thrilled about but here is where “lesser of two evils” would be an ACTUAL valid argument.

    I’m definitely considering him and Evan Mcmullin as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

© 2017 The New Americana