WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical support

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: Jon Estes

WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical support

Postby Sandy » Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:32 am

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mad ... e3a43c64b9

Let me give credit, Stephen Fox posted this in the New Baptist Covenant section, with which he seems to be fascinated because he thinks people will be attracted by the heading. But it fits better here, and this article is just so spot on, insightful, based on fact and observation, and worth a look, which it probably won't get over there.
Sandy
 
Posts: 8856
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby Haruo » Thu Aug 02, 2018 1:11 pm

Most of it is good, but the underlined part of this excerpt... «Frantic assertions that Hillary Clinton was “of Satan,” that President Barack Obama was a Muslim acting covertly for an Islamic state, that the Bible’s mandate to love one’s neighbor meant to love one’s American neighbor — all patently false — show the desperation for some sort of religious justification for their political views.» ...seems to me to perpetuate the problem. In the new order of things promoted by those these people read and heed, in the aftermath of Trump's election, I don't think that's any more justified than using "frantic", "patently false" and "desperation" this way to describe folks who personally believe in the human personhood of human fetuses, or who find Obama's drone attacks and border policies unacceptable, to describe the process by which such people may end up voting for Clinton.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12248
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby Sandy » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:20 am

Here's an interesting piece with some data that has some echoes of Quiros' conclusions. I think the deep political connections between churches, denominations and politics is bad news for the church, either way, and the suggestion that liberals could perhaps enhance their political position by going back to church is as troubling as the apostate status of most Evangelicals when it comes to politics, as Quiros points out in her article.
https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/7 ... erns-trump
Ansley Quiros wrote: Frantic assertions that Hillary Clinton was “of Satan,” that President Barack Obama was a Muslim acting covertly for an Islamic state, that the Bible’s mandate to love one’s neighbor meant to love one’s American neighbor — all patently false — show the desperation for some sort of religious justification for their political views.


Some subjective analysis in the use of the terms "frantic, patently false, desperation" but then, looking at the perspective and how it is expressed, is there a more "neutral" way to describe what was being observed? Trump has so overused his pointing to the media and name calling for applause that reporters in what he characterizes as the "fake news media" don't characterize those sitting there listening to all of his bull and baloney and indiscriminately buying his lies in "typical" terminology. A lie is a lie, but Trump tells so many of them, and in fact, has built a complete political campaign and personal character on them that a term like "patently false" or "pathological" is not adequate to describe how pathetic (another descriptive term) his hard core supporters look.

As I read more and more of these reports investigating why a high percentage of Evangelicals have connected to Trump, what I see developing from those who are observing from "outside" that bubble is a rapidly developing perspective that if these people are willing to believe what often turn out to be some of the wildest, most deceptive lies told by Trump, often in the very face of factual information, or evidence of Trumo contradicting himself repeatedly captured on the cameras in front of which he struts and poses, how can you trust a single thing they preach and teach in their churches? How is it that anything they say is believable?

And there are a few highly visible personalities in that mix to help with confirming that perspective.
Sandy
 
Posts: 8856
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

New Baptist Covenant

Postby Stephen Fox » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:01 am

Is good place. I was in the room at 16th Street Baptist in an NBC meeting with President Carter, Marian Wright Edelman et al and Quiros new book out Nov 19 speaks to a central message of the NBC with a focus on Americus Ga

A picture of myself and Dr. Quiros and the Collinsville Pastor s son and daughter in law is up on my facebook wall from 2012 and a Koinonia Celebration.

Here is what I posted in the Cher Co Alabama Herald facebook wall a few minutes ago

Here is what's up. In September 2012 I was in a conference in Americus Ga with the author, Ansley Quiros, my fellow Furman University grad along with this year Clayte Hubbard the son of the former speaker of the House Mike Hubbard. Also there were the son and daughter in law of FBC Collinsville Alabama, John and Susan Weaver Morgan. Susan is the daughter of Raymond who coached some exciting football games against Sand Rock in the 80s. Quiros piece--the picture will evokce comparisons to a sign on HWY 411 well known to residents of Cherokee County; and all this is likely to come into play in some fashion in the US house race between Mallory Hagan for Congress and the incumbent Rogers. Conversations are already taking place with administration at Jax St to discuss about all this article implies. Let's keep the conversation going. Also here is a challenge to the county GOP to begin a group read of Jon Meacham ( click on his site) new Book on the Soul of America. Seems to me that would be a no brainer for discerning Christians:
Stephen Fox
 
Posts: 9154
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:29 pm

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby Dave Roberts » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:09 am

What I see in this, more than anything else, is Trump's appeal to those who feel left out of the American dream. There is a certain vicarious satisfaction to support someone who lives in opulent luxury, who has never been to the grocery, who has no idea what it means to live in a coal mining town in West Virginia or in the hollowed out core of former textile and furniture towns along the VA/NC border. Knowing that the American dream doesn't work for them has left these people grasping at straws like MAGA and "America First." They believe that there is somehow a golden age that is going to return. It was the age when their parents could buy a home and a car while drawing only one salary, when the social fabric in their towns was either overwhelmingly Protestant in the South or Catholic in the North, and when their children had a chance for a better life than even they had achieved, but now these people see their children drowning in debt with no job prospects that will help them to repay those loans. Their desperation fuels only a grasping for false hopes. They cannot see that this is all a mirage to get their votes while Trump continues to favor the very policies that put them into this situation to start with. It's a sad situation for proud people who think that a lot of slogans will lift them from their economic malaise and their inability to climb the social ladder.
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 7280
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby KeithE » Sat Aug 04, 2018 2:03 pm

Dave Roberts wrote:What I see in this, more than anything else, is Trump's appeal to those who feel left out of the American dream. There is a certain vicarious satisfaction to support someone who lives in opulent luxury, who has never been to the grocery, who has no idea what it means to live in a coal mining town in West Virginia or in the hollowed out core of former textile and furniture towns along the VA/NC border. Knowing that the American dream doesn't work for them has left these people grasping at straws like MAGA and "America First." They believe that there is somehow a golden age that is going to return. It was the age when their parents could buy a home and a car while drawing only one salary, when the social fabric in their towns was either overwhelmingly Protestant in the South or Catholic in the North, and when their children had a chance for a better life than even they had achieved, but now these people see their children drowning in debt with no job prospects that will help them to repay those loans. Their desperation fuels only a grasping for false hopes. They cannot see that this is all a mirage to get their votes while Trump continues to favor the very policies that put them into this situation to start with. It's a sad situation for proud people who think that a lot of slogans will lift them from their economic malaise and their inability to climb the social ladder.


If Trump’s appeal is truly an economic one to majority of America - the 99%ers ('my life should be much easier economically’), then it should be very apparent that Trump's policies are slanted very much to the 1%ers. Take the so-called Tax Cut and Jobs Bill:

Tax cuts were focussed on the 1%ers (80% of tax cuts given to the top 1%er by 2027, okay they will only get 53% for 2018 returns):

Image

To make matters worse, Trump is now attempting an executive action to cut capital gains taxes (costing an estimate $100B over 10 years):
Trump asked Treasury to look into capital gains tax cut

Trump tax policy is favoring the very wealthy.

As far as job growth goes, it really has not changed matters much from Obama’s post-recovery record:

Image

And average wage rates have actually lowered slightly from $353 (Dec 2016) weekly to $346 weekly (as of Mar 2018, latest I could find).

And inflation has increased under Trump - 1.3% (in Dec 2016) up to 2.9% (in June 2018). https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/

----------------------------
These FACTS are probably lost of the members of FBC Luverne.

What they are paying attention to is their perceived change in culture (‘fear of a change in a way of life’ - segregationist, fear of Muslims, fear of LBGTs, fear of government, fear of losing their guns,...) which is being defined to them not by their supposed source of all truth (the bible) but by their folk religion mediated through non-prophetic preachers like Clay Crum and their table talk at the Chicken Shack. They are not deplorable, but they are ill-informed and being duped by an expert demagogue.
Last edited by KeithE on Sat Aug 04, 2018 6:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby William Thornton » Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:14 pm

Laughable, condescending discussion here. Why wouldn't these rubes just vote for Hil, anyway? Need your own forum for these discussions.
My stray thoughts on SBC stuff may be found at my blog, SBC Plodder
User avatar
William Thornton
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby KeithE » Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:26 pm

William Thornton wrote:Laughable, condescending discussion here. Why wouldn't these rubes just vote for Hil, anyway? Need your own forum for these discussions.

This is not talking about the 2016 election (where “Hil” was an option) and this forum is an open forum for “Baptists of all kinds” (see headliner above - scroll up).

As for my post, it is asking people (not “rubes” or “deplorables”) to judge for themselves as to whether or not Trump's economic promises to the middle class has been even remotely realized.

If you don’t like the FACTS or opposing opinions, you are welcome to counter them (or ignore them); but calling FACT givers and opinion givers “laughable" and “condescending” (without further explanation) is just plain inappropriate.
Last edited by KeithE on Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby Sandy » Sat Aug 04, 2018 7:13 pm

Condescending? Hardly. These aren't fictional characters from To Kill a Mockingbird. These are First Baptist Church members from the red brick building with the white steeple on the courthouse square. They are the sort of people that you would expect to be on the cutting edge of integration, of seeing the real reasons behind the poverty in their community and being on the cutting edge of doing something about it. I wouldn't expect that the First Baptist Church of Luverne, Alabama would be a place where I'd find racism, or the kind of fearmongering that goes along with it, or a lot of people that believe the kind of bull that gets tweeted by the trumpster every day.
Sandy
 
Posts: 8856
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby David Flick » Sun Aug 05, 2018 3:38 am

To William, KeithE wrote:If you don’t like the FACTS or opposing opinions, you are welcome to counter them (or ignore them); but calling FACT givers and opinion givers “laughable" and “condescending” (without further explanation) is just plain inappropriate.

    There is a huge difference between "FACTS" and "opposing opinions." You are entitled to have your own opinions. That's certainly fair. But to declare that your opinions constitute "FACTS" 100% of the time is ludicrous. William is correct. Liberals have always been condescending toward Conservatives and those who do not agree with their views. They possess a holier-than-thou attitude toward those with whom they disagree. Their attitude is consistently marked by an air of superior piety or morality. They believe they are the only ones care for the poor, the environment and the down trodden. They believe they are the only ones who have the correct answer for all that is wrong in the world. Those who do not espouse the liberal view points are looked down upon with derision. Hillary Clinton said. "...half of Donald Trump’s supporters belong in a “basket of deplorables” characterized by “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” views.> (Source...) Obama declared that ...it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. (Source...) FBI official Peter Strzok told his lover, Lisa Page, he went to a Walmart in southern Virginia and he could “SMELL the Trump support." (Source...) I could cite scores of arrogant liberal comments that liberal quotes where conservatives and Trump supporters are trashed. Once again, William nailed it when he wrote, Laughable, condescending discussion here.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8430
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby KeithE » Sun Aug 05, 2018 7:59 am

David Flick wrote:
To William, KeithE wrote:If you don’t like the FACTS or opposing opinions, you are welcome to counter them (or ignore them); but calling FACT givers and opinion givers “laughable" and “condescending” (without further explanation) is just plain inappropriate.

    There is a huge difference between "FACTS" and "opposing opinions." You are entitled to have your own opinions. That's certainly fair. But to declare that your opinions constitute "FACTS" 100% of the time is ludicrous. William is correct. Liberals have always been condescending toward Conservatives and those who do not agree with their views. They possess a holier-than-thou attitude toward those with whom they disagree. Their attitude is consistently marked by an air of superior piety or morality. They believe they are the only ones care for the poor, the environment and the down trodden. They believe they are the only ones who have the correct answer for all that is wrong in the world. Those who do not espouse the liberal view points are looked down upon with derision. Hillary Clinton said. "...half of Donald Trump’s supporters belong in a “basket of deplorables” characterized by “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” views.> (Source...) Obama declared that ...it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. (Source...) FBI official Peter Strzok told his lover, Lisa Page, he went to a Walmart in southern Virginia and he could “SMELL the Trump support." (Source...) I could cite scores of arrogant liberal comments that liberal quotes where conservatives and Trump supporters are trashed. Once again, William nailed it when he wrote, Laughable, condescending discussion here.


How then is one supposed to make public policy points, if FACTS and DATA do not do it???

Get over your hatred of “liberals”. Delve into the facts and data with a heart for the common good to settle arguments of public policy; it is a better approach than badmouthing (e.g merely calling people “laughable” and “condescending”) or quoting those who piss you off because they have gotten close to the truth.

Sorry if I piss you off; that is not my motive (not here and not on GW subjects).
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby William Thornton » Sun Aug 05, 2018 10:04 am

Yawn. The topic was the WaPo visits the rubes in Alabama piece. I recognized the genre.
My stray thoughts on SBC stuff may be found at my blog, SBC Plodder
User avatar
William Thornton
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12071
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Atlanta

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby KeithE » Sun Aug 05, 2018 2:31 pm

William Thornton wrote:Yawn. The topic was the WaPo visits the rubes in Alabama piece. I recognized the genre.

Yes, it was about the people of FBC Luverne and their stance supporting an adulterous, lying, envious President in light of the 10 commandments.

Definition of “rubes”:
an awkward unsophisticated person


Even though I do not agree with many of the FBC-V people quoted in the article, I would show more respect than calling them “rubes”.

Facts (more than pre-set, emotional stances) should be the playing field that informs public policy discussions.

But thus is the “post-truth” approach of some here at BL.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby Sandy » Sun Aug 05, 2018 7:00 pm

William Thornton wrote:Yawn. The topic was the WaPo visits the rubes in Alabama piece. I recognized the genre.


The Washington Post piece was the work of a couple of reporters who went to Luverne, Alabama, spoke with a dozen members of the First Baptist Church, asked some questions and got some answers. If you think that the questions were intended to make those answering them look like rubes (your word, not mine) then you need to point that out They asked specific questions, aimed at getting those they were interviewing to answer why they support Trump when his morality, character, and just about everything else he says or does is so diametrically opposed to their stated values as Evangelicals. And they got an answer, the consensus from most of them being that they don't like all of the things about his morality, character, and even politics, that are at odds with their faith. They like him because he will put black people back in their place, he won't let foreigners come into the country to steal their money and their jobs, and he is "against abortion." And they liked Hillary Clinton less, based mainly on the provably false statements about her character and actions that come out of the extremist right wing fake news propaganda media. If that makes them look like rubes, well, O.K., that's your opinion.

They could have hopped on the metro a couple blocks from their office and got off at Eastern Market in DC, and walked the four blocks to the largest SBC congregation in the District, if they wanted to talk to some Evangelicals, but it would not have been likely for them to find very many Trump supporters in a church in a city where he only got 4% of the vote, nor would they be likely to find those who are dependent on the extremist right wing media as a source of information about Hillary Clinton. Nor would a trip to the Virginia or Maryland suburbs have yielded the perspective they were looking for. The bulk of those 81% of white Evangelicals who supported Trump are in the South.

The other piece there, though, wasn't written by those "WaPo liberals." It was written by Dr. Ansley Quiros, a professor at the University of North Alabama, and clearly not someone who sees Alabamans of any stripe as "rubes."
Sandy
 
Posts: 8856
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby Jim » Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:23 pm

Quiros: “Using the language of Christianity and support for conservative cultural positions, they [Weyrich, Falwell] recruited these alienated Christians into new organizations such as Falwell’s Moral Majority, founded in 1979, and James Dobson’s Focus on the Family. They proffered a new brand of Christian conservative politics that was antiabortion, anti-homosexuality, pro-Israel and pro-private education, and utilized new tools such as Pat Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network to gain national resonance and ultimately take over the platform of the Republican Party.”

The lady-professor was obviously in high dudgeon, hopefully not having a temper tantrum whilst venting her spleen on people she disdains, probably members of Hillary's deplorable crowd, of which I am one. She's the type to applaud the Rev-Dr. (God **** America) Jeremiah Wright [Obama's mentor, by his own admission] and Hillary, a hopeless liar for “speaking truth to power” and “welcoming 500,000 Muslims,” respectfully. She represents the elitists, self-appointed keepers of the conscience, who never mention that it was southern democrats who stood in the way of all the “rights legislation” of the 50s-60s that almost totally destroyed black families. So, who was right, even though for the wrong reasons? Nor did she mention that racism was inherited from the British and not invented by the colonist/Americans, who got rid of it. Hers is the boilerplate garbage peddled by the current elitist democrats who are now trying to convert the U.S. into a socialist nation. She represents the elitist scourge on University/college campuses that is a greater threat than domestic politics practiced by any crowd, religious or otherwise.
Jim
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Nero, Trump and a few reminders

Postby Stephen Fox » Mon Aug 06, 2018 2:56 pm

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/20 ... s-not.html

Christianity Today seems to just want to sit these next two years of Trump, sit it out. Kinda the 8 white ministers to whom ML King sent the letter from the Bham Jail mentality.

As to the Quiros piece, let's be clear about a few things. Her piece links the original Luverne Alabama piece but she is taking the chat up a level. She has a chapter in her new book about Marshall Frady's days in Americus Ga, and two other Baptists who were key in the Civil Rights era, both, like Frady, with Furman ties.

Quiros is not a car carrying WAPO come down to condescend on Luverne as Willie T's genre obfuscation suggests. She is a native of Atlanta Georgia and is no more a Yankee snot than say James Dickey or Tom Watson.

Nor is she a fundamentalist like Adrian Rogers.
Stephen Fox
 
Posts: 9154
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:29 pm

Re: WAPO Piece by Ansley Quiros on Trump and Evangelical sup

Postby Sandy » Mon Aug 06, 2018 8:00 pm

Stephen Fox wrote: Quiros is not a car carrying WAPO come down to condescend on Luverne as Willie T's genre obfuscation suggests. She is a native of Atlanta Georgia and is no more a Yankee snot than say James Dickey or Tom Watson.


Absolutely. If there's a condescending statement in her whole article, point it out. But even the Post story isn't condescending. You can read the questions that were asked, and see the answers. No words put in anyone's mouth, and no commentary on the side. There's not even a hint of condescension in the analysis, they leave the conclusions up to the readers. They do point out facts and those facts do contrast on occasion with some of the statements of those in the interview but that's the point, after all. It's exactly the way some of those in the right wing extremist media do stories when they want you to contradict a liberal perspective.
Sandy
 
Posts: 8856
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago


Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest