I so very much appreciate the spirit of your video blog. (Thank you Lance Wallnau for sharing it.) Unlike most attacks on Trump (or promotions for Cruz) your love and concern gave me an ability to listen to your views and thoughts. I thank you for that very much. Please kindly hear a perspective from strong, committed Christians who hold a somewhat different views from yours based on a biblical, spirit led reasoning and observable fact. At the end of the day regardless of who wins the nomination or the Presidency, we are brothers in Christ for eternity and one of us can take a good part of that telling the other "I told you so." :-)
I hear you protesting the idea of a Trump Presidency for 3 reasons. First you believe that a good part of the Church is carnal by supporting him and not upholding decency and morality. Secondly, you seem to be under the impression Trump would provoke nations and appoint terrible Supreme Court Justices as a "loose canon." And finally you discuss the "general vulgarity" that bothers you with the Trump presidency. I also heard you say that you support Ted Cruz, in large part to your concern to counter the power of the Republican establishment.
I was very interested in the part where you said you understand we are not electing a pastor, but you are concerned about a sound moral base. I've addressed these in my post (http://www.politijim.com/2016/02/why-are-cruz-christians-allowing.html) but I also want to comment further.
As mentioned in my response to Max Lucado (http://bit.ly/MaxDecency), many of your arguments seem to rest on three very faulty assumptions. The first is that, as Christian citizens of the United States, the morality of the candidate should outweigh his technical proficiency at performing the job of President of the United States. Our legal obligation as "we the people", is to not to hire a king, but a chief executive. According to scripture we are responsible to be good stewards. As someone who has hired and managed (as employees) former CEO's of Levi's, Exxon and Citibank, I can tell you that aside from extremes, there is (unfortunately) little correlation between leadership, management and decision making ability to one's "vulgarity." Of course, a womanizing drug addict would have great potential liability, but Trump demonstrates he does not drink and, although he has had 3 marriages, he has never been accused of being the serial adulterer like Bill Clinton. He has a very strong family who clearly love and adore him. Ivanka, Donald Jr and Eric all talk of how involved their father was in growing up and it is clear they are all successful, well grounded and deeply devoted to family. Close friends like Judge Pirro who have known him for decades and derided the lifestyle morality of the Clintons and others, have nothing but admiration for him. And female employees and executives going back over 30 years, say he was extremely professional and even a mentor to many of them trying to achieve their career goals. Even his ex-wife Ivanka believes he would be "a great President." These are stories you won't read if you only subscribe to National Review or listen to Fox News.
In taking our civic responsibility seriously, we are charged to elect someone who has exhibited the ability to a) establish a vision for America, b) establish clear goals, c) hire amazing, strong executives and managers to oversee the government, d) create, manage and hold them to a budget, and d) to listen to the 'experts' in all areas from the military to treasury to make consistent decisions. As publicized, Donald Trump has built a $4.5 to $10 billion company that employs thousands. (That is actually 26% better than if he invested it in the S&P index back in 1975 and never took a dime out until now.) While some focus on his small side businesses which, although a minuscule part of his holdings, are likely to have failures as all entrepreneurs can tell you (do you not know how many failed products Steve Jobs launched?) - little is mentioned about his success which are substantially grander than what is being reported. He took the albatross that was Mar A Lago and made it into a jewel of South Florida - being the FIRST private country club that admitted blacks and Jews. Reporters who knew him for 20 years there speak glowingly of his ability to identify problems (including when political enemies began directing air traffic over his resort) and successfully resolve them profitably. He's built entire cities and, yes, he has had failures. As any successful executive from Steve Jobs to Ronald Reagan have said in retrospect, it is the failures that allow you to learn and develop the character needed for even bigger challenges in the future.
You have chosen Mr. Cruz who has essentially been a lawyer his entire life, never overseeing a budget and never having to recruit, motivate and manage even a hundred people to an end organizational goal much less 2.8 million of them. Except for a 18 months with a private law firm, he has always lived from a government check. In fact, despite promising Texans he would work "every day" to stop the government corruption in Washington, he began recruiting politicians in Iowa and early primary states within three months of taking his Senate seat. Although not as bad as Rubio's, Ted's Senate attendance is ten times worse than the average Senator and he has MISSED over 50% of his Armed Services Committee hearings, the ONLY Senator to do so. To put that in perspective, he has a worst attendance than Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and Al Franken combined. Unlike Trump, he doesn't directly run his own campaign, instead putting it into the hands of former Goldman Sachs and DHS partners of the enormously influential Chertoff Group lobbying company.
If, as a Christian you believe the lack of vulgarity is more important than managing the responsibility God has given you, I suggest you look at former President Jimmy Carter. Carter was a Sunday School teacher who was widely acknowledge to not curse or lie (although his campaign told some whoppers) and unlike Cruz actually had 2 to 3 years of gubernatorial experience (and a peanut farm) before leaving his Governor job to become President. Many Christians, thirsting for ANY acknowledgement of Christian values, swept him into office based only upon his profession of being born again not realizing that he increased Georgia's taxes, budget, and bureaucracy to unprecedented levels. In fact, in 1976 after he left office, the state had to call a special session to address the horrific shortfalls and address the Medicaid abuses that took nearly four years to unravel. You know of course how terribly he ran foreign policy as well as economic and budgetary concerns as well. If you wouldn't hire a youth minister based primarily on his bible knowledge rather than his ability to run the department, how can you not make this central to your rationale to hire the Chief Executive and Commander of the military?
You have to wonder why so many staunch Christian government executives like Governor Mike Huckabee and Governor Sarah Palin would NOT endorse Ted Cruz. Palin may be one of the most accomplished governors in modern history and by Cruz's own admission is the reason he won the Senate. (I worked tirelessly for Cruz here in Texas to get him elected in part because of her endorsement). And executive ability includes working with others with whom you disagree. The relationship between Reagan and Tip O'Neil is legend. Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich, while both very tough on liberal policies, KNEW they would never have the numbers to enact conservative LAW unless they could win moderates to their side. Together, both facilitated the greatest conservative turn of government since Disraeli in India. Cruz however seems to not only fail to win over others to his views in the Senate, he hasn't been able to attract "somewhat conservative" and moderate voters in his own party. His only attempt was 18 months into his term, he betrayed Texans by joining Mitch McConnell at the NRSC and gave the establishment $240,000 to stop Senate challengers to the establishment. Instead of influencing them, they influenced him.
Trump however has former Democrat Presidential candidates considering to vote for him. Fairly moderate Governor Chris Christie and conservative Governor Jan Brewer disagree on a lot of policy issues, but both joined Trump. And it is NOT because of the misnomer that Trump is a liberal. As I outlined here Trump is likely MORE conservative than Ted Cruz, even going back to Trump's non-political positions going back 20+ years. When you get the endorsement of Phyllis Schlafly, the godmother of the conservative movement, to endorse you, discerning people start rechecking their own conclusions. As a conservative might write off the endorsement of moderate Scott Brown (MA), but it's tougher to do with perhaps the most principled conservative Sheriff in America in Joe Arpaio.
Cruz wants a VAT tax which has dramatically increased government and the power of the IRS in EVERY country where it has been adopted. Lawrence Kudlow and others have praised Trump's Reagan-like economic plan. While Trump readily admits he was 'pro-choice' long ago, he NEVER defended the practice going back to public interviews given even in the 1990's and always would express distaste over it. At the 2011 CPAC convention Trump explained his revelation of how he came to understand that it is wrong to demand women to stop the procedure. Pat Robertson, Robert Jeffress and Jerry Falwell, Jr who have known Trump for years are convinced that his conversion is real. I know that mother (and pro-life advocate) of Down Syndrome son Trig Sarah Palin would never endorse Donald without being convinced herself this was a genuine position. And, Trump is technically correct that Planned Parenthood DOES provide cancer screening and other services beyond abortion. I disagree with him in defending even those specific practices but he is not worried about changing his view to pander for votes. It's what he believes. I understand the skepticism of the short amount of time Trump's view against abortion, but few realize that Ronald Reagan INCREASED abortion as Governor only 7 years before running for President. He became the single biggest influence in the pro-life movement for the next 20 years.
You mention that Christians are putting 'nationalism' second to biblical values. I'd argue that putting false pious promotion above Christian civic responsibility is a far worse charge. Do you despise General Patton's successes because he cursed and was arrogant? If not, why would you do so to the man who be the Commander in Chief?
I don't see how anyone can believe that Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio are qualified to fulfill the responsibilities, pressures and burdens of President with their extreme lack of executive experience. Trump however not only builds and runs a massive empire successfully, he has mastered media, overcome financial crises and even testified before Congress on job creation. As I stated in my earlier article, if you are the property manager of a church and find the basement full of vermin and termites, you had better make your decision on who to hire on qualifications other than their lack of vulgarity or politeness. I'd look for someone that had a string of successes eradicating the infestation for many years rather than a half term Senator who barely does his current job and who AUTHORED the Senate bill on Obama Trade and voted to help the current President give nuclear and economic power to Iran. I would think after the disaster of the current President who also was elected as a half term Senator with no successful executive leadership, we would be at least a little cautious but looking at two others.
It is also fair to ask, when Cruz capitulates and AIDS the 'establishment' by joining Mitch McConnell on the NRSC against reformers (like Mississippi) within 18 months of taking office, what objective evidence is there that he would fight, much less win, budget and ideological battles with his own party? Call Donald what you will, but he has already faced off successfully against the Pope, disgraced and New World Order ex-president Vincente Fox, leaders from China and the most powerful political family in the US, the Bushes. The secret unbeknownst to most Cruz supporters is just how deeply embedded into Washington Heidi and Ted are. Meanwhile Ted Cruz now has added Jeb Bush's brother Neil, responsible for $1.5 Billion in lost tax payer money and who pushes and profits from Common Core, as one of the key players in his campaign. The Cruz organization is replete with the Bush holdovers including the former head of DHS and the staff that miscalculated the Gulf War. In fact, while Cruz was disparaging Bush policies in his campaign, he actually was being advised by them. And how about the disgraced Clinton policy leaders he shares with Hillary Clinton. His new national spokesman? This was the person that attempted to shut down the TEA Party for the GOP. Things are NOT as they appear if you are only listening to Cruz's finely crafted stories.
It might surprise you to know that God often uses the profane and vulgar to accomplish HIS plans. Martin Luther, the greatest reformer in church history, was so profane the producers of the movie LUTHER struggled for months on how to accurately reflect his life, without getting an R rating for being historically accurate. One of my friends who was the script adviser on the movie. Upon further research, we learned that according to biblical scholars, Jesus's "brood of vipers" was, in that culture, worse than "son of a b**ch." Vulgarity does not disqualify one from being an effective leader, even for the Almighty.
Jesus wasn't always "nice." Weaving a weapon (whip) and overturning tables while calling others "wicked," "adulterous" and hypocritical escapes most Cruz proponents. And that is not nearly as bad (according to the standard you are demanding) as the racial insensitivity Jesus showed to the Syrophoenician woman in Mark 7. As pointed out by numerous published papers, "throwing a morsel to the dogs" was a terrible condescending racial slur between a Jew and a gentile. As a Christian, I do not believe it was said with venom (nor does the Greek grammatical structure indicate that), but most today would have responded with outrage that a religious leader would be so callous and harsh in the words used, much less to a woman! Just as many Christian men felt freed by John Eldridge's book, Wild at Heart, it's time for pastors to quit editing the real Jesus.
The second and third premises I am challenging in your argument, is that Trump is a divisive and immoral (carnal) figure, and that Cruz is not. I have a feeling that you, like many others, are the victim of a carefully constructed disinformation campaign. Rather than assuming Ben Carson is a "sell out" for endorsing Trump (as are Palin, Huckabee, Falwell, Jeffress, and famous Christian celebrities like Willie Robertson, Stephen Baldwin and Jon Voight), is it possible that you have mistaken some of your conclusions by only listening to a media stream and counsel that has intentionally tried to mislead you? Did you know "Christian" radio Salem network actually plotted with conservative leaders like Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh to push amnesty through Congress in the Gang of Eight bill? Things are not as they seem if you accept every report you hear from even long admired Christian or conservative voices.
Many have fallen for the media propaganda that Trump is a bigot somehow. Perhaps you missed that civil rights icon and brother to Medgar - Charles Evers enthusiastically endorsed Trump. Famous football player Herschel Walker who has known Trump for years, is fiercely defending his long time friend. Perhaps you missed that childhood friends not only talk of the integrity, honor and duty they learned as cadets but that no one from their class had anything but respect for him. Native Hawaiian's break into tears over the prospect of 'making America great again' and minorities are overwhelmingly supporting Trump. The Democrats are in arms because Trump may finally break the "Black border" getting as much as 25% of the African American vote in the general election. Do you really think Carl Ichan and former Presidential candidate Steve Forbes, who have worked with Trump for decades, would put their BUSINESS reputation on the line if he was as dangerous as suggested? These are all signs that something is wrong with "racist" and "divisive" view you are espousing. When Trump began his campaign talking about "the wall", the mainstream media immediately twisted it as though Trump was anti-immigrant, rather than anti-ILLEGAL immigrant. He didn't call all Mexicans "rapists" as the media reports. Go back and listen to the speech. Don't believe second hand accounts and do your own research as is our civic duty.
Ted Cruz however has been spending a lot of time dividing the nation into those in New York against the rest of us. He has told audiences that non-believers aren't worthy of being elected to government while having surrogates like Glenn Beck declare other believers "not Christian" if they support Trump. Cruz refuses to disavow those statements. He lied to the Morningstar church gathering declaring that Donald Trump is for ObamaCare despite accepting an invitation to Mar A Lago to speak the week after his ACA filibuster. Trump not only introduced Ted, spoke glowingly about his fight against ObamaCare and his agreement that it was horrible, he donated $5,000 to Cruz's PAC putting his money where is mouth was. (He also told the audience Trump was against the Second Amendment although he and his sons are lifetime NRA members and his sons are extreme hunting and gun enthusiasts.) He has then continued his disparagement of "low information voters" suggesting that only uneducated people support Trump. Not only does Trump win more college and post-graduate voters than Ted, Sarah Palin, who has been pretty silent until now, set forth all of the areas of duplicity Ted has held since taking office pretending that he holds 'conservative' values. And she didn't even get into the fact that like Barack Obama, Ted has sealed his college records, his immigration records and has passport records.
You might be unaware, but there is a very calculated disinformation campaign happening. Notice how in this debate - when the media was pushing Rubio - CBS used colorful graphics to underscore Rubio's points but did not do it for any other candidate. It was scripted. Here is just one piece of evidence that even our voting outcomes are corrupt. Isn't it strange that conservatives are screaming "Trump is a liberal" while Democrats are screaming he's a secret member of the KKK? People like Ben Shapairo are declaring the world is over if Trump is elected, but neglecting to mention they were encouraging Trump to get in the race instead of Romney in 2011!
Not since Goldwater and Reagan has the Republican party made such extreme effort to stop a candidate from being the nominee. So much of our news by both mainstream and conservative sources is uninformed if not staged. Some, like the National Review, don't even bother to make a pretense of balanced reporting or objectivity. Why? Because the establishment knows they can not control Trump and worse, he's already indicated he will begin to turn over stones and prosecute the guilty. As Phyllis Schlafly who was one of the original warriors against the Rockefeller Republicans says, the attacks on Trump began back in the days of Goldwater.
A little problem lost on Cruz supporters, is that you can't fix the government unless you have the control of it. Cruz is not even winning evangelicals and conservatives in his own party - much less attracting the broad base like Reagan had to gain the White House and pass legislation. Millions of the old Reagan democrats are flooding into the Republican party. While Trump sets attendance records for campaign events the Cruz campaign is reduced to grossly exaggerating the size of theirs. The GOP changed the electoral rules in 2012 to reward a candidate who play best in moderate and "blue" states, and hamper the influence of red states. This was designed for Jeb Bush. They always suspected a TEA Party type would only be strong in the Southern states and didn't count on Trump. Most understand that Cruz simply can't win. And he is hated enough by the party because of his personal off-putting demeanor he will only help a true establishment person take control in a brokered convention.
Christians HAVE tried more "perfect" candidates in the past. The TEA Party movement that elected dozens of "conservatives" to Congress and state government, ended up corrupted almost instantly as GOP Establishment high priest Trent Lent prophesied. Nikki Haley betrayed her principles. John Kaisch ended up embracing ObamaCare instead of joining the other governors fighting it. America - Christian and agnostic - aren't trusting lawyers and politicians to actually do the job anymore and is one reason why Cruz and Rubio aren't gaining traction. Those of us not supporting Cruz do not believe that he is capable of leading change when he hasn't done it with the chances he's been given. Faithful in small things, is the requisite. So may I ask, is it a Christian value to continue to electing compromised candidates that won't actually change anything?
Is it Christian to attack another professed Christian even though Jesus stated (Luke 9:50) “Do not stop him; for he who is not against you is for you.” At least on personal moral grounds?
Pastors promoting Ted Cruz as the "righteous" candidate is a polluting the gospel.
As I discussed in my earlier post, the danger of Christians focusing on a prototypical Dallas Seminary persona as being ideal for presidential qualification is cheapening the gospel of Jesus Christ.
What you may have missed in Lance Wallnau's "wrecking ball" prophecy, is that the wrecking is not just to the GOP and the DC establishment, BUT TO THE CHURCH. A church that wants to "qualify" who is a Christian by the Blood of Christ with standards of performance and works is wrong. What is being communicated to the world by the Christian chorus demanding "civility" and a perfect personal moral history, is EXACTLY what the Pharisees demanded Jesus and his followers. Jesus proclaimed that righteousness could be achieved as a "gift" by merely trusting in God with your heart and saying so with your words. Paul went farther and called those who demanded works to be the measure of acceptability as "foolish" and "bondage." So,
Christians distract from the real message of the gospel (simple trust in Jesus and confession), they place under false guilt Christians who have struggled or are struggling out from a "past" that isn't very upright.It is my notion that this one reason why Cruz is failing so badly among Republicans. Most of us also have a divorce or a moral failure in our past. To hear that a successful, conservative family man like Trump being condemned because he is still walking out his faith, leads a lot of us to run to his side and shun the Pharisee.
God ordered that no one eat from the knowledge of the tree of good and evil, but most modern Christians try to force feed "what is good and bad" to both Christians and non-Christians! No wonder the world hates Christ. With His direct presence, crowds flocked to Jesus during his ministry. Why? It wasn't because he was telling them how sinful and bad they were. He was telling them the "good news" that their sin - past, present and future - was no longer being recorded in Heaven if they trusted in Jesus' goodness and righteousness. (It was the religiously uncompromising who demanded his murder - not the secular leader who "could find no fault in Him.") Why then are we telling the world to evaluate the "righteousness" of a candidate by what he does rather than what he believes and confesses? Here is where I find preachers like you truly confusing other Christians in the world. Our acceptance to God is by what we believe and say. Our acceptance to the world is by what we have already accomplished, not by what we promise or say.
As a confessing Christian who doesn't drink, Trump has raised a great family and despises the attack on our faith by Muslims. I'm shocked at the number of pastors and religious leaders condemning Donald Trump, rather than encouraging him. He works hard and demands others - including his own privileged children - to work hard. He advocates for Israel. It's small, but the time when Ben Carson didn't hear his name being called at the debate, Donald Trump waited for Ben to go before taking the stage. Character is often seen best in the small things.
Instead the rest of the population is (falsely) learning from Christian leaders that Christianity is about condemnation and judgment. And hypocrisy. It's not that Trump is good and Cruz is bad. It's the hypocrisy of holding up a flawed candidate as an ideal when he isn't. Ted Cruz is being held up as the "acceptable" Christian because he has 'a form of godliness.' Paul tells Timothy to "turn away" from those people!
For a moment take off your political glasses and put on your shepherd's robe. Be a pastor and an evangelist for a minute LISTENING to those you are supposed to love. David Brooks, an observing Jewish conservative writer, reported on a case that Ted Cruz tried as Solicitor General in Texas. For him, it seem to exemplify what Ted Cruz and his supporters were all about. PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT to look at how Cruz is appearing to others. You can dismiss it as an anecdotal if you like, but with such historic crowds and very key leaders like Carson, Palin, Jeff Sessions and others moving to Trump - try to understand WHY they are shunning Ted Cruz. Brooks discusses the case of Michael Wayne Haley who was arrested after stealing a calculator from Walmart. The maximum sentence allowable was two years but a court error had sentenced him to 16 years. Ted Cruz had the ability and authority to let Haley go for "time served" but instead, Cruz used the case to build his career by arguing an obscure point of law before the Supreme Court. Ted Cruz made Haley stay in jail the full 16 years for stealing a calculator. Brooks writes:
The case reveals something interesting about Cruz’s character. Ted Cruz is now running strongly among evangelical voters, especially in Iowa. But in his career and public presentation Cruz is a stranger to most of what would generally be considered the Christian virtues: humility, mercy, compassion and grace. Cruz’s behavior in the Haley case is almost the dictionary definition of pharisaism: an overzealous application of the letter of the law in a way that violates the spirit of the law, as well as fairness and mercy.THIS is not the gospel of grace. Instead it feeds every stereotypical image about Christians.
Another view from a very famous NY Times columnist who is attracted by some conservative ideas and fights against the radicalization of feminists (for instance defending the right for men to men), changed her mind on Trump, but had very insightful reaction to Ted Cruz.
From my perspective as a fervent supporter of the ruggedly honest and principled Bernie Sanders, Trump with his pragmatic real-life record is a far more palatable national figure than Ted Cruz, whose unctuous, vainglorious professions of Christian piety don’t pass the smell test. Trump is a blunt, no-crap mensch, while Cruz is a ham actor, doling out fake compassion like chopped liver. Cruz’s lugubrious, weirdly womanish face, with its prim, tight smile and mawkishly appealing puppy-dog eyebrows, is like a waxen mask, always on the verge of melting. This guy doesn’t know who the hell he is—and the White House is no place for him and us to find out.I want to point out that the multitudes flocked to Jesus. He was NOT preaching about doing right and wrong, but grace (except to those still attempting to live by the law). He never asked the adulteress if she was going to repent before (or after) he saved her, but on her declaration of naming Him "Lord" He said that He did not condemn her. The thief on the cross was invited into paradise without praying the sinner's prayer. But he believed! And confessed with his mouth "Lord." How far the Christian church has come from educating the world on the REAL radical and dangerous simplicity of the gospel! It is GRACE by faith - not in being a perfect, sinless human.
Ted Cruz is the epitome of self-righteous Christian our society has come to despise. Trump may indeed be arrogant, but encourages Americans (legal Americans) to become united. He doesn't hide his Christianity but he also doesn't suggest that it is his primary prerequisite or purpose to lead ALL Americans, believer or not. To a culture that feels judged by the Christian church (as Anne Graham Lott's book suggests even quite a few believers as well), Trump is much more the epitome of Christ's grace than Cruz is.
One fifth of Americans have no opinion on Ted yet. But because of his lying about Ben Carson, lying on his fundraising material that he doesn't take money from lobbyists, lying that Trump gave donations to Hillary Clinton, and his penchant to use Bill Clinton like evasion from his policy record, he is already branded by the secular media a liar. And this is BEFORE they focus on him as they did with Sarah Palin. Articles are just beginning exposing it (here, here and here) and ridiculing through humor. He lied to David Brody at CBN about his tithing and raised money from gay donors in New York while condemning homosexuality a short time earlier at Liberty University. He even told the gay activists that he "would be fine" if his daughters turned out to be gay. (It was this specific incident many feel that led Mike Huckabee to talk about his debate charge that Cruz said one thing to people in New York and something different in Texas. Normally congenial Huckabee went on to call Cruz “Nasty…Stealing…Lowlife…Sleazy…” when he left the race and like Carson, endorsed Trump.
Cruz suddenly "discovers" he is Canadian only 18 months ago, but CNN interviews Princeton schoolmates that recall bold declarations Cruz made saying he was a dual citizen at the Canadian border. Those who exalt him as the "Christian" ideal do great harm to the rest of the Body, and the conservative movement in general.
And no - it is not a few incidents but an enormous body of deception as profiled here.
You make a good point on the Supreme Court. But again, I fear you are buying the PR spin rather than the facts on Cruz's qualifications for this. It was Cruz who recruited and pushed for John Roberts as a Bush adviser. Cruz authored the Agenda 21 ObamaTrade bill, used procedural gimmickry to have the bill's passages without recording individual votes, and then, this past November, voted to ban Congress from disallowing China to enter the agreement. He voted to protect Monsanto from product liability and to unconstitutionally override the states 10th Amendment rights by banning them from deciding themselves whether they wanted to label GMO food products. Yes, he would likely appoint a pro-life judge. But with the power Cruz has already been given, he has weakened the sovereignty of the country tremendously. It may thrill a lot of Christians that he speaks in tongues, but like the Carter election, many are overlooking his real track record and overstating his actual experience.
As for Donald Trump, whether his sister (who vigorously testified in favor of ultra conservative justice Samuel Alito at the Senate hearings) would actually have been an appointment or he was just joking I do not know. But he has not pressed for her again and was the only candidate to actually name two Supreme Court justice nominees he would appoint in the debate before last. None of the others did.
So many of us can not in conscience promote Ted Cruz as the "righteous" or "godly" alternative since to us, lying and theft are not any less sinful than cheating on your wife (which according to reports he deeply regretted.) Especially when his first wife Ivana has forgiven him and supports his candidacy. Some have suggested that Melania Trump would be a detriment but they obviously are unaware of Heidi Cruz's past.
Donald Trump is not the perfect example of a godly leader. However, murdering adulterer King David and his son Solomon with 700 wives and 300 concubines who did not "deprive himself of any pleasure" likely were not qualified under your standards as well. There are NO perfect people and when Christian leaders attempt to misuse the gospel to promote "a form of godliness" it easily shatters with the light of scrutiny.
At this point many of us believe that pressing for Cruz under the notion of "Christian" is detrimental to the church and the conservative cause, and that in actual conservative terms, Trump is vastly more equipped and anointed to do the job.