Poll: What should Trump do?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

What should Trump do?

  • He should concede. There was no fraud. He's being a baby.

  • He should abide by whatever the courts decide in regards to his voter fraud lawsuits.

  • If his lawsuits fail, he should declare martial law and assume leadership.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,888
4,540
113
#81
During Lincoln's presidency, he was criticized for taking what were considered "extra-constitutional measures." But in the end, the verdict of history is that Lincoln's use of power did not constitute abuse since every survey of historians ranks Lincoln as number one among the great presidents.4

Far harsher would have been his denunciation if the whole American experiment of a democratic Union had failed--as seemed possible given the circumstances. If such a disaster occurred, what benefit would have been gained by adhering to a fallen Constitution? It was a classic example of the age-old conflict in a democracy: how to balance individual rights with security for a nation.

In the words of historian James G. Randall: "No president has carried the power of presidential edict and executive order (independently of Congress) so far as [Lincoln] did.... It would not be easy to state what Lincoln conceived to be the limit of his powers."5

In the 80 days that elapsed between Abraham Lincoln's April 1861 call for troops--the beginning of the Civil War--and the official convening of Congress in special session on July 4, 1861, Lincoln performed a whole series of important acts by sheer assumption of presidential power. Lincoln, without congressional approval, called forth the militia to "suppress said combinations,"6 which he ordered "to disperse and retire peacefully" to their homes.7 He increased the size of the Army and Navy, expended funds for the purchase of weapons, instituted a blockade--an act of war--and suspended the precious writ of habeas corpus, all without congressional approval.

Lincoln termed these actions not the declaration of "civil war," but rather the suppression of rebellion.8

https://www.heritage.org/defense/report/abraham-lincoln-and-civil-liberties-wartime
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#82
During Lincoln's presidency, he was criticized for taking what were considered "extra-constitutional measures." But in the end, the verdict of history is that Lincoln's use of power did not constitute abuse since every survey of historians ranks Lincoln as number one among the great presidents.4

Far harsher would have been his denunciation if the whole American experiment of a democratic Union had failed--as seemed possible given the circumstances. If such a disaster occurred, what benefit would have been gained by adhering to a fallen Constitution? It was a classic example of the age-old conflict in a democracy: how to balance individual rights with security for a nation.

In the words of historian James G. Randall: "No president has carried the power of presidential edict and executive order (independently of Congress) so far as [Lincoln] did.... It would not be easy to state what Lincoln conceived to be the limit of his powers."5

In the 80 days that elapsed between Abraham Lincoln's April 1861 call for troops--the beginning of the Civil War--and the official convening of Congress in special session on July 4, 1861, Lincoln performed a whole series of important acts by sheer assumption of presidential power. Lincoln, without congressional approval, called forth the militia to "suppress said combinations,"6 which he ordered "to disperse and retire peacefully" to their homes.7 He increased the size of the Army and Navy, expended funds for the purchase of weapons, instituted a blockade--an act of war--and suspended the precious writ of habeas corpus, all without congressional approval.

Lincoln termed these actions not the declaration of "civil war," but rather the suppression of rebellion.8

https://www.heritage.org/defense/report/abraham-lincoln-and-civil-liberties-wartime
So are you saying that in your opinion that if the courts decide that Biden won the election that you would consider Biden voters the same kind of evil as slave owners and you would be willing to meet them in the field of battle and exchange musket shots?

If not what is your point?
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,888
4,540
113
#83
So are you saying that in your opinion that if the courts decide that Biden won the election that you would consider Biden voters the same kind of evil as slave owners and you would be willing to meet them in the field of battle and exchange musket shots?

If not what is your point?
Which is worse the killing the unborn or slavery? Destruction of liberty or having freedom? Treason with our foreign enemies or hard stance on our enemies?

Do I see the same evil? No, I see worse evil than just slavery.

If the defense of country, family, and liberty come to be at stake on the home front then any American should want to defend it from those who want to destroy it.

These are very serious times no one would have ever thought the survival of our Constitutional Republic would be at stake. But here we are.

Stay in prayer.
 
Jul 9, 2020
846
492
63
#84
So are you saying that in your opinion that if the courts decide that Biden won the election that you would consider Biden voters the same kind of evil as slave owners and you would be willing to meet them in the field of battle and exchange musket shots?
YES!!! Absolutely. Kyle Rittenhouse did exactly that. And he is a total hero. Anyone that would rather let these satanic globalist pedophiles take over than to actually fight them is worthless to me.

Why would you even ask that question? Is it your position is that you'd rather let evil prevail than to fight against it?
 

Roughsoul1991

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2016
8,888
4,540
113
#85
YES!!! Absolutely. Kyle Rittenhouse did exactly that. And he is a total hero. Anyone that would rather let these satanic globalist pedophiles take over than to actually fight them is worthless to me.

Why would you even ask that question? Is it your position is that you'd rather let evil prevail than to fight against it?
I am just assuming but he probably isn't thinking about the type of evil that we saw in the riots, or potential government overreach related to abortion, the 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, and how they choose to enforce their policies. Law enforcement? Military? He probably has the old picture of America where you could disagree and they didn't want to re-educate you, imprison you, or kill you as many were killed in the riots already.

It feels better to live in denial and not acknowledge what is at stake.

Trust me, I want to so badly see this to end in a healthy way as to why I am praying for God to show us the way.