There was only one time in which readers rebelled against the publication;s position (i.e. a controversy involving former quarterback Tim Tebow) by voicing their disagreement in the comments section.
A recent article about James Dobson's support of GOP candidate Donald Trump in spite his comments about sexually assaulting women seems to be causing yet another rebellion. The article said nothing about the new allegations Trump is now facing regarding actual sexual harassment. But the commentators still weren't having it. Some comments are as follows:
- “You got to cut him some slack,” Dobson insisted. “He didn’t grow up like we did.” - So that somehow justifies and gives Trump the ability to say and act however he chooses? I think not Sir...
- Dobson should just admit the real reason: Party outweighs candidate. He would rather have a womanising buffoon who agrees with his policies than a competent leader who opposes them, and there is nothing wrong with that.
- Dobson speaks as if Bill Clinton is running for president. He's not. If Bill was Hillary's brother, or cousin, or a current close colleague, would people like Dobson and Trump's advisers still be ragging on him? Why can't Hillary be the object of criticism and not Bill? That's an intentional distraction to try to pull people away from the main event which is that Trump is a womanizer, a molester of women (sexual assault), a guy who talks about grabbing women by the genitals, a bully who walks into women's dressing rooms claiming ownership of the pageant as his right to do this... and I believe there will be much more coming to light. Do you really want such a pervert to be president? If Dobson hopes that Trump will stand up for traditional marriage, he has a disappointment coming. Trump is twice divorced and doesn't respect women so do we really want such a person to lead the way on Biblical marriage when he is a lousy role model for it?
- Dobson says vote for Trump, not because he is good, but because he is been (in Dobson's opinion) than Hillary. That is moral relativism at its worst.