Why do Some Christians support Trump?

[Geneviev]

Which is not Christian, to be very clear.

Well, yes.
I don't believe Trump is Christian at all.

Trump doesn't believe that Trump is Christian.

[Manokan Republic]

Trump has never said anything in opposition to gay marriage. He initiated a ban on travel from some Muslim majority nations, but not on Muslims specifically.

Then why make the ban on those countries?

There were a disproportionate amount of violent criminals coming, North Korea and a few other countries were added too, and it was only 7% of the world's muslim population. It wasn't on muslims, it was just countries with large volumes of traveling dangerous people.

[Lower Nubia]

Then why make the ban on those countries?

There were a disproportionate amount of violent criminals coming, North Korea and a few other countries were added too, and it was only 7% of the world's muslim population. It wasn't on muslims, it was just countries with large volumes of traveling dangerous people.

The logical conclusion is airport checks. Not bans. I'll ask again. Why the bans on these countries.

[South Acren]

As a Christian your ethics should be informed by your faith. If your ethics are informed by your faith, and your ethics inform your political opinions, then your religious beliefs are of course influencing your political beliefs. If you claim to be a Christian but your politics have nothing to do with your religion, then something has gone wrong somewhere along the line.

Oh something went wrong somewhere, i agree. I just don't feel like basing my political decisions solely on religion. Say there is a politician who is running for presidency and his entire campaign is great, his plans are great, and his ideas are all good (of course this could be highly debated so lets just keep it general). Except one. Say he supports Abortion. Normally this would likely be a deal breaker with some Christians I know. For me, I wouldn't look at just one thing, even though its against what I believe. It would be unfair to fight against something with a little bad but mostly good. Would i support that direct idea or action? No. Would i likely support said politician if his/hers policies are what i would agree with? Yes.

So what secular reasons can you give against Joe, I'm curious.

This isn't the right forum for this but among other things is his idea to pull us out of Isolationism. I know its not a terrible thing, but i still don't like it. Also some of the actions he does just gives me the creeps. I mean who calls their sister the love of his life? I dont feel like going too far into this, as it rarely ends good.

I know right. How can your religion which you believe to be truth not influence your choices?

Free will. I know that I should, however, that could result in poor choices. I'd rather not act like those religious fanatics you see protesting abortion clinics or acting out with drama. I guess its against the Word of God, but I will pay for that when the time comes, however I will not let myself cloud my own judgement due to something that should remain separated from politics.

[Manokan Republic]

As a Christian your ethics should be informed by your faith. If your ethics are informed by your faith, and your ethics inform your political opinions, then your religious beliefs are of course influencing your political beliefs. If you claim to be a Christian but your politics have nothing to do with your religion, then something has gone wrong somewhere along the line.

I know right. How can your religion which you believe to be truth not influence your choices?

There's something to be said about not enforcing your religion on others, and on top of this you can vote for someone who is an atheist and not even a Christian but would be good for the country. The idea you must vote for a Christian or someone who embodies the perfect Christian spirit is silly, and the point of being a Christian is to forgive, to recognize no-one is perfect and accept people regardless of their imperfections, not to strive for someone who meets arbitrary criteria of being the best Christian. Alexander Hamilton said, if men were angels, there would be no need for government.

We never are voting for perfect men to take office, but flawed men to represent the country, and the question is if a chosen candidate does this well, not if they are Jesus Christ themselves and without any kind of sin. To err is human, and thus we accept that from our representatives in the way we'd expect it from everyone else. It is naive, at best, to think any man, let alone a politician, is going in to office as a perfect being, and even in fact dangerous to think they are somehow going to be averse from the pitfallings of all other human beings.

[Kowani]

Then why make the ban on those countries?

There were a disproportionate amount of violent criminals coming,

This was actually false, by the way.

North Korea and a few other countries were added too, and it was only 7% of the world's muslim population. It wasn't on muslims, it was just countries with large volumes of traveling dangerous people.

Notice how the narrative changes.

[Lower Nubia]

So what secular reasons can you give against Joe, I'm curious.

This isn't the right forum for this but among other things is his idea to pull us out of Isolationism. I know its not a terrible thing, but i still don't like it. Also some of the actions he does just gives me the creeps. I mean who calls their sister the love of his life? I dont feel like going too far into this, as it rarely ends good.

... Weren't there video's and pictures of Trump saying inappropriate things about his daughter before 2016? ...

I know right. How can your religion which you believe to be truth not influence your choices?

Free will. I know that I should, however, that could result in poor choices. I'd rather not act like those religious fanatics you see protesting abortion clinics or acting out with drama. I guess its against the Word of God, but I will pay for that when the time comes, however I will not let myself cloud my own judgement due to something that should remain separated from politics.

Free Will being an excuse for blatant inconsistency is pretty damning of your ability to rationalise issues.

[Manokan Republic]

There were a disproportionate amount of violent criminals coming,

This was actually false, by the way.

North Korea and a few other countries were added too, and it was only 7% of the world's muslim population. It wasn't on muslims, it was just countries with large volumes of traveling dangerous people.

Notice how the narrative changes.

First of all these people are not coming from the banned countries, and these countries due have disproportionate amounts of violence, especially compared to the U.S., and large amounts of terrorists who dislike the west. Secondly, the CATO institute study about illegal immigrants is wrong, as it ignores the totality of the Texas DHS data. I specifically actually even wrote up an article on this, although it's incomplete, and basically they only take the first set of data and ignore the rest, which is to say that they only include crimes from people who were previously known to be illegal immigrants, which is a very small sub-section of all illegal immigrants.

A quote: "The institute claims there is a homicide rate of 3.1 per 100,000 citizen for native citizens, while there is 2.6 for illegal immigrants, when based on the idea that illegal immigrants only committed 46 homicides per year. However, when the total figures of all illegal immigrant homicides are recorded and not just by those known to be illegal immigrants prior to their arrests, or a figure of 162 convictions, this results in a real homicide conviction rate of approximately 9.1 per 100,000 citizens for illegal immigrants, in comparison to 3.1 per 100,000 for native citizens, or figures that are about three times higher. It is clear that by using incomplete data they make illegal immigrant homicides look lower than they really are, which is a blatant misrepresentation of the data."

[Old Tyrannia]

I know right. How can your religion which you believe to be truth not influence your choices?

There's something to be said about not enforcing your religion on others, and on top of this you can vote for someone who is an atheist and not even a Christian but would be good for the country. The idea you must vote for a Christian or someone who embodies the perfect Christian spirit is silly, and the point of being a Christian is to forgive, to recognize no-one is perfect and accept people regardless of their imperfections, not to strive for someone who meets arbitrary criteria of being the best Christian. Alexander Hamilton said, if men were angels, there would be no need for government.

Being guided by your religious principles in making political decisions is not the same as enforcing your religion on others.

[Manokan Republic]

This isn't the right forum for this but among other things is his idea to pull us out of Isolationism. I know its not a terrible thing, but i still don't like it. Also some of the actions he does just gives me the creeps. I mean who calls their sister the love of his life? I dont feel like going too far into this, as it rarely ends good.

... Weren't there video's and pictures of Trump saying inappropriate things about his daughter before 2016? ...

Free will. I know that I should, however, that could result in poor choices. I'd rather not act like those religious fanatics you see protesting abortion clinics or acting out with drama. I guess its against the Word of God, but I will pay for that when the time comes, however I will not let myself cloud my own judgement due to something that should remain separated from politics.

Free Will being an excuse for blatant inconsistency is pretty damning of your ability to rationalise issues.

It's taken broadly out of context, and stretched to mean something it clearly doesn't. He's trying to compliment his daughter, and people have twisted it to mean something it clearly doesn't mean. Saying something that sounds weird out of context is different from sniffing hundreds of little girls on live camera, and one of them showing up in illegal photographs on Hunter Biden's labtop. That being said while the labtop is real and confirmed by the FBI, it is currently under investigation and so pending more information it's still somewhat up in the air. Sniffing little girls on air is not.

[Oppy Gasai]

I'm a conservative christian. Religion hardly has anything to do with it. It is a decision based on the info I've seen and the basic facts, while also including some personal values I hold dear, like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

[Kowani]

This was actually false, by the way.

Notice how the narrative changes.

First of all these people are not coming from the banned countries, and these countries due have disproportionate amounts of violence, especially compared to the U.S.

...This could apply to so many countries that this point is ridiculous.

and large amounts of terrorists who dislike the west.

So many that there has never been a terrorist attack by a Chad citizen in the US, right?

Secondly, the CATO institute study about illegal immigrants is wrong, as it ignores the totality of the Texas DHS data. I specifically actually even wrote up an article on this, although it's incomplete, and basically they only take the first set of data and ignore the rest, which is to say that they only include crimes from people who were previously known to be illegal immigrants, which is a very small sub-section of all illegal immigrants.

A quote: "The institute claims there is a homicide rate of 3.1 per 100,000 citizen for native citizens, while there is 2.6 for illegal immigrants, when based on the idea that illegal immigrants only committed 46 homicides per year. However, when the total figures of all illegal immigrant homicides are recorded and not just by those known to be illegal immigrants prior to their arrests, or a figure of 162 convictions, this results in a real homicide conviction rate of approximately 9.1 per 100,000 citizens for illegal immigrants, in comparison to 3.1 per 100,000 for native citizens, or figures that are about three times higher. It is clear that by using incomplete data they make illegal immigrant homicides look lower than they really are, which is a blatant misrepresentation of the data."

...The article you wrote is about a different CATO article than the one I cited. Try again.

[South Acren]

\

... Weren't there video's and pictures of Trump saying inappropriate things about his daughter before 2016? ...



Free Will being an excuse for blatant inconsistency is pretty damning of your ability to rationalise issues.

Indeed there was. Again, seems you want to start something at this point. If you look, i said I dislike trump, but only less then i dislike biden.

An excuse of course. Or just maybe I dont want to mix my ideas. How would you know what I want? And inconsistency? I don't believe ive been inconsistant. I've stuck to the same thing i always have, don't mix ideas, Even if its deemed against what you are supposed to believe.

The only damning thing i see here is your ridiculous idea that someone has to follow exactly what they are taught, no matter what or else they aren't religious like they claim. Not only is this silly, it is a dangerous way of thinking.

[Lower Nubia]

This was actually false, by the way.

Notice how the narrative changes.

First of all these people are not coming from the banned countries, and these countries due have disproportionate amounts of violence, especially compared to the U.S.,

Slow down, there's a difference between nations having high crime rates and people coming from those countries being part of that enterprise. In addition, I can think of plenty of more violent countries than the ones included in the ban, so why these countries specifically?

and large amounts of terrorists who dislike the west.

Boom boom! We got a winner! found the actual reason. Interestingly enough Saudi Arabia exports the most terrorists... why was that not on the list...

Secondly, the CATO institute study about illegal immigrants is wrong, as it ignores the totality of the Texas DHS data. I specifically actually even wrote up an article on this, although it's incomplete, and basically they only take the first set of data and ignore the rest, which is to say that they only include crimes from people who were previously known to be illegal immigrants, which is a very small sub-section of all illegal immigrants.

A quote: "The institute claims there is a homicide rate of 3.1 per 100,000 citizen for native citizens, while there is 2.6 for illegal immigrants, when based on the idea that illegal immigrants only committed 46 homicides per year. However, when the total figures of all illegal immigrant homicides are recorded and not just by those known to be illegal immigrants prior to their arrests, or a figure of 162 convictions, this results in a real homicide conviction rate of approximately 9.1 per 100,000 citizens for illegal immigrants, in comparison to 3.1 per 100,000 for native citizens, or figures that are about three times higher. It is clear that by using incomplete data they make illegal immigrant homicides look lower than they really are, which is a blatant misrepresentation of the data."

Again, this isn't actually a good reason for those specific nations being included. Why those nations and not, say... Brazil... or South Africa... or anywhere else with way higher crime rates?

The obvious reason he banned those countries is that they have Muslim asylum seekers and Trump didn't want Muslim asylum seekers in the US, as that would piss off his base.

[Manokan Republic]

There's something to be said about not enforcing your religion on others, and on top of this you can vote for someone who is an atheist and not even a Christian but would be good for the country. The idea you must vote for a Christian or someone who embodies the perfect Christian spirit is silly, and the point of being a Christian is to forgive, to recognize no-one is perfect and accept people regardless of their imperfections, not to strive for someone who meets arbitrary criteria of being the best Christian. Alexander Hamilton said, if men were angels, there would be no need for government.

Being guided by your religious principles in making political decisions is not the same as enforcing your religion on others.

There are a lot of things I talked about in my quote, but part of the idea of separating your personal religion from your political choices is not to enforce you religion on others. That is not the only part, but it is part of the idea of separating religion from politics. Furthermore you do not need to vote for a perfect man, but just a man with the ideal policies. Surely Biden who has been in office for nearly 50 years and has lied prolifically about everything from being top in his class and having three degrees, and plagiarizing speeches and his entire life's history, include his wives which was entirely fake, [1][2][3] on top of being close friends and eulogizing at a KKK person's funeral and so on, is much worse than what Trump is accused of.

There are often no good choices in life, just bad choices or worse choices. The point of being a Christian is not to make perfect choices or only be associated with those who do, but to make the best choices, presumably guided by God.

[Ricksolot]

For the past few elections I’ve seen it as a choice between two evils, and that Donald Trump is the lesser.

Here’s what I think is positive for him. The order of the list means nothing.
1. He been great for the black community and the poor.
2. He’s good for the economy and not entirely responsible for how the Corona Virus impacted us.
3. He promotes religious freedom.
4. He’s not going to defund or dismantle the police.
5. He protects the 2nd Amendment.
6. He’s against erasing history.
7. I’m glad he increased the Child Care fund in 2018 to help low income family’s.
8. He increased funding for Historically Black Colleges & Universities by 13% setting the Highest record. Providing more than 500,000,000$ in loans.
9. He’s not for the idea of taking away the electoral college.
10. He’s pro voter ID, meaning he supports the idea of people being required to show photo identification in order to vote.
11.Hes against the Green New Deal.
12. Anti Obamacare.
13. He’s physically and mentally capable of performing as President.
14. He’s Pro Life.


Negative and Anti Christian things.

1. I don’t see the point in the Wall. I don’t think Heavenly Father supports that, Heavenly Father wants us to be good Samaritans and help those in need. As far as I’m concerned this is his policy to ALL of his children regardless of what country they come from. So there needs to be immigration reform. If something is anti nuclear Family then it’s against God. Compassion is needed. However at the same time I do not support foolishness such as allowing anyone into the country, we need to come up with more effective ways of vetting out criminals and terrorists while at the same time not separating families.

2. As a person he is imperfect, as am I. So while God does not Condone adultery and all Sin he at the same time commands us to refrain from unrighteousness judgement. Jesus Christ said “He that is without sin among you, Let him first cast a stone at her”. How can I judge others when I walk so imperfectly? “Ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin”. So I pay more attention to how he runs the country rather than how he carries him self in his personal life.

3. I like Joe Biden’s voice more. But that’s not going to impact my voting.


4. Should have put more effort in fighting Corona. But also a lot of people use the fear of it to control people and further there agenda.



Lastly these lists do NOT contain everything so yeah.

Also if you argue with hatred, pride or contention or hypocrisy then you’ve lost favor with God. That’s happened to me and this applies to everyone. I could argue against abortion or using curse words or anything and yet if I start to be contentions or hateful then Im not really on His side anymore. Additionally I could always pretend to be nice and fake love, and others may very well believe it. But God is omnipotent and know my heart so I’d still be wrong. So as you carry on today in your lives please remember to treat each other courteously and be loving in practice. And forgive people who aren’t doing so.

[Old Tyrannia]

The only damning thing i see here is your ridiculous idea that someone has to follow exactly what they are taught, no matter what or else they aren't religious like they claim. Not only is this silly, it is a dangerous way of thinking.

No one has said any such thing. Only that you should make political decisions based on your ethical principles, and if you claim to be a Christian then those ethical principles should be informed by Christian belief. If you are actively making decisions that you know to be unethical, then you are not an ethical person, i.e. you are a bad person. It's not complicated.

[Lower Nubia]

\

... Weren't there video's and pictures of Trump saying inappropriate things about his daughter before 2016? ...



Free Will being an excuse for blatant inconsistency is pretty damning of your ability to rationalise issues.

Indeed there was. Again, seems you want to start something at this point. If you look, i said I dislike trump, but only less then i dislike biden.

An excuse of course. Or just maybe I dont want to mix my ideas. How would you know what I want? And inconsistency? I don't believe ive been inconsistant. I've stuck to the same thing i always have, don't mix ideas, Even if its deemed against what you are supposed to believe.

You said you voted Trump the first time, no? Which to my mind means you voted for them, maybe I'm mistaken there. Even when they did worse things regarding his daughters than Biden has to his sister. But now Biden doing it is a problem for you? I can't but help see the hypocrisy.

Your religion and your position are not separable without inconsistency. Very few religions have tenets without real life effects and Christianity is not one of those few ones. Either you're ignoring the real-life consequences of the tenets of your religion, or you're unable to rationalise those conclusions.

The only damning thing i see here is your ridiculous idea that someone has to follow exactly what they are taught, no matter what or else they aren't religious like they claim. Not only is this silly, it is a dangerous way of thinking.

I haven't said you need to follow what you're taught. I said you follow your religion which makes truth claims and they apply in the real world, failing to see that either makes you deceptive or irrational.

[Washington Resistance Army]

on top of being close friends and eulogizing at a KKK person's funeral and so on, is much worse than what Trump is accused of.

I'm sorry if this comes across as rude but have you ever actually read anything about Robert Byrd beyond what Trumpist propaganda shoves into your head? Like, even a single article?

[Lower Nubia]

... Weren't there video's and pictures of Trump saying inappropriate things about his daughter before 2016? ...



Free Will being an excuse for blatant inconsistency is pretty damning of your ability to rationalise issues.

It's taken broadly out of context, and stretched to mean something it clearly doesn't. He's trying to compliment his daughter, and people have twisted it to mean something it clearly doesn't mean.

He's trying to compliment his daughter by saying, if he could, he would? In what was is that not creepy?

I mean... here's the video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avQq2Mr0A9M

Saying something that sounds weird out of context is different from sniffing hundreds of little girls on live camera, and one of them showing up in illegal photographs on Hunter Biden's labtop. That being said while the labtop is real and confirmed by the FBI, it is currently under investigation and so pending more information it's still somewhat up in the air. Sniffing little girls on air is not.

Haven't seen a deflection like this since the Hand of God.

[Manokan Republic]

First of all these people are not coming from the banned countries, and these countries due have disproportionate amounts of violence, especially compared to the U.S.,

Slow down, there's a difference between nations having high crime rates and people coming from those countries being part of that enterprise. In addition, I can think of plenty of more violent countries than the ones included in the ban, so why these countries specifically?

and large amounts of terrorists who dislike the west.

Boom boom! We got a winner! found the actual reason. Interestingly enough Saudi Arabia exports the most terrorists... why was that not on the list...

Secondly, the CATO institute study about illegal immigrants is wrong, as it ignores the totality of the Texas DHS data. I specifically actually even wrote up an article on this, although it's incomplete, and basically they only take the first set of data and ignore the rest, which is to say that they only include crimes from people who were previously known to be illegal immigrants, which is a very small sub-section of all illegal immigrants.

A quote: "The institute claims there is a homicide rate of 3.1 per 100,000 citizen for native citizens, while there is 2.6 for illegal immigrants, when based on the idea that illegal immigrants only committed 46 homicides per year. However, when the total figures of all illegal immigrant homicides are recorded and not just by those known to be illegal immigrants prior to their arrests, or a figure of 162 convictions, this results in a real homicide conviction rate of approximately 9.1 per 100,000 citizens for illegal immigrants, in comparison to 3.1 per 100,000 for native citizens, or figures that are about three times higher. It is clear that by using incomplete data they make illegal immigrant homicides look lower than they really are, which is a blatant misrepresentation of the data."

Again, this isn't actually a good reason for those specific nations being included. Why those nations and not, say... Brazil... or South Africa... or anywhere else with way higher crime rates?

The obvious reason he banned those countries is that they have Muslim asylum seekers and Trump didn't want Muslim asylum seekers in the US, as that would piss off his base.

If his problem was muslims coming here, then why not add Saudi Arabia to the list, as you have already mentioned, it's a far larger muslim country? You are contradicting yourself already. The main reason is that terrorists are coming here from this countries, as well as other various violent individuals, such as with North Korean military individuals, and so on. There are muslim asylum seekers coming here, so this did not block them, it just didn't let them come directly from these countries, they went to other countries first, such as Saudi Arabia.

The reason for these nations was due to the ongoing hostilities and high chance violent individuals would be embedded within potential refugee populations and there would be no way to vet them. Frankly there is a need for restrictions on all countries, which there are already are hence the legal vs. illegal immigration situation, but these countries specifically were high risk. It's not that the population is violent, it's that embedded within the populations coming here there will be disproportionate groups of violent people. If you look at Europe, you will see these refugee groups have been disproportionately violent and that muslim terrorist attacks have skyrocketed across many European countries, just in recent memory a beheading of a teacher for example. This doesn't mean that we don't let in refugees outright or that all of them are violent (they are not), but that we have to be incredibly selective and careful in how we do it, or else we will see spikes in violence, like the nearly doubling of all rapes and 50% increase in lethal violence in Sweden, just for example. We're now getting in to the nuances of very specific policies, and again I figured "people coming from violent regions of the world" would be good enough, but if you want to pilpul everything, I am willing to go down the increasingly specific reasons. Whatever you want to say, what you are claiming is that you think you can read his mind, and you are accusing him of bad thoughts for having these policies, specifically anti-Muslim thoughts, for whatever reason, as compared to the threat of violent groups of individuals likely to come here when it wasn't all muslim countries, and countries like North korea were added to the list. We also didn't stop taking Muslim refugees. You have to expect me to broadly assume bad intentions by the president, and not give a charitable interpretation at all, which is silly at best. This depends entirely on perspective and desired will for someone else's thinking behind a policy. Objectively, the policy does not ban all muslims, or even only muslims from entering, and so even if he had bad thoughts about it which I doubt and wouldn't take a highly opinionated person's view on over my own, the simple reality is that if the policy is good, I don't care if he potentially also has secret bad thoughts about it. We can try to argue all day long about how we think the candidate thought about something, but at the end of the day if the policy is sound, I don't really even care. For all we know he just thought these countries were icky, and that's why he did it, but it was sound policy.


Sweden lethal violence increase from 80 to 120 since 2012.

[Manokan Republic]

It's taken broadly out of context, and stretched to mean something it clearly doesn't. He's trying to compliment his daughter, and people have twisted it to mean something it clearly doesn't mean.

He's trying to compliment his daughter by saying, if he could, he would? In what was is that not creepy?

I mean... here's the video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avQq2Mr0A9M

Saying something that sounds weird out of context is different from sniffing hundreds of little girls on live camera, and one of them showing up in illegal photographs on Hunter Biden's labtop. That being said while the labtop is real and confirmed by the FBI, it is currently under investigation and so pending more information it's still somewhat up in the air. Sniffing little girls on air is not.

Haven't seen a deflection like this since the Hand of God.

If complimenting your daughter in a weird way is creepy, how is sniffing little girls that end up naked on your son's labtop not creepy? If we are talking about why Trump instead of Biden, if simply a weird compliment = evil and bad, how is sexually assaulting under-aged girls not dramatically worse? The choice doesn't seem very hard between the two if going by the individual character of the two individuals.

[South Acren]

[
No one has said any such thing. Only that you should make political decisions based on your ethical principles, and if you claim to be a Christian then those ethical principles should be informed by Christian belief. If you are actively making decisions that you know to be unethical, then you are not an ethical person, i.e. you are a bad person. It's not complicated.

Unethical for not combining my religion with my politics. What a state we are in. What isn't complicated is how bad this ideology is. Do not try to force how you believe something should be handled onto someone else. Anyway, I see this getting more and more heated. This conversation will end here.
Agree to Disagree.

[Epic Anime Junta]

first,i dont understand these politics. what politics are we talking here?

[Epic Anime Junta]

[
No one has said any such thing. Only that you should make political decisions based on your ethical principles, and if you claim to be a Christian then those ethical principles should be informed by Christian belief. If you are actively making decisions that you know to be unethical, then you are not an ethical person, i.e. you are a bad person. It's not complicated.

Unethical for not combining my religion with my politics. What a state we are in. What isn't complicated is how bad this ideology is. Do not try to force how you believe something should be handled onto someone else. Anyway, I see this getting more and more heated. This conversation will end here.
Agree to Disagree.

agree. although some wont listen. especially ones who click this button

>>>>>

We're no strangers to love
You know the rules and so do I
A full commitment's what I'm thinking of
You wouldn't get this from any other guy
I just wanna tell you how I'm feeling
Gotta make you understand
Never gonna give you up
Never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and desert you
Never gonna make you cry
Never gonna say goodbye
Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you
We've known each other for so long
Your heart's been aching but you're too shy to say it
Inside we both know what's been going on
We know the game and we're gonna play it
And if you ask me how I'm feeling
Don't tell me you're too blind to see
Never gonna give you up
Never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and desert you
Never gonna make you cry
Never gonna say goodbye
Never gonna tell a…