In a traditional polar world yes. But Johnson’s stances on many other issues would be an anathema to those on the traditional left and would place him squarely on the right. Indeed both Johnson and Weld are former Republicans, so it’s not like they’re generally considered traditional liberals.
Looking at the polls in my state (Idaho). The polls in my state are solidly projecting to go to Trump, I honestly don’t feel any logical need to add my additional vote for him. Especially since I have such strong moral reservations against both of these candidates, I feel that adding my vote to somebody that I absolutely dont believe in is a wasted vote. So, Im voting my conscience…looking at both Johnson and others who have announced their campaign.
One state to watch in particular is Florida:
Will it have zero effect ?
Not only they never had a super majority but not a super majority who would ban all abortions.
When the republicans did not ban funding for Planned Parenthood after that baby parts scandal, I lost my faith in the pro-lifeness of the GOP.
Which was essentially Justice Scalia’s position. Or so I heard.
Ultimately amendments need to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. The issue can be brought up by 2/3rd of the states (constitutional convention) and Congress need not even be involved. Don’t let any politician tell you otherwise.
I wonder why the pro-life cause hasn’t been taken up by any of the state legislatures/Governors? (Genuinely asking)
It was VETOED
Because they just don’t care. Can the unborn give money to the state? No. Can the unborn vote for you? No. Can the unborn hold to your political views? No. Then why defend them?! That’s a perfectly consistent line of logic for any politician. Of course, there are those who do care, but we cannot prove something so subjective.
I’d say there are many arguments that allowing these children to live are in the national interest. (Not arguing with you, just countering the views of the pro-choice politicians)Because they just don’t care. Can the unborn give money to the state? No. Can the unborn vote for you? No. Can the unborn hold to your political views? No. Then why defend them?! That’s a perfectly consistent line of logic for any politician. Of course, there are those who do care, but we cannot prove something so subjective.
However, I’m sure we could counter by saying that because they can’t do those things, their lives are all the more precious – they wouldn’t be able to grow up to do those things if we cannot defend them!
No, he doesn’t. There’s no chance. The **vast **majority of voters will be going for either Trump or Hillary.
The GOP has, indeed, suffered some serious hits; and Republicans everywhere are rejoicing to finally hear a loud voice condemning the Republican establishment. What we’re seeing right now is an upheaval which will redefine what the Republican party is.
Actually Johnson’s website says that choices have to be left up to the individual without government interference.
The Libertarian Party platform includes the right to life. What we need to do as a society is to recognize that life begins at conception. Many don’t.
The Libertarian platform’s “right to life” is only a right to life for those already breathing air. In fact they explicitly exclude the unborn by their acknowledgment that the government should not get involved in deciding the abortion question, but should leave it up to the individuals to decide for themselves. Read what their platform says about abortion.
The idea of a third party is to keep the other ones honest and to call them out on their negative campaigning, which is all we’re hearing.