George W. Bush: "I'm worried that I might be the last Republican president."

[Stylteralmaldo]

Trump saved the Republican Party. If cruz or Jeb was the nominee, hillary would be our next president. Illegal immigration and entitlement programs will continue to grow unfettered, the beneficiaries of which will mostly vote democrat. The demographic of the country will change to an extent where no republican president may be elected again. Just my two cents.

Trump saved the GOP if he wins and has a successful 4 years during his term. If both don’t come to fruition, it’s over for the GOP.

 

[Songcatcher]

Nope. She’ll maintain the status quo like the good little elite that she is. But Trump will not only NOT change anything when it comes to abortion, (his last known position was that it’s the law and shouldn’t change) he will weaken any credibility the Pro-Life movement still has and will set us back decades.

I’m thinking long term, beyond Supreme Court nominations, which so far have gotten us nowhere. A principled front from the minority against a clear ideological enemy like Clinton is a FAR superior position than forfeiting our moral legitimacy by cozying up to someone who shares none of our moral convictions. That we have come to the point where a thrice married, unrepentant adulterer, who praises Planned Parenthood and supports denying First Amendment rights to an entire religion, is enthusiastically supported by Christians is disturbing to me beyond words. We’re putting unnecessary stumbling blocks up in front of non-Christians and confirming to them all the worst stereotypes of Christianity. :sad_yes:

And that’s besides all the other evils Trump has promised to do once in office that he actually has a real chance of carrying out. A president has no authority to change the law on abortion, he does have authority to affect foreign policy. And I can not in clear conscience support someone who has said he is willing to directly target innocents. Not to mention the fear-mongering tactics he uses, which honestly reminds me of certain dictators in the past. I pray everyday I’m wrong, but his ignorance of government and the constitution is frightening to me.

So that’s where I’m coming from. If anyone here supports Trump, I may disagree, but as long as you have fully weighed the pros and cons I can respect your decision. But I also have to follow my conscience and do what I believe will actually limit abortion. And that means not voting for Trump.

 

[7_Sorrows]

My two cents is that trump has successfully divided and destroyed the gop as well knew it. To some, that’s great, but to many, Jeb, Romney, etc, it’s one step forward, two steps back. Trumps plan to deport all illegals and build a wall is unfeasible and pretty much impossible, not to mention cruel in my opinion.

the elitists at the DNC convention have built an 8ft. wall for 4 miles around the Wells Fargo Convention center. who are they trying to keep out? who are they trying to protect themselves from?

 

[Sy_Noe]

Trump saved the Republican Party. If cruz or Jeb was the nominee, hillary would be our next president. Illegal immigration and entitlement programs will continue to grow unfettered, the beneficiaries of which will mostly vote democrat. The demographic of the country will change to an extent where no republican president may be elected again. Just my two cents.

You don’t know that she still won’t be.

 

[seaton2005]

Time will tell. There are pro-life Democrats and socially conservative Democrats, too, but those are few in number.

However, remember Romans 13:1. We must obey the governing authorities and God placed them there.

The John Kennedy Democrats have all but disappeared. I got excited about Jim Webb but he did not last long.I remain a democrat, as I have all of my 50 plus years.Believe it or not, the parish school I grew up in 1970s and into the 1980s were all democrats. Interesting, Most of my Catholic friends today voted for President Obama. Around the water cooler at work, there is talk that Hillary best represents what Catholics beliefs on most issues. They say, therefore, that they will vote for Hillary Clinton over Trump. Interesting, I’m hearing that fellow Catholics plan to vote for Hillary in many of my catholic circles.

The catholic vote could very well go to Hillary as it did to President Obama. What would be the detriment or advantages? Leave out the abortion stuff that won’t change at this point. It is a private matter between the person and her God. Personally, I am not necessarily for abortion but I am for the right of a women to choose what happens to her body. Catholics need to move on with other priorities, such as the evolving discrimination of undocumented workers who simply want to make a better life for them and their families , poverty, racisms nd the like. I rarely hear a catholic priest deliver a homily about the evils of racism and prejudice. That homily should be front and center in the times we live in.

 

[petra22]

My two cents is that trump has successfully divided and destroyed the gop as well knew it. To some, that’s great, but to many, Jeb, Romney, etc, it’s one step forward, two steps back. Trumps plan to deport all illegals and build a wall is unfeasible and pretty much impossible, not to mention cruel in my opinion.

Let’s just start somewhere… let’s stop illegals from coming in. That’s what it’s all about. Does the term illegal not mean anything to you? It’s against the LAW. Can we at least get back to following some kind of law? Trump (and the rest of us) are NOT against Hispanics or other immigrants. Legally. Please, I’m tired of laws being pushed aside from the top on down…

 

[Good_Tidings]

the elitists at the DNC convention have built an 8ft. wall for 4 miles around the Wells Fargo Convention center. who are they trying to keep out? who are they trying to protect themselves from?

Possibly the Russians?

 

[Jeanne_S]

The John Kennedy Democrats have all but disappeared. I got excited about Jim Webb but he did not last long.I remain a democrat, as I have all of my 50 plus years.Believe it or not, the parish school I grew up in 1970s and into the 1980s were all democrats. Interesting, Most of my Catholic friends today voted for President Obama. Around the water cooler at work, there is talk that Hillary best represents what Catholics beliefs on most issues. They say, therefore, that they will vote for Hillary Clinton over Trump. Interesting, I’m hearing that fellow Catholics plan to vote for Hillary in many of my catholic circles.

The catholic vote could very well go to Hillary as it did to President Obama. What would be the detriment or advantages? Leave out the abortion stuff that won’t change at this point. It is a private matter between the person and her God. Personally, I am not necessarily for abortion but I am for the right of a women to choose what happens to her body. Catholics need to move on with other priorities, such as the evolving discrimination of undocumented workers who simply want to make a better life for them and their families , poverty, racisms nd the like. I rarely hear a catholic priest deliver a homily about the evils of racism and prejudice. That homily should be front and center in the times we live in.

Wow! Words fail me!

 

[Darryl1958]

Let’s just start somewhere… let’s stop illegals from coming in. That’s what it’s all about. Does the term illegal not mean anything to you? It’s against the LAW. Can we at least get back to following some kind of law? Trump (and the rest of us) are NOT against Hispanics or other immigrants. Legally. Please, I’m tired of laws being pushed aside from the top on down…

Being for controlled, legal immigration at some point in American politics came to be the radical position.

It will be interesting to see how the rejection of law and order as a value on multiple fronts will work out for Americans in the coming decades.

 

[wllmjoseph]

Donald Trump, is getting more support from Hispanics, than John McCain or Mitt Romney got: thehill.com/latino/287086-poll-trumps-hispanic-support-on-par-with-romney-2012

Trump would not need to get 40% of he Hispanic vote to win, he could win potentially with less than 20% overall minority votes for him if the White turnout increases. Check this out: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=14056148&postcount=913

I live and work in Charlotte, NC. Charlotte know has a strong Hispanic population. The Hispanic Americans who I work with are overwhelmingly against Trump. I find his rhetoric to be abrasive and antagonistic. President George W Bush received 40% of the Hispanic vote in the 2004 election. Even with 40% of the Hispanic vote Bush won what was a close election. For Trump to win the election with 20% of the Hispanic vote and less than 10% of the African American vote he will need to have an overwhelming majority of the Caucasian vote and I don’t see that happening. The demographics have changed. The Republican party in not going to be a viable party for the office of President unless it becomes a party of inclusion.

 

[TCEL]

The demographics have changed. The Republican party in not going to be a viable party for the office of President unless it becomes a party of inclusion.

I’ve been telling my husband for a while that, in order to keep Christian sheep from being subverted to the pro-choice mentality, conservatives must be more understanding of Hispanic immigrants. Yet, I meet with resistance from both sides when I bring this up.

From the conservative side, there is sometimes outright fear of the alien culture. Sometimes they are unwilling to concede on the legality. And that frustrates me, because we must concede on some areas if we are to win on others. Ultimately, what’s more important: crossing legally, or maintaining authentic Christian sentiment regarding family and abortion? I think the latter. I hate to be so political about it, but there you go.

But, from the liberal side, I’ve never seen willingness to compromise on the “pelvic” issues, in exchange for conservative compromise on immigration. Sometimes it really does boil down to choosing fleshpots over freedom. I’m not saying I would choose differently if I were in that sticky situation. I’m human.

But, so long as that’s the case, it’s a stalemate that Liberals keep winning, because both camps are ultimately misguided when it comes to the nature of the family, and the nature of man, woman, and child.

 

[queenofheartscv]

I’ve been telling my husband for a while that, in order to keep Christian sheep from being subverted to the pro-choice mentality, conservatives must be more understanding of Hispanic immigrants. Yet, I meet with resistance from both sides when I bring this up.

From the conservative side, there is sometimes outright fear of the alien culture. Sometimes they are unwilling to concede on the legality. And that frustrates me, because we must concede on some areas if we are to win on others. Ultimately, what’s more important: crossing legally, or maintaining authentic Christian sentiment regarding family and abortion? I think the latter. I hate to be so political about it, but there you go.

But, from the liberal side, I’ve never seen willingness to compromise on the “pelvic” issues, in exchange for conservative compromise on immigration. Sometimes it really does boil down to choosing fleshpots over freedom. I’m not saying I would choose differently if I were in that sticky situation. I’m human.

But, so long as that’s the case, it’s a stalemate that Liberals keep winning, because both camps are ultimately misguided when it comes to the nature of the family, and the nature of man, woman, and child.

Crossing legally and Christian sentiment regarding the family are a false dichomy to choose from. We can have both if we are willing. Law and order do not prevent a godly life. In fact they foster godly family life. Without law and order chaos reigns. The devil delights in disorder and confusion.

 

[TMC]

The fact there was a Republican in office when Roe v Wade was decided is irrelevant. What was relevant was the make up of the court at that time, which did have 7 Republican appointees (6 of which voted to make murder of the unborn a constitutional right) and 2 Republican appointees (1 of which voted to make murder of the unborn a constitutional right).

Since the ruling, every Democrat running for national office vowed to keep the right to murder the unborn constitutional - a litmus test for justices for being on the court. They have followed through in their philosophy to appoint pro-abortion justices to the USSC.

Republicans, for their part, have always said Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and have had mixed results some good and others bad when it came to judicial appointments. It’s this inconsistent appointments that have buried the Republicans. Now with Trump, I’m deeply concerned that Roe v. Wade will never be overturned. I actually think that a pro-life justice will replace Scalia if Trump wins. But that would still leave us at least one justice short of overturning Roe v Wade. My concern is in whether he can get two pro-lifers appointed. Yet I know with virtual certainty that Clinton will appoint pro-abortion justices.

The pro-life justices are in a minority right now 3 pro-life to 5 anti-life.

Both parties try to paint this picture that Roe v Wade is within one vote because it drives contributions for both sides. The fact is that Thomas is the only current justice who has advocated overturning Roe v Wade. Alito, Roberts, and Kennedy have all advocated restrictions on abortion, pretty much in that order. The balance point now is between more and less restrictive abortion laws, not the legality of abortion itself. Still an important issue, but RvW has a lot larger margin than either party wants voters to believe.

 

[TCEL]

Crossing legally and Christian sentiment regarding the family are a false dichomy to choose from. We can have both if we are willing. Law and order do not prevent a godly life. In fact they foster godly family life. Without law and order chaos reigns. The devil delights in disorder and confusion.

Truly, I am more sympathetic to the conservative argument. What I am saying is that I think this breakdown in law and order is a result of breakdown in family. So, which should be addressed first? I’m not convinced we have the resources to do it all at once. I think efforts to address both are in order, but it might be wiser to target family first.

 

[queenofheartscv]

Truly, I am more sympathetic to the conservative argument. What I am saying is that I think this breakdown in law and order is a result of breakdown in family. So, which should be addressed first? I’m not convinced we have the resources to do it all at once. I think efforts to address both are in order, but it might be wiser to target family first.

Addressing the family break down is a much more difficult task than upholding law and order. The former encompasses every part of the culture we live in. The government is not capable of this task, I’m afraid. Thats up to the church and the faithful.

 

[TCEL]

Addressing the family break down is a much more difficult task than upholding law and order. The former encompasses every part of the culture we live in. The government is not capable of this task, I’m afraid. Thats up to the church and the faithful.

I agree it’s the harder task, and therefore it is the more pressing one. But it must also be addressed at the government level, mustn’t it? Liberals have made immigration about family, so we meet that head on. As long as we put immigration first, we will lose Hispanic Christians to pro-choice platforms.

Liberals talk a good talk, and often walk a good walk too. Conservatives must present an attractive vision and ideal. Freedom? Liberals have the more immediately appealing message. Inclusiveness? Ditto. What do conservatives stand for?

I’ve always heard people bat down the idea that we must compromise on the immigration issue, because we won’t get anything in return. I know I’m in the minority. Maybe I’m just young and naïve. Maybe it doesn’t matter. But wouldn’t it be great if, instead of putting money into building a wall, we put that same money towards helping pregnant women, and marital counseling? Towards reversing the culture of death rotting our country from within? A wall needs something to protect.

 

[queenofheartscv]

I agree it’s the harder task, and therefore it is the more pressing one. But it must also be addressed at the government level, mustn’t it? Liberals have made immigration about family, so we meet that head on. As long as we put immigration first, we will lose Hispanic Christians to pro-choice platforms.

Liberals talk a good talk, and often walk a good walk too. Conservatives must present an attractive vision and ideal. Freedom? Liberals have the more immediately appealing message. Inclusiveness? Ditto. What do conservatives stand for?

I’ve always heard people bat down the idea that we must compromise on the immigration issue, because we won’t get anything in return. I know I’m in the minority. Maybe I’m just young and naïve. Maybe it doesn’t matter. But wouldn’t it be great if, instead of putting money into building a wall, we put that same money towards helping pregnant women, and marital counseling? Towards reversing the culture of death rotting our country from within? A wall needs something to protect.

You can’t be democrat lite in order to win over their voters. They will just go for the real thing. Law and order must be upheld. There is no other way. As a legal immigrant I very much resent illegal immigration. There is no justice to it and not the right kind of mercy.

 

[Geist]

cnn.com/2016/07/19/politics/george-w-bush-last-republican-president/

Interesting article. George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, and John McCain all skipped out on this years GOP convention.

The way the electoral college is, he’s probably right.

Given the (deserved) dislike of Clinton she should have been an easy win though. Naturally the GOP nominated the only person who could lose to her. Ditto for the Dems; this election was theirs to lose as well.

It’s a good thing Clinton and Trump are running against each other; they’re the only two who could lose to the other.

 

[TCEL]

You can’t be democrat lite in order to win over their voters. They will just go for the real thing. Law and order must be upheld. There is no other way. As a legal immigrant I very much resent illegal immigration. There is no justice to it and not the right kind of mercy.

Then based on my peers we will continue to be liberal, and Bush’s worry is legitimate.

 

[ProVobis]

By way of amnesty. In fact Hillary’s VP already promises amnesty within 100 days of inauguration.

Amnesty to become documented (and legal) or automatic citizenship? It seems efforts to provide paths to citizenship have been stifled in Congress.