Trump or Hillary?

[bekalc]

My understanding is Church teaching is you cannot vote for someone because they are pro choice but you can vote for them if you have significantly grave reasons.

I will probably do a write in.

I have very grave reasons to NOT support Trump. His outright racial discussions.

I was listening to an African American commentary get very emotional on the KKK scenario. And he mentioned how emotional Trump gets on ISIS and how unemotional he gets on the KKK. The KKK killed far more Americans than ISIS. No amount of the KKK was once Democrat works. That was 50 years ago. This is them now.

This kind of stuff is horrible. And so for a group of Pro Lifers to say well we will still elect this man because he says he is pro life? What does that say about our movement.

Let’s not go into the freedom of the press thing.

In the end I am not convinced a pro life President changes things. What must change is hearts in this country. Many people are woefully deceived in the issue and I don’t think electing a megalomaniac because he claims to be pro life is going to change this.

In the end I am not thinking about just ONE ELECTION. I am thinking Long Term.

I see Donald as a threat to our Democracy. After some prayer I may decide it does not matter and vote third party letting Hilary lose too

 

[Path_Finder]

My understanding is Church teaching is you cannot vote for someone because they are pro choice but you can vote for them if you have significantly grave reasons.

I will probably do a write in.

I have very grave reasons to NOT support Trump. His outright racial discussions.

I was listening to an African American commentary get very emotional on the KKK scenario. And he mentioned how emotional Trump gets on ISIS and how unemotional he gets on the KKK. The KKK killed far more Americans than ISIS. No amount of the KKK was once Democrat works. That was 50 years ago. This is them now.

This kind of stuff is horrible. And so for a group of Pro Lifers to say well we will still elect this man because he says he is pro life? What does that say about our movement.

Let’s not go into the freedom of the press thing.

In the end I am not convinced a pro life President changes things. What must change is hearts in this country. Many people are woefully deceived in the issue and I don’t think electing a megalomaniac because he claims to be pro life is going to change this.

In the end I am not thinking about just ONE ELECTION. I am thinking Long Term.

Abortion kills way more blacks than the Klan did, that’s what Rev. Childress, an African-American’s “blackgenocide.org” website is about. The Democratic Party stands behind abortion 100%; black babies are 3 times more likely to be aborted than white children.

The administration has befriended the Muslim Brotherhood, a racist organization and Al Sharpton, who incited a riot where someone was killed.

 

[bekalc]

Abortion kills way more blacks than the Klan did, that’s what Rev. Childress, an African-American’s “blackgenocide.org” website is about. The Democratic Party stands behind abortion 100%; black babies are 3 times more likely to be aborted than white children.

The administration has befriended the Muslim Brotherhood, a racist organization and Al Sharpton, who incited a riot where someone was killed.

Did President Reagan stop abortion? Did President Bush 1 or 2?

And you are forgetting the fact that many in our country don’t see it as a life. So you are basically supporting something that is EVIL for something they are not sure is evil.

The nation will not change on abortion until hearts change. And people will not listen to us if they see us supporting Evil.

 

[bekalc]

And you know what maybe if we become swing voters. We might start getting some real restrictions on abortion. But what I really feel like God is telling me is “Come out and Be Separate.”

 

[Theo520]

They know that the DNC supports Hillary as much as the RNC hates Trump, but that doesn’t decide primaries. O’Malley is just a whiner who wouldn’t stand a chance if the DNC ran a corpse.

Watch your verbs.
The DNC has taken many active steps that support Hillary, that lean the machine in her favor.

While the RNC may hate Trump, they did not take similar extreme active steps to support Jeb etal. The RNC scheduled plenty of debates, and they didn’t give Jeb free office space around the country, etc.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Did President Reagan stop abortion? Did President Bush 1 or 2?

And you are forgetting the fact that many in our country don’t see it as a life. So you are basically supporting something that is EVIL for something they are not sure is evil.

The nation will not change on abortion until hearts change. And people will not listen to us if they see us supporting Evil.

It will change when people stop voting for Hillary and intrinsic evil via lame excuses.

First all there is noting that indicates Trump is a racist nor that he supports anything evil, in fact a read of his entire take indicates otherwise. Making above much to do about nothing with flash points in what opposition wants to believe.

The fact that many don’t see the aborted unborn as life simply is inconsistent with the discussion of the Catholic position.

And last the fact Reagan nor anyone stopped abortion has everything to do with getting away from the RNC party line with candidates such as Trump and Cruz, and indicates why a majority no longer trust the RNC and for good reason as you seem to agree.

Hillary is a vote for abortion, has no plan of doing a thing about abortion and a vote for Hillary is cooperation with intrinsic evil. There is no excuse.

So since the argument is establishment politicians never do a thing about abortion than Hillary for sure is also an establishment politician.

 

[GaryTaylor]

FBI Director James Comey told Congress on Tuesday that he is closely involved in the agency’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of State.

Comey was being questioned by the House Judiciary Committee in a hearing that was intended to address the battle over Apple’s encryption practices. But Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) switched gears during the questioning to press Comey on the progress into the email investigation.

“A few weeks back, the FBI’s general counsel James Baker acknowledged the the FBI is, quote, working on matters related to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, end quote," Chabot said to Comey.
Chabot went on to quote White House press secretary Josh Earnest as saying Clinton is “not a target of this investigation and that it’s not trending in that direction.” He also mentioned President Obama’s comments about not seeing any “national security implications” in Clinton’s emails.

“This is a matter of considerable import,” Chabot said. “Is there anything that you can tell us as to when this matter might be wrapped up one way or the other?”

“I can’t, congressman, as you know we don’t talk about our investigations,” Comey responded. “What I can assure you is that I am very close personally to that investigation to ensure that we have the resources we need, including people and technology, and that it’s done the way the FBI tries to do all of it’s work: independently, competently and promptly. That’s our goal, and I’m confident that it’s being done that way, but I can’t give you any more details beyond that.”

thehill.com/policy/national-security/271387-fbi-director-i-am-closely-involved-with-clinton-email-investigation

 

[GaryTaylor]

Clinton routinely tells blacks they are the victims of “systemic racism” and scolds whites for not demonstrating more “humility.” She falsely claims discrimination is causing the higher poverty and incarceration rates among blacks.

There isn’t a shred of evidence to back up her claims — yet she gets a pass from the media.

Let’s separate facts from her racially inflammatory fictions.

On the campaign trail, she complains “race still plays a significant role in determining who gets ahead in America and who gets left behind,” noting black families have “just a tiny fraction” of the wealth of white families.

Yes, there’s a wealth gap. Hillary blames it on racism instead of confronting the self-destructive choices young blacks are encouraged to make by a welfare system that subsidizes girls having babies before they finish their education or marry.

A troubling 73 percent of black children are born to single mothers. That’s not a vestige of slavery, as some liberals argue. In 1950, before widespread welfare, the figure was only 18 percent.

“It is well known that people who finish high school, hold a job and do not have children until they are 21 and have a steady partner are almost never poor,” says black Columbia professor John McWhorter.

Clinton rages against a “school-to-prison pipeline,” blaming “racist” schools that disproportionately suspend black students, “racist” police who target blacks and “racist” judges who mete out longer sentences to blacks than whites for the same offenses.

Again, she’s got the facts wrong.

Evidence of a school-to-prison pipeline is “laughably weak,” notes Manhattan Institute scholar Heather Mac Donald. While black students are suspended at twice the rate of Hispanics and whites, blacks misbehave more — another consequence of inadequate parenting and failure to stress school achievement at home.

And it’s ridiculous to suggest racist educators are to blame. Teaching is among the most liberal professions.

At schools, Hillary proposes ending suspensions, and keeping disruptive students in the classroom while they get counseling. Mayor Bill de Blasio tried that, and assaults shot up 40 percent the first year. The victims of this misguided policy are kids who want to learn, especially poor kids who can’t escape an unruly school.

Clinton apologizes for having used the word “super-predators” to describe teens maiming and murdering without remorse. But there’s no denying the problem — and it has a racial component. The homicide rate among black males 14 to 17 is nearly 10 times higher than for whites and Hispanics that age.

As for prison, Clinton tells black audiences it’s time to fix the “crisis of mass incarceration” of black men. But neither she nor anyone else has produced evidence that blacks are given longer sentences than others for the same offenses.

Nor is drug-law enforcement to blame. In federal prisons, drug offenders are 48 percent Hispanic, 22 percent white and 27 percent black. Most incarcerated blacks are in state prisons, for violent crimes and repeated theft.

For seven years, President Obama has played the race card, rubbing raw the emotions between blacks and whites.

A Clinton presidency will make it worse. She pledges to enshrine racial preferences in hiring and college admissions, never mind fairness, or the impact on whites and Asians applying to schools and for jobs.

Obama dignified race hustler Al Sharpton with roles at White House events. Now Hillary’s seeking Sharpton’s advice. She ought to repudiate him as the David Duke of her party.

Hillary’s electoral strategy is to win big with minority voters. No surprise, she’s trying to duplicate Obama’s successful campaigns in 2008 and 2012, when he lost among whites but was carried to victory with overwhelming black support. This time, the nation needs a president who embraces all Americans and tells them the truth, even about race.

nypost.com/2016/03/01/hillary-clinton-is-winning-votes-with-vile-race-games/

Sunday at the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan said don’t “fall” for Democartic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s “crap” on African-American issues because she and her husband, former President Bill Clinton are responsible for mass incarceration of black people.

breitbart.com/video/2016/02/28/farrakhan-dont-fall-for-satan-hillary-clintons-****/

The DNC is in trouble as 2 million less Democrats turned out to vote last night opposed to 4 years ago while 3-million more Republicans turned out nationwide opposed to 4 years ago.

 

[pnewton]

It will change when people stop voting for Hillary and intrinsic evil via lame excuses.

How does one stop voting for Hillary when this is her first run, and most people have not even had a chance to vote for Hillary, much less to stop voting for Hillary. Therefore, it is illogical to tie this action, which is makes no sense, to abortion, at least at this time.

If any democrat gets into office…it’s a literal death sentence for millions of innocent lives.

It is not. King Herod gave a literal death sentence for millions. I think what you mean is that it would result in millions of innocent lives.

Even that is questionable, as the numbers tell a different story. Here are the changes in the abortion rates by administration, in millions.

The Reagan Years:
1.6 - 1.6

GHWB

1.6 - 1.5

Clinton

1.5 -1.3

GWB

1.3 - 1.2

BHO

1.2 - 1.1? (the last three years are not in, with the 2011 reporting 1,058,490, the lowest number since 1975)

The CDC numbers mirror this result, though the numbers differ.

christianliferesources.com/article/u-s-abortion-statistics-by-year-1973-current-1042

By no means should we ever abandon the hope of overturning legalized abortions. However, if we are to look to reduce abortions, we should look to what is actually working and at very least redirect part of our efforts to what does reduce abortions. I do not doubt that some of the results are from social assistance simply giving hope to expectant mothers that their lives will be okay if they have a child. Also, I can’t help but believe that a lot of this is the impact of the pro-life movement changing the minds of young people, through all their hard work. All the demonstrations and pro-life events may seem like running in place, but I think it is yielding results in the newer generations.

The point is, there is no need to despair if Clinton is elected that abortions will sky-rocket. The same thing was said when Obama was elected and the opposite proved true.

 

[pnewton]

Here’s my question about all this: how many of us are thinking “No matter who gets the Republican nomination, Hillary Clinton will be the next president”?

I believe this to be the most likely scenario.

This will possibly be my last year to vote in the Republican primary, unless compelled by a local election. I think that this movement to elect a loud, boisterous rich guy, is a reflection of the changes of the party in this decade, from a political party, to a party of posturing. We have seen in the last few decades a polarization of the nation, a deadlock of the legislature and s shift for substance to symbolism. Our culture is changing. We used to be capable of the art of politics, compromising what is less important so more people can achieve what is most important.

Where are the Henry Clay’s of the day? They are lambasted as moderates and establishment in favor of the ineffectual polarized. Perhaps this is the fruit of reality TV and political shock jocks. There is more catharsis in screaming about an issue than there is in resolving it.

It is possible that from this mayhem a third option will arise, though what form it takes will be equally contested. I think that may well be where the efforts of the last decades of my life will be spent, if America is to have a future.

 

[GaryTaylor]

How does one stop voting for Hillary when this is her first run, and most people have not even had a chance to vote for Hillary, much less to stop voting for Hillary. Therefore, it is illogical to tie this action, which is makes no sense, to abortion, at least at this time.

This isn’t her “first run” she ran for President via Democratic nomination and lost once already to her abortion partner Obama. I fail to see your point at all. I think you want to argue about nothing again?

 

[grotto]

Guess we made some progress last evening - Trump did “disavow” the D. Duke (KKK) several times. The other overcooked noodle charge was that he had dealings with the Mob!
Who in the world thought that one up - Jeb? Have fun proving that one.

The Trump train is picking up steam to take on Hilary if she can arrange a “work” pass.

 

[OraLabora]

It will change when people stop voting for Hillary and intrinsic evil via lame excuses.

No. It will stop when the US is finally re-evangelized.

Politicians are generally a fairly good barometer on how the people feel about certain issues. They will pander to the masses or to the constituencies they think they need to get elected.

Any attempt to fix this issue through the political process is putting the cart before the horse. People need to be evangelized into believing that abortion is the taking of an innocent life, which it is, and not just a mass of tissue (which it isn’t that mass of tissue has the DNA of a single individual).

When the people start asking for more support for unwed mothers instead of asking for easy access to abortion, trust me many politicians will pander to that.

As it is, that is NOT the message they are getting unanimously. There are two very vocal constituencies on this but the social consensus appears to favour abortion-on-demand.

It is not with joy that I say this, I was adopted myself as an infant by imperfect but loving parents in 1958, a far better choice than the other alternatives and fortunately back then abortion was illegal and a taboo.

 

[pnewton]

I think you want to argue about nothing again?

Well, I guess calling the opinions of others “nothing” is one reaction, and one that is representative of the political respect one can see in the Republican Party this year.

 

[pnewton]

The other overcooked noodle charge was that he had dealings with the Mob!
Who in the world thought that one up - Jeb? Have fun proving that one.

If anyone is really interested in checking on this, start by finding out about Felix Sater, a former Trump associate.

“Proof” is something for philosophers and mathematicians, but there is a lot of evidence to be had.

 

[Peter_J]

I don’t see any way that it will be anything but Donald v. Hillary.

At this point it is largely up to Marco Rubio: if he removes his name from the ballots fairly soon (at least before March 15) then Cruz will have a reasonable chance of getting the nomination.

(I think Rubio would make the best president, but that doesn’t change what I believe he ought to do.)

 

[Vanny]

Well my perspective:
I do not care for Trump but as much as I don’t like him I feel I will have to vote for him if he is the nominee. I’m praying he is not the nominee, but as of now it looks like he very well may be.
I could never in good conscience vote for Hillary, or Bernie Sanders.
I would simply stay home before I would do that.
I have never sat out a Presidential general election before.
Plus my youngest son, now 19, is every excited to vote in his first Presidential election this November.
As much as I do not like Trump-he is still better than Hillary,or Bernie, in my opinion.
Plus, if he gets the White house, he will get a cabinet of Republicans and advisors who will hopefully keep him from doing stupid things(I hope) and advise him to be more Presidential.
That is my perspective.

As a Republican, I do not want to see a split or divided Republican Party-Hillary will get in for sure if that happens.
We have a Supreme Court Nominee at stake and a lot else. The Future of the nation.
Some of my conservative friends have said they would take Bernie over Trump- Ok yes he’s honest and a nice guy but are they serious?
He is a socialist!
However, it is looking less likely that he will be the nominee now anyway.

ETA: Trump has not come out as strongly Pro life as the other candidates(Well excepting Kasich) but I feel he will at least respect Pro-lifers I hope and would be 100 times better than Clinton or Sanders)

 

[Path_Finder]

Bryan Fischer’s (AFA, American Family Association or something like that) twitter feed cites a story from Life Site News where as Trump gave money to a GLBT organization and Life Site News makes it sound like the organization promoted the worse things, I don’t want to link to the story because it might indeed be too sundry. The story is from late February. It just kind of makes me wonder, what we make of such kinds of stories. Surely, if Ted Cruz gave to such an organization, he’d be much maligned about it.

Fischer is much maligned per some “watchdog” groups, but most of what I’ve read him say sounds acceptable. Just getting that out of the way in case of the routine pre-emptive comments.

 

[Cider]

I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump gave to GLBTQ groups, he doesn’t seem strongly invested in any social issues.

 

[Peter_J]

Well my perspective:
I do not care for Trump but as much as I don’t like him I feel I will have to vote for him if he is the nominee.

I’d only take issue with the “have to” part. I haven’t decided yet what I’ll do if he’s in the general election; but the way I see it, neither supporting Trump nor not supporting Trump excludes anyone from being a Republican – which honestly I think is the most important message for Republicans to hear at the point.