Who will win the Catholic vote this week? It's hard to predict. [CNA]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CNA_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mulligan2 said:
No, it is not hard to predict who will win the Catholic vote this week. A majority of Catholics will NOT vote for Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton will win the Catholic vote, perhaps by greater margins that President Obama in his two victories.
Click to expand...
It would be no surprise to see the “Catholic vote” go for Clinton. Fully 1/3 of Catholics in the U.S. are Hispanic. Among non-Hispanics, Trump will prevail. But overcoming 1/3 that favor Clinton is a virtual impossibility.

But the reality is there’s no “Catholic vote”. Voting patterns will be by ethnic and economic groups. as has been the case for a long time.

It’s too bad there is no “Catholic vote”. If there was, and if Catholics were faithful to the teachings of the Church, the Dems would have long ago gone prolife. But they needn’t do it because far too many Catholics ignore Church teaching.
 
Ridgerunner said:
It would be no surprise to see the “Catholic vote” go for Clinton. Fully 1/3 of Catholics in the U.S. are Hispanic. Among non-Hispanics, Trump will prevail. But overcoming 1/3 that favor Clinton is a virtual impossibility.

But the reality is there’s no “Catholic vote”. Voting patterns will be by ethnic and economic groups. as has been the case for a long time.

It’s too bad there is no “Catholic vote”. If there was, and if Catholics were faithful to the teachings of the Church, the Dems would have long ago gone prolife. But they needn’t do it because far too many Catholics ignore Church teaching.
Click to expand...
If Catholics were faithful to the teachings of the Church, the republicans would have nominated a pro-life candidate, instead of someone like Trump. We have to remember that a faithful Catholic cannot vote for Trump on his own merits, but because his opponent is worse.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
If Catholics were faithful to the teachings of the Church, the republicans would have nominated a pro-life candidate, instead of someone like Trump. We have to remember that a faithful Catholic cannot vote for Trump on his own merits, but because his opponent is worse.
Click to expand...
There is merit in what you say. However, Trump is not certain to promote any intrinsic evil, while Clinton most assuredly is. With Trump, it’s all a matter of prudential judgment.
 
Ridgerunner said:
There is merit in what you say. However, Trump is not certain to promote any intrinsic evil, while Clinton most assuredly is. With Trump, it’s all a matter of prudential judgment.
Click to expand...
Right. The most I had/have against him is how I originally viewed him years ago, as a playboy reality-star millionaire and all the stuff that comes with that territory. (Territory often familiar to liberal Hollywood stars, one might add, except for some of the business sense. The whole thing is a big turn-off for me.) And yet, as far as I know, he’s not trying to run on that platform. The most I have against him is distrust, disgust, and distaste; the most I have against Clinton is Democratic track-record and platform.
 
Memaw said:
Yes it is because the president vetos everything he does’t agree with!! The balance of this country depends on our respect for LIFE, Marriage and Religious Freedom. All of which has been attacked by Obama and Hillary, over and over again. And they attack it for Latinos, blacks and everyone else!!! They will go down with America right along with the rest of us! God help us! God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
But what have republicans done for minorities?

Nothing, they have not done a thing. They aliebate us, and they even know that the only way they will an election is by having more whites vite than minorities. Which is where you hear of voter intimidation, done by republicans.

I told you, that your response was going to abortion or gay marriage. Talk about the issues, drop those 2 issues and let’s talk about the issues. Your putting up a shield.
 
Ridgerunner said:
If you read “Carhart vs. Gonzales” you would not dismiss the Repub prolife potential. I encourage you to do that. It was about state bans on partial birth abortion. All of the Repub Supreme Court Justices voted to uphold the state bans. Even renegade Kennedy found partial birth abortion too much to stomach. All Dems voted against banning partial birth abortion. All state efforts to limit abortion came from Repub legislators. Elections matter a lot, and dismissing Repub prolife efforts is just a DNC talking point and an utter falsehood.
Click to expand...
Ok, but what have republicans done for minorities.

I recommend you watch this video, a well done documentary, about how Trump has made racism in this country skyrocket. And you want minorities to vote for him? Please, you cannot use abortion or gay marriage as your shield anymore. There are more issues than just those 2.

youtube.com/watch?v=Htw815XfdkE
 
Ridgerunner said:
There was, indeed, a law against homosexual “marriage”, but the Obama administration refused to defend it. The Democrats (and Kennedy) on the Court voted against the law. The Repubs voted to uphold the sanctity of marriage.

Elections matter. Had Obama not been elected, homosexual “marriage” would not be the law of the land.
Click to expand...
Bush had the opportunity from 2004 to 2006 to shove tht law down the democrats throat, when he had control of the house, senate and whute house. Plus he had just appointed to SCOTUS justices. He had everything and didn’t do it. But once republicans lost control, now they brought up the moral issues. Very interesting.
 
chero23 said:
But what have republicans done for minorities?

Nothing, they have not done a thing. They aliebate us, and they even know that the only way they will an election is by having more whites vite than minorities. Which is where you hear of voter intimidation, done by republicans.

I told you, that your response was going to abortion or gay marriage. Talk about the issues, drop those 2 issues and let’s talk about the issues. Your putting up a shield.
Click to expand...
I thought though in the Republican autopsy of themselves after 2012, that they were supposed to do something about their lack of support among Latinos.
 
Sy_Noe said:
I thought though in the Republican autopsy of themselves after 2012, that they were supposed to do something about their lack of support among Latinos.
Click to expand...
That was the game plan. That is why their rising star was Cruz or Rubio. But once Trump got the support, and started winning states, the RNC crumbled to Trump and his ideology.

Some members here will say Latinos are bad for not voting for Trump and voting for Trump. They will call us supporters of abortion. But the majority of us, oppose abortions, having said that, we will not stand next to someone who demeans us and wants to break our families apart.
 
chero23 said:
That was the game plan. That is why their rising star was Cruz or Rubio. But once Trump got the support, and started winning states, the RNC crumbled to Trump and his ideology.

Some members here will say Latinos are bad for not voting for Trump and voting for Trump. They will call us supporters of abortion. But the majority of us, oppose abortions, having said that, we will not stand next to someone who demeans us and wants to break our families apart.
Click to expand...
While I’m not Latino, I do reside among a rather large Hispanic population as well as other minorities. I personally love the diversity. And my understanding and experience is that Latinos place a great emphasis on family. So I get it.
 
Memaw said:
They shouldn’t be sending anybody. We do have laws that should be respected by all. Trump did say they are sending all those in there too and we ALL know that’s TRUE. So whats the problem? Do we want things to be even worse than what it has been with Obama?? We all KNOW she is for Partial birth abortion and all the other immoral actions she has pulled. They are weakening our Military, our only means of protection in this crazy world. We need to be able to defend ourselves or just set back and let the Bullies take over!!! We KNOW who and what she is. I don’t trust her with my pet rattlesnake!!! God Help us!!! Memaw
Click to expand...
I know what Trump has done with his power and influence in his lifetime to support pro-life issues: nothing. Zip. Nada.

He freely admits that he has dedicated his life to his own greed. He admits that he has been dedicated to lusting after women not his wife, even women he knew were married to someone else. He took out a full-page add in the New York Times demanding the execution of men convicted of rape who were later exonerated and set free, but he never apologized. He implied he would solve the problem of terrorism with heavy bombing. He vows vengeance on anyone who has harmed him. Of course, he characterized modern-day Catholic immigrants to the United States as not the best, as primarily bringing drugs and crime, with the back-handed qualification that “some, I assume, are good people.” Some…he “assumes” are good people. He also assumes that a person whose parents have that background could not be a fair judge.

I’m extremely saddened that Trump is what we got as an alternative to Clinton. I don’t think there is a candidate I can vote for without a serious violation of conscience.
 
EasterJoy said:
I know what Trump has done with his power and influence in his lifetime to support pro-life issues: nothing. Zip. Nada.

He freely admits that he has dedicated his life to his own greed. He admits that he has been dedicated to lusting after women not his wife, even women he knew were married to someone else. He took out a full-page add in the New York Times demanding the execution of men convicted of rape who were later exonerated and set free, but he never apologized. He implied he would solve the problem of terrorism with heavy bombing. He vows vengeance on anyone who has harmed him. Of course, he characterized modern-day Catholic immigrants to the United States as not the best, as primarily bringing drugs and crime, with the back-handed qualification that “some, I assume, are good people.” Some…he “assumes” are good people. He also assumes that a person whose parents have that background could not be a fair judge.

I’m extremely saddened that Trump is what we got as an alternative to Clinton. I don’t think there is a candidate I can vote for without a serious violation of conscience.
Click to expand...
Given that your sympathies seem to be with Clinton, and you believe all DNC talking points about Trump, perhaps it’s better than you didn’t vote, lest you check Clinton on the ballot.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Given that your sympathies seem to be with Clinton, and you believe all DNC talking points about Trump, perhaps it’s better than you didn’t vote, lest you check Clinton on the ballot.
Click to expand...
You sure do get offended when someone talks against Trump.
 
EasterJoy said:
I know what Trump has done with his power and influence in his lifetime to support pro-life issues: nothing. Zip. Nada.

He freely admits that he has dedicated his life to his own greed. He admits that he has been dedicated to lusting after women not his wife, even women he knew were married to someone else. He took out a full-page add in the New York Times demanding the execution of men convicted of rape who were later exonerated and set free, but he never apologized. He implied he would solve the problem of terrorism with heavy bombing. He vows vengeance on anyone who has harmed him. Of course, he characterized modern-day Catholic immigrants to the United States as not the best, as primarily bringing drugs and crime, with the back-handed qualification that “some, I assume, are good people.” Some…he “assumes” are good people. He also assumes that a person whose parents have that background could not be a fair judge.

I’m extremely saddened that Trump is what we got as an alternative to Clinton. I don’t think there is a candidate I can vote for without a serious violation of conscience.
Click to expand...
I agree.

New York City, where Trump is from, recently tried to legislate against crisis pregnancy centers. “Pro-life” Trump never came out in support of the centers. Not monetarily not vocally.

“Pro-life” Trump hasn’t supported any of the many pro-life charities in New York.

As a private citizen, he could have.

He didn’t mention pro-life issues at the convention.

He’s spoken positively about planned parenthood, claiming that women by the hundreds have sent him letters regarding the excellent care given to them. I’m not really believing the narrative that women actually do send letters to businessmen regarding their doctor visits.
 
“Each weekend I waited for something – anything– to be said from the pulpit. Direct and unequivocal: to the point. Please! Speak to our Catholic responsibility to stand unswayed on pro-life, anti-abortion, marriage between a man and a woman and anti-euthanasia topics.
The silence was deafening. A lot of mumbo jumbo about developing an “informed conscience” (as if everybody in the pews actually knew what that meant!) and “standing firm for our Catholic beliefs” while carefully avoiding any specific mention of what those beliefs were and what they demand of us as Catholics as we approached one of the greatest moral litmus tests since the Civil War. That opportunity was lost.”

From: Lament of a Colorado Catholic
 
chero23 said:
You sure do get offended when someone talks against Trump.
Click to expand...
Oh, I’m not in the least offended. But the last I knew, and before Hillary Clinton shuts CAF down as part of her “Catholic Spring”, I understood I was free to enter into this discussion.
 
chero23 said:
Here’s more information about how Trump and his racist views towards Mexicans, is sending us to the polls, and motivated.

nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-election-day/trump-targeted-mexicans-now-latino-vote-surge-may-wall-him-n679201

thefiscaltimes.com/2016/11/07/Trump-Awakens-Sleeping-Giant-Record-Turnout-Latino-Voters
Click to expand...
Trump is not “racist against Mexicans”. Indeed, if this country got control of illegal immigration, Mexicans here lawfully would be the first to benefit from it.

But the Dem party has admittedly done a better job of proselytizing Hispanics against the Repub party. Romney didn’t do very well among them, and nobody claimed he was “racist” for it.
 
Ridgerunner said:
…and you believe all DNC talking points about Trump,
Click to expand...
Just because they’re talking points doesn’t mean they aren’t true.

Everything in Easters post is an accurate description of Trumps past behaviors. You may not agree they’re important but you can’t say they aren’t true.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top