...including 40% of all Republicans. However, 70% of conservative Republicans oppose abortion in most or all cases.
Since the conservative tail of the GOP wags the dog, you can be sure that the Republican candidate for Pres. will be vigorously opposed to abortion, and it will be another nail in the coffin constructed of Republican Party platform planks that are anathema to the majority of Americans and will sink the GOP in 2016.Reagan and the Bushes won 5 terms when support for abortion was higher. Republicans are crushing it nationally, dominating the poltical landscape.
The R candidate will never be pro-choice, at least not in our lifetime.
Many people who are pro-choice are not nearly as fervent about it as pro-lifers are and most are not one issue voters anyway.
Economic issues trump all the social stuff.
The Dems are one loss away from being completely swept out of majorities at any level of government.
We'll keep the pro-life platform, thank you for your concern.
........and yet the GOP establishment is quietly plotting how to derail him, if he is the GOP nominee. It must be a nightmare for the establishment knowing full well that a Trump nomination would spell disaster for down ticket, Senate & House GOP races.
The R candidate will never be pro-choice, at least not in our lifetime.
Many people who are pro-choice are not nearly as fervent about it as pro-lifers are and most are not one issue voters anyway.
Economic issues trump all the social stuff.
The Dems are one loss away from being completely swept out of majorities at any level of government.
We'll keep the pro-life platform, thank you for your concern.
But I don't think abortion plays a part in it Honda.
The R party would crumble if it went pro-choice.
Cruz and Rubio both would make abortion a major plank in their platform, but Trump seems to only talk about things that he wants to talk about and I bet if he is nominated he will be more than capable of not letting the Religious right run his campaign for him.
I predict that "if" Trump is nominated, hardly a sure thing, but certainly VERY possible. He will give the right to lifers lip service and then move on to more important matters.
I find it hugely ironic that the GOP candidate LEAST likely to pander to the religious right is the one the lefties can't seem to get their panties unwound about.
...large chunk of religious conservative voters. He can't veer away from thumping because as a Yankee he has to appeal to Bible Belt voters too.
His pandering while knowing nothing about Christianity has offended this thumper already:
Maybe some more intelligent Christians will pull back the curtain to reveal what a fraud this Wizard of Odd is.
All politicians pander, and your link is a pitiful attempt from one of the nuttiest of the nutty to discredit Trump for not being "Christian enough"
Your BFF has been criticizing Cruz for accepting the endorsement of a guy not much nuttier than this guy, I would think this idiots criticism of Trump would be reason to vote for Trump not against him.
and please don't tell me we are going to start going back to the days of the disappearing posts. It's been rare that I have had even a post a week pulled for the last month or so, but within twenty four hours of your return I have already had two. Let's just hope that's a coincidence and not a sign of an old trend here.
-- Modified on 12/22/2015 8:10:47 PM
...yourself wherein you, p/k & USG were gleeful about giving Laffy the silent treatment. I called you guys out for your lack of maturity and in your embarrassment you reported it. Speaking of old trends, old friend, don't start your old habit of farting and then blaming someone else for it.
"...your link is a pitiful attempt..." "Your BFF..." Can "backstabber" be far behind?
Why would I want to have posts removed in a thread I was actually having some fun with?
BTW, here's my post again, it starts with the subject line "When have I ever pretended to be mature" and goes on to say
"As for giving Laffy the silent treatment, he has bragged on many occasions about putting people on ignore. Call me old fashioned, but I don't need an app to ignore someone.
It is actually your advice I am following, you mentioned months ago about all the effort some of us put into on a site only read by a couple of dozen people. I finally came to the realization that engaging Laffy is pointless. He'll never be convinced of anything, he will argue a point endlessly, twisting, misquoting and outright lying about every word I say in the process, and for what? To prove to a couple of dozen people that I am smarter than him? I would say going through THAT much effort would prove the exact opposite.
BTW, nice to have you back.
and lastly, there are actual conversations between lefties and righties all the time, it's just that none of them involve Laffy."
Why in the world would I want that post removed?
Speaking of old trends, we can pick up where we left off a month or so ago, or we can go back to how things were before, your choice. I have no problems being civil if you don't. As for Laffy, I haven't responded to him in months and the board is a much better place because of it. He will never just let things go and concede a point and you have seen what happens when you try to shout down a troll, remember liorr? Someone has to take the first step by refusing to engage, he wasn't about to, so I did.
Certainly long enough to know that questioning my "maturity" is hardly the way to piss me off. Call me a liar and we have an issue, but calling me immature is like calling me an asshole. I am hardly going to even try to refute such a statement, especially with well over 30,000 posts proving otherwise.
I honestly can't think of why anyone but Laffy would have wanted the thread removed, and Laffy with all his faults is not one to go crying to admin when someone is mean to him. It's about the only positive thing I can think to say about him.
AAR, since taking your advice my post count has been cut by two thirds and I have quit wasting my time "debating" a board troll. I do find it a bit ironic that Laffy now makes as many posts as the rest of the top ten board posters combined a feat that even an admitted board blabbermouth has never even come close to achieving.
With all the ill controlled kids I see at the market and malls these days I can only hope abortion will soon become retroactive, thus proactively bettering the homo sapiens gene pool.
Too be serious for a moment, it's well known here that I am firmly pro choice, but it's simply not an issue that I waste a lot of time over. There is a solid majority in this country that is in favor of leaving it up to the woman carrying the fetus/baby in most cases, even the most whacko right to lifer is not going to change this fact. What does bother me is candidates that spend all of their political capital on this issue. Roe/Wade is NOT getting overturned any more than Gay Marriage, lets get over it and move on
so long as we 1) get more baby parts 2) pick the right babies to kill (use if for gender selection like some Asian communities, or for social engineering - 1/2 of all inner-city pregnancies are terminated by abortion so it is kinda like a silent minority genocide)
I don't care what people do, it is the "choice" euphemism that is insulting and offensive - call it what it is - infanticide and be done with it
-- Modified on 12/28/2015 1:56:06 PM