Hellery Vs Donald POLL

Good point. Admittedly, I am not an expert on the Constitution, but from Article 10 it should not be handled at the fed level, but perhaps state level, which was one of Trump's point. Legally, it is a thorny issue, but I think as a nation we need to have a serious change of heart (in general) about this (life) and respecting one another.

BTW, you've challenged me to go back and reread the constitution and other founding docs. They are valuable to know & understand.

 

Basically, the 10th said that if its not expressly stated as a federal responsibility elsewhere, then it falls to the states. This is brilliant because the founders realized that there are regional differences and a national solution to most problems will lead to massive division (ring any bells?). You are right on with the cultural issues. Abortion is a 'heart and minds' issue. I'd prefer the govt stay out and make it so people don't need abortions (better birth control) or want them (better pre/post delivery support and easier adoption options)

 

[video=youtube;tsOlXidHXRE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsOlXidHXRE[/video]

 

1999 is cherry picking. Most people change opinion on this issue. ive gone from pro choice to full anti now to a hybrid. Ok first tri but banned in 3rd

 

I know it was a while ago. People also change their position when they want to run for office and they become politicians.

 

I don't know that he has changed his position though. If I recall from this past debate, he said he was against "full term" abortions. I don't recall the topic of the 1st trimester being discussed, maybe I missed it? If what I recall is correct, his stance is actually the same.

 

He used to be pro choice, before he was interested in running as a republican

 

nynj sharp as a tack braddah.

 

Good point, I was going from memory and all I remembered was the part about late term abortion. I went back and watched that segment of the debate and he said he's "pro life" more than once, so I stand corrected.

 

This is why we lack virtue in our leaders. For the most part (i.e., in many of them), they form their opinions on what will get them elected (be it to get financial support or votes). I understand the role in compromise to get things accomplished once elected, but true leaders do the right thing (often from wise counsel), regardless of whether it is accepted by the masses, understanding they could "take their lumps for it", knowing that it will lead to what is truly best their constituents.

 

As Pump stated though, some people change positions or they blend the two positions into a middle ground. So maybe there should be a 3rd term created to label those people too lol

 

kinda like he wasnt a racist??

 

is the problem the leaders or the electorate?

 

What does that mean? I don't follow

 

before he ran as a republican, most black leaders (Sharpton, et al) praised him.

 

Gotcha.Yeah the whole charade is ridiculous...

But it's more like how he was for the banning of AR's until he needed the NRA and 2nd amendment supporters to support him.

 

That is a very good question.

This is a virtue of a Democratic Republic vs a Democracy.

 

Both McCain and Romney were relatively moderate with political stances that leaned towards more moderate bases, until they were actual presidential candidates. Once under the Republican mantra, I firmly believe that candidates are told exactly what to say and how to behave.

Can you imagine how difficult iit must have been for those 2 gentlemen to maintain a moderate or centrist agenda when the bulk of your electorate is a very vocal group of Tea Partiers and ultra conservative Christians? I'm betting that the Republican think tank gets their candidates to fall in line and deliver the same old message of the same old core tenets.

Same goes with the Dems. Bernie brought something new to the table, but some of his stances changed somewhat as he became a more serious candidate.

And let's not forget the differences in Hillary's platform and demeanor since she first competed against Obama 8 years ago.

The core tenets of a party usually stay the same, but the actual messages change frequently according to the current political winds.

 

Well put.

 

Your definition of pro choice means 3rd tri abortions are fine too. I think most people can be pro choice but it doesn't include 3rd trimester abortions. It's crazy that if a women may die because of giving birth or cancer is causing issues that people are considering killing a practically newborn baby. Have you looked at how this is done and how much pain would be inflicted on that unborn baby? I think if it's your time, so be it, the child is born and the mother dies. Instead medicine is saying let's murder a baby practically full term to save someone who has lived their life. That sounds selfish to me.

Hey abortion is selfish. People make a huge mistake and don't take personal responsibility for their action. Hey wrap it up. You got yourself into this situation. It's too much of an inconvenience on their life. So they decide to murder the baby and we are fine with it. It's pretty crazy if you ask me that someone can make a mistake, rather than own up to it, they have the right to kill something.