I want a candidate who is 100% pro-choice BUT pretty anti-immigration & socially conservative

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you against immigration? This country was founded on immigration. This country thrives on immigration. Immigrants not only get the job done, they revitalize the economy. That is a fact.

Show me a thriving, healthy, ethnically diverse community.

Montgomery County, Maryland

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Children born of single parents in China can’t get health insurance. This is known. Thus, single parenthood is nonexistent!


Rebublicans want to screw over our future generations by turning back the clock on their god given rights. That is going on right now in America so china will have to handle its own effed up reproductive rights situation for the time being.

Yeah, I would definitely not follow anything China does as far as "rights" go . . .

It's really appalling how "Christian" some so called "Christian's" views are in this country. They wield religion like it's a hammer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a moderate Republican, I agree with you OP.

How do you define being a 'moderate republican"?

Larry Hogan is the classic moderate republican; and amazingly, he is loved by just about everyone in Maryland, which is a solid democratic state. The only people who didn't like him were the uber-leftist local politicians of MoCo.

And me! Not a politician. Didn’t like his conservative politics. Hated his policy on starting school after Labor Day.

Obviously he was not as horrid as MAGA politicians. But that’s a low bar.

Still doesn't change the fact that he's a moderate Republican, which clearly you don't like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Republican and consider Bill Clinton nearly ideal as a political candidate. Super pro-America, pro-police, tough on crime, strong border control, cut the deficit, oversaw massive economic expansion-- I could go on. He would be republican by today's standards. Obama Term 1 was also a fantastic, modern-conservative president.

Sorry but Clinton and Obama were pro choice.

Yes, I have no issue with that. I stand by it-- Bill Clinton is ideal.

Whatever you want to label yourself is fine. You vote for a democrat on election day so good. Call yourself a republican or whatever you want as long as you vote pro choice.

NP - so strange. This is why person holing people based on a single issue is stupid. It’s been to Dems detriment.

Detriment? You are not paying attention. This issue is bringing out voters and driving election outcomes. Is it just men and clueless women on this thread? Get it through your thick skills...forced birth policies are a huge deal and are not going to be tolerated. That's it.

What? The response was that pigeon-hoping people on single issues as dem or gop is stupid. I said nothing about the issue. If you think x, you must be a dem or gop supporter. Dumb, dumb, dumb. I don’t fully agree with OP. I wish more major party people would feel comfortable expressing where they don’t fully align with their party. They are not all 100% in on 100% of issues. There was a time you could be anti-abortion and a Dem, and pro-abortion and be a GOPer. Now each party demands complete outward adherence to an orthodoxy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Republican and consider Bill Clinton nearly ideal as a political candidate. Super pro-America, pro-police, tough on crime, strong border control, cut the deficit, oversaw massive economic expansion-- I could go on. He would be republican by today's standards. Obama Term 1 was also a fantastic, modern-conservative president.

Agreed. I'm an Independent and in some ways, one would think I'm conservative because of all these things; pro-police, strong border control, thinks trans women have no place in women's sports.. However, I am pro-choice and very much pro-gun control. I feel like I don't have a home in either party.

You don’t have a home. You need to help create a new one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Republican and consider Bill Clinton nearly ideal as a political candidate. Super pro-America, pro-police, tough on crime, strong border control, cut the deficit, oversaw massive economic expansion-- I could go on. He would be republican by today's standards. Obama Term 1 was also a fantastic, modern-conservative president.

Sorry but Clinton and Obama were pro choice.

DP. That's why I would consider Bill Clinton an ideal candidate. I'm also a Republican and I'm pro-choice, as well as all the other things PP listed.

I’m a lifelong Dem and I voted for Clinton twice. What I want to know is this: Where were all of you in the 90s when Newt et al went after Clinton and helped usher the sh*tshow that we are still dealing with? We’d all be better off if Gore had been president instead of W.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a moderate Republican, I agree with you OP.

How do you define being a 'moderate republican"?

Larry Hogan is the classic moderate republican; and amazingly, he is loved by just about everyone in Maryland, which is a solid democratic state. The only people who didn't like him were the uber-leftist local politicians of MoCo.

And me! Not a politician. Didn’t like his conservative politics. Hated his policy on starting school after Labor Day.

Obviously he was not as horrid as MAGA politicians. But that’s a low bar.

Still doesn't change the fact that he's a moderate Republican, which clearly you don't like.

Moderate by comparison. Hell, Goldwater would be moderate by comparison to today’s wing nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a moderate Republican, I agree with you OP.

How do you define being a 'moderate republican"?

Larry Hogan is the classic moderate republican; and amazingly, he is loved by just about everyone in Maryland, which is a solid democratic state. The only people who didn't like him were the uber-leftist local politicians of MoCo.

And me! Not a politician. Didn’t like his conservative politics. Hated his policy on starting school after Labor Day.

Obviously he was not as horrid as MAGA politicians. But that’s a low bar.

Still doesn't change the fact that he's a moderate Republican, which clearly you don't like.

Because he’s mealy mouthed when it comes to supporting abortion rights, refusing to take a stance one way or another. He has not condemned Hobbs and says he is for “states’ rights”. Sorry but Republicans have a trust issue and I don’t trust anyone who calls themself a states’s rights supporter when it comes to abortion.

[Anonymous]

I think that IVF should only be legal for women under 40.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does socially conservative mean if not anti-abortion?

Tough on crime/anti gay rights/pro gun/pro church in politics

Why are you anti-gay rights? Note - gay rights aren't the same as trans-rights. What do you have against gay rights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope.

Your options are pro-life/Christian Nationalism, or else democrats.

Nope. The options are fascist, speech-policing imbeciles, or else Republicans.
DP

So no choice at all, is what you are saying.

Democrats certainly don't offer a "choice" when it comes to speaking and opinions. There is only your way, or the highway. I'll take the highway, thanks.

If anything, Democrats are too accepting of varying opinions.

The exception, of course, is they don’t tolerate intolerance. Which makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope.

Your options are pro-life/Christian Nationalism, or else democrats.

Nope. The options are fascist, speech-policing imbeciles, or else Republicans.
DP

So no choice at all, is what you are saying.

Democrats certainly don't offer a "choice" when it comes to speaking and opinions. There is only your way, or the highway. I'll take the highway, thanks.

If anything, Democrats are too accepting of varying opinions.

The exception, of course, is they don’t tolerate intolerance. Which makes sense.

LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Republican and consider Bill Clinton nearly ideal as a political candidate. Super pro-America, pro-police, tough on crime, strong border control, cut the deficit, oversaw massive economic expansion-- I could go on. He would be republican by today's standards. Obama Term 1 was also a fantastic, modern-conservative president.

Sorry but Clinton and Obama were pro choice.

Yes, I have no issue with that. I stand by it-- Bill Clinton is ideal.

Whatever you want to label yourself is fine. You vote for a democrat on election day so good. Call yourself a republican or whatever you want as long as you vote pro choice.

NP - so strange. This is why person holing people based on a single issue is stupid. It’s been to Dems detriment.

Detriment? You are not paying attention. This issue is bringing out voters and driving election outcomes. Is it just men and clueless women on this thread? Get it through your thick skills...forced birth policies are a huge deal and are not going to be tolerated. That's it.

What? The response was that pigeon-hoping people on single issues as dem or gop is stupid. I said nothing about the issue. If you think x, you must be a dem or gop supporter. Dumb, dumb, dumb. I don’t fully agree with OP. I wish more major party people would feel comfortable expressing where they don’t fully align with their party. They are not all 100% in on 100% of issues. There was a time you could be anti-abortion and a Dem, and pro-abortion and be a GOPer. Now each party demands complete outward adherence to an orthodoxy.

No kidding when it comes to an issue like abortion. Roe was actually, in fact, overturned. This is not some political game at this point. The GOP did it and the fighting back is going to come from the democrats. That reality, like it or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that IVF should only be legal for women under 40.

I think you should seek IVF or any other medical procedure with the advice and counsel of your doc and stay out of it with regards to other people's medical issues. Not your concern. I can't imagine inserting myself into your personal medical decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does socially conservative mean if not anti-abortion?

Not op but — I’m 100% pro choice but anti thots

Hookup culture is gross

Tattoos are gross and should be taxed

Onlyfans and porn is gross

Broken families are terrible

Too many bastards are being born

OP here and I agree

You agree that there are children who should be labeled bastards?