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.

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.

+1

+2

Awwww. Poor babies have to compromise because they don't have the perfect candidate. Political candidates never align entirely with a single voters views. Quit your belly aching over nonsense and choose based on your most critical issues.

And don't get manipulated that some issue that affects a tiny fraction of people is somehow more pressing than an issue that affects half of the population of the country.

Nope. Found another party that better suits me though I am not a straight party ticket holder.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

I don’t think trans women belong in women’s sports either but I’m smart enough to notice that republicans don’t otherwise care about or support women’s athletics; they’re using it as a wedge issue to begin attacking trans rights altogether and then on to attacking gay rights. LGBTQIA+ deserve human rights. See the long game.

We need where to go that is not GOP, but also not the Democratic Party.

Keep looking for that unicorn which can’t exist in our current system. Or you can just get on the bus that’s going forward instead of the bus that’s going backward.

You lack imagination. And Dems don’t understand independents which means they will keep getting blindsided.

Republicans don't seem to understand that 2024 will be about reproductive rights. They will continue to be blindsided until they accept this reality.

True, but it’s the Dems I’m more likely to support. I want to see them get back on track; but it’s highly unlikely.

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.

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.

+1

+2

Awwww. Poor babies have to compromise because they don't have the perfect candidate. Political candidates never align entirely with a single voters views. Quit your belly aching over nonsense and choose based on your most critical issues.

And don't get manipulated that some issue that affects a tiny fraction of people is somehow more pressing than an issue that affects half of the population of the country.

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.

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.

I don’t think trans women belong in women’s sports either but I’m smart enough to notice that republicans don’t otherwise care about or support women’s athletics; they’re using it as a wedge issue to begin attacking trans rights altogether and then on to attacking gay rights. LGBTQIA+ deserve human rights. See the long game.

We need where to go that is not GOP, but also not the Democratic Party.

Keep looking for that unicorn which can’t exist in our current system. Or you can just get on the bus that’s going forward instead of the bus that’s going backward.

You lack imagination. And Dems don’t understand independents which means they will keep getting blindsided.

Republicans don't seem to understand that 2024 will be about reproductive rights. They will continue to be blindsided until they accept this reality.

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.

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.

I don’t think trans women belong in women’s sports either but I’m smart enough to notice that republicans don’t otherwise care about or support women’s athletics; they’re using it as a wedge issue to begin attacking trans rights altogether and then on to attacking gay rights. LGBTQIA+ deserve human rights. See the long game.

We need where to go that is not GOP, but also not the Democratic Party.

Keep looking for that unicorn which can’t exist in our current system. Or you can just get on the bus that’s going forward instead of the bus that’s going backward.

You lack imagination. And Dems don’t understand independents which means they will keep getting blindsided.

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.

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.

+1

+2

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.

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.

+1

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.

DP. Are you deliberately misunderstanding or are you simply obtuse? Just because we may be personally pro-choice doesn't mean we're one-issue voters. The PP is a Republican. Sadly, Bill Clinton probably doesn't even recognize today's Democratic party. I believe the PP is saying since there's no Bill Clinton to vote for, s/he votes Republican - for issues other than abortion. So do I.

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.

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.

I don’t think trans women belong in women’s sports either but I’m smart enough to notice that republicans don’t otherwise care about or support women’s athletics; they’re using it as a wedge issue to begin attacking trans rights altogether and then on to attacking gay rights. LGBTQIA+ deserve human rights. See the long game.

DP. I find it utterly astounding that the issue of WOMEN'S rights seems to have utterly disappeared when discussing "trans rights." Why should biological men be able to compete against biological women? That's all it comes down to. Where are the women's rights in that scenario? Where is the equity in that scenario?

You aren’t paying attention. The issue is being handled by sports bodies from the Olympics, NCAA, individual sport bodies, etc. and they all are making rules that would require a lengthy transition and low levels of testosterone for eligibility. In other words, no more Lia Thomases. This is not an issue for pandering demagogue governors and candidates. The swimming, tennis, track, etc. governing bodies are handling it.

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.

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.

I don’t think trans women belong in women’s sports either but I’m smart enough to notice that republicans don’t otherwise care about or support women’s athletics; they’re using it as a wedge issue to begin attacking trans rights altogether and then on to attacking gay rights. LGBTQIA+ deserve human rights. See the long game.

We need where to go that is not GOP, but also not the Democratic Party.

Keep looking for that unicorn which can’t exist in our current system. Or you can just get on the bus that’s going forward instead of the bus that’s going backward.

You lack imagination. And Dems don’t understand independents which means they will keep getting blindsided.

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.

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.

I don’t think trans women belong in women’s sports either but I’m smart enough to notice that republicans don’t otherwise care about or support women’s athletics; they’re using it as a wedge issue to begin attacking trans rights altogether and then on to attacking gay rights. LGBTQIA+ deserve human rights. See the long game.

We need where to go that is not GOP, but also not the Democratic Party.

Keep looking for that unicorn which can’t exist in our current system. Or you can just get on the bus that’s going forward instead of the bus that’s going backward.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

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 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.

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.

I don’t think trans women belong in women’s sports either but I’m smart enough to notice that republicans don’t otherwise care about or support women’s athletics; they’re using it as a wedge issue to begin attacking trans rights altogether and then on to attacking gay rights. LGBTQIA+ deserve human rights. See the long game.

DP. I find it utterly astounding that the issue of WOMEN'S rights seems to have utterly disappeared when discussing "trans rights." Why should biological men be able to compete against biological women? That's all it comes down to. Where are the women's rights in that scenario? Where is the equity in that scenario?

You aren’t paying attention. The issue is being handled by sports bodies from the Olympics, NCAA, individual sport bodies, etc. and they all are making rules that would require a lengthy transition and low levels of testosterone for eligibility. In other words, no more Lia Thomases. This is not an issue for pandering demagogue governors and candidates. The swimming, tennis, track, etc. governing bodies are handling it.

The Biden Administration is mandating it. You speak of these individual sport bodies dealing with high level eligibility, while girls will be forced to accept boys in the locker room at so many other levels.