Anonymous wrote:I will vote for Haley if she bans Tik-Tok!
Mom of 11 year old boys

You know you can ban it in your house, right? Or put controls in their phones.

Anonymous wrote:I will vote for Haley if she bans Tik-Tok!
Mom of 11 year old boys

You do know that you, as a mother if 11 year old boys, are capable of banning tiktok for your children.

Anonymous wrote:Haley made the most sense of anybody on the stage. Vivek is nuts...from saying the moderators should be replaced with Tucker/Rogan/Elon,
Mto slamming Ronna "don't call me Romney" McDaniel, to attacking Haley's daughter, to calling Zelensky a nazi. I'm not sure how anybody can take him seriously.

How about speculating that Michelle Obama might really be running the country??

Anonymous wrote:Haley made the most sense of anybody on the stage. Vivek is nuts...from saying the moderators should be replaced with Tucker/Rogan/Elon, to slamming Ronna "don't call me Romney" McDaniel, to attacking Haley's daughter, to calling Zelensky a nazi. I'm not sure how anybody can take him seriously.

I agree that Vivek is kookoo bananas but Ronna Romney is his stopped clock. It’s a complete mystery as to why she’s still in charge at the RNC when they keep losing elections like this.

I will vote for Haley if she bans Tik-Tok!
Mom of 11 year old boys

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally! A Republican says that if you are pro-life, it has to cover the whole life, not just in the womb.

Points to Chris Christie for highlighting the party’s hypocrisy on this point. (Another obstacle to MAGAS supporting him!)

I have long wanted a journalist to confront so-called “right to lifers” to reveal their stance on the death penalty!!

You do know that the death penalty... is for violent criminals, right? Wow.

Violent criminals…who are alive.

So, if you are PRO-LIFE..,

The life of an innocent baby is more valuable than the life of a violent criminal.

You are making the point.

They are not really “pro-life.”

They are pro fetus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haley is so damn reasonable .

Are you sure she is a Republican?

She and maybe Christie at times are clearly the only people on that stage that can articulate a case for being considered for POTUS.

Agree. I would feel comfortable with either of them as POTUS and I generally vote for democrats. Depressing that Trump is so far ahead.

+1, I think they are doing a great job staying the course for when Trump inevitably is convicted of something in one of the criminal matters. The Dems should be worried if Haley somehow emerges with the nomination. I’ve never voted for a R for president before but I would vote for Haley over Biden.

I really don't see republican voters lining up behind Nimarata against Trump.

Unfortunately I think you’re right unless there is a conviction and a sentence imposed before the primaries. But if that happens, I definitely think she has a fighting chance. Since I’m in VA I will definitely vote for her in the R primary.

It’s impossible for that to happen. The first trial is scheduled to start on March 4, which is after Iowa, NH, NV, SC, and MI and the day before Super Tuesday.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally! A Republican says that if you are pro-life, it has to cover the whole life, not just in the womb.

Points to Chris Christie for highlighting the party’s hypocrisy on this point. (Another obstacle to MAGAS supporting him!)

I have long wanted a journalist to confront so-called “right to lifers” to reveal their stance on the death penalty!!

You do know that the death penalty... is for violent criminals, right? Wow.

Violent criminals…who are alive.

So, if you are PRO-LIFE..,

The life of an innocent baby is more valuable than the life of a violent criminal.

If you are in fact pro LIFE, then a life is a life.

Right. I assume your pro life views are rooted in your religion, PP? Which religion is telling you that you are the one who gets to decide which lives are more valuable? That’s not a Christian belief…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haley is so damn reasonable .

Are you sure she is a Republican?

She and maybe Christie at times are clearly the only people on that stage that can articulate a case for being considered for POTUS.

Out of that lot I like those two the best. I’ve always liked Chris Christie. I think it’s a shame that he had such a sharp decline after the bridge fiasco. Somebody up thread wondered if it was weight discrimination. Maybe but that’s a shame because he is on the moderate side.

The "bridge fiasco" should have ended his political career.

Still, he is the best GOP on that stage, which is why he doesn't stand a chance, because he is too sane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haley is so damn reasonable .

Are you sure she is a Republican?

She and maybe Christie at times are clearly the only people on that stage that can articulate a case for being considered for POTUS.

Out of that lot I like those two the best. I’ve always liked Chris Christie. I think it’s a shame that he had such a sharp decline after the bridge fiasco. Somebody up thread wondered if it was weight discrimination. Maybe but that’s a shame because he is on the moderate side.

Christie is the only one of the bunch I would consider voting for in the general election. But no way he gets the nomination.

Haley made the most sense of anybody on the stage. Vivek is nuts...from saying the moderators should be replaced with Tucker/Rogan/Elon, to slamming Ronna "don't call me Romney" McDaniel, to attacking Haley's daughter, to calling Zelensky a nazi. I'm not sure how anybody can take him seriously.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haley is so damn reasonable .

Are you sure she is a Republican?

She and maybe Christie at times are clearly the only people on that stage that can articulate a case for being considered for POTUS.

Out of that lot I like those two the best. I’ve always liked Chris Christie. I think it’s a shame that he had such a sharp decline after the bridge fiasco. Somebody up thread wondered if it was weight discrimination. Maybe but that’s a shame because he is on the moderate side.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally! A Republican says that if you are pro-life, it has to cover the whole life, not just in the womb.

Points to Chris Christie for highlighting the party’s hypocrisy on this point. (Another obstacle to MAGAS supporting him!)

I have long wanted a journalist to confront so-called “right to lifers” to reveal their stance on the death penalty!!

You do know that the death penalty... is for violent criminals, right? Wow.

Violent criminals…who are alive.

So, if you are PRO-LIFE..,

The life of an innocent baby is more valuable than the life of a violent criminal.

I thought "pro" life doesn't give any wiggle room for more or less valuable of a life. Either you are pro or you aren't.

Catholic pro-life is officially anti death penalty. Not to the extent that communion would be denied to a pro-death penalty politician or anyone would picket, but they still say they are. Evangelicals seem fine with the death penalty.

Opinions run the gamut on this complex issue. Anyone who has carried a fetus to term knows that a fetus is a baby. A baby is an innocent human life. So, I understand why some people find abortion morally abhorrent. But it's a human life that requires someone else to agree to support it, so.. it's complicated. I'm pro choice because I believe women have the right to bodily autonomy even if it ends the life of someone else who requires her body to live. No one can compel anyone to donate a kidney to save life and no one should be able to coerce someone into donating their uterus either.

As for the death penalty, I feel we as a society are completely justified to judge and execute murderers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Finally! A Republican says that if you are pro-life, it has to cover the whole life, not just in the womb.

Points to Chris Christie for highlighting the party’s hypocrisy on this point. (Another obstacle to MAGAS supporting him!)

I have long wanted a journalist to confront so-called “right to lifers” to reveal their stance on the death penalty!!

You do know that the death penalty... is for violent criminals, right? Wow.

Violent criminals…who are alive.

So, if you are PRO-LIFE..,

The life of an innocent baby is more valuable than the life of a violent criminal.

I thought "pro" life doesn't give any wiggle room for more or less valuable of a life. Either you are pro or you aren't.

Catholic pro-life is officially anti death penalty. Not to the extent that communion would be denied to a pro-death penalty politician or anyone would picket, but they still say they are. Evangelicals seem fine with the death penalty.

Opinions run the gamut on this complex issue. Anyone who has carried a fetus to term knows that a fetus is a baby. A baby is an innocent human life. So, I understand why some people find abortion morally abhorrent. But it's a human life that requires someone else to agree to support it, so.. it's complicated. I'm pro choice because I believe women have the right to bodily autonomy even if it ends the life of someone else who requires her body to live. No one can compel anyone to donate a kidney to save life and no one should be able to coerce someone into donating their uterus either.

As for the death penalty, I feel we as a society are completely justified to judge and execute murderers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haley is so damn reasonable .

Are you sure she is a Republican?

She and maybe Christie at times are clearly the only people on that stage that can articulate a case for being considered for POTUS.

Agree. I would feel comfortable with either of them as POTUS and I generally vote for democrats. Depressing that Trump is so far ahead.

+1, I think they are doing a great job staying the course for when Trump inevitably is convicted of something in one of the criminal matters. The Dems should be worried if Haley somehow emerges with the nomination. I’ve never voted for a R for president before but I would vote for Haley over Biden.

I really don't see republican voters lining up behind Nimarata against Trump.

Unfortunately I think you’re right unless there is a conviction and a sentence imposed before the primaries. But if that happens, I definitely think she has a fighting chance. Since I’m in VA I will definitely vote for her in the R primary.