Serious Q's To Trump Supporters (or those on the fence for Trump)

[zoogs]

That seems like a fair analogy?...

 

Look, the (settled?) legal fight is about whether or not abortion should be legal in this country. There are for, and against sides to that.

 

If we're to move beyond that specific legal battle and fight to reduce unwanted pregnancies, then I think there's a lot of unity to be had.

[Fru]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am 100% pro-life and in fact am on the Board of Directors a local pro-life organization. After our last board meeting I asked others on the board what they were going to do about this election. Not a single one of them that I talked to were going to vote for either Trump or Clinton. I understand the argument about voting for the lesser of two evils, but at some point, both are so bad I can't do that. Just like I wouldn't choose between Mussolini or Stalin. I won't choose between Trump or Clinton.

 

If there were one thing that put me over the top on being "never Trump", It was when he said that the military would commit war crimes for him because he's a strong leader. WTF.....totally unfit.

I'm genuinely asking, and not trying to inflame arguments or anything, but when you say you are 100% Pro Life, does that also translate to other political and social stances for you as well?

 

Many times when I talk politics with folks, many folks claim to be Pro Life. However in other political stances folks who claim to be Pro Life are generally

 

-in favor of war and military intervention

-against addressing gun deaths

-against universal health care coverage

-against public assistance programs that largely assist children and the elderly

-against regulation and protecting the environment

 

These are all issues that concern life and well being.

So you stating that you are 100% Pro Life, is that across the board? Or only for the issue of abortion?

 

Again, I'm not trying to be inflammatory, or trying to create arguments. I'm genuinely trying to understand this, as it seems there is a lot of cognitive dissonance going on with folks who claim to be Pro Life.

 

 

I'm at work, so don't have tons of time so this might not be as well articulated as I would hope; but here's my quick, and probably clumsy answer.

 

I believe an unborn child has the same moral weight as a 3 month old.

 

So, could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be in favor of a war, yes

could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be in favor of gun rights, yes

could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be opposed to universal healthcare, yes

could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be against public assistance, yes

could I be against a mother killing her 3 month old but be against environmental regulations, yes

 

If you were more specifically asking my personal view on these issues, I don't have time right now other than to say they're varied.

I guess I was asking if you held those seemingly contradicting beliefs, not hypothetically "Could someone believe this while also believing that."

 

Can you see the difficulty in understanding how someone can call themselves "Pro Life" when it comes to abortion, but then want to deny healthcare to the sick, deny food assistance to the young and elderly, do nothing about the 30,000 gun deaths a year, not want to take action to take care of the environment, and be pro war?

 

My view is that if you're going to call your self "Pro Life" then your other stances should reflect that as well. If you don't want healthcare for all, don't want to do anything about gun deaths, don't want to protect the environment, don't want children and the elderly to have food assistance, but then say people shouldn't get abortions, you're not really pro life, you're just anti-abortion.

I disagree, you can be against and ever expanding gov't, and be pro life.

I guess your phrase "100% Pro Choice" led me to believe that your value of life would be across the board, in all areas.

 

Of all the issues I've listed, the only time life counts unconditionally is regarding the issue of abortion. Doesn't seem like 100% to me.

[NM11046]

Hey, new to the board, but I've read anonymously for a long time. Wanted to chime in on this one.

 

Two questions:

1. Who do you respect enough, that if they took a strong public stance against Trump you would listen and reconsider?

No one. I'm well researched and know exactly what I'm voting for.

2. Is there anything that he could say or do between now and election day to change your support of him?

Probably. What that something is? Who knows. But his stance on so many issues in my view are much needed for quite some time now in government. He's not a politician. He doesn't choose his words carefully. He comes with his baggage. The plain and simple fact is that his policies are exactly what this country needs in order to stop the downward spiral, or at the very least, slow it down.

One thing is for certain. There is a candidate for the Democratic party that I would not vote for if she were the only option available.

Thanks for joining us Aloha.

 

When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to?

[AlohaHuskers]

 

Hey, new to the board, but I've read anonymously for a long time. Wanted to chime in on this one.

 

Two questions:

1. Who do you respect enough, that if they took a strong public stance against Trump you would listen and reconsider?

No one. I'm well researched and know exactly what I'm voting for.

2. Is there anything that he could say or do between now and election day to change your support of him?

Probably. What that something is? Who knows. But his stance on so many issues in my view are much needed for quite some time now in government. He's not a politician. He doesn't choose his words carefully. He comes with his baggage. The plain and simple fact is that his policies are exactly what this country needs in order to stop the downward spiral, or at the very least, slow it down.

One thing is for certain. There is a candidate for the Democratic party that I would not vote for if she were the only option available.

Thanks for joining us Aloha.

 

When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to?

 

 

I could probably echo BIGREDIOWAN with the concern about how he'd handle foreign relations. But my view into his life and how he's handled his business interactions tell me that he's much more... I guess most people would say "reasonable-sounding" behind closed doors in meetings. When he's on stage and on TV, the entire reason he says some of the controversial things he's said is to get attention drawn to him. He has literally owned the media for the past year with how he makes them cover him.

 

First off, the whole "A man you can bait with a tweet" ordeal is such utter fear-mongering BS coming from the Dems. I trust DJT 10000000% more than Hillary War-monger Clinton with them. So that part of foreign relations, I am not worried about. I also think his policy of not playing police to the world is something I've been saying for a lot of years about the US, as playing police for decades has caused a lot of hatred toward us and has cost us immense amounts of money on military spending.

 

I encourage everyone to actually take a look and see the REAL policies he's proposing instead of taking CNN's word - or worse, the Washington Post...

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

[Lil' Red]

 

 

Hey, new to the board, but I've read anonymously for a long time. Wanted to chime in on this one.

 

Two questions:

1. Who do you respect enough, that if they took a strong public stance against Trump you would listen and reconsider?

No one. I'm well researched and know exactly what I'm voting for.

2. Is there anything that he could say or do between now and election day to change your support of him?

Probably. What that something is? Who knows. But his stance on so many issues in my view are much needed for quite some time now in government. He's not a politician. He doesn't choose his words carefully. He comes with his baggage. The plain and simple fact is that his policies are exactly what this country needs in order to stop the downward spiral, or at the very least, slow it down.

One thing is for certain. There is a candidate for the Democratic party that I would not vote for if she were the only option available.

Thanks for joining us Aloha.

 

When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to?

 

 

I could probably echo BIGREDIOWAN with the concern about how he'd handle foreign relations. But my view into his life and how he's handled his business interactions tell me that he's much more... I guess most people would say "reasonable-sounding" behind closed doors in meetings. When he's on stage and on TV, the entire reason he says some of the controversial things he's said is to get attention drawn to him. He has literally owned the media for the past year with how he makes them cover him.

 

First off, the whole "A man you can bait with a tweet" ordeal is such utter fear-mongering BS coming from the Dems. I trust DJT 10000000% more than Hillary War-monger Clinton with them. So that part of foreign relations, I am not worried about. I also think his policy of not playing police to the world is something I've been saying for a lot of years about the US, as playing police for decades has caused a lot of hatred toward us and has cost us immense amounts of money on military spending.

 

I encourage everyone to actually take a look and see the REAL policies he's proposing instead of taking CNN's word - or worse, the Washington Post...

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

 

 

Why didn't Trump showcase his "reasonable sounding" side during the debate? It was the perfect opportunity for him to do that.

[Landlord]

I haven't read through all this, but I'll just say this to my friends who are regretfully voting for Trump because of the single issue of pro-life. I empathize with that a lot, as I mostly share the opinions of abortion being considered murder of unborn children.

 

 

That being said.

 

 

The abortion rate has been decreasing at a steady, consistent rate since Reagan. Doesn't matter if the President, Congress, or the Supreme Court have been conservative or liberal. Further, there's no evidenced correlation between abortion being illegal and there being less abortions. Frankly put, the data doesn't support that position.

 

I am not voting for Hillary Clinton, and I do not support Hillary Clinton, but here is a good article from someone who is pro-life but can not bring herself to vote for Donald Trump.

 

http://www.shannondingle.com/blog//im-pro-life-and-im-voting-for-hillary-heres-why

[NM11046]

 

 

Hey, new to the board, but I've read anonymously for a long time. Wanted to chime in on this one.

 

Two questions:

1. Who do you respect enough, that if they took a strong public stance against Trump you would listen and reconsider?

No one. I'm well researched and know exactly what I'm voting for.

2. Is there anything that he could say or do between now and election day to change your support of him?

Probably. What that something is? Who knows. But his stance on so many issues in my view are much needed for quite some time now in government. He's not a politician. He doesn't choose his words carefully. He comes with his baggage. The plain and simple fact is that his policies are exactly what this country needs in order to stop the downward spiral, or at the very least, slow it down.

One thing is for certain. There is a candidate for the Democratic party that I would not vote for if she were the only option available.

Thanks for joining us Aloha.

 

When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to?

 

 

I could probably echo BIGREDIOWAN with the concern about how he'd handle foreign relations. But my view into his life and how he's handled his business interactions tell me that he's much more... I guess most people would say "reasonable-sounding" behind closed doors in meetings. When he's on stage and on TV, the entire reason he says some of the controversial things he's said is to get attention drawn to him. He has literally owned the media for the past year with how he makes them cover him.

 

First off, the whole "A man you can bait with a tweet" ordeal is such utter fear-mongering BS coming from the Dems. I trust DJT 10000000% more than Hillary War-monger Clinton with them. So that part of foreign relations, I am not worried about. I also think his policy of not playing police to the world is something I've been saying for a lot of years about the US, as playing police for decades has caused a lot of hatred toward us and has cost us immense amounts of money on military spending.

 

I encourage everyone to actually take a look and see the REAL policies he's proposing instead of taking CNN's word - or worse, the Washington Post...

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

 

Now, now - nobody on this thread has been condescending or aggressive, so please don't start with the name calling of candidates and references to us all being uneducated or that people only trust one source etc. It's been a cordial discussion so far.

 

So you believe strongly in his thoughts on the US staying out of international governing. If I were to click on the link you're aligned to all his other policies? Is there one that's most important to you?

 

With respect to his business interactions, you mention people say he's good behind doors. Do you feel you know enough detail about his actual business dealings and worth, historical contributions etc to formulate a strong opinion? Do you feel that knowing how to maximize the work arounds legally in order to make or keep money is admirable from a business perspective?

[Moiraine]

If we're allowed to go off of what people say about how Trump acts behind closed doors that really opens up a lot more negative things said about him than positive.

[AlohaHuskers]

 

 

 

Hey, new to the board, but I've read anonymously for a long time. Wanted to chime in on this one.

 

Two questions:

1. Who do you respect enough, that if they took a strong public stance against Trump you would listen and reconsider?

No one. I'm well researched and know exactly what I'm voting for.

2. Is there anything that he could say or do between now and election day to change your support of him?

Probably. What that something is? Who knows. But his stance on so many issues in my view are much needed for quite some time now in government. He's not a politician. He doesn't choose his words carefully. He comes with his baggage. The plain and simple fact is that his policies are exactly what this country needs in order to stop the downward spiral, or at the very least, slow it down.

One thing is for certain. There is a candidate for the Democratic party that I would not vote for if she were the only option available.

Thanks for joining us Aloha.

 

When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to?

 

 

I could probably echo BIGREDIOWAN with the concern about how he'd handle foreign relations. But my view into his life and how he's handled his business interactions tell me that he's much more... I guess most people would say "reasonable-sounding" behind closed doors in meetings. When he's on stage and on TV, the entire reason he says some of the controversial things he's said is to get attention drawn to him. He has literally owned the media for the past year with how he makes them cover him.

 

First off, the whole "A man you can bait with a tweet" ordeal is such utter fear-mongering BS coming from the Dems. I trust DJT 10000000% more than Hillary War-monger Clinton with them. So that part of foreign relations, I am not worried about. I also think his policy of not playing police to the world is something I've been saying for a lot of years about the US, as playing police for decades has caused a lot of hatred toward us and has cost us immense amounts of money on military spending.

 

I encourage everyone to actually take a look and see the REAL policies he's proposing instead of taking CNN's word - or worse, the Washington Post...

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

 

 

Why didn't Trump showcase his "reasonable sounding" side during the debate? It was the perfect opportunity for him to do that.

 

 

The better questions is this: Why do people put so much weight on a debate instead of actually looking at the things that really matter? You know, like... What are they going to do to lower the national debt? To do away with corruption in government? To allow creation of REAL opportunity for citizens? To allow citizens their freedoms that are declared in the constitution? To fix our terrible education system? To stop the rampant illegal immigration to our country? To protect us from our enemies, which at this time happens to be radical Islamic terrorism?

 

People get so caught up in how things sound instead of what they ought to be focusing on. Watching the debate, a neutral observer would probably say that Hillary won because she was indeed very polished in what she was saying. But if someone is truly educated on the issues and what she is proposing for our country, they'd realize that all she is is a polished turd - a corrupt polished turd that says terrific things (which are extremely vague, BTW) but will likely do the opposite once elected when her Super PACs and big donors pay her off.

[zoogs]

(...) The abortion rate has been decreasing at a steady, consistent rate since Reagan. Doesn't matter if the President, Congress, or the Supreme Court have been conservative or liberal. Further, there's no evidenced correlation between abortion being illegal and there being less abortions. Frankly put, the data doesn't support that position.

 

I am not voting for Hillary Clinton, and I do not support Hillary Clinton, but here is a good article from someone who is pro-life but can not bring herself to vote for Donald Trump.

 

http://www.shannondingle.com/blog//im-pro-life-and-im-voting-for-hillary-heres-why

To add, here's a perspective on abortion law that I hadn't really known a great deal about, except that it existed: the Hyde Amendment.

 

http://www.vox.com/identities/2016/9/30/13111900/hyde-amendment-40-years-taxpayer-abortion-funding

 

The Hyde Amendment is more of a tradition than a law, a rider that gets added to the federal budget every year. Every year without fail, Congress passes it again. And every year without fail, America effectively makes a choice: to try to reduce the number of abortions by making it harder for poor women, specifically, to get them.

 

The policy’s original sponsor, Rep. Henry Hyde of Illinois, had no illusions about this goal. “I certainly would like to prevent, if I could legally, anybody having an abortion: a rich woman, a middle-class woman or a poor woman,” Hyde said. “Unfortunately, the only vehicle available is the ... Medicaid bill.”

 

But while Hyde would probably be pleased that the overall rates of abortion in America have decreased dramatically since 1990, it’s not because poor women have been blocked from accessing abortions. The abortion rate has gone down because women and girls have gotten better access to contraception and better education about how to prevent pregnancy.

This, the bold. Let's seize on that and agree on it.

 

Also, this article is pretty sobering reading.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

Hey, new to the board, but I've read anonymously for a long time. Wanted to chime in on this one.

 

Two questions:

1. Who do you respect enough, that if they took a strong public stance against Trump you would listen and reconsider?

 

No one. I'm well researched and know exactly what I'm voting for.

 

2. Is there anything that he could say or do between now and election day to change your support of him?

 

Probably. What that something is? Who knows. But his stance on so many issues in my view are much needed for quite some time now in government. He's not a politician. He doesn't choose his words carefully. He comes with his baggage. The plain and simple fact is that his policies are exactly what this country needs in order to stop the downward spiral, or at the very least, slow it down.

 

One thing is for certain. There is a candidate for the Democratic party that I would not vote for if she were the only option available.

 

Thanks for joining us Aloha.

 

When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to?

 

I could probably echo BIGREDIOWAN with the concern about how he'd handle foreign relations. But my view into his life and how he's handled his business interactions tell me that he's much more... I guess most people would say "reasonable-sounding" behind closed doors in meetings. When he's on stage and on TV, the entire reason he says some of the controversial things he's said is to get attention drawn to him. He has literally owned the media for the past year with how he makes them cover him.

 

First off, the whole "A man you can bait with a tweet" ordeal is such utter fear-mongering BS coming from the Dems. I trust DJT 10000000% more than Hillary War-monger Clinton with them. So that part of foreign relations, I am not worried about. I also think his policy of not playing police to the world is something I've been saying for a lot of years about the US, as playing police for decades has caused a lot of hatred toward us and has cost us immense amounts of money on military spending.

 

I encourage everyone to actually take a look and see the REAL policies he's proposing instead of taking CNN's word - or worse, the Washington Post...

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

 

Why didn't Trump showcase his "reasonable sounding" side during the debate? It was the perfect opportunity for him to do that.

 

The better questions is this: Why do people put so much weight on a debate instead of actually looking at the things that really matter? You know, like... What are they going to do to lower the national debt? To do away with corruption in government? To allow creation of REAL opportunity for citizens? To allow citizens their freedoms that are declared in the constitution? To fix our terrible education system? To stop the rampant illegal immigration to our country? To protect us from our enemies, which at this time happens to be radical Islamic terrorism?

 

People get so caught up in how things sound instead of what they ought to be focusing on. Watching the debate, a neutral observer would probably say that Hillary won because she was indeed very polished in what she was saying. But if someone is truly educated on the issues and what she is proposing for our country, they'd realize that all she is is a polished turd - a corrupt polished turd that says terrific things (which are extremely vague, BTW) but will likely do the opposite once elected when her Super PACs and big donors pay her off.

 

Clinton would do as well as or better at all of the important things you listed except for illegal immigration. Although with that topic, the word "better" is pretty subjective. Innocent people would be hurt for no reason other than their ethnicity or religion.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

 

 

 

 

 

Hey, new to the board, but I've read anonymously for a long time. Wanted to chime in on this one.

 

Two questions:

1. Who do you respect enough, that if they took a strong public stance against Trump you would listen and reconsider?

No one. I'm well researched and know exactly what I'm voting for.

2. Is there anything that he could say or do between now and election day to change your support of him?

Probably. What that something is? Who knows. But his stance on so many issues in my view are much needed for quite some time now in government. He's not a politician. He doesn't choose his words carefully. He comes with his baggage. The plain and simple fact is that his policies are exactly what this country needs in order to stop the downward spiral, or at the very least, slow it down.

One thing is for certain. There is a candidate for the Democratic party that I would not vote for if she were the only option available.

 

Thanks for joining us Aloha.

 

When you say "his policies" are what we need, what exactly are you referring to?

 

I could probably echo BIGREDIOWAN with the concern about how he'd handle foreign relations. But my view into his life and how he's handled his business interactions tell me that he's much more... I guess most people would say "reasonable-sounding" behind closed doors in meetings. When he's on stage and on TV, the entire reason he says some of the controversial things he's said is to get attention drawn to him. He has literally owned the media for the past year with how he makes them cover him.

 

First off, the whole "A man you can bait with a tweet" ordeal is such utter fear-mongering BS coming from the Dems. I trust DJT 10000000% more than Hillary War-monger Clinton with them. So that part of foreign relations, I am not worried about. I also think his policy of not playing police to the world is something I've been saying for a lot of years about the US, as playing police for decades has caused a lot of hatred toward us and has cost us immense amounts of money on military spending.

 

I encourage everyone to actually take a look and see the REAL policies he's proposing instead of taking CNN's word - or worse, the Washington Post...

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

 

Why didn't Trump showcase his "reasonable sounding" side during the debate? It was the perfect opportunity for him to do that.

 

The better questions is this: Why do people put so much weight on a debate instead of actually looking at the things that really matter? You know, like... What are they going to do to lower the national debt? To do away with corruption in government? To allow creation of REAL opportunity for citizens? To allow citizens their freedoms that are declared in the constitution? To fix our terrible education system? To stop the rampant illegal immigration to our country? To protect us from our enemies, which at this time happens to be radical Islamic terrorism?

 

People get so caught up in how things sound instead of what they ought to be focusing on. Watching the debate, a neutral observer would probably say that Hillary won because she was indeed very polished in what she was saying. But if someone is truly educated on the issues and what she is proposing for our country, they'd realize that all she is is a polished turd - a corrupt polished turd that says terrific things (which are extremely vague, BTW) but will likely do the opposite once elected when her Super PACs and big donors pay her off.

 

Clinton would do as well as or better at all of the important things you listed except for illegal immigration. Although with that topic, the word "better" is pretty subjective. Innocent people would be hurt for no reason other than their ethnicity or religion.

 

Speaking of education, as I didn't really touch on that in my post, I believe that Hilary supports common core correct? Trump doesn't support common core so that's another topic I agree with him on. Common core, to me, isn't doing the job it's supposed to do from what I've seen of it so far into my children's school career. I get the national standards thing, but the problem is there are plenty of studies out there that state these young children aren't learning anything. They're memorizing and that's all they're doing. If the schools don't meet those national standards then they lose access to federal funding based on what I've heard/read and the teachers are rated poorly. So the schools obviously push these standards and it doesn't allow the teachers to truly teach in the correct way. If you can get a teacher to admit this to you most of them will tell you they aren't fans of common core because it doesn't allow them to teach in a way that the children actually learn. So it may be doing more harm than good at this point.

 

I have twin 7 year old's now. One has some issues with reading and if he doesn't meet standards by the end of this year I'm told he'll automatically be held back in 2nd grade so he can meet the standards next year. That's completed B.S.! How the hell am I supposed to send one twin to 3rd grade and hold the other back in 2nd grade? Answer? I won't....... I'll pull both of them out of the school and we'll go to a different district before I allow the one twin that's having troubles with reading to go through the psychological pain of seeing his brother move on to 3rd grade while he stays in 2nd grade. It would crush him, which leads to us hammering homework EVERY. SINGLE. NIGHT! I've paid tutors, I spent all summer going over math, reading, spelling, and writing with them almost every day. So I'm doing plenty as a parent outside of school. When they were in Kindergarten it was an hour of homework every night. No, I'm not kidding........

 

Another option is for me to send them to private school to avoid the common core standards. I'll do that if needed, but it'll cost me probably between $15,000 to $20,000 a year for both kids to make it happen. Ouch...........

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/02/17/why-i-once-liked-common-core-but-changed-my-mind-one-principals-view/

[Moiraine]

 

 

The better questions is this: Why do people put so much weight on a debate instead of actually looking at the things that really matter? You know, like... What are they going to do to lower the national debt? To do away with corruption in government? To allow creation of REAL opportunity for citizens? To allow citizens their freedoms that are declared in the constitution? To fix our terrible education system? To stop the rampant illegal immigration to our country? To protect us from our enemies, which at this time happens to be radical Islamic terrorism?

 

People get so caught up in how things sound instead of what they ought to be focusing on. Watching the debate, a neutral observer would probably say that Hillary won because she was indeed very polished in what she was saying. But if someone is truly educated on the issues and what she is proposing for our country, they'd realize that all she is is a polished turd - a corrupt polished turd that says terrific things (which are extremely vague, BTW) but will likely do the opposite once elected when her Super PACs and big donors pay her off.

Clinton would do as well as or better at all of the important things you listed except for illegal immigration. Although with that topic, the word "better" is pretty subjective. Innocent people would be hurt for no reason other than their ethnicity or religion.

 

Speaking of education, as I didn't really touch on that in my post, I believe that Hilary supports common core correct? Trump doesn't support common core so that's another topic I agree with him on. Common core, to me, isn't doing the job it's supposed to do from what I've seen of it so far into my children's school career. I get the national standards thing, but the problem is there are plenty of studies out there that state these young children aren't learning anything. They're memorizing and that's all they're doing. If the schools don't meet those national standards then they lose access to federal funding based on what I've heard/read and the teachers are rated poorly. So the schools obviously push these standards and it doesn't allow the teachers to truly teach in the correct way. If you can get a teacher to admit this to you most of them will tell you they aren't fans of common core because it doesn't allow them to teach in a way that the children actually learn. So it may be doing more harm than good at this point.

 

I have twin 7 year old's now. One has some issues with reading and if he doesn't meet standards by the end of this year I'm told he'll automatically be held back in 2nd grade so he can meet the standards next year. That's completed B.S.! How the hell am I supposed to send one twin to 3rd grade and hold the other back in 2nd grade? Answer? I won't....... I'll pull both of them out of the school and we'll go to a different district before I allow the one twin that's having troubles with reading to go through the psychological pain of seeing his brother move on to 3rd grade while he stays in 2nd grade. It would crush him, which leads to us hammering homework EVERY. SINGLE. NIGHT! I've paid tutors, I spent all summer going over math, reading, spelling, and writing with them almost every day. So I'm doing plenty as a parent outside of school. When they were in Kindergarten it was an hour of homework every night. No, I'm not kidding........

 

Another option is for me to send them to private school to avoid the common core standards. I'll do that if needed, but it'll cost me probably between $15,000 to $20,000 a year for both kids to make it happen. Ouch...........

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/02/17/why-i-once-liked-common-core-but-changed-my-mind-one-principals-view/

 

 

I'm against Common Core. I want things to go back to what they were pre-2000, because they've definitely gone downhill since then.

 

But Trump wants to eliminate the entire Department of Education. When questioned on it he changed his mind to say he "may" do it. I'm all for states having more say and the federal government having less, but getting rid of it is a bad idea.

 

Unfortunately that's where we are now. Someone who supports a bad thing vs. someone who is crazy.

[HuskermanMike]

I am not voting Trump because he is strictly pro-life, I am voting for him for other reasons as well. It seems America needs a leader who will fight for America and be a pro-American. We do not need a globalist as the next president of the US, because the UN is slowly starting to try and take freedom away.

 

Anyway, it is a tough election and I was never in favor of Trump from the beginning. He seems to be semi-intelligent, but needs to learn to not contradict himself. I really like how he doesn't like the media, they have been unkind to him about his rally numbers and some of them ask generalizations to him and not questions. He has a good VP pick in my opinion and I actually think Pence will have a lot of work to do, because Trump will be busy with lots of things. In fact, Pence will be in charge of foreign policy I believe and will also do all the little things the vp does like break ties in the senate, give speeches and take over for the president when he is not able to perform his duty.

 

Basically, Hillary will make a bad president and she would make future woman presidents look bad in the future. Trump is going to make us feel good to be American again, and he is going to attract to the hard working Americans that don't have a voice to vote for him. He will not back down and let other countries boss us around, we are in charge when he is president and that is something he can accomplish with his big American ego, which is what we need in our president.

 

Only worry I have with him is the nukes he has at his disposal, but I hope he puts that in Pence's hands because Pence would know how to handle that situation better.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

The better questions is this: Why do people put so much weight on a debate instead of actually looking at the things that really matter? You know, like... What are they going to do to lower the national debt? To do away with corruption in government? To allow creation of REAL opportunity for citizens? To allow citizens their freedoms that are declared in the constitution? To fix our terrible education system? To stop the rampant illegal immigration to our country? To protect us from our enemies, which at this time happens to be radical Islamic terrorism?

 

People get so caught up in how things sound instead of what they ought to be focusing on. Watching the debate, a neutral observer would probably say that Hillary won because she was indeed very polished in what she was saying. But if someone is truly educated on the issues and what she is proposing for our country, they'd realize that all she is is a polished turd - a corrupt polished turd that says terrific things (which are extremely vague, BTW) but will likely do the opposite once elected when her Super PACs and big donors pay her off.

Clinton would do as well as or better at all of the important things you listed except for illegal immigration. Although with that topic, the word "better" is pretty subjective. Innocent people would be hurt for no reason other than their ethnicity or religion.

 

Speaking of education, as I didn't really touch on that in my post, I believe that Hilary supports common core correct? Trump doesn't support common core so that's another topic I agree with him on. Common core, to me, isn't doing the job it's supposed to do from what I've seen of it so far into my children's school career. I get the national standards thing, but the problem is there are plenty of studies out there that state these young children aren't learning anything. They're memorizing and that's all they're doing. If the schools don't meet those national standards then they lose access to federal funding based on what I've heard/read and the teachers are rated poorly. So the schools obviously push these standards and it doesn't allow the teachers to truly teach in the correct way. If you can get a teacher to admit this to you most of them will tell you they aren't fans of common core because it doesn't allow them to teach in a way that the children actually learn. So it may be doing more harm than good at this point.

 

I have twin 7 year old's now. One has some issues with reading and if he doesn't meet standards by the end of this year I'm told he'll automatically be held back in 2nd grade so he can meet the standards next year. That's completed B.S.! How the hell am I supposed to send one twin to 3rd grade and hold the other back in 2nd grade? Answer? I won't....... I'll pull both of them out of the school and we'll go to a different district before I allow the one twin that's having troubles with reading to go through the psychological pain of seeing his brother move on to 3rd grade while he stays in 2nd grade. It would crush him, which leads to us hammering homework EVERY. SINGLE. NIGHT! I've paid tutors, I spent all summer going over math, reading, spelling, and writing with them almost every day. So I'm doing plenty as a parent outside of school. When they were in Kindergarten it was an hour of homework every night. No, I'm not kidding........

 

Another option is for me to send them to private school to avoid the common core standards. I'll do that if needed, but it'll cost me probably between $15,000 to $20,000 a year for both kids to make it happen. Ouch...........

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/02/17/why-i-once-liked-common-core-but-changed-my-mind-one-principals-view/

 

 

I'm against Common Core. I want things to go back to what they were pre-2000, because they've definitely gone downhill since then.

 

But Trump wants to eliminate the entire Department of Education. When questioned on it he changed his mind to say he "may" do it. I'm all for states having more say and the federal government having less, but getting rid of it is a bad idea.

 

Unfortunately that's where we are now. Someone who supports a bad thing vs. someone who is crazy is obscuring the bejeezus out of his real positions.

 

 

I feel like this is more likely. He is just completely full of crap to the point that we have no idea what kind of agenda he'd actually pursue. Cruz, during the primary, tried to call attention to an off the record interview he granted the NYTimes where he basically insinuated he was lying about the wall and people who believed him were idiots. It never really got off the ground.

 

The fact of the matter is, the dude can't hold a consistent political position to save his life. Remember when he espoused three different views on abortion in the SAME DAY?

 

One thing I appreciate about Clinton is that at least she's consistent in her positions. You can rip them up and down 8 ways from Sunday, but you actually know what they are. Her opponent is such a BSer that I strongly feel we have no idea what his real plans are. This story suggest he'd leave almost everything up to Pence, if you sub him in for Kasich. It is feasible; I don't view him as having any strong predilection to actually implement any serious policy.

 

Pence in charge of our country makes me sick to my stomach. I've got no desire for his particular brand of far-right insanity on a national level.

 

And, FWIW, I would lose my mind if the Dept of Ed went away. I need them to help figure out how to payoff my loans.