An Anonymous Poll

[Smyth]

She's not Trump.

I bow to your logic.

Nope. I don't support abortion at all.

By opposing Trump, you support Hillary, you support abortion, abortion on demand, abortion paid for by taxpayers. Abortion assisted by unwilling participants. (The Supreme Court just refused to hear a case of a Christian pharmacist being forced by the government to dispense abortion-causing drugs. In response Justice Alito tried to sound the alarm, "If this is a sign of how religious liberty claims will be treated in the years ahead, those who value religious freedom have cause for great concern" but your ears are deaf. And, Hillary hasn't even appointed the Fifth Activist yet, the fatal blow to the Constitution.)

Nope, not at all.
Nope, not at all.

Prove it, vote against Hillary, i.e. vote for Trump. As long as you refuse to vote against Hillary, in effect you support punishing Christians who don't take part in anti-Christian activities. This is the beginning and end of what Hillary stands for. But, Trump has never shown the least bit inclination or interest in punishing Christians for being Christian.

I do not support blanket amnesty programs or the use of executive orders to force a political figure's will on the populace (something that Trump is likely to do quite a bit if elected).

On this planet you think Hillary is less likely to ignore immigration law than Trump? The same Trump that has been less immigrant-friendly than any other candidate? (FYI, I think all immigration should be legal, but that the government shouldn't give welfare to immigrants nor force people to do business with immigrants.)

Hardly. Neither Ms. Clinton or Mr. Trump have an ideal record on religious liberty, but I believe Trump is much worse. He has specifically asserted that he wants to restriction immigration based on the religion of the applicant.

Your case against Trump on religious liberty is his rhetoric to ban Muslim immigrants? He'll never be able to make that happen, so what's the problem? A ban on Muslim immigrants has no impact on the religious freedom of American citizens, including Muslim Americans. A ban on Muslim immigrants doesn't compel a single Muslim on the planet to violate his faith. A ban on Muslim immigration that will never happen is nothing compared to Hillary's desire and ability to make living by Christian faith illegal.

I don't like higher taxes, but if our government can use money effectively and not wastefully, I don't mind paying taxes. I prefer a graduated tax up to around $50,000/year for a family, then a flat tax - without all of the deductions that make our tax code insane and help the rich avoid paying any taxes.

Hillary wants to raise taxes on everyone (that really is her position), at every income level, aside from expanding a few deductions and credits (e.g. 2500 credit for college). Her "tax plan" is mainly promises of income growth for the poor (e.g. raising minimum wage) and middle-class. But, Trumps tax plan is more along your line.

Nope. I don't want ANY activists on the Supreme Court - left or right wing. I want the Court to be non-political.

It takes five votes to control what has become the highest power in the land, the Supreme Court. Hillary already owns 4 votes with Activists and has an empty seat to fill. This is an unprecedented opportunity in American history to nullify the Constitution. Trump has suggested some very good judges for the empty seat.

(1) I am not a #NeverTrump "follower." I decided against Trump before I ever heard of the #NeverTrump movement.

You might have decided against Trump before Trump won the primary. But, I find it hard to believe that the influence of anything but #NeverTrump rhetoric is going to stop you from voting for Trump in the election, assuming you're a Republican.

This kind of talk where good citizens are labelled "enemies of America" is exactly the kind of rhetoric that the followers of Mr. Trump perpetuate.

I think the Supreme Court issue alone justifies labeling Hillary supporters as enemies of America, which effectively includes those Republicans who won't vote for Trump. In a way, Republicans who won't vote for Trump are worse than Democrats. The Republican should know better and it's the Republican base that Hillary is the greatest danger to.

 

[Rolfe]

#NeverTrump followers arrived at their position by endlessly listening to inflammatory rhetoric from neoconservative pundits (neoconservatives: liberals who pretend to be conservative). It would take countless hours of deprogramming to convince them of reason.

Uh...no. I cannot speak on behalf of others, but as for me, I came to the conclusion that Trump is no better than Clinton based on both individuals' words and actions. Trump may be different in some ways, but he is no better.

The more often that you call people Enemies of America, the more clownish you appear. I should not be surprised, though. You are just following your master.

 

[Smyth]

That's a huge assumption.

I don't watch talking head shows and I avoid pundits.

I made no assumptions. I said "#NeverTrump followers...", not "you". And it's a truism that "followers" follow.

I didn't see reasons, just accusations. However, you are laboring under the illusion that I like and approve of Ms. Clinton. I do not. It takes a candidate as bad as Trump to make me consider Clinton at all.

If you've done all this independent research, you should be able to present a good case.
E.g.
1) Trump is better on almost every issue than Hillary.
2) There are four left-wing activist judges judges on the Supreme Court and an open seat. Hillary wants a Fifth Activist, Trump has provided a list of good judges.

Your turn, why would any Christian not try to stop Hillary, even if it means voting for Trump? You wave your hand saying you " have spent a bit of time reviewing Trumps website, his tweets, and several of his speeches." So, what is it that makes Trump an unacceptable option to stop Hillary? Rude tweets? Blowhard speeches?

 

[Baptist Believer]

By opposing Trump, you support Hillary, you support abortion, abortion on demand, abortion paid for by taxpayers. Abortion assisted by unwilling participants. (The Supreme Court just refused to hear a case of a Christian pharmacist being forced by the government to dispense abortion-causing drugs. In response Justice Alito tried to sound the alarm, "If this is a sign of how religious liberty claims will be treated in the years ahead, those who value religious freedom have cause for great concern" but your ears are deaf. And, Hillary hasn't even appointed the Fifth Activist yet, the fatal blow to the Constitution.)

No I don't. Ms. Clinton may get my vote, but she will not have my support. I will continue to oppose the agenda you have outlined.

In short, I don't answer to you. I answer to Jesus at the end of the age. Jesus knows why I have come to my position and He knows that it is not because of any of your accusations.

Prove it, vote against Hillary, i.e. vote for Trump.

I don't have to prove anything to you. If I turned around - using your logic - and claimed that you heartily approve of adultery because you intend to vote for Trump, you would rightly resist that characterization.

As long as you refuse to vote against Hillary, in effect you support punishing Christians who don't take part in anti-Christian activities. This is the beginning and end of what Hillary stands for. But, Trump has never shown the least bit inclination or interest in punishing Christians for being Christian.

Nope. You've restricted your understanding of the government to the Executive Branch. We have Congress and the Courts. The Executive Branch is quite powerful, but it is not the only thing.

On this planet you think Hillary is less likely to ignore immigration law than Trump?

That was not my contention. Nothing about ignoring the law has come up in this conversation until now. I am concerned that Trump will use Executive Orders to enact unconstitutional policies that will drive us immediately into a constitutional crisis. I expect Trump to get impeached and removed from rather quickly if he is elected, but not before he does enormous damage to our country.

Your case against Trump on religious liberty is his rhetoric to ban Muslim immigrants? He'll never be able to make that happen, so what's the problem?

Suggesting the very thought of it tells me something horrible about him and his views of the Constitution. Moreover, you seem more convinced that Trump is making false promises than I do... and you want me to vote for him?

A ban on Muslim immigrants has no impact on the religious freedom of American citizens, including Muslim Americans.

That's a weak view of religious liberty. Baptists have always asserting that religious liberty is from God, not humankind. Therefore, it doesn't matter where a person's earthly citizenship is based, that person deserves religious liberty.

A ban on Muslim immigrants doesn't compel a single Muslim on the planet to violate his faith.

By the same token, ISIS beheading Christians doesn't compel a single Christian on the planet to violate his faith. But that's not the point.

A ban on Muslim immigration that will never happen is nothing compared to Hillary's desire and ability to make living by Christian faith illegal.

So your man Trump is ineffectual, dishonest or both? You have a lower opinion of him than I do.

Hillary wants to raise taxes on everyone (that really is her position), at every income level, aside from expanding a few deductions and credits (e.g. 2500 credit for college). Her "tax plan" is mainly promises of income growth for the poor (e.g. raising minimum wage) and middle-class. But, Trumps tax plan is more along your line.

As I pointed out before, this is not about taxes, it is about the Constitution, religious liberty and the American ideal.

It takes five votes to control what has become the highest power in the land, the Supreme Court. Hillary already owns 4 votes with Activists and has an empty seat to fill. This is an unprecedented opportunity in American history to nullify the Constitution. Trump has suggested some very good judges for the empty seat.

If I vote for Trump, I am voting to undermine the Bill of Rights. Why should I expect him to care about the rest of the Constitution? Moreover, the list Trump has floated has a political purpose. It is non-binding and I think it is irrelevant.

You might have decided against Trump before Trump won the primary. But, I find it hard to believe that the influence of anything but #NeverTrump rhetoric is going to stop you from voting for Trump in the election, assuming you're a Republican.

You really make a lot of assumptions. I am a registered Republican, but I don't hold any particular loyalty to the Republican Party if they give me bad candidates. For the record, I have voted for the Republican candidate in every election since Reagan (I turned 18 when Reagan ran for President), so I have a long record. Trump is NOT like any other Republican Presidential candidate.

I. Will. Not. Vote. For. Trump.

I think the Supreme Court issue alone justifies labeling Hillary supporters as enemies of America, which effectively includes those Republicans who won't vote for Trump. In a way, Republicans who won't vote for Trump are worse than Democrats. The Republican should know better and it's the Republican base that Hillary is the greatest danger to.

So what do you propose to do with me since I am an enemy - and worse - in Trump's America? Persecute me? Lock me up? Have me killed? What's the Trump plan?

 

[Baptist Believer]

If you've done all this independent research, you should be able to present a good case.
E.g.
1) Trump is better on almost every issue than Hillary.

I don't place the weight on the issues in the same way you do.

2) There are four left-wing activist judges judges on the Supreme Court and an open seat. Hillary wants a Fifth Activist, Trump has provided a list of good judges.

You are worried about who will interpret the Constitution. I am worried about Trump destroying the Constitution.

Your turn, why would any Christian not try to stop Hillary, even if it means voting for Trump?

Already told you. First Amendment reasons.

You wave your hand saying you " have spent a bit of time reviewing Trumps website, his tweets, and several of his speeches." So, what is it that makes Trump an unacceptable option to stop Hillary? Rude tweets? Blowhard speeches?

His appalling view of the First Amendment. His lack of competence and knowledge of contemporary world issues. His ridiculous ego and his notoriously thin skin. His attitude toward women that is expressed in his life and in his tweets. His inability to lead people who are not on his payroll without resorting to demagoguery. His promotion of a border wall when he should know that it is completely fiscally unfeasible and also physically impossible to do in a proper way in Texas without effectively ceded quite a bit of property to Mexico. He allegedly told a newspaper that he wasn't really going to do it (which would make sense), but if that is true, then it says quite a bit about his honesty.

Beyond those issues, people like you and a couple of others on this site demonstrate by your words and actions that Trump supporters are an incredibly intolerant crowd. Your line about persons like me being "enemies of America" only reinforces my opinion that Trump will attempt to be a totalitarian leader.

 

[Rolfe]

Beyond those issues, people like you and a couple of others on this site demonstrate by your words and actions that Trump supporters are an incredibly intolerant crowd. Your line about persons like me being "enemies of America" only reinforces my opinion that Trump will attempt to be a totalitarian leader.

Yep.

 

[777]

I'm sad to say it, but I think the GOP is on its way out.

If they dump Trump, they will lose the populist vote, but they may keep most of the other people. The populists will probably try to start a new party.

If they nominate Trump, they will lose a large number of non-populist voters who will not want to be associated with the GOP again. I will be one of those folks. The refugees from the GOP will probably try to start our own party.

If they nominate Trump and he wins... then declares those who oppose his policies to be "enemies of America" like some of supporters then we'll either have impeachment/war or won't have political parties anymore.

If they nominate Trump and he loses, then there will be an enormous amount of bitterness that will likely rip apart the party and make room for a new party.

Your reasoning here looks sound on the surface and you are presenting four pretty well thought-out scenarios:

1.dump Trump, he probably will go third party and Hillary will win. This would be a weird replay of 1992, 1996. If he doesn't go third party, she still wins and I will help her do so.

2. Trump won by the rules, maybe you should stick around and form some sort of super-delegate system like the Democrats have in place in their so-called "democratic" party. or go there for it.

3. Obama's biggest enemy has always been members of the Republican Party, this sounds like the same. Of course, Trump's detractors will call for impeachment, just like the anti-Bush, anti-Obama crowd but it would be toothless.

4. Most interesting one - it'll probably be like 1964 all over again, but, frankly the GOPe has to stop putting up dogs like Dole, the Bushes and Romney. All they have done in recent history is to lose.

What I don't like about #neverTrump is that they act like this is the first election ever when they had to choose between evil, or whatever they say. Just since 2000, I had to choose between some spoiled stupid frat boy and some other spoiled stupid frat boy, then between the frat boy who wasn't that good of a president and just got worse with time and some questionable "war hero", the "Winter Soldier" liar.

Them, in 2008, some crazy war hero that didn't even want to win against some media fabrication with a dubious background then four years later, the media fabrication who wan't that good of a president against a whiny Mormon that once tied a dog to his roof.

Now it's the Butcher of Benghazi against a loud unstable rich boy. I was hoping she was the nominee eight years ago when I knew the Democrat would win and here she is again.

 

[Smyth]

No I don't. Ms. Clinton may get my vote, but she will not have my support.

Because a vote is not support?

I answer to Jesus at the end of the age.

Yes you will. What if Jesus asks why did you voted for the candidate that made following the Christian faith illegal?

I don't have to prove anything to you. If I turned around - using your logic - and claimed that you heartily approve of adultery because you intend to vote for Trump, you would rightly resist that characterization.

I'm not voting for a Christian leader, but for the lessor of two evils. Politically, Hillary is more a supporter of adultery than Trump, and I don't mean her supporting her adulterous husband. I mean her war on marriage, Christian values, and religious freedom.

Nope. You've restricted your understanding of the government to the Executive Branch.

No matter how many times I have pointed out that Hillary will be able to appoint the Fifth Activist to the Supreme Court, you think my understanding of government is limited to the Executive Branch?

Nothing about ignoring the law has come up in this conversation until now. I am concerned that Trump will use Executive Orders to enact unconstitutional policies that will drive us immediately into a constitutional crisis. I expect Trump to get impeached and removed from rather quickly if he is elected, but not before he does enormous damage to our country.

And, you tell me you're not a #NeverTrump follower? Where else would you get paranoia about Trump causing a constitutional crises? You've been listening to fear-mongering neoconservative pundits. Anyway, whatever Trump might do, it won't be nullifying the Constitution, as Hillary would do by appointing the Fifth Activist to the Supreme Court.

By the same token, ISIS beheading Christians doesn't compel a single Christian on the planet to violate his faith. But that's not the point.

How does a Muslim not immigrating to America violate the faith of a Muslim? Do you think a case can be made that forcing a Christian to convert to Islam or die is a violation of the Christian's faith?

As I pointed out before, this is not about taxes, it is about the Constitution, religious liberty and the American ideal.

That's the most insane defense of Hillary I've seen yet.

For the record, I have voted for the Republican candidate in every election since Reagan (I turned 18 when Reagan ran for President), so I have a long record. Trump is NOT like any other Republican Presidential candidate.

Trump will be the first Republican for president I vote for, because Hillary has unprecedented potential opportunity to destroy the Constitution. And, Trump isn't controlled by the Republican leadership.

I. Will. Not. Vote. For. Trump.

So what do you propose to do with me since I am an enemy - and worse - in Trump's America? Persecute me? Lock me up? Have me killed? What's the Trump plan?

I expect you to be reminded of the evil you contributed to, when Hillary is president.

 

[Smyth]

I am worried about Trump destroying the Constitution.

THERE ARE FOUR JUDGES SITTING ON THE SUPREME COURT THAT DO NOT FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION. THEY ARE ARE LEFTIST ACTIVISTS. PRESIDENT HILLARY WILL BE IN A POSITION TO APPOINT A FIFTH LEFTIST ACTIVIST AND THE CONSTITUTION WILL THEN BE FULLY NULLIFIED.

I'm hoping CAPS helps you see the simple truth. Trump is in no position to destroy the Constitution. You couldn't be more backwards if you tried.

 

[Rolfe]

Trump is in no position to destroy the Constitution. You couldn't be more backwards if you tried.

If you think that, you could not be more gullible.

 

[Smyth]

What I don't like about #neverTrump is that they act like this is the first election ever when they had to choose between evil, or whatever they say. Just since 2000, I had to choose between some spoiled stupid frat boy and some other spoiled stupid frat boy, then between the frat boy who wasn't that good of a president and just got worse with time and some questionable "war hero", the "Winter Soldier" liar.

Them, in 2008, some crazy war hero that didn't even want to win against some media fabrication with a dubious background then four years later, the media fabrication who wan't that good of a president against a whiny Mormon that once tied a dog to his roof.

Now it's the Butcher of Benghazi against a loud unstable rich boy. I was hoping she was the nominee eight years ago when I knew the Democrat would win and here she is again.

(You know they're not the brightest bulbs in the box). Republicans haven't had a candidate they liked since Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. Republican voters have a history of holding their nose and voting. And, now some Republicans are so fed up with the betrayal and hypocrisy of the Republican leadership that they've voted for Trump as their presidential candidate (a man who depended on acting loud and unstable to get the media coverage needed to win the primaries).

Democrats like Obama. Democrats liked Bill Clinton. Hillary would be the first Democrat president in modern times that Democrats didn't generally like -- and that might change during her administration.

 

[777]

Yep, I have my own reasons to be skeptical of the #neverTrump crowd because their posts are music to Hillary's ears. This is exactly what she wants and has to have, a bitterly divided GOP since now she's going to have to run against Trump, which she never wanted to do at all.

She'll have to change the MSM/DNC playbook, or just throw it out altogether, because it won't work with Trump. Good, make them come up with something new, because you know what they would've said about JEB (brothers of a feather), Cruz (not NBC, extremist), Kasich (he has baggage the DNC is sitting on), Rubio (amnesty shill, inexperienced) and so on.

#neverTrumps will say really crazy things like Trump has had free advertising, when it was all negative publicity aimed to take him out. Some "free advertising", then they talk on and on about things like Trump University, some class-action lawsuit that had a whole whoppin' seven plaintiffs at its peak and just ignore the Clinton Foundations real money-laundering, foreign donations and all. And the email scandal ("old news"), and the FBI scandal, and so on.

One of them here actually thinks Trump is establishment, more nonsense and I think this was a REAL #neverTrump, a former Cruz supporter that thinks it's Ted or dead. Yet the same person turned around and accused Trump of running a cult.

You have to wonder if they WANT to be talked into voting for Trump, with the "should I vote against my conscience" posts - no, you shouldn't unless you happen to be a national delegate, then you vote FOR the person who won your precinct but why ask strangers this question?

Doesn't help that there's this guy I work with (a real Trump supporter, used to be with me on Walker) is posting right now in a Bernie Sanders board as a Bernie Sanders supporter trying a get the leftists there to sit out the election or vote for Trump in protest. Thing is there, it looks like it's working.

 

[Smyth]

Yep, I have my own reasons to be skeptical of the #neverTrump crowd because their posts are music to Hillary's ears.

The #NeverTrump movement is about electing Hillary. The Republican leadership would have been happy if Hillary had run as a Republican.

Doesn't help that there's this guy I work with (a real Trump supporter, used to be with me on Walker) is posting right now in a Bernie Sanders board as a Bernie Sanders supporter trying a get the leftists there to sit out the election or vote for Trump in protest. Thing is there, it looks like it's working.

The difference between #NeverTrump an Sanders-supporters-against-Hillary is that #NeverTrump is supported be Republican Party leadership and its engineers of rhetoric, like George Will and the Weekly Standard. But, Hillary has the full backing of the party leadership. And, "#NeverTrump" is a lot more catchy than "Sanders-supporters-against-Hillary", or whatever.

Trump will get the votes of some people who wouldn't otherwise vote Republican. And, those people are Trumps chance, given the Republicans who wont vote for Trump. #NeverTrump is a minority, dimwits led around by neoconservive pundits, but elections is a game of margins.

 

[InTheLight]

The #NeverTrump movement is about electing Hillary. The Republican leadership would have been happy if Hillary had run as a Republican.

You keep repeating and repeating this and it's not true. The #Never Trump's want a conservative candidate. Suggesting they want Hillary their candidate is ludicrous.

#NeverTrump is a minority, dimwits led around by neoconservive pundits.

Ahhh... And Trump voters are PhD's.



Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo

 

[Smyth]

You keep repeating and repeating this and it's not true. The #Never Trump's want a conservative candidate. Suggesting they want Hillary their candidate is ludicrous.

#NeverTrump followers do not want a conservative candidate. Trump is more conservative, sometimes much more, on nearly every issue than Hillary. But, they'd prefer Hillary to win (that's what it means when you refuse to vote for Trump).

#NeverTrump followers would have voted for any neoconservative candidate the Republican party offered. A neoconservative is a liberal than claims to be conservative. Jeb "full-amnesty", of course. Rubio "another Trillion in military spending", of course. Any candidate willing to surrender in the culture war, of course, just like the previous modern Republican candidates.

What do you think a conservative is? Someone who rants about Democrat scandals? Fox News that drones on about Hillary's email scandal? That's called partisanship. A #NeverTrump follower has no idea of what conservative means. But, it's something do with tax cuts for the rich, right? Maybe trade policy that favors big corporations?

For starters, it means protecting the Constitution by voting for Trump to keep Hillary out office. It means voting for the candidate that doesn't see big government has a path to utopia. It means voting against a candidate that brazenly opposes religious freedom.

Ahhh... And Trump voters are PhD's.

Yet, my most repeated and emphasized reason for voting for Trump has been completely ignored by the #NeverTrump followers. It tells me that their puppeteers haven't given them talking points about the direction of Supreme Court. It's amusing when a #NeverTrump person worries that Trump will cause a "Constitutional Crises" a phrase that would never come naturally from one of them, a phrase that they can even begin to support, because they're just parroting fear-mongering rhetoric from those puling their strings.

I'll take a sarcastic PhD comment over having a wooden head.

 

[InTheLight]

#NeverTrump followers...they'd prefer Hillary to win (that's what it means when you refuse to vote for Trump).

Yep, just keep on repeating that. Over and over and over.

#NeverTrump followers would have voted for any neoconservative candidate the Republican party offered. A neoconservative is a liberal than claims to be conservative.

A liberal that claims to be conservative. That's Trump, all right.

Rubio "another Trillion in military spending", of course.

“I’m gonna build a military that’s gonna be much stronger than it is right now,” Trump said on Meet the Press. “It’s gonna be so strong, nobody’s gonna mess with us.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump stated he would increase military spending on Wednesday’s “Hannity” on the Fox News Channel.

GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump said Monday he agrees to the "Penny Plan" for across-the-board spending cuts except for the military.

"I like the concept of the Penny Plan," Trump said on Fox News Channel's "Hannity." "Not for the military, because the military we have to build up."

Any candidate willing to surrender in the culture war, of course, just like the previous modern Republican candidates.

Donald Trump: Let transgender people use the bathroom they want

GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Thursday came out against a North Carolina law barring people from using the public restrooms of the opposite sex.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/21/donald-trump-let-transgender-people-use-bathroom-t/

“Look, Planned Parenthood has done very good work for many, many — for millions of women,” Trump said in a news conference Tuesday night.

 

[Smyth]

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump stated he would increase military spending on Wednesday’s “Hannity” on the Fox News Channel.

I don't find anything in writing to back that up, let alone detail it.He actually said he'd cut spending across the board except on the military. Even taking him at his off-the-cuff word, that's nothing like the big spending increases Republican candidates promoted.

Unlike Trump, straightening the military (i.e. spending more) is actually in Hillary's position statements. The Republican leadership his happy with Hillary's military position and her support for military aggression (She won neoconservative love for her push for the Iraq war, but neoconservatives hate Trump's position on the war.)

Donald Trump: Let transgender people use the bathroom they want

GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Thursday came out against a North Carolina law barring people from using the public restrooms of the opposite sex.

Trump said just leave things alone. And, that had been working for many years. What Trump ignores, or is ignorant of because the media ignores it, is that a big city in NC passed a law telling businesses how to use their restrooms, and the NC law was designed overturn that.

Trump simply doesn't want this battle, which is strategically reasonable. Hillary, on the other hand has made promoting the LGBT agenda of oppression a central issue in her campaign. Hillary's supreme court will dictate bathroom use to the whole nation. Trump's Supreme court won't.

 

[Rolfe]

I wonder, of the four who voted for Clinton in the poll, how many were possibly Protest Votes.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Because a vote is not support?

Not in this case. My vote is not an expression of support for her, but a rejection of Trump.

Yes you will. What if Jesus asks why did you voted for the candidate that made following the Christian faith illegal?

He won't have to ask, He knows exactly what I am doing. We talk several times a day.

In my estimation, Mr. Trump is most likely to destroy religious liberty by trying to "help" Christians, than Ms. Clinton. Mr. Trump is not beholden to anyone, while Ms. Clinton is beholden to the Democratic Party. There are a very large number of Democrats who embrace religious liberty who will not stand for it being minimized. Moreover, I don't have any evidence of Ms. Clinton undermining religious liberty. All of the examples of issues with religious liberty cited are things that Obama has supported that are rooted in aspects of Obamacare and old Civil Rights legislation that required businesses open to the public to accommodate non-whites. The law is being tested now in regard to homosexual clients and we don't know exactly how that is going to turn out.

But Ms. Clinton is not the same person as President Obama, despite what Trump supporters seem to want everyone to believe.

And, you tell me you're not a #NeverTrump follower? Where else would you get paranoia about Trump causing a constitutional crises?

It's not paranoia when they are really out to get you. I get my opinions from:
(1) Listening to Trump.
(2) Knowing a little something about history and human nature, as well as the characteristics of a "strong man" political figure. I have a historical understanding of what happens when a person like that gets elected.
(3) Being a lay Constitutional scholar - especially regarding religious liberty. I've formally studied it at a graduate level as well as carefully followed these issues for 30 years. And that's not reading fear-mongering websites, but actually reading Supreme Court decisions and scholarly legal analysis and coming to my own conclusions.
(4) The actions and attitudes of many Trump supporters are thuggish. He has also encouraged such behavior in his rallies, even offering to provide legal assistance. Today you attack with words, but if he gets elected, what is going to happen to the people whom you have branded "enemies of America"?

You've been listening to fear-mongering neoconservative pundits.[/quote[
Stop repeating the lie.

How does a Muslim not immigrating to America violate the faith of a Muslim?

Because he is being rejected simply on the basis of his faith. Moreover, it is less about the Muslim than about US rejected religious liberty. If we start doing that, we have established a precedent that a person's religious faith alone can be used as a basis to make legal decisions. Next it might be surveillance of all Muslims (as has already been proposed in the Republican primary) and then sanctions. Next thing you know, the Westboro Baptist nuts might do something violent and then we'll have the public clamoring to control the more fundamentalist Baptists. They're all Baptists, right? They must be in league together.

Do you think a case can be made that forcing a Christian to convert to Islam or die is a violation of the Christian's faith?

It is an obvious violation of a Christian's right before God for religious liberty. However, that does not actually REQUIRE a Christian to violate his/her faith - that can't be done. Of course, they can kill the body, but that has happened for 2,000 years. Christians have been slain, just like their Master.

That's the most insane defense of Hillary I've seen yet

You still think its about Ms. Clinton. Bashing Clinton is not going to change my mind since my concerns are not about Ms. Clinton. I can barely stomach the idea of voting for her, but I CANNOT vote for Mr. Trump because I am a faithful Christian and a knowledgeable American. I would be violating my own conscience. To vote for Mr. Trump would be a repudiation of everything I have ever stood for and the entire course of my life. It would be moral and spiritual suicide for me.

Trump will be the first Republican for president I vote for, because Hillary has unprecedented potential opportunity to destroy the Constitution. And, Trump isn't controlled by the Republican leadership.

So are you just a kid, or have you be voting in Democrats all these years?

If you are just a kid, then I suggest you have some life experience to gain and you need to be quite careful about jumping on a bandwagon. If you have been voting for Democrats all these years, then you have helped create this problem for us, and you have no standing to criticize those of us who have tried to actually promote a sane conservative agenda in our nation.

I expect you to be reminded of the evil you contributed to, when Hillary is president.

If Trump is elected, I'm not sure I will have the opportunity to speak at all, since I am - according to you - an enemy of America.

You keep avoiding my question. What should be done to the "enemies of America" when the glorious Trump takes his rightful position as President? Persecution? Prosecution? Imprisonment? Execution?

 

[Smyth]

In my estimation, Mr. Trump is most likely to destroy religious liberty by trying to "help" Christians, than Ms. Clinton. Mr. Trump is not beholden to anyone, while Ms. Clinton is beholden to the Democratic Party.

I've told you exactly how Hillary is a certain threat to America. Your argument about Trump is that Trump doesn't feel beholden to anyone?

There are a very large number of Democrats who embrace religious liberty who will not stand for it being minimized. Moreover, I don't have any evidence of Ms. Clinton undermining religious liberty.

Then explain how the first four Activists made to the Supreme Court, if there is a very large number of Democrats who embrace religious liberty. Explain why Obama nominated a Fifth Activist (which Republicans have rightly refused to move along, keeping a seat empty on the Court).

Hillary's whole Presidential campaign amounts to a declared war on religious liberty. But, I'm sure you don't see evidence of how forcing a Christian pharmacist to provide abortion-inducing drugs undermines religious liberty.

I get my opinions from:

If you're not a marionette of neoconsevatives, respond to the Supreme Court issue.[/QUOTE]