Evidence for God from Science

I'm convinced now, that Mrs. Clinton will be the next president of the United States.

After the Benghazi fiasco, after the email fiasco, she is still the leading candidate in the Dem. party.

Who from the republican side, has a better chance to become president?

After the first 4 years of Obama, I didn't think he could possibly be re-elected. He won easily.

Get used to saying, "And here's the First Lady, Bill Clinton."

Well, if enough people of common sense and concern will get off their kiesters and vote, then THAT won't happen. I mean, EVERY major Republican candidate is FAR superior to the lying, scandal-plagued Clintons! Those two will lie, cheat and do anything for power or money.

But if a combination of just two things are in place, President Hilary may well happen: 1) Amongst those who DO vote, either their personal beliefs have become so skewed by the false beliefs behind the unworkable policies of liberalism/progressivism (or they're either just young or dumb and naive); 2) Not enough people with common sense values will vote.

Because there is a vast void between ANY of the Republican candidates and Hilary! God may simply give America what she TRULY deserves (and appears to want). People of good values, those who are fed up, who have seen our national debt almost DOUBLE (to TWENTY TRILLION DOLLARS!!!) under Obama, who have seen the Democrats not present one balanced budget proposal, only continuously using the threat (and thus the blame) for a government shutdown over Republicans if they refuse to keep raising the debt ceiling - those who stay home on election day will be helping Hilary into office (just like millions of them did for both Obama elections).

Here's a question for you Philip. Say Trump and Clinton get the nominations. Do you vote for Trump?

Unfortunately, yes - given the alternative . And, while there's a lot about Trump I don't like, it just goes to show you just HOW exceptionally dangerous and disastrous I see letting the Clintons back into the White House would be. And the longer Democrats are in charge of the White House or the House and Senate, the closer we are going to be to magically seeing most (if not ALL) illegals declared legal (without ANY reasonable vetting or process) - meaning, subsequently, there will be only socialist and evermore liberal/progressive candidates trying to out promise each other with what goodies they can provide. We'll devolve into a socialist/leftist state not a lot different than Venezuela. Ah, but such is the art of smoke-and-mirrors, er, I mean, politics.

Besides, Trump may not be the candidate: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/11 ... tcmp=hpbt2

I'd love to see an outsider get in. Especially Carson. I'm just not sure if he can.

Like I said before, he's at the top of my list right now. I guess we'll see...

Philip wrote:But if a combination of just two things are in place, President Hilary may well happen: 1) Amongst those who DO vote, either their personal beliefs have become so skewed by the false beliefs behind the unworkable policies of liberalism/progressivism (or they're either just young or dumb and naive); 2) Not enough people with common sense values will vote.

Wow...

That's as vague as it is insulting. Can you at least try to be a bit more specific with your vitriol? It's hard to respond when your attack contains no substance...

Can you at least try to be a bit more specific with your vitriol? It's hard to respond when your attack contains no substance...

Well, as I don't have all day (let me count the ways), these people have a record of constant, ongoing corruption going back many, many years. Seriously, there are probably dictators I would trust more. NO need to regurgitate all of that. If you disbelieve what their long record clearly shows, then no amount of discussion is going to change your mind. They will say or do anything they think necessary to win the White House - I doubt seriously if they ever sincerely let ethics stand in their way. Know what Bill Clinton calls politicians who only occasionally fudge the truth? "Amateurs!" That's what. Anyway, no more Bushes, no more Clintons - they're both so 80s! Jeb is toast anyway.

Hey, Rick, I really like Carson a lot. He doesn't see the need to be flashy or loud. Comes across as a person with a lot of common sense, doesn't get easily flustered, thinks for himself, isn't desperate to be president. He seems a very thoughtful person - kind of like a 21st century Calvin Coolidge. He is unimpressed with the loudmouths constantly blowing their own horns. I'll tell you this - if he gets to be president, it will be incredible because he's one of these rare, humble, common sense guys that came out of the woodwork. He's not had a lot of big bucks behind him. He's not the "party's man." We'll see.

Philip wrote:Hey, Rick, I really like Carson a lot. He doesn't see the need to be flashy or loud. Comes across as a person with a lot of common sense, doesn't get easily flustered, thinks for himself, isn't desperate to be president. He seems a very thoughtful person - kind of like a 21st century Calvin Coolidge. He is unimpressed with the loudmouths constantly blowing their own horns. I'll tell you this - if he gets to be president, it will be incredible because he's one of these rare, humble, common sense guys that came out of the woodwork. He's not had a lot of big bucks behind him. He's not the "party's man." We'll see.

I'm voting for him because he's black.

I'm voting for him because he's black.

I hope others do, too! Whatever it takes.

Philip wrote:

Can you at least try to be a bit more specific with your vitriol? It's hard to respond when your attack contains no substance...

Well, as I don't have all day (let me count the ways), these people have a record of constant, ongoing corruption going back many, many years. Seriously, there are probably dictators I would trust more. NO need to regurgitate all of that. If you disbelieve what their long record clearly shows, then no amount of discussion is going to change your mind.

Huh. So you're telling me you have nothing specific?

Philip said

But if a combination of just two things are in place, President Hilary may well happen: 1) Amongst those who DO vote, either their personal beliefs have become so skewed by the false beliefs behind the unworkable policies of liberalism/progressivism (or they're either just young or dumb and naive); 2) Not enough people with common sense values will vote.

If they don't have enough common sense to vote for the President of their nation to begin with then I'm not sure I would attribute common sense to those people to begin with.
I'm not saying that I think Hilary should win, but if that is the case I don't think any one can sit on their hind legs and claim that only the dumb and naive people voted and those with common sense values did not which secured the win because the issue lies within the statement.
This is the one time you get to stand at your polling booths and decide who presents your country.
The ones who choose not too, don't really deserve to have 'common sense' attached to them.
If they cared about those values one iota then they would cast their vote as to who was leading their country and not cry foul when the opposition wins.
If it is the dumb and naive by majority who are voting then I'm not sure what attributes I would assign to those who choose not too.

If it is the dumb and naive by majority who are voting then I'm not sure what attributes I would assign to those who choose not too.

I take a very dim view of those not voting - at least whenever there are significant contrasts in their potential for harm. The ONLY way I wouldn't vote is if the choice is between two equally terrible candidates. We've now endured nearly two terms of the most disastrous president in history! Now, there are some very smart people who will tell you they simply can't find a candidate to vote for. But, looking at the choices of the past two U.S. national elections, this tells me that many who can't stand the policies and actions of the present president didn't vote because they believed they couldn't find a decent candidate. But this tells me they are not realists, in that, we don't have the luxury of perfect candidates, and sometimes only a choice between one you're not so fond of and one you see as VERY problematic, perhaps even dangerous. So, I think you should choose the "best" possible horse amongst the choices you're given, not amongst the ones that only exist in your desires. Because the reality is, NOT choosing a lesser choice will, given enough people staying home/not voting, means helping a disastrous choice to possibly win. And thus things spiral evermore downward.

Philip wrote:We've now endured nearly two terms of the most disastrous president in history!

Citation, please...