Evidence for God from Science

I get the impression most people here are anti-Hillary (and don't consider Johnson et al a viable option) so I'm curious what you all expect to happen out of her if she is elected.

patrick wrote:I get the impression most people here are anti-Hillary (and don't consider Johnson et al a viable option) so I'm curious what you all expect to happen out of her if she is elected.

I'd expect more of the last 8 years. Basically a continuation of Obama's policies. And, liberals appointed to the Supreme Court, which will affect the next 40 years. And, lying, enabling and cover-ups on a scale we haven't seen yet.

We pretty much know from her history, what we'll get in the future from Hillary.

And, Gary Johnson isn't a viable candidate because he's not electable. If I felt Johnson actually had a chance to become president, and despite some of what he believes and wants to do, I'd vote for him over Hillary in a heartbeat.

I'd expect to see her try to institute some modest, center-left policies that don't really change much. If Trump goes down hard enough to lose Congress for the Republicans she'll have a decent two years, after which the Republicans will retake Congress during the midterms and gridlock will resume. If the Republicans hold Congress then maybe we'll see some compromises made and some work done, assuming Ryan can rein in the Freedom Caucus. If the Republicans lose the Senate but keep the House we'll see 4 years of obstruction and gridlock.

Also, we'll see the Supreme Court move a bit to the left. It won't be the apocalypse that conservatives are predicting, since she'll still have to get her choices confirmed by Congress, but we should end up with a more moderate SCOTUS.

Long story short, not much will change.

She's not going to win.I don't even want to think what it would be like if she won,it would be disastrous for the US and possible war with Russia.It would also show that the American people could careless about corruption in government and the Supreme Court would be liberal for 40 years and Democrats always use the Supreme Court to force things on the American people against their will when they cannot get things passed politically.

abelcainsbrother wrote:Democrats always use the Supreme Court to force things on the American people against their will when they cannot get things passed politically.

You still don't understand how our government works.

edwardmurphy wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Democrats always use the Supreme Court to force things on the American people against their will when they cannot get things passed politically.

You still don't understand how our government works.

Same-sex marriages.

edwardmurphy wrote:If the Republicans hold Congress then maybe we'll see some compromises made and some work done, assuming Ryan can rein in the Freedom Caucus. If the Republicans lose the Senate but keep the House we'll see 4 years of obstruction and gridlock.

From what I'm seeing, your last scenario is the most probable. It looks like Trump will give the Senate to the Democrats, but the Republicans should be able to hold on to the House.
I'm not quite as gloomy as you are if that happens. Clinton is not the rigid liberal idealogue that Obama is. And I think that Clinton's idealogical 'flexibility' could potentially decrease the gridlock that we've seen between the Executive and Legislative branches under Obama. I could be right... I could be wrong. But I'm trying to find a silver lining in what looks to be an ugly year for conservatives like myself.

Also, we'll see the Supreme Court move a bit to the left. It won't be the apocalypse that conservatives are predicting, since she'll still have to get her choices confirmed by Congress, but we should end up with a more moderate SCOTUS.

As a conservative, I'm leaning more to the SCOTUS 'apocalypse' scenario
This is my single biggest concern with a Clinton Presidency.
If the rulings of the last four years happened under a right leaning SCOTUS, I don't even want to think what will happen under a left leaning SCOTUS.

I am genuinely concerned that as a country we are headed towards an environment where Christians who refuse to actively participate in activities that God says are sinful will potentially be accused of 'hate speech', lose their jobs, or even be placed in jail. I don't think this is alarmist nonsense, because we have seen some of this happen already.

My .02

It'd be hard for Hillary to run the country behind bars. Any leader should be first and foremost honest with their country, there are too many skeletons in Hillary's and I doubt the worst have been revealed. I'm not sure people understand the gravity of her crimes, they're not really seriously being reported on.

Sanders would've been like Jesus by comparison, that's how I see Hillary. I don't envy Americans right now.

Here you go DB and any NeverTrumpers

The Morality of Voting For Trump
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/mora ... ing-trump/

The leopard will not change her spots. It'd be like if the Gambino Family would be given the Executive Branch except they have more likeable personalities.

She has an obvious venomous hatred of the constraints of law or morality. She's already said us Christians need to change and get with the times on debauchery and abominations.

I'd anticipate an internal resistance from within the Federal govt.

abelcainsbrother wrote:Here you go DB and any NeverTrumpers

The Morality of Voting For Trump
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/mora ... ing-trump/

I had actually already read Laura's article, and as I think I have said earlier...
IMHO it is not the NeverTrumpers who have betrayed the conservative cause and are responsible for putting Hillary in the White House.

I blame that on the supposed conservatives who abandoned their conservative principles by enabling and supporting an unelectible faux conservative candidate like Trump. There are a number of allegedly 'conservative' personalities such as Laura Ingraham who I used to respect prior to their support of Donald Trump. But people like Laura and Hannity lost all credibility with me when they threw their support behind Donald Trump and then actively participated in the con game of attempting to portray Trump as a conservative to the public.

For me, a vote for Donald Trump is a fundamentally immoral choice that I can not and will not make.
That's why I will most likely be voting for Evan McMullin (throwing that in for Rick )

My .02

JButler wrote:The leopard will not change her spots. It'd be like if the Gambino Family would be given the Executive Branch except they have more likeable personalities.

Trump has ties to the Gambino family going back to the 80s. Just sayin'...

DBowling wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Here you go DB and any NeverTrumpers

The Morality of Voting For Trump
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/mora ... ing-trump/

I had actually already read Laura's article, and as I think I have said earlier...
IMHO it is not the NeverTrumpers who have betrayed the conservative cause and are responsible for putting Hillary in the White House.

I blame that on the supposed conservatives who abandoned their conservative principles by enabling and supporting an unelectible faux conservative candidate like Trump. There are a number of allegedly 'conservative' personalities such as Laura Ingraham who I used to respect prior to their support of Donald Trump. But people like Laura and Hannity lost all credibility with me when they threw their support behind Donald Trump and then actively participated in the con game of attempting to portray Trump as a conservative to the public.

For me, a vote for Donald Trump is a fundamentally immoral choice that I can not and will not make.
That's why I will most likely be voting for Evan McMullin (throwing that in for Rick )

My .02

I remember way back in the Bush administration Hannity warned the Republicans in Congress to stand on their conservative principles because they were not doing it at the time so Hannity has been consistent yet the Republicans ignored him. I cannot persuade you to vote for Trump and you can vote for who you choose to but the Republican party has been dead long before Trump so we have every right to jump on the Trump train and I'm never looking back.

abelcainsbrother wrote:I remember way back in the Bush administration Hannity warned the Republicans in Congress to stand on their conservative principles because they were not doing it at the time so Hannity has been consistent yet the Republicans ignored him.

Hannity can afford to be uncompromising and unreasonable forever. He's a pundit. He has no power and no responsibility. Our elected leaders aren't in Washington to stick to their guns no matter what. Their task is to work together to achieve the best possible outcome for the nation as a whole. That means making compromises, and to hell with Hannity's opinion on the matter.

What do I expect if Hilary is elected?

Besides Hilary, I expect that all foriegn nations like China, North Korea, Iran, Russia, etc will also have our Nuclear codes... too...


-
-
-