One issue (abortion) voters. No matter which way they turn they are losers this election.?

Question

Does anyone else agree?

If they stay home and refuse to vote because Giuliani is the nominee - or Thompson or Romney (who they do not trust either on this issue) - then the Democrats win and a pro-choice President will be in place.

If they come out, hold their nose, and vote against the Democrats anyway, and a Republican wins, then they will still likely have a pro-choice President, or one who has flip flopped on the issue and can't be trusted to stand firm.

I would love to hear from these voters in particular as to their thinking on what is the best course of action, as well as other's opinion on this GOP problem. I can't imagine being a one issue voter when we currently have so many issues to deal with, but amazingly there are millions of them. Will they vote (or not vote) their principles when the outcome will make them unhappy no matter who wins? Or is it all just talk and they'll vote anyway in the end?

Jerry C:
I am not forgetting anything. Rather I think that it is you who did not read the question. I know there are many other issues - but I am talking about those who only vote on ONE issue, namely abortion, and there are millions of these people. We are talking about THEM, not those who vote on multiple issues.

TxSup:
And so far, the one issue abortion voters don't believe them, or trust them, period. If they don't trust them to keep that promise they won't vote for them, and they clearly don't trust them. Being pro-choice in the first place makes these candidates untrustworthy in their eyes. So are they going to believe that they will restrain themselves from appointing pro-choice judges? Hmm...I don't think a lot of these people, but are they that gullible?

roadrunner:
No, I am over twice that age. And I am not the one taking a simplistic view. I am simply responding to the Religious Right leaders who have been very vocal in this vein lately. They are the ones who are being simplistic by making this issue the point of voting or not voting, not me. Personally, I'm amazed by this sort of tunnel vision by voters.

Holbrook:
Thanks, I think, for the backhanded compliment. But again it is not me who is being simplistic, but the Religious Right leaders who claim their people simply will not vote for a pro-choice candidate, no matter what, and no matter how much the base wants them to vote to keep out Hillary Clinton. The question is simplistic because their stance is simplistic - and affords them no satisfaction in the end no matter what they do.

You find me blind because I support Hillary, and I find you blind because you don't. That's the way it goes.

Soldiers:
Speaking of blindness...you are right, McCain is the GOP's best bet to win the '08 election but they are too blind to see it.

Holbrook:
Yes, we can agree to disagree about Hillary. But I would like to mention that she is extremely pro-military - it is one of the ways she differs significantly from her husband. But back to the question.
They have problems with Thompson as well. His numbers dropped significantly with the evangelicals when he told them he doesn't really attend church much. And his past pro-choice stance is also in their minds. Yes, incredibly they are that thin-skinned. I can imagine you don't vote per what the Religious Right says - but it's hard not to acknowledge what a huge voting bloc they are and how much of a difference they make to the GOP. It's why they were courted shamelessly by Bush in both elections.

Holbrook:
If you are interested here is a late 2005 article about Hillary being pro-military. Since then she has advocated for the military many times as well, asking for better pay for them, seeking to increase the size of the military, and seeking to ensure better care for our returning military.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/clinton_hillary_military_offensive.htm

What is it she has done or said that makes you think she is anti-military? Really curious about this.

"I have had the privilege of working with Hillary Clinton since 1993, and her depth of experience makes her uniquely qualified to be President," Senator Inouye said. "She has been a tireless advocate for our soldiers and veterans, fighting for life-saving body armor when they deploy, and the healthcare and benefits they deserve when they return home.Clinton has been a longtime advocate for veterans, calling attention to Gulf War Syndrome as First Lady, and leading efforts in Congress to provide life-saving armor for our troops and their vehicles in Iraq. She recently proposed a new GI Bill of Rights, which would expand opportunities for veterans to pursue education and home ownership and provide low-interest loans to start their own businesses. Her bill would also cut red tape for military personnel to receive the benefits and the healthcare they need, and crack down on predatory lenders who target military families.

"The challenge for our nation now is complex -- we need a candidat

.who understands the issues and can get things done. Senator Clinton is the candidate," said Congressman Joe Sestak, a former three-star Admiral and 31-year Navy veteran.

"Hillary Clinton is a strong leader who can protect our nation while rebuilding our relationships abroad," said Retired Army Lt. General Kennedy, the first woman to be appointed a three-star General. "Her life-long commitment to health care and better lives for children, along with her commitment to America's men and women in uniform and veterans, makes her well suited to be our next President."

Korean War veteran and Purple Heart recipient Congressman Charlie Rangel said, "I've worked closely with Hillary Clinton as a Senator and First Lady, and I've seen firsthand her commitment to veterans and their families. She has the experience and toughness to lead this nation from her first day in the Oval Office."

Hillary's growing Steering Committee includes veterans of World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Holbrook:
Believe what you will, but she has backed up her words with action. She has sponsored more than one bill that went through for the benefit of our military, and to increase that military. It might help if you stopped harping about what Bill Clinton did and start to understand they are not Siamese twins and do have different outlooks on some issues. The military is one of them. I'd hoped you could open that closed mind enough to accept the truth of that. But I won't hold my breath ;-).

Thanks for the back and forth, I enjoyed it.

Answer 1

And they should be losers on this issue. Abortion is not a question of politics as the religious right has made it out to be. It is a decision between a woman and her doctor and/or anyone else the woman wants to bring into the decision making process. You are going to trust a bunch of old men to make a woman's decision? You can't. The same group of men have failed to include or list nicotine as a narcotic, even though it is the most dangerous one in the world. Since they have no problem with keeping nicotine legal, isn't that evidence that they are not qualified to make decisions about what we do with OUR OWN bodies? Presidential candidates ( and the one in office ) are stepping outside of their mandate to govern according to the people's wishes when they inject the government into the decision making process. The government does not decide what is right and what is wrong, the people do and they are supposed to do as we tell them, not the other way around!

Answer 2

If you vote based on only one issue, you're never going to be happy with the results. You have to pick the candidate that most closely matches your views and/or who you feel has the best chance of being effective. When something comes up where you have a different view than your representative, then you lobby for your position.

The thing that people forget about politics is it's supposed to be about debate and compromise. Even if you only had a small body to govern, you would be unlikely to find unanimous support for the majority of issues. Instead, you have to aim for the solution that provides the most benefit (or least inconvenience) for the most people.

Answer 3

The truth is that abortion really has nothing to do with presidential politics... They might nominate a superior judge but even a supreme judge does not want to hear abortion cases... AND THEN, if they decide to rule on a abortion case then they are just going to punt the responsibility to the sates (if the justices are overwhelmingly conservative and pro-life). But they will NEVER just outlaw abortion they will just take away the federal right to abortions.... then it will be decided in states' legislatures and then the cycle will go on and on.

So I don't even think about abortion politics when it comes to voting... its a big waste of time when other more pressing issues that a politician will be more likely to address.

Answer 4

It is definitely a problem, but most of us Republicans have to face the reality that abortion will not be made illegal any time soon, so what is a pro-choice candidate really going to do? Make abortion more legal? As long as we don't have to go through that exceedingly repugnant partial birth abortion argument again, we'll probably just have to deal with it if Rudy gets the nomination.

Answer 5

Usually your question are better...this is too simplistic...you left out many things...the problem is, if you want to admit it or not, Hilary is to polarizing...more people will go out and vote to keep her from becoming President...if Hilary is the Democrat's nominee, then no matter where the republican stands...the Conservatives and Moderates will vote for whoever the GOP nominates...(An abortion Dr could run against Hilary and she would still not win the South or the Heartland)I could really careless about abortion, but I would walk 50 miles up hill both ways to vote against Hilary...but right now I think your camp may need to worry about the FEC...or did y'all forget you have to be able to vote to donate money among other things...ha ha ha ha...but you are a good person, even though I do not see why you follow Hilary so blindly...

EDIT: We can agree to disagree about Hilary...I never vote the way the "Religious Right" wants me to vote, that is how many voters my age in the South feel...older people excluded...my reason for being against Hilary is the way her and her "husband" treated the Military during their last reign...I will never forget in 97 having to decided between paying my car payment and buying my kids Christmas presents, while working 70 hr a week for the Government...and while Billery was handing out money to any and everyone, but the Military...so it is personal to me...you all forget about Fred Thompson who is Pro-Life...go ahead and use all your energy against Rudy...Fred will come in from behind and take the nomination...

EDIT: Hilary PRO MILITARY? you got to be shittin me...she hates the Military and the Military hates her...I don't believe a word she says...if she was Pro Military she would get off her butt and vote us a budget...or she would speak out about Moveon.org's attack on Gen Patreus, who by the way I served under and is a great General, but she lined up to sign a letter against Rush...you can see who pulls her strings, George Sorros...she is a coward, to far Left, and once again the Military hates her...=)...she is only Pro Military when she speaks to a Military group...I hope you tell her staff that there are still many, many Soldiers left in the Military that remember how she and her husband treated us...remember they were "Co-Presidents"...she never visited the Troops until it was a photo op...I had a friend who was detailed to go to a meeting with her in Iraq, because no on volunteered to go, and they said she was the most venomus witch in the world...

EDIT: I do not believe a word that comes out of her mouth...she was in the best position when she was "First Lady"...but instead the Clintons downsized the Military and only gave us the little 3% every year which is required by law...so The Co-Presidency of Billery is responsiable for the Military going into Iraq without new equipment...Clinton cut the DOD budget every year he was in office...Bush atleast gave us good pay raises...he gave NCOs and above in 02 a 12% raise throughout the year...Clinton also took away many of our benefits, use to family memebers got free dental...but Clinton to save money took it away and started making use pay for substandard care...so you can believe what she says, but from someone who was there, she is lying...a E-4 makes more than I did as an e-5 back in late 00...so who has done what for the Military? She is running for President, so she will say whatever she thinks people want to hear...but just like in 00 and 04...the Military will overwhelmingly vote Republican...I hope Hilary and Bill choke...

Answer 6

I think you take a very simplistic view of voters in general - my guess is you are under 25

99.9% of people are not single issue voters (not "Millions of them") - they have many issues that might drive them to vote this way or that - things I can think of might be in addition to abortion include gun control, immigration, the economy, the war, national security, etc etc.

Your argument could also be phrased to say if it looks like a pro-choice president will be elected either way, the pro-choice folks might just stay home (actually this is a much more likely scenario if you think about it)

Answer 7

Well I grew up knowing you are either "pregnant or not" meaning that you either are Republican or Democrat. Yes, I too am a woman and believe that everyone SHOULD have the right to choose their own decisions, but I have been raised a catholic. But you are right no matter what you vote the abortion question will always be one that sadly at this point seems to be a tie breaker with women.

Answer 8

certainty worldwide 23,000 little ones an afternoon die of starvation and a million American little ones a nighttime visit mattress hungry some fairly scary issues can and usually do ensue to the undesirable little ones of usa and the international in the U. S. our modern grant of undesirable little ones far exceeds the call for to discover them sturdy everlasting sturdy residences . everybody that believes that including yet another a million.2 million undesirable little ones a year to that pool is a sadist who hates childrens the classic relatives Poverty formulation is that young ones = Poverty and in develop in C practically continually resulted in an develop in P For a relatives of five it rather is incredibly making it having yet another baby will become the straw that breaks the camel's back ultimately the maternal mortality value for first trimester abortions is below it fairly is for finished term pregnancies

Answer 9

The majority of Americans are pro-choice. Naturally, the President should be pro-choice, also. However, the Supreme Court decides this issue, not the President. I hope they do overturn Roe v Wade. Then we can toss alot of these right-wingers out of office using the ballot box. When people find that abortions aren't available, there'll be hell to pay.

Answer 10

I like Giuliani...and I am prochoice. Also a Repub. For the Dems I like Obama, however, I sadly think Hilliary will beat him out. But, I would like to see either Guiliani or Obama in the big chair next year. McCain would be my prime choice, but sadly enough, he doesn't sway the way most GOP peeps like, so therefore the amazing man that he is, doesn't really stand a chance. So sad, since if anyone knows how to handle a war, it's HIM.