Women? No way! Its politics that’s getting increasingly ugly here!
Must be one of those “Trump Democrats” the GOP is hoping for…It’s attitude like that that makes him a “Former” Governor and will make Trump a “one time presidential hopeful”.
Be assured it will get much worse.
But Rendell has probably misjudged Republican women. I’ll get blasted for saying this, but I met my wife at a Republican victory party. I was a Democrat at the time and worked the election, but I went to the Repub victory party for a Senator because I knew the food would be better, the drinks more generous and the women prettier than what I would get at my own victory party.
And I was right. Back in those days, young Dem women were given to stringy hair, military jackets and little or no makeup. Young Repub women, on the other hand, looked sharp.
I don’t know what any of them look like now, because after I left the Dem party because of its total dedication to abortion on demand, I have not become a Repub. I just philistine me.
(I think I see people picking up stones, so I’ll leave now)
Most people are ordinary, and that’s been the case everywhere in human history. We probably have more chance to be better looking now (hygiene goes a long way!)
That being said, the governor seems to make the all-too-common assumption that offense is only possible if it’s true. Not so. And it appears he would agree with Trump…not company I’d want to keep.
Nice try, but no.
Of course I was kidding…
There will be no Trump Democrsts…heck the GOP is having a hard enough time scraping up a few Trump Republicans!
Someone just help me out here. I know I’m not the brightest tool in the shed. But why, are we talking about women being less attractive in the United States?
Are our nations problems so small that now we’re focusing on how fine are women are?
There will probably be some democrats who vote for Trump, but I doubt there will be many. A true dyed-in-the-wool Democrat would support the abortion on demand candidate if he/she had horns on his/her head and cloven hooves.
What’s much more important is the number of people who characteristically or often vote Democrat, but aren’t really party faithful.
Actual party Democrats outnumber party Repubs by about 6%; 31% to 25%. The remaining voters mostly identify themselves as Independents. Of the Independents the larger number vote Democrat more than they vote Republican. But that’s where the general election can be won or lost; among people who aren’t really party people.
Of those, I’m one. I used to be a regular party Democrat, born and raised and an activist. I couldn’t do it anymore when I realized I couldn’t be true to the Dem party and the teachings of the Church. But not all are like that.
Now, Dems would consider me conservative, which I am on most things, but many Repubs would consider me uncomfortably liberal on many things.
Voting against Hillary Clinton is no problem for me at all because of her total devotion to abortion on demand. But I could see others who are more liberal than me voting against her because of her corruption and warmongering.
How are your comments not getting you banned from CAF?
You just called people who vote for democrats the devil. I guess your God now and your passing judgement?
He absolutely did not!
Read his first paragraph. What is he describing?
I read his first paragraph. I think you should re-read it for clarity
Plus, he states that anyone who votes for a democrat or who won’t vote in this election, is supporting abortion on demand.
Well, I guess we’re all going to hell then.
So horns and hooves is not a sign of the devil?
Right, keep thinking that.
And you’re still not reading it correctly…
So you are calling for the banning of people who disagree with you?
That’s not what he said, he said “dyed in the wool” democrats would vote democrat no matter what, which is what “dyed in the wool” means.
dyed in the wool
unchanging in a particular belief or opinion; inveterate.
“she’s a dyed-in-the-wool conservative”
synonyms: inveterate, confirmed, entrenched, established, long-standing, deep-rooted, diehard; More complete, absolute, thorough, thoroughgoing, out-and-out, true blue;
firm, unshakable, staunch, steadfast, committed, devoted, dedicated, loyal, unswerving, full bore;
I don’t agree with a lot of people but he constantly states that those who vote for democrats or who will not vote this election are for abortion on demand. That is a string judgement call.
Moderators on here, have interrupted threads bc of the way posts are going. One thing is to differ, which you and I have in other threads. But to constantly state, if you vote democrat or not vote your supporting abortion on demand, your basically calling those individuals killers.
Where’s the charity with that comment? Aren’t we suppose to be charitable to each other and others. We don’t know why someone votes for a democrat or why someone is not going to vote this election. It is not our judgement to make.
We can guide someone, but not label them and he does that.