My VP picks in order of preference

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

How would you distinguish between MAGA and the extreme right?

The way I distinguish between the two.....?
I hadn't really thought about it. But what I do know is that the MSM, Biden, Clinton, etc... all believe that anyone that doesn't support their exact views is extreme right. The media is so bad, they have Brandon calling EVERYONE that supports Trump as Ultra MAGA.

Do I fall into the category of MAGA just because I support most of President Trumps policies? If that makes me MAGA, then I have been MAGA since the 1990's.
Limited immigration; Bring in people that make America better, not provide an expense for us.
Abortion; Not a valid form of birth control, and needs to be closely monitored.
Weapons (GUNS); Let the peoples right not be infringed, but certainly keep them out of the hands of the clinically challenged and criminals.

Care to explain how you can't support this?

Are you for open boarders?
Are you for "abortion on demand, until birth"?
Are you for unarming the people?

[bpj]

It doesn't take much critical thought to determine which side is right/wrong.

The side that wants to make America great. Or the side that's trying their hardest to turn it into a nonstop dragfest and acting like the term MAGA is derogatory.

Libs are literal retards. Can't think for themselves.

[gil]

How would you distinguish between MAGA and the extreme right?

The way I distinguish between the two.....?
I hadn't really thought about it. But what I do know is that the MSM, Biden, Clinton, etc... all believe that anyone that doesn't support their exact views is extreme right. The media is so bad, they have Brandon calling EVERYONE that supports Trump as Ultra MAGA.

Do I fall into the category of MAGA just because I support most of President Trumps policies? If that makes me MAGA, then I have been MAGA since the 1990's.
Limited immigration; Bring in people that make America better, not provide an expense for us.
Abortion; Not a valid form of birth control, and needs to be closely monitored.
Weapons (GUNS); Let the peoples right not be infringed, but certainly keep them out of the hands of the clinically challenged and criminals.

Care to explain how you can't support this?

Are you for open boarders?
Are you for "abortion on demand, until birth"?
Are you for unarming the people?

I think there is a tendency of "both sides" to demonize the other, to paint opponents as at the extreme end often other side. I don't think all Trump supporters have the same opinions on everything. I don't think all people who are against Trump have the same opinions on everything.

I'm certainly not for open borders. I think the immigration system needs a complete overall, and I think it's ridiculous that there is a huge backlog of court cases for people who are seeking asylum or have been arrested entering the country illegally. I think we need to figure out how to address individual cases quickly (i.e., determine who gets to stay and who gets send back), but I don't know how to do it. I don't think any presidential administration has figured it out.

I'm of two minds on abortion. The religious part believes that conception is a miracle and that the life of an embryo is just as important as any other human life, that the embryo should not have fewer rights just because it is not "viable". And I also understand the viewpoint that getting an abortion is incredibly personal (and usually psychologically traumatic) and that government should have no role in it. I think some middle ground (e.g., abortion legal until the point of fetal viability) is the best way, but both of the sides I describe hate that "middle" position.

I have no problem keeping guns out of the hands of clinically challenged and criminals. I don't know what to do about people like Trump's attacker. If he lived, he would have been a criminal, but he wan't before the attack. I sure wish he would have not had access to such a powerful, accurate weapon. Same thing with gangbangers driving around shooting at each other and hitting innocents. I wish they were settling their differences with knives or guns that only were lethal a short distance away. So yes, I believe there should be some restrictions beyond what we have now, but I don't know exactly what those are. Like abortion, I think we (as a country) are too divided to have an intelligent conversation about it.

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

How would you distinguish between MAGA and the extreme right?

The way I distinguish between the two.....?
I hadn't really thought about it. But what I do know is that the MSM, Biden, Clinton, etc... all believe that anyone that doesn't support their exact views is extreme right. The media is so bad, they have Brandon calling EVERYONE that supports Trump as Ultra MAGA.

Do I fall into the category of MAGA just because I support most of President Trumps policies? If that makes me MAGA, then I have been MAGA since the 1990's.
Limited immigration; Bring in people that make America better, not provide an expense for us.
Abortion; Not a valid form of birth control, and needs to be closely monitored.
Weapons (GUNS); Let the peoples right not be infringed, but certainly keep them out of the hands of the clinically challenged and criminals.

Care to explain how you can't support this?

Are you for open boarders?
Are you for "abortion on demand, until birth"?
Are you for unarming the people?

I think there is a tendency of "both sides" to demonize the other, to paint opponents as at the extreme end often other side. I don't think all Trump supporters have the same opinions on everything. I don't think all people who are against Trump have the same opinions on everything.

I'm certainly not for open borders. I think the immigration system needs a complete overall, and I think it's ridiculous that there is a huge backlog of court cases for people who are seeking asylum or have been arrested entering the country illegally. I think we need to figure out how to address individual cases quickly (i.e., determine who gets to stay and who gets send back), but I don't know how to do it. I don't think any presidential administration has figured it out.

I'm of two minds on abortion. The religious part believes that conception is a miracle and that the life of an embryo is just as important as any other human life, that the embryo should not have fewer rights just because it is not "viable". And I also understand the viewpoint that getting an abortion is incredibly personal (and usually psychologically traumatic) and that government should have no role in it. I think some middle ground (e.g., abortion legal until the point of fetal viability) is the best way, but both of the sides I describe hate that "middle" position.

I have no problem keeping guns out of the hands of clinically challenged and criminals. I don't know what to do about people like Trump's attacker. If he lived, he would have been a criminal, but he wan't before the attack. I sure wish he would have not had access to such a powerful, accurate weapon. Same thing with gangbangers driving around shooting at each other and hitting innocents. I wish they were settling their differences with knives or guns that only were lethal a short distance away. So yes, I believe there should be some restrictions beyond what we have now, but I don't know exactly what those are. Like abortion, I think we (as a country) are too divided to have an intelligent conversation about it.

So, in regards to these 3 hot button issues, we are not too far off.

And keep in mind, in regards to long rifles, the shortest distance I have shot a deer in eastern Washington is 120 yards, and that was with a 20ga shotgun. Most of my kill shots are with a 243 caliber (larger diameter than what an AR shoots) at over 300 yards. It too is a semi-automatic rifle, but the magazine only holds 5 rounds.

So if this shooter didn't have access to an AR-style rifle, he could have done the same thing with any hunting rifle, but not a standard 22-long.

[gil]

The way I distinguish between the two.....?
I hadn't really thought about it. But what I do know is that the MSM, Biden, Clinton, etc... all believe that anyone that doesn't support their exact views is extreme right. The media is so bad, they have Brandon calling EVERYONE that supports Trump as Ultra MAGA.

Do I fall into the category of MAGA just because I support most of President Trumps policies? If that makes me MAGA, then I have been MAGA since the 1990's.
Limited immigration; Bring in people that make America better, not provide an expense for us.
Abortion; Not a valid form of birth control, and needs to be closely monitored.
Weapons (GUNS); Let the peoples right not be infringed, but certainly keep them out of the hands of the clinically challenged and criminals.

Care to explain how you can't support this?

Are you for open boarders?
Are you for "abortion on demand, until birth"?
Are you for unarming the people?

I think there is a tendency of "both sides" to demonize the other, to paint opponents as at the extreme end often other side. I don't think all Trump supporters have the same opinions on everything. I don't think all people who are against Trump have the same opinions on everything.

I'm certainly not for open borders. I think the immigration system needs a complete overall, and I think it's ridiculous that there is a huge backlog of court cases for people who are seeking asylum or have been arrested entering the country illegally. I think we need to figure out how to address individual cases quickly (i.e., determine who gets to stay and who gets send back), but I don't know how to do it. I don't think any presidential administration has figured it out.

I'm of two minds on abortion. The religious part believes that conception is a miracle and that the life of an embryo is just as important as any other human life, that the embryo should not have fewer rights just because it is not "viable". And I also understand the viewpoint that getting an abortion is incredibly personal (and usually psychologically traumatic) and that government should have no role in it. I think some middle ground (e.g., abortion legal until the point of fetal viability) is the best way, but both of the sides I describe hate that "middle" position.

I have no problem keeping guns out of the hands of clinically challenged and criminals. I don't know what to do about people like Trump's attacker. If he lived, he would have been a criminal, but he wan't before the attack. I sure wish he would have not had access to such a powerful, accurate weapon. Same thing with gangbangers driving around shooting at each other and hitting innocents. I wish they were settling their differences with knives or guns that only were lethal a short distance away. So yes, I believe there should be some restrictions beyond what we have now, but I don't know exactly what those are. Like abortion, I think we (as a country) are too divided to have an intelligent conversation about it.

So, in regards to these 3 hot button issues, we are not too far off.

And keep in mind, in regards to long rifles, the shortest distance I have shot a deer in eastern Washington is 120 yards, and that was with a 20ga shotgun. Most of my kill shots are with a 243 caliber (larger diameter than what an AR shoots) at over 300 yards. It too is a semi-automatic rifle, but the magazine only holds 5 rounds.

So if this shooter didn't have access to an AR-style rifle, he could have done the same thing with any hunting rifle, but not a standard 22-long.

I hope there is more agreement among people than it would seem when listening to the extreme positions.

You obviously have much more knowledge and experience with guns than I do, but ... you shot a deer with a 20 gauge shotgun? I've never heard of that, especially at that distance. Wow!

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

Extreme is all about how it's presented. The MSM calls anything that may be center-right to center an extreme position.

A lot of how I make my opinions is how the decision will affect others rights. For example, new gun laws ONLY affect legal gun owners.

And the shot with the 20 gauge with with a rifled slug, and a scope on the gun.

I don't shoot as much as I used to, but ammo has gotten so expensive, I don't want to use what I have.

[Seattle or Bust]

Extreme is all about how it's presented. The MSM calls anything that may be center-right to center an extreme position.

A lot of how I make my opinions is how the decision will affect others rights. For example, new gun laws ONLY affect legal gun owners.

And the shot with the 20 gauge with with a rifled slug, and a scope on the gun.

I don't shoot as much as I used to, but ammo has gotten so expensive, I don't want to use what I have.

Is saying that people who are childless should have less of a voice in our democracy an extreme position?

[Walla Walla Dawg II]

Extreme is all about how it's presented. The MSM calls anything that may be center-right to center an extreme position.

A lot of how I make my opinions is how the decision will affect others rights. For example, new gun laws ONLY affect legal gun owners.

And the shot with the 20 gauge with with a rifled slug, and a scope on the gun.

I don't shoot as much as I used to, but ammo has gotten so expensive, I don't want to use what I have.

Is saying that people who are childless should have less of a voice in our democracy an extreme position?

I'd say yes, it is an extreme position.

I personally believe that every citizen in this country is equal. Or at the very least SHOULD be equal. Unfortunately it isn't that way.
!!!!!!Illegals can kiss my ass!!!!!!

And yes, I know the MSM has already bent what Vance said to get the loonies to rebel against him. I'm so very glad you took the bait.

[Seattle or Bust]

Extreme is all about how it's presented. The MSM calls anything that may be center-right to center an extreme position.

A lot of how I make my opinions is how the decision will affect others rights. For example, new gun laws ONLY affect legal gun owners.

And the shot with the 20 gauge with with a rifled slug, and a scope on the gun.

I don't shoot as much as I used to, but ammo has gotten so expensive, I don't want to use what I have.

Is saying that people who are childless should have less of a voice in our democracy an extreme position?

I'd say yes, it is an extreme position.

I personally believe that every citizen in this country is equal. Or at the very least SHOULD be equal. Unfortunately it isn't that way.
!!!!!!Illegals can kiss my ass!!!!!!

And yes, I know the MSM has already bent what Vance said to get the loonies to rebel against him. I'm so very glad you took the bait.

How did they bend what he said?

He literally believes that if you are childless, you should have less of a voice in our democracy. He made it very clear.

[Seattle or Bust]

Also, you won't really find me disagreeing on immigration.

However, I think immigration from Latin countries is pretty essential when it comes to filling jobs in agriculture, hospitality, restaurant, landscaping industries, etc... immigration from these countries is essential because these are not desirable jobs. Americans tend to have no interest in filling them.

I have a significant problem with companies like Google, Facebook, etc... abusing the visa system to fill tech jobs in Northern California and Western Washington. I think these companies should be required to hire domestically instead of hiring immigrants that they pay lower wages and never have to increase wages due to them being on temporary visas. I think they should have to hire Americans as a means of giving back for the opportunity to build the immense wealth they've been given here.

I think major companies should not be allowed to outsource customer support centers offshore. I think all major companies should be required to open call centers in areas that are struggling with job creation... places like West Virginia, Arkansas, etc... again, give back by creating jobs in the US rather than off shoring them.