Here’s what we need to know about Rep. Elise Stefanik’s support for Donald Trump

The thing with Congresswoman Stefanik is she was elected mostly because of her support for Fort Drum. The questions she was asked were basically along a line of 'do you think Trump can be a capable commander in chief?' Maybe she was hemmed into a corner by a journalist with an agenda. She's not beholden to the journalists though, is she? If the people voting for her want those answers, she damn well better provide them. If they don't, they're just tools of the party as well.

Thanks for your input. I think I'll be writing in Vermin Supreme this year as well.

SSG (Join to see) - I don't care what a candidate thinks of another candidate for the same office or another. Have you ever met a single person in your life that you agreed with 100%? Linking me to a controversial candidate that I have not commented on is not legitimate. Asking me about a specific policy proposal of that candidate is legitimate. Asking me to make broad sweeping characterizations is not.

Maj John Bell - No one person agrees with any other person 100 percent of the time. I totally get that. There are some things I agree with conservatives on, there are things I agree with liberals on, there are things I think both sides have the right idea on but are just going about it e wrong way. As far as Ms. Stefanik goes, the article posts six *very specific* policy related questions. Reading them, do you think that they are too unreasonable - that they are asking for too much from *any* candidate they would be put in front of?

SSG (Join to see) -

Question 1) What does a non-specific question relating to Mr. Trump’ character and temperament have to do with Representative Stefanik’s legislative agenda if she is re-elected?

Question 2) The set up for the question is deliberately provocative and only partially accurate.
__Does Mr. Trump advocate bombing civilian populations? Or, does he advocate bombing valid military targets that hide among the civilian population? There is some degree of moral imperative upon the civilian populace to remove itself from the battlefield.
__In my book targeting the non-combatant family members is a war crime, but their presence does not veto my right to target the terrorists. And inflicting pain, suffering, deprivation, fear or restraint beyond the minimum necessary to guarantee custody upon a prisoner is a war crime. (That's when he went from no to HELL NO! in my book.)
Once again, what does this have to do with Representative Stefanik’s legislative agenda if she is re-elected?
Question 3) Asking her opinion of non-specific statements of unidentified pundits isn’t worthy of an answer. Once again what does this have to do with Representative Stefanik’s legislative agenda if she is re-elected?

Question 4) If, she made the comparison and the comparison is accurately represented, a valid question.

Question 5) If, the “suggestion” is a valid representation of what she has said, a valid question. But party loyalty often influences a candidate’s opinion of other party members. It has to do with funding. But also valid, a candidate would rather be evaluated on their agenda and priorities than some dubious “link” to a controversial candidate. I would say as much and not answer the question.

Question 6) It is unrealistic to assume that someone who does business internationally, will not have international financial ties. This is the moral equivalent of asking Democrats to answer "What is Candidate Obama hiding?", when he wouldn’t release his birth certificate. That didn’t merit an answer and neither does this until some level of proof of wrong doing is offered. If the appearance of impropriety was grounds for eliminating a candidate…, well I’d be much less unhappy about the potential choices we’d be considering.

That's a logical position. She is from my district though, so can you see why *I* might be concerned?