“[Trump’s] track record does not show that he can be relied on. He has flip-flopped on pro-life issues. He has a sister who is a federal judge who is strongly pro-abortion, who he said he would consider for the U.S. Supreme Court. He has said Planned Parenthood has done good things.”

Obviously Georgia Right to Life PAC is a bunch of Paultards and/or Hillary- lovers. /s

What it means is that there are some people in Georgia who won't be voting for Donald Trump, they head an organization, and they are urging that those who are affiliated with the organization don't vote for Donald Trump either. Such is their right.

Obviously if Trump is more pro-life than they think, when he is elected and behaves in a pro-life way, it will be because he really believes his pro-life position, and not because he is currying favor with people who already rejected him.

They'll vote for his re-election, once they see that he really is pro-life.

when he is elected and behaves in a pro-life way,

And what way is that?

US president's have very little leverage in the matter. Congress is where it's at, though since murder is a state and not federal matter (with limited exceptions), state laws are where it should be addressed.

Nominating USSC justices is about all the US presidents can do, and even then, Congress has to approve, and B) justices are about as unpredictable as any in how they'll rule. Look at how Roberts approved Obamacare.

lol

Georgia Right to Life PAC endorses Darrell Castle.

At different times Georgia Right to Life PAC has given ringing endorsements to Cruz, Santorum, Gingrich and Huckabee. How did that work out for them? Not well, some will say. Others might say that their endorsement doesn’t do squat and based on the record, they would appear to be right.

So, hondo, you can kiss your boy Darrell Castle goodbye.

Furthermore, in Bible-belt Georgia, one would think that pro-life organizations would support the federal “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” which imposes a 20 week abortion ban (with exceptions for rape and incest). The bill passed the House last week generally along party lines, 242-184. But one pro- life organization vigorously opposed this bill. Georgia Right to Life wrote that the bill, H.R. 36, “contains dangerous exceptions that allow babies conceived via rape or incest to be murdered despite the ability to feel pain.” And while that’s true, this is more than a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. It’s a case of Georgia Right to Life bullying itself into irrelevancy and ineffectiveness.

And what way is that?

Nominating Supreme Course justices that pass the litmus test in private meetings with the President.

REPUBLICAN Justices are unpredictable. DEMOCRAT Justices are completely predictable, because only the most completely committed ideologues are ever named to the high court by Democrats in recent times.

The Republican justices named in recent times are also quite predictable, it's just that the REAL litmus tests of Republican Presidents have not been social conservatism but crony capitalism.

Remember, the Republican Party PRETENDS to be pro-life and socially conservative, but it really ISN"T. Social conservatives are just a country faction of the GOP. They're the electoral muscle, the duped rubes who vote Republican because the Republican elites wave boob bait for Bubbas in their face and whip up their outrage.

Donald Trump looks to be an actual pro-life conservative. He certainly is not a full-on social conservative, but on the pro-life matter he seems to actually be sincere. Which means you will probably get Justices who are moderate on sexuality, but pro-life.

One would think that such a combination could not exist, given the braying notes of the "leaders" of the conservative movement, but actually, such people are legion. There are PLENTY of people who are sexually libertarian, but who are very protective of children. For them, sexuality begins at adulthood, but children are off limits and to be protected from it. And for these people, abortion is the murder of children for sexual convenience.

Georgia Right to Life wrote that the bill, H.R. 36, “contains dangerous exceptions that allow babies conceived via rape or incest to be murdered despite the ability to feel pain.”

If the law didn't legalize and previously illegal abortions, and did ban some previously illegal abortions - and it sounds as if this is the case - then it's deeply misguided for any pro-lifer to oppose it.

And while that’s true, this is more than a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. It’s a case of Georgia Right to Life bullying itself into irrelevancy and ineffectiveness.

They have no influence ... yet they're bullies?

And while that’s true, this is more than a case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. It’s a case of Georgia Right to Life bullying itself into irrelevancy and ineffectiveness.

They have no influence ... yet they're bullies?

It is not the case of Georgia Right to Life “having no influence and yet they’re bullies.” It’s a case of continued bullying by Georgia Right to Life will result in their being in a worthless state and become unimportant and useless.

It is not the case of Georgia Right to Life “having no influence

As to influence, I was referring to your "At different times Georgia Right to Life PAC has given ringing endorsements to Cruz, Santorum, Gingrich and Huckabee. How did that work out for them? Not well, some will say. Others might say that their endorsement doesn’t do squat and based on the record, they would appear to be right."

and yet they’re bullies.” It’s a case of continued bullying by Georgia Right to Life

You seem to be using a nonstandard definition of "bullying." (I agree that in their opposition to the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act they're unwisely letting the best be the enemy of the good.)