"Republicans" confuse me, contraindications in beliefs. Republicans manta is all about the constitution and its strict limits. If it is not EXplicitly written in the Constitutions, the powers reside in state, then local. That is one of the chief arguments against parts of ACA (mandate, market place), and environmental laws saying this oversteps the powers written in the Constitution. Interesting discussion about Leonard Leo, who picked the last 4 Republican Justices. The Gun debate is another example, where despite heinous crimes conservatives refuse to add or modify any law to further hinder anyone from getting a gun citing the 2ed Amendment. Discussions in here I see by conservative poster consistently say "stay out" to the Fed Gov, even not getting involved in conflict overseas. Even laws on violent crime are state and local. I totally get that, we do not want a Big Brother government. HOWEVER there are plenty of issues where the Republicans do everything they can to create Federal Laws for individual decisions, laws I expect should be left to states. In North Carolina the HB2 "bathroom bill" was largely reversed, except the right to dictate who has the power to regulate bathroom usage is still held by the state, not local (or even private?). While it is state's decision, why insist on controlling bathroom use, and cause trouble if issues on Porta Potty use comes up? Sounds exactly like Big Gov at state level. And of course there is the debate about abortion, something that originated by religions groups. Again Leonard Leo discussion above where on one hand he is strict constitutionalist, strict interpretation, but on other hand does everything he can to forward an anti-abortion agenda. Now Leo is being IMplicit, meaning if it is not specified in the law, it is an implied law, which is 180 opposite to what I think is a conservative is. Tomi Lahren is a conservative voice on The Blaze, however she recently said abortion should be right of individual, something in line with Libertarians. Yet she was abruptly silenced for saying a debatable point, once again a contradiction between the limits of government but then using the federal government to control actions of specific demographics. Also these rifts also about cutting taxes vs cutting spending, which are different focus on budget depending on who you ask. So which is it?