(“Issues not raised in the lower court are waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.”). Accord, e.g., Walsh v. Borczon. 881 A.2d 1, 4-6 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005); see also, e.g., State Fa 05). A Rule 1925(b) statement of matters complained of on appeal is not a vehicle in which issues not previously asserted may be raised for the first time. It is, instead, the vehicle by which an appellant advises the trial court of the previously preserved issues that the appellant will advance on appeal so that the trial court may determine if it needs to write an opinion and to direct the trial court to the issues for which an opinion is needed. Id. (emphasis added); accord Commonwealth v. Melendez-Rodriguez, 856 A.2d 1278, 1287-89 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2004) (en banc) (unanimous opinion) (<HOLDING>), followed in Commonwealth v. Tejada, 107 A.3d
holding party must make timely and specific objection at trial to preserve issue for appellate review recognizing that the specific argument regarding an issue must be made in the trial court to preserve that issue for appellate review holding defendant who fails to object timely and specifically before trial court cannot preserve the issue for appellate review by including the issue in a concise statement of matters complained of on appeal holding a general ruling by the trial court is insufficient to preserve a specific issue for appellate review holding that defendant failed to raise a constitutional issue at trial and thus failed to preserve the issue for appellate review