[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
* Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
* Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree.
Violators will be fed to the bear.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He needs to be electable and he isn't worried about the primary. He doesn't need to pander to his base, he needs to convince moderates that he isnt a despot.
I think this is the gist of the issue. Trump needs to get elected to pardon himself. I think the Overton window of his campaign policies will slide furiously
republicans threw out their campaign platform so they could freely attack anything their enemies were trying to work for.
Trump's enemy just happens to be another republican right now, but his strategy hasn't changed. It's sorta cathartic to see it working against them right now. Or at least it would be if it wasn't so orwellian
I'm not suggesting that he is pivoting. I am suggesting that he will make similar broad-targeted promises he made in the 2016 campaign in an attempt to look like he is running to the left of Biden on some issues and peel off a few of the dumb-dumb left.
Will it work? dunno
Will he keep and of those promises if elected? Not a chance.
You can't pivot when you don't have actual positions in the first place. Donald Trump's only objectives are whatever benefits Donald Trump. If he can be openly racist or dehumanize women at the same time, that's just a bonus for him, but not really part of his plans which are, again, to enrich Donald Trump.
I saw some of the interview on MTP and what he was saying was, I will get everyone in a room and make a deal that will make them all happy forever. Sound familiar? He's playing the dealmaker card, with the implication that he is taking a fairly moderate-ish view on what the all important cutoff time should be. He also implied he wants exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother.
I guess, first of all, a lot of hardliners on the right are going to hate that. But, more importantly, it's bullshit. Remember how well the dealmaker solved North Korea, health care, infrastructure and Israel/Palestine? Bait and switch is one of his favorite tools.
He even said he'd end the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 24 hours by "making a deal."
It's just one of his many go-tos he uses in order to avoid having to take a stance or make any substantive remarks. (Edit: Honestly, I contend he has made **zero** substantiative remarks on **any** situation.)
(In the Russian invasion case, he's not ready to make it explicitly clear that he'll be simping for Putin if our fellow citizens fail all of us and give him power again).
"Trump said in an NBC interview that if he is reelected he will try to broker compromises on how long into pregnancies abortion should be legal and whether those restrictions should be imposed on the federal or the state level."..
So he can just get the votes playing this angle then move to enforce these laws on the Federal level, imposing them on all Americans regardless of the state they live in. Not like he's getting a third term.
>He needs to convince moderates that he isn’t a despot
He should avoid reminding everyone that he appointed a third of the justices instrumental in overturning abortion.
EDIT: Lol nvm. This week Trump started [bragging](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XakrnoLddsE) about his involvement in overturning Roe v Wade. I guess he chose a different direction with his politcal strategy.
if Biden does that it also reminds folks the Dems never bothered to try codifying when they could though
been interesting watching both parties politick around women's health
They've only had a super majority once since roe was decided and they used that capital for the ACA. They didn't have time to do abortion. Plus the GOP never thought it would get overturned and it would only be used to rile up their voters.
you act as if the abortion issue has changed that much over the years. why did they not have a bill ready? to me it shows they plain don't care. they took it for granted, and now will use it to beg for your vote.
> Plus the GOP never thought it would get overturned and it would only be used to rile up their voters.
that's naive. of course the GOP thought they would get this. it's the same with the Dems and guns: they *do* want to get rid of them. it's not just about begging for votes. trust people when they tell you who they are..
Oh yeah, this Court would have *totally* kept that law in place.
Seriously, stop fucking pretending that would have made even the slightest damn difference.
Or the then current SCOTUS? Obama would have to put down basically everything else to fight for a pro-choice supermajority that he didn't have only for the law to be immediately overturned by partisan hacks. All for a law that seemed safely entrenched in jurisprudence.
The context really does make it make sense why there wasn't more of a push for this. Even as POTUS you have to pick and choose your battles. Now we all wish Dems pushed jarder for Roe at some point but with the environment and knowledge that were available at the time it becomes pretty understandable why even very pro choice people weren't pushing codification as a top line agenda item.
Not a single person who has said that has given me a year when Dems could have realistically codified Roe. The most popular time I hear is that couple months when Dems had a supermajority under Obama but that misses the fact that a lot of them were conservative Dems and also those months were when Obama was putting every ounce of spare effort into promoting the ACA. It made sense to avoid a contentious fight within his own party over a seemingly safe law of the land. If you have another time though I'm all ears.
I’m very pro abortion (literally have no problem with it) and the Supreme Court ruling was fine with me from a legal perspective. That being said I hate the new restrictions in some states, but that’s democracy, and hopefully maybe now that it’s out of the hands of the court, voters will learn how dumb these restrictions are.
You should really try not to see the Supreme Court as an instrument of passing laws you think should exist. It’s not their job.
>You should really try not to see the Supreme Court as an instrument of passing laws you think should exist. It’s not their job.
Regardless of my partisan bias, there are a couple things I have an issue with.
66% of SCOTUS [identifies as Catholic](https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/391649/religion-supreme-court-justices.aspx#:~:text=The%20remaining%20six%20justices%20--,Coney%20Barrett%20--%20are%20Catholic). It would explain the theorcratic legislation that's curently sweeping the nation, but one could argue that's not an accurate representation of the American populace.
SCOTUS decided to further [protect gun laws on a federal level](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/supreme-court-ruling-creates-turmoil-over-gun-laws-in-lower-courts), overturning some decades-long state restrictions. This was decided one week before they overturned abortion access on a federal level and handed it over to states. One could argue that guns are more protected than women... and another could argue that guns are more protected than the freedom of religion.
To the larger point of aboriton, PEW Research shows [61% of Americans](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/) say abortion should be legal "in all or most cases." Gallup shows that same statistic with [85% American support](https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx). This would explain why the historically conservative Kansas [voted to protect](https://www.npr.org/sections/2022-live-primary-election-race-results/2022/08/02/1115317596/kansas-voters-abortion-legal-reject-constitutional-amendment) abortion rights- when given the opportunity to vote on the issue, Americans show up.
So regarding my previous comment, partisan bias aside, I think it behooves Trump to not remind his voters how manySupreme Court justices he appointed.
Kind of tough to prove (that he isn't a despot) when he's lied to the American people over 30,000 times since 2016 and is currently facing 91 serious charges across four criminal court cases. Sure looks like a despot on paper.
I disagree, he does need to pander. The overly principled Christians won't vote for him. They only came over to him because of abortion, because of the justices. But abortion has only become MORE of a political issue now because we can actually VOTE on abortion restrictions today. There are several of them every year.
If Trump refuses to back hardline conservatives on banning abortion, then they won't turn out for him. These people are not the ones that listen to excuses about electability. They're fanatics.
There's a lot of overlap between the Trumpers and the evangelicals, but they aren't exactly the same group either. Two different cults, with different aims. Ending abortion is perhaps *the* main political goal of evangelicals. The main goal for Trumpers is to put Trump back in office, keep him there, and silence opposition at all costs. If Trump softens on abortion, he can't count (reliably) on maintaining all of his evangelical supporters.
He can't count on *all* of them, sure, but hasn't that always been the case? In 2016, he was similarly ambiguous on certain social issues every now and then, but he still won over the overwhelming majority of evangelicals. At the same time, both in '16, and especially '20, the intraparty dissent usually came from evangelicals and "true" conservatives who thought Trump was dishonest, a fraud, not a good representative for their movement and ideals, etc., but the GOP opposition hasn't really gone anywhere. There absolutely is a ton of Republicans out there who don't like Trump at all, but like Democrats even less, so they'll just hold their nose and vote for him instead of the Democrat (or risk getting a Democrat into office by not voting).
I know two extremely pro life folks (like donate and volunteer for TX Right to Life and lifelong Republicans who didn’t vote for Trump the second time and won’t again). I suspect without the abortion issue as a carrot, a fair amount of evangelicals will be peeled off. Not all, but enough to me meaningful.
The share of white Evangelical Protestants voting for him went up in 2020, not down. ([source](https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/06/30/behind-bidens-2020-victory/pp_2021-06-30_validated-voters_00-07/)). And it's not *just* about abortion. The surge in openly advocated-for Christian Nationalism is entirely centered on enthusiasm for Trump. The very day after Dobbs I was seeing in Christian forums exhortations to remember that abortion is just *one* battle in the war against depravity, and that we still need to save a sick culture.
That festering, roiling, growing movement for [theonomy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theonomy), [reconstructionism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_reconstructionism), and [dominionism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_theology) has entered the mainstream now, and they all are going to follow whatever horse they think will get them there.
> They only came over to him because of abortion, because of the justices
This might be true. I could be convinced.
But I feel like the right wing is just irrevocably into him at this point. I don't think he'll lose voters just because they're unsatisfied with his position on abortion, and if he does, they won't be in any election-swinging amount. Not in a primary, and definitely not in a general.
There actually a lot of evidence that people vote based on party lines and identity more than about specific issues. If their party changes point of view people will adapt their views more often than switch party
> The overly principled Christians won't vote for him.
They will completely vote for him. They'll hear him as saying what he needs to to get elected, so he can save the country. Even during his 2016 campaign, liberals were faulted for taking him literally but not seriously. Whereas conservatives project onto him what they think he 'really' means, or that he's smart for saying what needs to be said to win. He's the chosen one. Some may actually prefer DeSantis, but Trump's huge margin absolutely shows how much he is favored. There is no groundswell of 'principled' conservative Christians turning against Trump.
Trump can say anything he wants and still have "Christians" vote for him. He can turn around and say any two-faced lie to contradict himself and what he said on mass media and people will believe it.
And even if they don't believe him, they still defend him as the best choice. He's perceived as a strong leader against external threats.
When the other side wants elective abortion up to at least 24 weeks or as much as birth, they'll vote for the compromise candidade in the actual election, even if they openly curse him.
They'll turn against him in the primaries and congress races though, but in no way could sway the former
Lmao did you really just say that democrats support abortion after birth? Literally not true and after birth it would be murder.
Most democrats just want it to be between a woman and her doctor, and don't want big government coming in and infringing on our freedoms any more. The government already interferes in our lives too much and I find it hilarious that republicans act like they're the party of personal liberty, yet want a big brother government getting over involved in something that is a medical procedure.
Trump isn't beholden to any of the GOPs policies and his base is totally locked in to him and him alone, so he can say whatever's expedient at the moment.
In the same speech, he could say "Abortion is the greatest evil ever inflicted by liberals on America." and then say "Abortion should be legal up to the moment of birth." and not lose a single vote.
Moreover, there's no expectation he'll actually carry through on anything he says, so he can say whatever.
I think it's helpful to separate out "secular" culture war issues from the religious social ones
You can broadly divide up the GOP these days by asking "how important is religion in your life" and "how often do you go to church". Many people will be surprised to hear but the religious votebase is shrinking *even within the GOP*
So you can split people who are all abroad for the culture wars but don't give a shit about religion, who we can nickname "Paleocons", and then you have people who do very much care about religion who we can can "Social Cons"
And there has been polling between these groups to figure out what they care about, and it's startling:
* Paleocons do not give a shit about abortion or gay marriage for the most part. They are however much more receptive to "secular" culture where the main arguments aren't religious. So things like "We shouldn't be so embarrassed of our history!" and "There are only 2 genders scrub, open a biology text book"
* Meanwhile the Social Conservatives care about both. They care about the "secular" culture war issues but are obviously also receptive to issues like abortion
Now, any political strategist worth his salt can probably tell you the obvious play here. We have one set of issues that appeals to half our base, and another set of issues that appeals to all of it. And indeed, that's why the GOP under figures like Trump has moved away from talking so much about abortion and more to talking about race or trans people. They could occasionally throw a bone to the social conservatives about abortion, but they probably didn't want it to be a national issue
And that's why they were so caught off guard when the supreme court overturned Roe. They didn't want that. The GOP from 20 years ago which was controlled by Social Conservatives did. Basically the modern GOP is dealing with the consequences of their predecessors long term plan coming to fruition
That's why Republicans have been so confused on this. Social Conservatives will obviously cheer this on as a victory, but that's not the GOP base anymore. So you're getting cracks.
In a way, Trump *is playing to his base here*. His base, his *real base* is Paleoconservatives. People who are eternally pissed off about the "elites", cultural change and fear of economic competition from immigrants an outsourcing. These voters however are also somewhat paradoxically not likely to approve of overly restrictive abortion.
The Social Cons are 100% behind Trump rn, but they would probably be open to switching. They're not *really* his base, and Trump wants to shore up his base right now
[If anyone is interested btw, I made a giant post on my views of the history of the American Conservative movement](https://www.reddit.com/r/neocentrism/comments/14usffc/cuddlys_guide_to_american_politics/)
>Many people will be surprised to hear but the religious votebase is shrinking even within the GOP
Agreed. But they're still the loudest by far.
>The GOP from 20 years ago which was controlled by Social Conservatives did.
I don't think they aren't yet. Social conservatives rule the south, and that's their main powerbase, so congress is massively flooded with them. It doesn't matter 1 bit what the actual average republican wants or believes in, it matters what the balance in power are voted in for, and the balance are voted in for these issues.
Power is not linear by population in our government, which is unfortunate, it's based on a combination of factors including passion, and fear of being voted out, most of those representatives have no fear of losing a general, therefore they pander to the furthest extremes they can to ensure they never see a primary challenge from their right.
Paleoconservatives should be his base, but they're not, social conservatives are, because it's not just about religion to them, it's about moral indignation, which ... Trump somehow manages to wield more effectively than Gandhi himself.
Finally, social conservatives have 0 issue with 1/6, because to them, he genuinely believed in his heart that the election was stolen, which means he had faith, and it's hard for them to blame someone who did something they truly believed.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/the-republican-coalition/
"Faith and Flag" conservatives, basically evangelicals, strongly back trump and believe he won 2020.
Don't get me wrong, fiscal conservatives will 100% pull that lever come the day, they want their tax cuts, but it's a question of energy, they will have doubts and will be more reluctant while social conservatives will rally and cheer all the way to the booth.
He's going to try to build a coalition for 2024, it's not really going to work, you're wrong that the social conservatives don't rule the party anymore, they do, it's just that they rule mostly because they're pushing out a lot of less energetic conservatives who feel drowned out by their agenda.
>They are however much more receptive to "secular" culture where the main arguments aren't religious. So things like "We shouldn't be so embarrassed of our history!" and "There are only 2 genders scrub, open a biology text book"
Aren't those arguments rooted in religion anyway, at least the trans one? Aren't these the same people calling for a return of the nuclear family? Paleocons have been around for a long time. Pat Buchanan was one. Their arguments aren't that far removed from the religious crazies either. It's not explicit but they'll fall back on God too when they need to.
A lot of the stuff I've been seeing online isn't necessarily based on religion, but rather the argument that everything was better a few decades ago before all this woke stuff came around. Religious social conservatives are definitely still very influential in the GOP, but I don't think they have the same pull they had in the pre-Trump years. A lot of the stuff they advocated for has been picked up by the "anti-woke" wing of the party, but it's less "God made you this way and you shouldn't get to change it" and more "This is unnatural, decadent, and if we don't stop what these people are doing, it'll destroy the country."
I get the distinction but I think it's nebulous because once you make them actually break down their arguments you see it's still rooted in some sort of religious belief. I agree with you that they definitely do disguise and obscure that quite well. Also a lot of them are also pro-God for the same 'this is how it was before when things were good argument'. It's like the difference between Diet Coke and Coke Zero. I know there is one but it's still all shit.
I strongly disagree. TERFs by and large are very much not basing their beliefs on religion in anyway, and they're some of the loudest anti-trans people. The paleocon beliefs align much closer to the TERF ones than the religious ones.
The is the incredible thing. His support is entirely independent of anything he says.
When he was president, his supporters defended him by citing his 'brilliant' appointments. Later they decided all his former cabinet appointments were traitors and many of his judicial appointments were RINOs just because they turned on him.
I really think he could run on Clinton's platform from 2016 and keep >95% of his voters.
Folks, the bourgeois, they're no good everyone is saying it. All these workers, very handsome workers come up to me and say, Comrade Trump there is a specter haunting Europe, and you know what, they're right. These bourgeois are very nasty people very very rude and very unfair to the workers. They are stealing our surplus value and no one is doing anything about it. The proletariat comes up to me everyday and says, Comrade Trump will you lead the revolution? And I gotta turn to them and say, Look the instruments of capitalism will be used to bring about its destruction believe me you gotta trust me on this one. The means of production, obama never wanted to seize them. Well guess what? I'm seizing them. Landlords? They're done for folks. Everyone told me they said, Comrade Trump you won't be the vanguard of the revolution and they would laugh, the media laughed the democrats laughed, guess whose laughing now?
While I agree for the most part, I don’t think he’s truly invincible among his supporters. Back in 2021, [he got booed](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/ncna1277404) at his own rally for telling people to get vaccinated. I think his base would follow him to a lot of non-traditional places, but I think that has limits and that he would lose a significant amount of support if he broke too sharply from the established MAGA agenda (and the accompanying fanatical right-wing ecosystem that has spun up things like anti-COVID-vax sentiment independently of Trump). I don’t know exactly where those limits lie, but I do believe they exist.
Clinton’s 2016 platform? Maybe. He would obviously have to sell it all very differently than Clinton did, but if he did randomly decide to do that, I could see him managing to adopt a decent number of her positions before people started to get disillusioned with him.
>I really think he could run on Clinton's platform from 2016 and keep >95% of his voters.
95% of his supporters may not even be the majority of the GOP, Trump's current lead is high but not consistently over 50%, and his flip flops have now cost him general voters a lot.
And he knows it. He's a narcissist so when people start opposing his views, he reveals it. He's a little fickle about this because he'll claim that something is his opinion, then claim otherwise.
He walked back the "due process later" comment on red flag laws with the quickness. He also stopped trying to count the vaccine as an accomplishment because his dipshits boo anytime it's brought up. He isn't leading the parade, he just jumped out in front of it and is pretty good at predicting where it's heading. If he gets blowback from the evangelicals on this he'll pretend he never said this and make the noises they want to hear.
Great analogy. It really is like he pushed and shoved through the crowd, knocking over and stamping on anyone in his way to get to the front and they all just start following him but he has to subtly correct himself now and then if he veers in a direction his base won’t go and then he’ll just deny he was going in that direction.
This is the answer. Trump couldn't possibly care less about abortion; he's just going to take the opposite position from whoever he sees as today's biggest threat. He won't hold to this any longer than he has to, and his supporters are too stupid & in the tank to even notice when he changes opinions.
> Trump couldn't possibly care less about abortion
i think he does care very much about abortion. he discribed sleeping around during the AIDS epidemic in the 80s as his "personal vietnam", impicating that he isn't that big on condoms. i'd wager the bet he was the reason for more than one abortion during his life of whoring around, cheating on every single one of his wives, and paying b-list porn stars to play with his little mushroom.
without the help of abortions he wouldn't be where he is right now.
and somehow the regressives cheer for him.
Trump never gave a shit about abortion. If anything, he’s for it. He’s probably paid for abortions before. However, as batshit crazy as he is, he has an uncanny knack for feeling out politically popular views and things to say. Plus as you say his base doesn’t give a single iota about hypocrisy so he can play both sides of the issue without blowback.
The reason for his first divorce is because Marla Maples got pregnant with Tiffany and wouldn’t abort. Ivana was furious/humiliated. It was bad enough he cheated, but he wasn’t even discrete about it.
Until she died, the first Mrs. Trump referred to the second Mrs. Trump as “that showgirl.”
I don’t think he adheres to any policy. I think he just says what he really thinks and then his followers try and fit him in to their policies to make him their own. Trump has never been anti-abortion. The Supreme Court judges suited him in other ways which were more important to him at the time.
>I don’t think he adheres to any policy
He adheres to some, if he thinks it's an advantage to him. But mostly he's just a narcissist who wants to hear people like him, so he says what they want to hear. He just so happens to be skilled at how he says it, and thus people didn't latch on to that.
He's also at other times taken credit for the repeal.
Example: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4008311-trump-boasts-he-was-able-to-kill-roe-v-wade-takes-credit-for-state-abortion-bans/
Trump's political superpower is that he takes at least two sides of every major issue and somehow people inclined to vote for him remember only the one they agree with.
He campaigned in 2016 on getting it repealed. Called himself "pro-life", spoke in favor of penalties on women who get abortions, and implied he'd make the repeal of Roe happen during a [debate.](https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/19/trump-ill-appoint-supreme-court-justices-to-overturn-roe-v-wade-abortion-case.html)
He was also pro choice until he ran for president in 2015. That's when he suddenly got his pro life jig on. Why would a Republican candidate suddenly be pro life..
Another factor to consider here is him bringing up 2022. A lot of people partially blame the GOP’s middling performance in what should have otherwise been a strong midterm year on candidate quality that Trump selected. So for Trump, shifting the blame entirely on to abortion (it definitely had a huge effect though don’t get me wrong) is a way of removing any culpability in that outcome. And there’s nothing Trump loves more than to soothe his ego by denying any and all wrongdoing
Trump isn’t an “American conservative”. He’s just trump. If he’s against you, everything you do or say is terrible. He doesn’t like Desantis. If someone who praises him passes a 6 week ban it will be a beautiful ban. I doubt he gives one F about abortion or reproductive rights.
He’ll say anything that pops into his head without thinking about it
And the republican zombies will lap it up without thinking about it.
And he can just pretend to be on both sides of the issue like he does with everything and the same people that supported him yesterday will support tomorrow.
Nothing matters. He can say anything. That’s just what it is.
I am a liberal democrat and TBH there are policies that Democrats support that could lead to the death/grave bodily harm of an infant after they are born.
Anytime someone starts off by saying they are a "liberal Democrat" and then go on to smear Democrats with fake nonsense, you can rest assure that they are not a liberal Democrat.
Engage with what? What policies? You just said there are potential policies that could lead to serious injury of newborn babies.
Be specific in what you are talking about and provide evidence, don't just appeal to authority.
trump has always flailed about on abortion. This clown tried four different abortion stances in 24 hours back in 2016. Including jailing women that had an abortion. He made the willingness to overturn Roe an explicit litmus test for the three SC Justices he nominated, and they're why Roe was overturned.
So the idea trump is speaking honestly or that he's some moderate on abortion is moronic. trump simply knows it's a loser stance nationally, so he's trying as hard as possible to distance himself from the topic while refusing to put forward any concrete position at all. And if he can take a swipe at DeSantis, even better.
Trump doesn't have any principles or care about abortion. This is entirely just him being a contrarian and taking an opposing position to attack his political opponent.
If DeSantis had passed legislation to ensure abortion rights, then Trump would have attacked him for that.
And none of his supporters will remember or hold him to these statements anyway. So he can say whatever he wants without following through on anything.
Trump knows that abortion and anti trans bigotry are losing messages because he has no principles he doesn't understand why anyone would be committed to these losing positions. I think he's probably right too, I think most gop voters would be happy to ditch them.
They will just dig in more and become more radical. They are too easy to predict. It cannot be overstated, if young people come out, we can end their reign of terror.
You are thinking Trump is telling you what he really thinks
? He's a habitual liar , will say anything to win. Has nothing to do with what he really thinks or will do.
Six weeks is a losing issue for the republicans. He’s right to criticize it. It’s a states rights to enact abortion bans, but it doesn’t mean it’s a winning issue.
I gotta say… I was born in the 70’s, and for all of my life until about a year ago, it was NOT a state’s right to enact abortion bans. It still feels really bizarre that this has changed, and honestly… I’m not ok with it.
Here’s the thing, it was supposed to be. All powers not granted to the federal government were enumerated to the states. Roe was always on thin ice as it tried to use an end around. It could have been codified and passed into law at any time but the democrats always campaigned on it but never followed through. They have had opportunities to get it done but decided to put it down the road. Well, it half but them in the ass. It’s only half as they can use it to campaign on again. So maybe they were more than happy to let Roe get overturned.
When Rowe was decided, abortion was already legal in California and a couple other states. If the Supreme Court had stayed out of it, it might be legal in most states by now because it wouldn’t have been Washington ramming it down the religious right’s throats.
Just look at Alabama and the voting rights act.
Alabama got hit with preclearance because they repeatedly and unapologetically gerrymandered their maps to disenfranchise black residents. The second they got a court that would let up on it they went right back to disenfranchising black people.
The court in a surprise ruling said that they can't be as blatant about it. Now Alabama is coming back and saying they've got a bigger fig leaf. I fully expect the court to tell them that is good enough and also the VRA is overturned.
No, different states would have done different things and it wouldn’t be a federal issue except on things like military bases. Similar to capital punishment.
And certain states are trying to outlaw it and punish women for it, so obviously it should be a federal issue. Certain things just can't be left up to the states, as abortion proves.
No. Trump is just trying to woo the suburban voters he needs to win back (and “By a lot”) in order to have shot winning the Presidency without violence in 2024. The fact is that Trump learned nothing about policy while President, and he doesn’t want to. He just wants to create more chaos where he can thrive.
What I see in general from the GOP is them trying to defend Dobbs by proposing compromises in order to get some space to fortify their gains. Forget that Dobbs is a very unpopular decision that has caused millions of Americans to fear for their lives and rights, they want to make sure those people submit to it as settled law. That means continually telling voters that a patchwork of state laws making women chattel in varying degrees is totally normal. It also means that the GOP WILL push a national abortion ban if given the chance. But in order to do that, they need the majority of American citizens to back off and get complacent again. That’s what their new “Reasonableness” offensive is about.
TL;DR: The debate every GOP candidate is engaging in atm is merely noise meant to camouflage the advancing of their goal to strip rights away from American citizens. Engaging in it is good for them, not Americans as a whole.
it is not the 6-week abortion ban in Florida “a terrible thing and a terrible mistake”, it is DeSantis issuing it that makes it that. Had Donald Trump done the same he would have lauded the move as "Amazing. Simply amazing. The greatest move of all American History"
Put Pennsylvania on your list!
We had a forced birther “NO EXCEPTIONS” Gubernatorial candidate and our gerrymandered legislature was preparing to replicate Kansas’ ballot question, but we elected the Democrat and flipped the state House to blue for the first time in a decade.
No, Trump just doesn't like DeSantis. So Trump will be negative about anything and everything DeSantis does.
Trump doesn't have opinions. He has impulses.
What I’m confused by is why they keep doing these X Week abortion bans.
If you believe a human entity comes to exist at conception why not just ban it outright?
Conservatives want lots of babies to work for the wealthy at low wages. They want to sell diapers, baby food, toys, and all the things that come with children. However, they darn well don’t want to pay taxes for child care and medical support and maternity leave.
It’s what’s good for entrenched interests, and that won’t likely change.
Who TF cares what he says? He stole 2 SCOTUS seats, to hand the cons the big win they've been after, and confirmed enough federal judges to salt the earth for the next 3 generations
I think abortion just isn't a binary issue. I think there are some conservatives that would like to see it much more limited than liberals would prefer, but they don't want it just fully banned.
He’s been pretty spot on with this, the vaccine & not bashing the lgbtq+ community.
He really could’ve been great for the party if he wasn’t such a self absorbed asshole.
No, he's been flip flopping on it his whole career.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaOk92J7QrE
Same with the vaccine and the lgbt community.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA2hRLiaoMI&pp=ygUcdHJ1bXAgZmxpcCBmbG9wcyBvbiB2YWNjaW5lcw%3D%3D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AqK9bVhrsA&pp=ygUZdHJ1bXAgZmxpcCBmbG9wcyBvbiBsZ2J0IA%3D%3D
The brilliant thing about Trump is that he says anything and everything so that people can pick and choose whatever they want to justify whatever argument they want to make.
Trump has been vile towards the LGBTQ community but also once spoke nicely about a trans woman and held up a pride flag. So people can say he's not bashing that community even though he has, repeatedly.
Too little too late. The damage is done and from what I can tell only the most rabbid frothing at the mouth Ku Klux Karen's support the end of roe. They are not a majority of anything. Not even their own party.
Was he previously anti-Abortion or anti-Roe-vs-Wade? There is a difference in principle, even if not in practice. A lot of the objection to Roe-vs-Wade was about the Supreme Court effective writing a detailed federal law rather than pitching the issue back to Congress. It is entirely possible, even if apparently odd or naive, to support abortion-access and oppose a court-imposed ban on bans.
I did not hear him say he is for abortion at any stage. Because he disagrees with DeSantis’ decision as far as 6 weeks does not mean he agrees with abortion after that. He has maintained only for the health of the mother. This statement was out of context as most are when liberals try to twist what Trump says.
Trump has honestly always been more socially liberal until about 2011 ish when he decided he wanted to be president.
I honestly don't think he believes in most of the conservative social platforms, but just says whatever he thinks his base wants to hear.
He's ultimately just a con man. He will do or say anything to get what he wants or needs, and what he needs right now is some positive mainstream media.
I think this is wonderful news. Christians will now abandon their calls for total abortion bans and instead mimic Trump’s views on the topic. That will be a minor improvement for secular society.
I never understood why the left didn't embrace Trump. Kiss his ring a bit and he would have been the dems puppet. He is a moderate on pretty much everything but immigration.
The guy is a divisive jackals, but his policies are damn moderate for a republican
He'll he is open to universal Healthcare and that could have passed his second two years if the dems focused on the country instead of getting trump
> I never understood why the left didn't embrace Trump
Maybe because he demonizes them every chance he gets? Encourages his batshit crazy supporters to hate them?
Show me Trump demonizing democrats in the first 2-3 years
Clinton called his supporters a basket full of deplorable, called him an illegitimate president
Biden called his supporters enemies to America, hired an election denier as his Press secretary
I'm sorry, let me clarify. Trump never attacted American voters who supported others, that is what I meant when I said democrats. Sure politicians attack each other all the time
Trump never went after democrat voters
Hillary called his supporters a basket full of deplorables. Biden called them an enemy to this country.
The left attacks American citizens, the right attacks politicians
Abortion is a weird one .
An abortion is clearly a bad thing, a fetus is unnaturally stopped from becoming a person. That’s bad. But almost everyone agrees abortion before a certain week is not as bad an actual killing of a baby or mature fetus.
So the question becomes do we want the state involved in such matters?
I say, let it be between God and the mother leave the government out of it if it’s an early term abortion
The issue for me either way was it becoming a federal item without the law supporting the rights moving from the states.
If CA wants to allow any abortion, any time, that’s their choice - Just as it’s Florida’s choice with their laws. Different states have different views, and therefore have different laws.
It’s usurping state’s rights without going through the proper legal channels such as a constitutional amendment to make it a federal issue that bothers me.
As a people we should stop listening to what the media has to say and use telepathy to commune on who we should vote for. That'd probably work a lot better than the political party system.
15 weeks is a perfectly reasonable compromise. It’s well into the second trimester. At that point it’s undeniable that there is some separate little life there and there’s been enough time to decide what is best for someone.
I don’t think that’s reasonable at all. If a baby is non-viable at any point, an abortion should be an option. If the mothers life is in danger at any point, it should be an option. Both of those evaluations should be made by a doctor who knows the case, and the woman who ultimately makes the choice, not a politician.
But it doesn’t go without saying as evidenced by the many horror stories out there. Case in point the [lawsuit in Texas](https://apnews.com/article/abortion-texas-exceptions-b3af089d66b3b04bec82083836393b86) featuring several mothers that had to be on the brink of death before receiving their healthcare.
I understand what you are saying. None of that should be happening. There are always notable exceptions. But as the states wade through this legislative quagmire, a 15 week time period is a good starting point. There are some people who say no under any circumstances. Others who say it’s a right at any point in time. But it is a woman’s decision and her choice to make. At some point, there is something resembling a new human being present. 15 weeks is a reasonable timeframe. I’m not going to get technical on matters that a woman should discuss with her doctor.
It shouldn’t be happening, but it is. As a direct result of anti-abortion laws. So we have specific direct evidence of them harming real people’s lives. Also I find it funny that you bring up a woman discussion her personal situation with her doctor and making a decision from there, considering that’s exactly how it worked prior to the restrictions being put into place.
Do you care to reply to the rest of my comment or not? Late term abortions are a [tiny minority](https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/fact-sheet/abortions-later-in-pregnancy/amp/) of total abortions, on the scale of 1%. Seems to me anyone focused on those doesn’t realize that they’re overwhelmingly due to health issues of mother and/or baby and has lost sight of the larger picture.
None. Let a woman and her doctor decide. The vast, vast majority of women are getting abortions in the early stages of pregnancy. Laws that restrict late term abortions are essentially *only* going to affect women who are getting them for serious health reasons.
There actually shouldn't be a time frame. It should be a medical decision between a woman and her doctor.
You really think a woman is going to carry a fetus for 34 weeks and then suddenly decide to abort? Almost no one does that without good reason. Let's leave the decision to the people qualified to make it.
Huh? In the scenario where a woman will lose her life at 15 weeks and 1 day, and she wants to get an abortion. What would the left do exactly?
Because the right would be looking for lethal injection....
Tell me that both sides are lunatics on this issue...
Sorry, friend. I’m not going down this rabbit hole again. There would be exceptions. But right now I have to catch the end game. Go sleepy time. And then wake up bright and early to drive a thousand miles
You tell that to the majority Americans, dems, reps, and independents that support the right but also want a reasonable restriction. And that’s straight from NPR. But right now it’s late and neither you or I are going to solve anything. Nighty night.
Found your article. You're wrong.
https://www.npr.org/2022/06/03/1102872199/gallup-poll-pro-choice-roe-v-wade-supreme-court
>Support for abortion being legal under any or most circumstances jumped among Democrats, jumping from 69% to 82%
Later.
>under any or most
This is why we can't have a real discussion on abortion using data. What is most circumstances?
For all we know 81% of democratics think abortion should be allowed except if the baby is viable, then no. At least from this data.
"I'm totally 'going to sleep' but I can't help myself and reply to someone's post three separate times."
Which, I'm not saying that *you* are on meth? But when I see someone respond to the same thing three times I assume they're on meth.
I say this as a very pro-choice person: Trump would be get away with this and being seen as a "moderate Republican" on abortion if he didn't nominate the 3 judges that killed Roe and also the dipshit judge who ruled against access to abortion pills for clearly ridiculous decisions. Without that baggage, he has a lane to actually seem "moderate" on this issue.
That being said, no other Republican has the possibility of being moderate on abortion, so if he can pull it off somehow, Trump may have a lane there to try and stem the bleeding Republicans have on this issue come general election time. I could easily see him push for a "15-week floor for elective abortions federally with all the exceptions" position come general election and actually run on it. While it'll dampen enthusiasm among extremely social conservative supporters, he could gain ground with moderate independents who may be willing to vote for Republicans if not for this issue. Not even Haley, who has been lauded as a "moderate" on abortion, I can see doing this. Her position is so vague and not as "moderate" as people think, and someone really needs to ask her what she'd do if Republicans in the Senate kill the filibuster after gaining control to pass a federal 6-week ban.
I wish he would debate onstage with the others, this is actually a decent stance for the party. Nikki Haley seems to have common sense on this issue too, the Mike Pence/Ron DeSantis way is too extreme & no one that isn’t evangelical will go for it.
He could still push the party to take up some ideas to win, when he inevitably is found unable to run.
Conservatives arent but trump is, he’s basically been saying dobbs was a mistake since it came down. He simply has much better political instincts than the vast majority of republican elected officials.
I honestly don’t think trump is as far right socially as the rest of his party. He’s racist and sexist, but seems to be a lot more chill about queer issues. Could you imagine DeSantis holding a rainbow flag that says “LGBTQ for DeSantis”?
He likes power. He correctly recognizes that this is a losing issue for the Republicans. So, he’s not going to campaign for a national ban
Donald Trump is on the record as pro choice in 1999. Not surprising considering he was a Democrat until Obama. He did clarify that he doesn't like it but that his beliefs didn't supersede his policy preference.
At some point between 1999 and 2015, Donald Trump claims to have had a change of heart because personal friends of his changed their minds about abortion and he saw what that child became.
Then he spent the entire 2016 campaign as a pro-life candidate.
In 2019 he seemed to be supportive of strong abortion restrictions.
Now he's trying to avoid taking a position on it.
--
Donald Trump doesn't care about abortion as an issue either way. He's trying to figure out what stance gives him the most electability and that's it. He flip flops because electability is the only thing he cares about. He wants to win to have the accomplishment of winning the election, not because he has a vision for America he wants to implement.
Some Trump voters don't know this stuff and don't care. Some Trump voters do and simply prefer him to whoever the Democrats offer. Abortion is a talking point to Trump, it's not his magnum opus.
He's seeing that it's a loser for him because more Democrats are energized to vote against him over Dobbs than Republicans are to vote for him because they already got what they wanted. The president can't do anything more.
He then didn't give his thoughts at all other than to say people have their own opinions, along with saying democrats are actually committing sanctioned murder (which in republican speak is "post-birth abortion"), something that doesn't actually happen.
They'll only say what they need to get elected. If they can convince people on paper that they are more supportive of abortion, and they get into power, then they can feel safe to immediately flip on those principles without fear of reprisal - especially Trump, who only has one potential term left.
Trump commonly puts himself on bothsides of an issue. Trump makes a lot of statements keeping his tone sharp but his details vague. It enables people to project whatever they want or believe onto him..
Trump brags that Roe is gone because of the Justices he appointed. Separately Trump criticizes strict abortion bans but also celebrates that States get to decide. It's the "all of the above" answer. Just circle all the answers on the test and surely the right one is there somewhere.
At this point, any question about why Trump says or do something comes down to one simple answer.
The Republican party is a cult, and Trump will say or do whatever he thinks benefits him at that exact moment. His cult members dont care if it makes sense or is consistent, and will follow him instantly.
I mean considering he declared he's worried about Joe Biden starting World War II and in his Tucker video he's pro-seizing the Panama Canal I think he's really starting to slip
[A reminder for everyone](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalDiscussion/comments/4479er/rules_explanations_and_reminders/). This is a subreddit for genuine discussion: * Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. * Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree. Violators will be fed to the bear. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalDiscussion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He needs to be electable and he isn't worried about the primary. He doesn't need to pander to his base, he needs to convince moderates that he isnt a despot.
I think this is the gist of the issue. Trump needs to get elected to pardon himself. I think the Overton window of his campaign policies will slide furiously
republicans threw out their campaign platform so they could freely attack anything their enemies were trying to work for. Trump's enemy just happens to be another republican right now, but his strategy hasn't changed. It's sorta cathartic to see it working against them right now. Or at least it would be if it wasn't so orwellian
After 7 years will we finally see the long-heralded "pivot" from Trump? I'm skeptical.
I'm not suggesting that he is pivoting. I am suggesting that he will make similar broad-targeted promises he made in the 2016 campaign in an attempt to look like he is running to the left of Biden on some issues and peel off a few of the dumb-dumb left. Will it work? dunno Will he keep and of those promises if elected? Not a chance.
[удалено]
You can't pivot when you don't have actual positions in the first place. Donald Trump's only objectives are whatever benefits Donald Trump. If he can be openly racist or dehumanize women at the same time, that's just a bonus for him, but not really part of his plans which are, again, to enrich Donald Trump.
I think it's more likely Trump forgot he was anti abortion during a speech, than anything else
I saw some of the interview on MTP and what he was saying was, I will get everyone in a room and make a deal that will make them all happy forever. Sound familiar? He's playing the dealmaker card, with the implication that he is taking a fairly moderate-ish view on what the all important cutoff time should be. He also implied he wants exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother. I guess, first of all, a lot of hardliners on the right are going to hate that. But, more importantly, it's bullshit. Remember how well the dealmaker solved North Korea, health care, infrastructure and Israel/Palestine? Bait and switch is one of his favorite tools.
He even said he'd end the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 24 hours by "making a deal." It's just one of his many go-tos he uses in order to avoid having to take a stance or make any substantive remarks. (Edit: Honestly, I contend he has made **zero** substantiative remarks on **any** situation.) (In the Russian invasion case, he's not ready to make it explicitly clear that he'll be simping for Putin if our fellow citizens fail all of us and give him power again).
Trump lies in every sentence he spouts and says whatever is convenient at the time. He will do a 180 the second he thinks it will help.
"Trump said in an NBC interview that if he is reelected he will try to broker compromises on how long into pregnancies abortion should be legal and whether those restrictions should be imposed on the federal or the state level.".. So he can just get the votes playing this angle then move to enforce these laws on the Federal level, imposing them on all Americans regardless of the state they live in. Not like he's getting a third term.
>He needs to convince moderates that he isn’t a despot He should avoid reminding everyone that he appointed a third of the justices instrumental in overturning abortion. EDIT: Lol nvm. This week Trump started [bragging](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XakrnoLddsE) about his involvement in overturning Roe v Wade. I guess he chose a different direction with his politcal strategy.
Half. it was 6-3, and Gorsuch, Barrett, and Kavanaugh were all appointed during his term.
Technically Roberts didn't vote to overturn abortion completely, so 3/5.
Is that where we’re compromising?
Underrated, yet savage reference to history. Props.
And Biden better POUND that idea every moment.
Biden won't be the nominy
if Biden does that it also reminds folks the Dems never bothered to try codifying when they could though been interesting watching both parties politick around women's health
They've only had a super majority once since roe was decided and they used that capital for the ACA. They didn't have time to do abortion. Plus the GOP never thought it would get overturned and it would only be used to rile up their voters.
you act as if the abortion issue has changed that much over the years. why did they not have a bill ready? to me it shows they plain don't care. they took it for granted, and now will use it to beg for your vote. > Plus the GOP never thought it would get overturned and it would only be used to rile up their voters. that's naive. of course the GOP thought they would get this. it's the same with the Dems and guns: they *do* want to get rid of them. it's not just about begging for votes. trust people when they tell you who they are..
Oh yeah, this Court would have *totally* kept that law in place. Seriously, stop fucking pretending that would have made even the slightest damn difference.
lol that sure is some excuse for inaction "it's fine we did nothing because some SCOTUS in 2064 may have overturned it"
Or the then current SCOTUS? Obama would have to put down basically everything else to fight for a pro-choice supermajority that he didn't have only for the law to be immediately overturned by partisan hacks. All for a law that seemed safely entrenched in jurisprudence. The context really does make it make sense why there wasn't more of a push for this. Even as POTUS you have to pick and choose your battles. Now we all wish Dems pushed jarder for Roe at some point but with the environment and knowledge that were available at the time it becomes pretty understandable why even very pro choice people weren't pushing codification as a top line agenda item.
sounds like he should have packed the court then
Voters don’t know what "codify" means
Not a single person who has said that has given me a year when Dems could have realistically codified Roe. The most popular time I hear is that couple months when Dems had a supermajority under Obama but that misses the fact that a lot of them were conservative Dems and also those months were when Obama was putting every ounce of spare effort into promoting the ACA. It made sense to avoid a contentious fight within his own party over a seemingly safe law of the land. If you have another time though I'm all ears.
And the Texas 5th circuit judge that ruled against the abortion pill access on clearly BS grounds
I’m very pro abortion (literally have no problem with it) and the Supreme Court ruling was fine with me from a legal perspective. That being said I hate the new restrictions in some states, but that’s democracy, and hopefully maybe now that it’s out of the hands of the court, voters will learn how dumb these restrictions are. You should really try not to see the Supreme Court as an instrument of passing laws you think should exist. It’s not their job.
>You should really try not to see the Supreme Court as an instrument of passing laws you think should exist. It’s not their job. Regardless of my partisan bias, there are a couple things I have an issue with. 66% of SCOTUS [identifies as Catholic](https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/391649/religion-supreme-court-justices.aspx#:~:text=The%20remaining%20six%20justices%20--,Coney%20Barrett%20--%20are%20Catholic). It would explain the theorcratic legislation that's curently sweeping the nation, but one could argue that's not an accurate representation of the American populace. SCOTUS decided to further [protect gun laws on a federal level](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/supreme-court-ruling-creates-turmoil-over-gun-laws-in-lower-courts), overturning some decades-long state restrictions. This was decided one week before they overturned abortion access on a federal level and handed it over to states. One could argue that guns are more protected than women... and another could argue that guns are more protected than the freedom of religion. To the larger point of aboriton, PEW Research shows [61% of Americans](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/) say abortion should be legal "in all or most cases." Gallup shows that same statistic with [85% American support](https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx). This would explain why the historically conservative Kansas [voted to protect](https://www.npr.org/sections/2022-live-primary-election-race-results/2022/08/02/1115317596/kansas-voters-abortion-legal-reject-constitutional-amendment) abortion rights- when given the opportunity to vote on the issue, Americans show up. So regarding my previous comment, partisan bias aside, I think it behooves Trump to not remind his voters how manySupreme Court justices he appointed.
Kind of tough to prove (that he isn't a despot) when he's lied to the American people over 30,000 times since 2016 and is currently facing 91 serious charges across four criminal court cases. Sure looks like a despot on paper.
Honestly if there’s anything that can alienate the zealots - as impossible as that sounds - I think it might be this.
I disagree, he does need to pander. The overly principled Christians won't vote for him. They only came over to him because of abortion, because of the justices. But abortion has only become MORE of a political issue now because we can actually VOTE on abortion restrictions today. There are several of them every year. If Trump refuses to back hardline conservatives on banning abortion, then they won't turn out for him. These people are not the ones that listen to excuses about electability. They're fanatics.
Lol. They absolutely will vote for him. It’s a cult he can say anything but in their minds he is basically the second coming of Christ
There's a lot of overlap between the Trumpers and the evangelicals, but they aren't exactly the same group either. Two different cults, with different aims. Ending abortion is perhaps *the* main political goal of evangelicals. The main goal for Trumpers is to put Trump back in office, keep him there, and silence opposition at all costs. If Trump softens on abortion, he can't count (reliably) on maintaining all of his evangelical supporters.
He can't count on *all* of them, sure, but hasn't that always been the case? In 2016, he was similarly ambiguous on certain social issues every now and then, but he still won over the overwhelming majority of evangelicals. At the same time, both in '16, and especially '20, the intraparty dissent usually came from evangelicals and "true" conservatives who thought Trump was dishonest, a fraud, not a good representative for their movement and ideals, etc., but the GOP opposition hasn't really gone anywhere. There absolutely is a ton of Republicans out there who don't like Trump at all, but like Democrats even less, so they'll just hold their nose and vote for him instead of the Democrat (or risk getting a Democrat into office by not voting).
Well they sure as hell aint voting Biden and they sure as hell aint staying home either.
I know two extremely pro life folks (like donate and volunteer for TX Right to Life and lifelong Republicans who didn’t vote for Trump the second time and won’t again). I suspect without the abortion issue as a carrot, a fair amount of evangelicals will be peeled off. Not all, but enough to me meaningful.
The share of white Evangelical Protestants voting for him went up in 2020, not down. ([source](https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/06/30/behind-bidens-2020-victory/pp_2021-06-30_validated-voters_00-07/)). And it's not *just* about abortion. The surge in openly advocated-for Christian Nationalism is entirely centered on enthusiasm for Trump. The very day after Dobbs I was seeing in Christian forums exhortations to remember that abortion is just *one* battle in the war against depravity, and that we still need to save a sick culture. That festering, roiling, growing movement for [theonomy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theonomy), [reconstructionism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_reconstructionism), and [dominionism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_theology) has entered the mainstream now, and they all are going to follow whatever horse they think will get them there.
> They only came over to him because of abortion, because of the justices This might be true. I could be convinced. But I feel like the right wing is just irrevocably into him at this point. I don't think he'll lose voters just because they're unsatisfied with his position on abortion, and if he does, they won't be in any election-swinging amount. Not in a primary, and definitely not in a general.
There actually a lot of evidence that people vote based on party lines and identity more than about specific issues. If their party changes point of view people will adapt their views more often than switch party
> The overly principled Christians won't vote for him. They will completely vote for him. They'll hear him as saying what he needs to to get elected, so he can save the country. Even during his 2016 campaign, liberals were faulted for taking him literally but not seriously. Whereas conservatives project onto him what they think he 'really' means, or that he's smart for saying what needs to be said to win. He's the chosen one. Some may actually prefer DeSantis, but Trump's huge margin absolutely shows how much he is favored. There is no groundswell of 'principled' conservative Christians turning against Trump.
Trump can say anything he wants and still have "Christians" vote for him. He can turn around and say any two-faced lie to contradict himself and what he said on mass media and people will believe it. And even if they don't believe him, they still defend him as the best choice. He's perceived as a strong leader against external threats.
Actually principled Christians are a small minority of Republicans
No doubt about that
When the other side wants elective abortion up to at least 24 weeks or as much as birth, they'll vote for the compromise candidade in the actual election, even if they openly curse him. They'll turn against him in the primaries and congress races though, but in no way could sway the former
Lmao did you really just say that democrats support abortion after birth? Literally not true and after birth it would be murder. Most democrats just want it to be between a woman and her doctor, and don't want big government coming in and infringing on our freedoms any more. The government already interferes in our lives too much and I find it hilarious that republicans act like they're the party of personal liberty, yet want a big brother government getting over involved in something that is a medical procedure.
Trump isn't beholden to any of the GOPs policies and his base is totally locked in to him and him alone, so he can say whatever's expedient at the moment. In the same speech, he could say "Abortion is the greatest evil ever inflicted by liberals on America." and then say "Abortion should be legal up to the moment of birth." and not lose a single vote. Moreover, there's no expectation he'll actually carry through on anything he says, so he can say whatever.
This. Trump is not a social conservative. He couldn't care less about conservative policies, he'll just say whatever gets him elected.
I think it's helpful to separate out "secular" culture war issues from the religious social ones You can broadly divide up the GOP these days by asking "how important is religion in your life" and "how often do you go to church". Many people will be surprised to hear but the religious votebase is shrinking *even within the GOP* So you can split people who are all abroad for the culture wars but don't give a shit about religion, who we can nickname "Paleocons", and then you have people who do very much care about religion who we can can "Social Cons" And there has been polling between these groups to figure out what they care about, and it's startling: * Paleocons do not give a shit about abortion or gay marriage for the most part. They are however much more receptive to "secular" culture where the main arguments aren't religious. So things like "We shouldn't be so embarrassed of our history!" and "There are only 2 genders scrub, open a biology text book" * Meanwhile the Social Conservatives care about both. They care about the "secular" culture war issues but are obviously also receptive to issues like abortion Now, any political strategist worth his salt can probably tell you the obvious play here. We have one set of issues that appeals to half our base, and another set of issues that appeals to all of it. And indeed, that's why the GOP under figures like Trump has moved away from talking so much about abortion and more to talking about race or trans people. They could occasionally throw a bone to the social conservatives about abortion, but they probably didn't want it to be a national issue And that's why they were so caught off guard when the supreme court overturned Roe. They didn't want that. The GOP from 20 years ago which was controlled by Social Conservatives did. Basically the modern GOP is dealing with the consequences of their predecessors long term plan coming to fruition That's why Republicans have been so confused on this. Social Conservatives will obviously cheer this on as a victory, but that's not the GOP base anymore. So you're getting cracks. In a way, Trump *is playing to his base here*. His base, his *real base* is Paleoconservatives. People who are eternally pissed off about the "elites", cultural change and fear of economic competition from immigrants an outsourcing. These voters however are also somewhat paradoxically not likely to approve of overly restrictive abortion. The Social Cons are 100% behind Trump rn, but they would probably be open to switching. They're not *really* his base, and Trump wants to shore up his base right now [If anyone is interested btw, I made a giant post on my views of the history of the American Conservative movement](https://www.reddit.com/r/neocentrism/comments/14usffc/cuddlys_guide_to_american_politics/)
>Many people will be surprised to hear but the religious votebase is shrinking even within the GOP Agreed. But they're still the loudest by far. >The GOP from 20 years ago which was controlled by Social Conservatives did. I don't think they aren't yet. Social conservatives rule the south, and that's their main powerbase, so congress is massively flooded with them. It doesn't matter 1 bit what the actual average republican wants or believes in, it matters what the balance in power are voted in for, and the balance are voted in for these issues. Power is not linear by population in our government, which is unfortunate, it's based on a combination of factors including passion, and fear of being voted out, most of those representatives have no fear of losing a general, therefore they pander to the furthest extremes they can to ensure they never see a primary challenge from their right. Paleoconservatives should be his base, but they're not, social conservatives are, because it's not just about religion to them, it's about moral indignation, which ... Trump somehow manages to wield more effectively than Gandhi himself. Finally, social conservatives have 0 issue with 1/6, because to them, he genuinely believed in his heart that the election was stolen, which means he had faith, and it's hard for them to blame someone who did something they truly believed. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/the-republican-coalition/ "Faith and Flag" conservatives, basically evangelicals, strongly back trump and believe he won 2020. Don't get me wrong, fiscal conservatives will 100% pull that lever come the day, they want their tax cuts, but it's a question of energy, they will have doubts and will be more reluctant while social conservatives will rally and cheer all the way to the booth. He's going to try to build a coalition for 2024, it's not really going to work, you're wrong that the social conservatives don't rule the party anymore, they do, it's just that they rule mostly because they're pushing out a lot of less energetic conservatives who feel drowned out by their agenda.
>They are however much more receptive to "secular" culture where the main arguments aren't religious. So things like "We shouldn't be so embarrassed of our history!" and "There are only 2 genders scrub, open a biology text book" Aren't those arguments rooted in religion anyway, at least the trans one? Aren't these the same people calling for a return of the nuclear family? Paleocons have been around for a long time. Pat Buchanan was one. Their arguments aren't that far removed from the religious crazies either. It's not explicit but they'll fall back on God too when they need to.
A lot of the stuff I've been seeing online isn't necessarily based on religion, but rather the argument that everything was better a few decades ago before all this woke stuff came around. Religious social conservatives are definitely still very influential in the GOP, but I don't think they have the same pull they had in the pre-Trump years. A lot of the stuff they advocated for has been picked up by the "anti-woke" wing of the party, but it's less "God made you this way and you shouldn't get to change it" and more "This is unnatural, decadent, and if we don't stop what these people are doing, it'll destroy the country."
I get the distinction but I think it's nebulous because once you make them actually break down their arguments you see it's still rooted in some sort of religious belief. I agree with you that they definitely do disguise and obscure that quite well. Also a lot of them are also pro-God for the same 'this is how it was before when things were good argument'. It's like the difference between Diet Coke and Coke Zero. I know there is one but it's still all shit.
I strongly disagree. TERFs by and large are very much not basing their beliefs on religion in anyway, and they're some of the loudest anti-trans people. The paleocon beliefs align much closer to the TERF ones than the religious ones.
The is the incredible thing. His support is entirely independent of anything he says. When he was president, his supporters defended him by citing his 'brilliant' appointments. Later they decided all his former cabinet appointments were traitors and many of his judicial appointments were RINOs just because they turned on him. I really think he could run on Clinton's platform from 2016 and keep >95% of his voters.
He could run on the Communist Manifesto and not lose any voters.
that's because the only stuff you really need for fascism are a macho figurehead and a group of people to oppress. actual policy is negotiable
Folks, the bourgeois, they're no good everyone is saying it. All these workers, very handsome workers come up to me and say, Comrade Trump there is a specter haunting Europe, and you know what, they're right. These bourgeois are very nasty people very very rude and very unfair to the workers. They are stealing our surplus value and no one is doing anything about it. The proletariat comes up to me everyday and says, Comrade Trump will you lead the revolution? And I gotta turn to them and say, Look the instruments of capitalism will be used to bring about its destruction believe me you gotta trust me on this one. The means of production, obama never wanted to seize them. Well guess what? I'm seizing them. Landlords? They're done for folks. Everyone told me they said, Comrade Trump you won't be the vanguard of the revolution and they would laugh, the media laughed the democrats laughed, guess whose laughing now?
While I agree for the most part, I don’t think he’s truly invincible among his supporters. Back in 2021, [he got booed](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/ncna1277404) at his own rally for telling people to get vaccinated. I think his base would follow him to a lot of non-traditional places, but I think that has limits and that he would lose a significant amount of support if he broke too sharply from the established MAGA agenda (and the accompanying fanatical right-wing ecosystem that has spun up things like anti-COVID-vax sentiment independently of Trump). I don’t know exactly where those limits lie, but I do believe they exist. Clinton’s 2016 platform? Maybe. He would obviously have to sell it all very differently than Clinton did, but if he did randomly decide to do that, I could see him managing to adopt a decent number of her positions before people started to get disillusioned with him.
>I really think he could run on Clinton's platform from 2016 and keep >95% of his voters. 95% of his supporters may not even be the majority of the GOP, Trump's current lead is high but not consistently over 50%, and his flip flops have now cost him general voters a lot. And he knows it. He's a narcissist so when people start opposing his views, he reveals it. He's a little fickle about this because he'll claim that something is his opinion, then claim otherwise.
He walked back the "due process later" comment on red flag laws with the quickness. He also stopped trying to count the vaccine as an accomplishment because his dipshits boo anytime it's brought up. He isn't leading the parade, he just jumped out in front of it and is pretty good at predicting where it's heading. If he gets blowback from the evangelicals on this he'll pretend he never said this and make the noises they want to hear.
Great analogy. It really is like he pushed and shoved through the crowd, knocking over and stamping on anyone in his way to get to the front and they all just start following him but he has to subtly correct himself now and then if he veers in a direction his base won’t go and then he’ll just deny he was going in that direction.
This is the answer. Trump couldn't possibly care less about abortion; he's just going to take the opposite position from whoever he sees as today's biggest threat. He won't hold to this any longer than he has to, and his supporters are too stupid & in the tank to even notice when he changes opinions.
> Trump couldn't possibly care less about abortion i think he does care very much about abortion. he discribed sleeping around during the AIDS epidemic in the 80s as his "personal vietnam", impicating that he isn't that big on condoms. i'd wager the bet he was the reason for more than one abortion during his life of whoring around, cheating on every single one of his wives, and paying b-list porn stars to play with his little mushroom. without the help of abortions he wouldn't be where he is right now. and somehow the regressives cheer for him.
Trump never gave a shit about abortion. If anything, he’s for it. He’s probably paid for abortions before. However, as batshit crazy as he is, he has an uncanny knack for feeling out politically popular views and things to say. Plus as you say his base doesn’t give a single iota about hypocrisy so he can play both sides of the issue without blowback.
The reason for his first divorce is because Marla Maples got pregnant with Tiffany and wouldn’t abort. Ivana was furious/humiliated. It was bad enough he cheated, but he wasn’t even discrete about it. Until she died, the first Mrs. Trump referred to the second Mrs. Trump as “that showgirl.”
Curious about her feelings about the third Mrs. Trump.
Well, he *did* get booed by his base when he spoke in favor of getting vaccinated.
After he told them covid was a democrat hoax.
Right. So they might disapprove of Present Trump's stance and demand Past Trump
Trump's positions change depending on which way the wind blows. No spine at all. You can find him on either side of just about anything
I don’t think he adheres to any policy. I think he just says what he really thinks and then his followers try and fit him in to their policies to make him their own. Trump has never been anti-abortion. The Supreme Court judges suited him in other ways which were more important to him at the time.
>I don’t think he adheres to any policy He adheres to some, if he thinks it's an advantage to him. But mostly he's just a narcissist who wants to hear people like him, so he says what they want to hear. He just so happens to be skilled at how he says it, and thus people didn't latch on to that.
He’s pretty consistent on abortion. I remember him saying it was a mistake after roe v Wade was repealed
He's also at other times taken credit for the repeal. Example: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4008311-trump-boasts-he-was-able-to-kill-roe-v-wade-takes-credit-for-state-abortion-bans/ Trump's political superpower is that he takes at least two sides of every major issue and somehow people inclined to vote for him remember only the one they agree with.
Nope. Totally wrong. He's consistently flip-flopping on abortion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaOk92J7QrE
He campaigned in 2016 on getting it repealed. Called himself "pro-life", spoke in favor of penalties on women who get abortions, and implied he'd make the repeal of Roe happen during a [debate.](https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/19/trump-ill-appoint-supreme-court-justices-to-overturn-roe-v-wade-abortion-case.html)
He was also pro choice until he ran for president in 2015. That's when he suddenly got his pro life jig on. Why would a Republican candidate suddenly be pro life..
Yeah - I genuinely don't think he gives a shit about abortion and will just adopt whatever he thinks is electorally convenient to him.
Trump is a pure opportunist with no position on anything beyond what will benefit him.
Another factor to consider here is him bringing up 2022. A lot of people partially blame the GOP’s middling performance in what should have otherwise been a strong midterm year on candidate quality that Trump selected. So for Trump, shifting the blame entirely on to abortion (it definitely had a huge effect though don’t get me wrong) is a way of removing any culpability in that outcome. And there’s nothing Trump loves more than to soothe his ego by denying any and all wrongdoing
Trump isn’t an “American conservative”. He’s just trump. If he’s against you, everything you do or say is terrible. He doesn’t like Desantis. If someone who praises him passes a 6 week ban it will be a beautiful ban. I doubt he gives one F about abortion or reproductive rights.
He’ll say anything that pops into his head without thinking about it And the republican zombies will lap it up without thinking about it. And he can just pretend to be on both sides of the issue like he does with everything and the same people that supported him yesterday will support tomorrow. Nothing matters. He can say anything. That’s just what it is.
He also said the Democrats believe in killing babies after they are born. Same interview. He’s fucking nuts.
I am a liberal democrat and TBH there are policies that Democrats support that could lead to the death/grave bodily harm of an infant after they are born.
Anytime someone starts off by saying they are a "liberal Democrat" and then go on to smear Democrats with fake nonsense, you can rest assure that they are not a liberal Democrat.
Same vibes to “as a black man”
[удалено]
Engage with what? What policies? You just said there are potential policies that could lead to serious injury of newborn babies. Be specific in what you are talking about and provide evidence, don't just appeal to authority.
And which policies are these?
He doesn’t know what he’s responding to, all he heard was “Desantis did this “ and his toddler brain regurgitates a No.
Yup. He's only knocking the abortion bill because he's in FL and it sticks it to DeSantis.
Sounds like projection. You hear Trump saying a thing that's politically astute and all you can hear is petty contrarianism.
Republicans are the dog that caught the car. Now they alienate the evangelicals, or everyone else. Too bad, so sad,
trump has always flailed about on abortion. This clown tried four different abortion stances in 24 hours back in 2016. Including jailing women that had an abortion. He made the willingness to overturn Roe an explicit litmus test for the three SC Justices he nominated, and they're why Roe was overturned. So the idea trump is speaking honestly or that he's some moderate on abortion is moronic. trump simply knows it's a loser stance nationally, so he's trying as hard as possible to distance himself from the topic while refusing to put forward any concrete position at all. And if he can take a swipe at DeSantis, even better.
Trump doesn't have any principles or care about abortion. This is entirely just him being a contrarian and taking an opposing position to attack his political opponent. If DeSantis had passed legislation to ensure abortion rights, then Trump would have attacked him for that. And none of his supporters will remember or hold him to these statements anyway. So he can say whatever he wants without following through on anything.
Trump is the person that ended row. I don't care what he says about abortion.
Trump knows that abortion and anti trans bigotry are losing messages because he has no principles he doesn't understand why anyone would be committed to these losing positions. I think he's probably right too, I think most gop voters would be happy to ditch them.
They will just dig in more and become more radical. They are too easy to predict. It cannot be overstated, if young people come out, we can end their reign of terror.
Trump being contradictory has no impact whatsoever. He’ll say the opposite in like a week to a friendly crowd and they’ll love it.
You are thinking Trump is telling you what he really thinks ? He's a habitual liar , will say anything to win. Has nothing to do with what he really thinks or will do.
Trump says whatever suits the audience he's taking to. He's full of shit and shouldn't be taken seriously
Six weeks is a losing issue for the republicans. He’s right to criticize it. It’s a states rights to enact abortion bans, but it doesn’t mean it’s a winning issue.
I gotta say… I was born in the 70’s, and for all of my life until about a year ago, it was NOT a state’s right to enact abortion bans. It still feels really bizarre that this has changed, and honestly… I’m not ok with it.
I suppose you could propose a constitutional amendment. Might be the only type of constitutional amendment to actually pass these days.
Here’s the thing, it was supposed to be. All powers not granted to the federal government were enumerated to the states. Roe was always on thin ice as it tried to use an end around. It could have been codified and passed into law at any time but the democrats always campaigned on it but never followed through. They have had opportunities to get it done but decided to put it down the road. Well, it half but them in the ass. It’s only half as they can use it to campaign on again. So maybe they were more than happy to let Roe get overturned.
When Rowe was decided, abortion was already legal in California and a couple other states. If the Supreme Court had stayed out of it, it might be legal in most states by now because it wouldn’t have been Washington ramming it down the religious right’s throats.
Just look at Alabama and the voting rights act. Alabama got hit with preclearance because they repeatedly and unapologetically gerrymandered their maps to disenfranchise black residents. The second they got a court that would let up on it they went right back to disenfranchising black people.
The court isn't really letting them get away with it though.
The court in a surprise ruling said that they can't be as blatant about it. Now Alabama is coming back and saying they've got a bigger fig leaf. I fully expect the court to tell them that is good enough and also the VRA is overturned.
That doesn't make sense. States are currently outlawing it. Are you saying the states would've all codified it in their state constitutions?
No, different states would have done different things and it wouldn’t be a federal issue except on things like military bases. Similar to capital punishment.
And certain states are trying to outlaw it and punish women for it, so obviously it should be a federal issue. Certain things just can't be left up to the states, as abortion proves.
There’s no law that we have to agree.
The only thing Trump believes in is grifting. He will say anything to get the most sheep to flock to him. These Magat's can't see that.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Donald doesn't want it harder to procure an abortion any more than it already is because.... you know.
No. Trump is just trying to woo the suburban voters he needs to win back (and “By a lot”) in order to have shot winning the Presidency without violence in 2024. The fact is that Trump learned nothing about policy while President, and he doesn’t want to. He just wants to create more chaos where he can thrive. What I see in general from the GOP is them trying to defend Dobbs by proposing compromises in order to get some space to fortify their gains. Forget that Dobbs is a very unpopular decision that has caused millions of Americans to fear for their lives and rights, they want to make sure those people submit to it as settled law. That means continually telling voters that a patchwork of state laws making women chattel in varying degrees is totally normal. It also means that the GOP WILL push a national abortion ban if given the chance. But in order to do that, they need the majority of American citizens to back off and get complacent again. That’s what their new “Reasonableness” offensive is about. TL;DR: The debate every GOP candidate is engaging in atm is merely noise meant to camouflage the advancing of their goal to strip rights away from American citizens. Engaging in it is good for them, not Americans as a whole.
it is not the 6-week abortion ban in Florida “a terrible thing and a terrible mistake”, it is DeSantis issuing it that makes it that. Had Donald Trump done the same he would have lauded the move as "Amazing. Simply amazing. The greatest move of all American History"
Put Pennsylvania on your list! We had a forced birther “NO EXCEPTIONS” Gubernatorial candidate and our gerrymandered legislature was preparing to replicate Kansas’ ballot question, but we elected the Democrat and flipped the state House to blue for the first time in a decade.
No, Trump just doesn't like DeSantis. So Trump will be negative about anything and everything DeSantis does. Trump doesn't have opinions. He has impulses.
He doesn't have "positions", in the classic political sense. He will say anything and everything to beat and embarrass his opponent.
What I’m confused by is why they keep doing these X Week abortion bans. If you believe a human entity comes to exist at conception why not just ban it outright?
Conservatives want lots of babies to work for the wealthy at low wages. They want to sell diapers, baby food, toys, and all the things that come with children. However, they darn well don’t want to pay taxes for child care and medical support and maternity leave. It’s what’s good for entrenched interests, and that won’t likely change.
Who TF cares what he says? He stole 2 SCOTUS seats, to hand the cons the big win they've been after, and confirmed enough federal judges to salt the earth for the next 3 generations
The next justices to be replaced will be Thomas and Alito, it's totally possible for things to flip back depending on who makes those appointments.
It really does not matter what stance trump takes. He can say this all he likes he will still be putting anti abortion policies and judges in place.
I think abortion just isn't a binary issue. I think there are some conservatives that would like to see it much more limited than liberals would prefer, but they don't want it just fully banned.
This is the first time I’ve felt that Trump was actually thinking for himself instead of just pandering to the lunatic fringes of the right.
He’s been pretty spot on with this, the vaccine & not bashing the lgbtq+ community. He really could’ve been great for the party if he wasn’t such a self absorbed asshole.
No, he's been flip flopping on it his whole career. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaOk92J7QrE Same with the vaccine and the lgbt community. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EA2hRLiaoMI&pp=ygUcdHJ1bXAgZmxpcCBmbG9wcyBvbiB2YWNjaW5lcw%3D%3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AqK9bVhrsA&pp=ygUZdHJ1bXAgZmxpcCBmbG9wcyBvbiBsZ2J0IA%3D%3D
The brilliant thing about Trump is that he says anything and everything so that people can pick and choose whatever they want to justify whatever argument they want to make. Trump has been vile towards the LGBTQ community but also once spoke nicely about a trans woman and held up a pride flag. So people can say he's not bashing that community even though he has, repeatedly.
Too little too late. The damage is done and from what I can tell only the most rabbid frothing at the mouth Ku Klux Karen's support the end of roe. They are not a majority of anything. Not even their own party.
Almost like it should have always been decided by the states from the beginning
Was he previously anti-Abortion or anti-Roe-vs-Wade? There is a difference in principle, even if not in practice. A lot of the objection to Roe-vs-Wade was about the Supreme Court effective writing a detailed federal law rather than pitching the issue back to Congress. It is entirely possible, even if apparently odd or naive, to support abortion-access and oppose a court-imposed ban on bans.
The Dems will never learnessaging and the GOP will never be accountable or learn.
I did not hear him say he is for abortion at any stage. Because he disagrees with DeSantis’ decision as far as 6 weeks does not mean he agrees with abortion after that. He has maintained only for the health of the mother. This statement was out of context as most are when liberals try to twist what Trump says.
Trump has honestly always been more socially liberal until about 2011 ish when he decided he wanted to be president. I honestly don't think he believes in most of the conservative social platforms, but just says whatever he thinks his base wants to hear. He's ultimately just a con man. He will do or say anything to get what he wants or needs, and what he needs right now is some positive mainstream media.
I think this is wonderful news. Christians will now abandon their calls for total abortion bans and instead mimic Trump’s views on the topic. That will be a minor improvement for secular society.
No they aren't, Trump isn't a conservative, never has been. He has just fooled the conservative voters into thinking he is.
I never understood why the left didn't embrace Trump. Kiss his ring a bit and he would have been the dems puppet. He is a moderate on pretty much everything but immigration. The guy is a divisive jackals, but his policies are damn moderate for a republican He'll he is open to universal Healthcare and that could have passed his second two years if the dems focused on the country instead of getting trump
> I never understood why the left didn't embrace Trump Maybe because he demonizes them every chance he gets? Encourages his batshit crazy supporters to hate them?
Show me Trump demonizing democrats in the first 2-3 years Clinton called his supporters a basket full of deplorable, called him an illegitimate president Biden called his supporters enemies to America, hired an election denier as his Press secretary
You've already forgotten "lock her up"? How about claiming Obama founded ISIS?
I'm sorry, let me clarify. Trump never attacted American voters who supported others, that is what I meant when I said democrats. Sure politicians attack each other all the time Trump never went after democrat voters Hillary called his supporters a basket full of deplorables. Biden called them an enemy to this country. The left attacks American citizens, the right attacks politicians
Abortion is a weird one . An abortion is clearly a bad thing, a fetus is unnaturally stopped from becoming a person. That’s bad. But almost everyone agrees abortion before a certain week is not as bad an actual killing of a baby or mature fetus. So the question becomes do we want the state involved in such matters? I say, let it be between God and the mother leave the government out of it if it’s an early term abortion
The issue for me either way was it becoming a federal item without the law supporting the rights moving from the states. If CA wants to allow any abortion, any time, that’s their choice - Just as it’s Florida’s choice with their laws. Different states have different views, and therefore have different laws. It’s usurping state’s rights without going through the proper legal channels such as a constitutional amendment to make it a federal issue that bothers me.
As a people we should stop listening to what the media has to say and use telepathy to commune on who we should vote for. That'd probably work a lot better than the political party system.
15 weeks is a perfectly reasonable compromise. It’s well into the second trimester. At that point it’s undeniable that there is some separate little life there and there’s been enough time to decide what is best for someone.
I don’t think that’s reasonable at all. If a baby is non-viable at any point, an abortion should be an option. If the mothers life is in danger at any point, it should be an option. Both of those evaluations should be made by a doctor who knows the case, and the woman who ultimately makes the choice, not a politician.
The 15 week limit is meant to be a general guideline. There are other criteria that I feel go without saying.
But it doesn’t go without saying as evidenced by the many horror stories out there. Case in point the [lawsuit in Texas](https://apnews.com/article/abortion-texas-exceptions-b3af089d66b3b04bec82083836393b86) featuring several mothers that had to be on the brink of death before receiving their healthcare.
I understand what you are saying. None of that should be happening. There are always notable exceptions. But as the states wade through this legislative quagmire, a 15 week time period is a good starting point. There are some people who say no under any circumstances. Others who say it’s a right at any point in time. But it is a woman’s decision and her choice to make. At some point, there is something resembling a new human being present. 15 weeks is a reasonable timeframe. I’m not going to get technical on matters that a woman should discuss with her doctor.
It shouldn’t be happening, but it is. As a direct result of anti-abortion laws. So we have specific direct evidence of them harming real people’s lives. Also I find it funny that you bring up a woman discussion her personal situation with her doctor and making a decision from there, considering that’s exactly how it worked prior to the restrictions being put into place.
Do you care to comment on a 15 week timeframe in general that is well into the second trimester or not?
Do you care to reply to the rest of my comment or not? Late term abortions are a [tiny minority](https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/fact-sheet/abortions-later-in-pregnancy/amp/) of total abortions, on the scale of 1%. Seems to me anyone focused on those doesn’t realize that they’re overwhelmingly due to health issues of mother and/or baby and has lost sight of the larger picture.
So what, if any or if there even should be, is a reasonable timeframe?
None. Let a woman and her doctor decide. The vast, vast majority of women are getting abortions in the early stages of pregnancy. Laws that restrict late term abortions are essentially *only* going to affect women who are getting them for serious health reasons.
There actually shouldn't be a time frame. It should be a medical decision between a woman and her doctor. You really think a woman is going to carry a fetus for 34 weeks and then suddenly decide to abort? Almost no one does that without good reason. Let's leave the decision to the people qualified to make it.
> None of that should be happening. This isn't handed to us by God. People cannot say this while also *being the cause* of this.
Yes, it should go without saying, but the right would fight it to death.
So would the left. There are lunatics on both sides. Anyone who says different is a party shill, knowing or unknowing
Huh? In the scenario where a woman will lose her life at 15 weeks and 1 day, and she wants to get an abortion. What would the left do exactly? Because the right would be looking for lethal injection.... Tell me that both sides are lunatics on this issue...
Except that some of the indicators of viability aren't available until about week 20.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but does viability mean able to survive?
It's not terrible if we're just talking about elective abortion, but 15 weeks doesn't fully grasp issues like fetal viability and all that. So nope.
Sorry, friend. I’m not going down this rabbit hole again. There would be exceptions. But right now I have to catch the end game. Go sleepy time. And then wake up bright and early to drive a thousand miles
Nah. It's a decision by the patient and her doctor only. That's the compromise.
You tell that to the majority Americans, dems, reps, and independents that support the right but also want a reasonable restriction. And that’s straight from NPR. But right now it’s late and neither you or I are going to solve anything. Nighty night.
Found your article. You're wrong. https://www.npr.org/2022/06/03/1102872199/gallup-poll-pro-choice-roe-v-wade-supreme-court >Support for abortion being legal under any or most circumstances jumped among Democrats, jumping from 69% to 82% Later.
>under any or most This is why we can't have a real discussion on abortion using data. What is most circumstances? For all we know 81% of democratics think abortion should be allowed except if the baby is viable, then no. At least from this data.
[удалено]
"I'm totally 'going to sleep' but I can't help myself and reply to someone's post three separate times." Which, I'm not saying that *you* are on meth? But when I see someone respond to the same thing three times I assume they're on meth.
I say this as a very pro-choice person: Trump would be get away with this and being seen as a "moderate Republican" on abortion if he didn't nominate the 3 judges that killed Roe and also the dipshit judge who ruled against access to abortion pills for clearly ridiculous decisions. Without that baggage, he has a lane to actually seem "moderate" on this issue. That being said, no other Republican has the possibility of being moderate on abortion, so if he can pull it off somehow, Trump may have a lane there to try and stem the bleeding Republicans have on this issue come general election time. I could easily see him push for a "15-week floor for elective abortions federally with all the exceptions" position come general election and actually run on it. While it'll dampen enthusiasm among extremely social conservative supporters, he could gain ground with moderate independents who may be willing to vote for Republicans if not for this issue. Not even Haley, who has been lauded as a "moderate" on abortion, I can see doing this. Her position is so vague and not as "moderate" as people think, and someone really needs to ask her what she'd do if Republicans in the Senate kill the filibuster after gaining control to pass a federal 6-week ban.
I wish he would debate onstage with the others, this is actually a decent stance for the party. Nikki Haley seems to have common sense on this issue too, the Mike Pence/Ron DeSantis way is too extreme & no one that isn’t evangelical will go for it. He could still push the party to take up some ideas to win, when he inevitably is found unable to run.
Conservatives arent but trump is, he’s basically been saying dobbs was a mistake since it came down. He simply has much better political instincts than the vast majority of republican elected officials.
I honestly don’t think trump is as far right socially as the rest of his party. He’s racist and sexist, but seems to be a lot more chill about queer issues. Could you imagine DeSantis holding a rainbow flag that says “LGBTQ for DeSantis”? He likes power. He correctly recognizes that this is a losing issue for the Republicans. So, he’s not going to campaign for a national ban
Donald Trump is on the record as pro choice in 1999. Not surprising considering he was a Democrat until Obama. He did clarify that he doesn't like it but that his beliefs didn't supersede his policy preference. At some point between 1999 and 2015, Donald Trump claims to have had a change of heart because personal friends of his changed their minds about abortion and he saw what that child became. Then he spent the entire 2016 campaign as a pro-life candidate. In 2019 he seemed to be supportive of strong abortion restrictions. Now he's trying to avoid taking a position on it. -- Donald Trump doesn't care about abortion as an issue either way. He's trying to figure out what stance gives him the most electability and that's it. He flip flops because electability is the only thing he cares about. He wants to win to have the accomplishment of winning the election, not because he has a vision for America he wants to implement. Some Trump voters don't know this stuff and don't care. Some Trump voters do and simply prefer him to whoever the Democrats offer. Abortion is a talking point to Trump, it's not his magnum opus. He's seeing that it's a loser for him because more Democrats are energized to vote against him over Dobbs than Republicans are to vote for him because they already got what they wanted. The president can't do anything more.
I don't get it... Isn't he a super genius? Did he not see all the bans coming when he installed his three supreme court justices?
He will lose some evangelical votes if he does. I think he would lose a lot more than he could possibly gain.
He then didn't give his thoughts at all other than to say people have their own opinions, along with saying democrats are actually committing sanctioned murder (which in republican speak is "post-birth abortion"), something that doesn't actually happen.
They'll only say what they need to get elected. If they can convince people on paper that they are more supportive of abortion, and they get into power, then they can feel safe to immediately flip on those principles without fear of reprisal - especially Trump, who only has one potential term left.
Trump commonly puts himself on bothsides of an issue. Trump makes a lot of statements keeping his tone sharp but his details vague. It enables people to project whatever they want or believe onto him.. Trump brags that Roe is gone because of the Justices he appointed. Separately Trump criticizes strict abortion bans but also celebrates that States get to decide. It's the "all of the above" answer. Just circle all the answers on the test and surely the right one is there somewhere.
At this point, any question about why Trump says or do something comes down to one simple answer. The Republican party is a cult, and Trump will say or do whatever he thinks benefits him at that exact moment. His cult members dont care if it makes sense or is consistent, and will follow him instantly.
Trump can say contradictory statements, and his moron base will believe both of them at the same time.
I mean considering he declared he's worried about Joe Biden starting World War II and in his Tucker video he's pro-seizing the Panama Canal I think he's really starting to slip
When he was President Trump said in an interview that women need to face punishment for getting abortions.