[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
politics and politicians Title: Trump: If abortion is banned, there has to be some form of punishment for women who do it Charles Cooke calls this an ideological Turing test, i.e. a question whose answer reveals how plausible it is that Trump really is who he claims to be. The standard answer from nearly all serious pro-lifers is that it’s the abortionist, not his patient, who should be sanctioned if and when abortion is banned. The March of Life explains why: Ted Cruz, when he’s inevitably asked about this now, will give some variation of that same response. Trump, whom his conservative critics suspect of being an opportunist on abortion rather than committed to the cause, went a different route. You can almost see the wheels turning in his head here: He knows, as a political matter, that he can’t let Cruz get to his right on abortion. Republicans will let him slide on a lot — a lot — but if he gives them reason to think he’s BSing them on an issue at the very core of social conservatism, it could give Cruz the break he needs to take off. And so, when he gets the question from Matthews about what to do with women who insist on having abortions in a hypothetical future where the practice is banned, he goes with his gut — and his gut is “stay to the right.” So … sure, let’s punish women for abortion. This is the message the party’s carrying into the general election against the first woman major-party nominee, huh? By a guy who’s already having major problems polling among women, no less. It’s easy to understand how an amateur would stumble into this answer, writes Matt Lewis, but why would you want to nominate an amateur? Yet these political compromises are necessary in order to cobble together a palatable and defensible (if admittedly inconsistent) public policy position that might someday actually be able to win the argument in mainstream America. Part of the goal is to remove the ability for pro-choicers to demagogue the issue by scaring vulnerable women. Now, thanks to Trump, that’s back on the table. Trump’s already trying to walk it back even though the townhall with Matthews from which this was clipped hasn’t aired yet: — Sarah McCammon NPR (@sarahmccammon) March 30, 2016 Hillary’s already attacking him over it. So is Team Cruz, as you’ll see in the second clip below. Trump can run from it but it’s on tape and every down-ballot Republican will wear it now if he’s the nominee. And the best part, as one Twitter pal said, is that Trump will eventually (“eventually” as in “probably within the next few hours”) deny that he ever said it to begin with. Still think this is all part of a master strategy or could it be that he really is winging it? — The Lead CNN (@TheLeadCNN) March 30, 2016 Poster Comment: The next Trump scandal. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 51. Trump: If abortion is banned, there has to be some form of punishment for women who do it
Trump is absolutely correct. If, and the word is IF, an act is made a serious disregard or affront to the law, the act must be punished or there is no law. That's a secondary consequence that must by considered when passing a law.
#13. To: rlk (#2) "That's a secondary consequence that must by considered when passing a law." Exactly. Trump should have responded, "Well, what does the law say?" The law could read that no one is allowed to perform an abortion. Those who do are punished according to the law. Whether or not the woman is also punished is subject to the law.
#18. To: misterwhite (#13) Exactly. Trump should have responded, "Well, what does the law say?" But that isn't what he said. The Dims will promptly launch a campaign against him like the one against Todd Akin. All that Akin said was that women who are "legitimately" raped rarely get pregnant. Trump went much further than that. And the Dims will tar every Republican with the same brush, the usual War On Women garbage.
#29. To: TooConservative (#18) "But that isn't what he said." Correct. He responded poorly to a poorly phrased hypothetical. He later clarified his position. Time to move on.
#37. To: misterwhite (#29) He responded poorly to a poorly phrased hypothetical. He later clarified his position. It wasn't poorly phrased or a hypothetical. It was a direct yes-or-no question. And Trump answered YES, women must be punished for abortion. Go back up and look at the interview again. Did you even watch it?
#51. To: TooConservative (#37) "It wasn't poorly phrased or a hypothetical." Sure it was. All Matthews said was that "abortion is illegal". What does that mean? Does that mean "If a woman has an abortion she is breaking the law"? If so, doesn't it follow that a woman be punished if she breaks the law? "And Trump answered YES, women must be punished for abortion." Within hours he corrected that and said no. Did you read it? Are people not allowed to correct their mistakes?
Replies to Comment # 51. Within hours he corrected that and said no. Did you read it? Are people not allowed to correct their mistakes? And what if he decides to correct his "mistake" of being pro-life 4 hours after he is sworn in as prez? You'll be okay with that too?
End Trace Mode for Comment # 51. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|||||
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|