From "Trump Privately Expresses Support for a 16-Week Abortion Ban/In supporting a 16-week ban with exceptions, Donald Trump appears to be trying to satisfy social conservatives who want to further restrict abortion access and voters who want more modest limits" (NYT)(free access link).
The 3 exceptions are when the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest and when it is necessary to save the life of the mother.
"In a Fox News town-hall event in January, a week before the Iowa caucuses, a socially conservative voter asked Mr. Trump to 'reassure me' that he would protect 'every person’s right to life, without compromise.' Mr. Trump declined to reassure her. 'I love where you are coming from,' he told the voter. 'But we still have to win elections. And they have used this — you know, we have some great Republicans and they are great on the issue, and you would love them on the issue. And a lot of them have just been decimated in the election.'"
पोस्ट्स
७३ टिप्पण्या:
...who was given anonymity to describe a private conversation. 'It’s even. It’s four months.
I do believe Trump is looking for a middle ground on abortion. 16 weeks could to be it. Or, somewhere between 15 and 20. It also puts Democrats and Feminists in a position to defend abortion up until the moment of birth which is basically grotesque, immoral, infanticide.
This will make Feminist heads explode.
But I don't believe the even number bullshit from the anonymous source. Trump has a great idea here and the NYTs wants it to look like his depth on the subject is nothing more "than and even number".
Youngkin supported a 15-week ban here in Virginia, and it didn't seem to provoke controversy. It's obviously frustrating for those who oppose all abortions, but Trump's right; that position doesn't have the votes, and pursuing it ultimately results in more abortions, not fewer. Take the opportunity to ban the late-term abortions, and work on hearts and minds for everything else.
This appears to be the most commonly desired policy in almost every Western country.
I would like someone to define for me the number of abortions that come from:
1. Rape
2. Incest
3. Protecting the life of the mother
Been talking about this issue my entire adult life. Have no idea if that comprises .1% or 10% of all abortions, and attributed to which categories.
Sixteen is a beautiful and comfortable number. If Trump were anyone else the press would be kind about his OCD instead of snickering at it.
What's hilarious is that this is exactly what NeverTrump and the GOPe kept insisting for years: that the GOP needed to moderate its stance on abortion in order to win over independents. Trump is correct that 16 weeks is a nice round number, and it's one that puts us in line with Europe. But the reality is that it won't do much of anything to win over suburban women, because they never really cared about abortion, just about being on the socially acceptable side of any issue- which is to say, the side not Republican.
If true, this might be the stupidest thing he has ever said. And only less than a week after "I would encourage them [Russia] to do whatever the hell they want".
At what point will you admit that Trump is batshit crazy?
Soooooo ... the corporate media mafia will now explain that Trump is NOT some crazy neanderthal rethuglikan social conservative who wants to keep women perpetually barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. Right?
It might be an OCD thing (even numbers).
Ask me how I know...
Figured NYT would step on its tiny little dick moaning about the Euro standard 16 week compromise. Maybe later…
The rape exception may not be a real exception because it’s going to be hard to legally prove the father is a rapist in only four months, no? Sounds like it could be very messy.
Maybe the a$$hole isn’t a total zero on political common sense. I was going to support him anyway, but it is good that I agree with him on yet another policy issue.
Just doing the math and ignoring politics and morality for a moment, Trump would legalize more than 95 percent of abortions in America.
told one of these people, who was given anonymity to describe a private conversation
I note 'describe' is not qualified by the word 'accurately'; nor is 'conversation' qualified by the phrase 'that actually happened'.
Is there a reason anyone should believe what Democrats at the NYTimes write about Trump?
I'm skeptical about the veracity of the source. Trump's always been somewhat muted on some social issues particularly abortion and LGBT stuff. I can see him dismissing a potential VP candidate who isn't in favor of the 3 exceptions, but the 3 exceptions is rather boiler-plate stuff for the Pro-Life movement. What I'm really skeptical of is that he would seek a 16 Federal ban on abortion. He conspicuously didn't take a victory lap after the Dobbs decision, which ahs been a victory for a generations long effort for the Pro-Life movement. I also wonder how many in the Pro-Life camp he still needs to win over. As someone who considers themselves moderately Pro-Life, while I do want some State restrictions on abortion, I do not want the Federal government involved in it, either banning it or subsidizing it.
16 weeks is more or less consistent with the laws in most of Europe, though I am sure it will be reported on as handmaidens tale II
I don't know why this would be described as private. I'm pretty sure Trump said in public not long ago that Dobbs defended the law in a specific state, Missouri, and a specific "cutoff," 15 weeks. Somewhat surprisingly, the Court struck down any Constitutional basis for any state law on abortion, but Trump said he likes the idea of something like 15 or 16 weeks: it gives both sides something, does not concede to the extremes on either side, and holds out the promise of a national solution to the abortion issue that might last for some time. This is a statesmanlike approach, partly involving an attempt to maintain some distance between abortion and infanticide. 16 weeks would almost always allow enough time to deal with rape, incest, and life of the mother. If a difficult delivery at 9 months or term sets up the possibility of the death of both mother and child, it is perfectly ethical for the doctor to kill the child and save the mother.
Staunchly pro-choice states will go no limits on abortion throughout pregnancy (at least tacitly getting into partial birth, severe deformity, etc). Pro-lifers may be disappointed at how many states go this way. Some states may go to a "heartbeat law," which one would think is asking for this issue to remain at a boil.
If we’re going to have europe’s abortion laws then it’s only fair we adopt their approach to healthcare as well.
HOW is this a federal issue? Isn't Murder a matter for states?
If someone shoots and kills someone.. Is that a Federal Offense? Where (what court) are you tried?
Trump gives a pragmatic,a realistic position, that would be acceptable to a majority of people.
OH NO!!!!!!!
THIS IS A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY!
Cue leftist screeching above.
"If true, this might be the stupidest thing he has ever said. "
How so? There is no "right" answer, you have to pick something, so you just pick one that prohibits the worst abortions yet gives women enough time to get an abortion when she realizes she's pregnant. Exactly how long is arbitrary, so you pick a nice, round number. How is that the stupidest thing ever?
I had the same opinion with the 6-foot covid rule that people enjoyed claiming there is no "scientific" basis for. Well, sure. It's just a realistic, arbitrary number. Obviously, separation lowers risk. 1 mile, no risk. 1 foot, high risk. It's easily remembered, reasonably practical. Don't get your panties in a wad that there aren't big, expensive studies trying to find the perfect answer that doesn't exist. (I do get the mockery over the "we're science, you must submit" phony baloney authoritarianism.)
Abortion is one of those things where Republicans have to engage in realpolitik if they want to win nationwide elections. I hate it (I hate capital punishment too) but as disgusting as it is, the Republicans need to take this issue away from the Democrats, and something like a 12-16 week number will do that because it will force the Democrats who want to keep abortion as an issue to support what any semi-thinking person would call infanticide (killing the baby as it’s emerging from the birth canal, aka abortion up to the instant of birth). And that is repugnant to the vast majority of the voters. But all out bans or six-week limits are not where the electorate is on this issue.
Blogger Ambrose said...
16 weeks is more or less consistent with the laws in most of Europe, though I am sure it5 will be reported on as handmaidens tale II"
I'm sure that's one more reason Democrats hate European-style liberal governance. Right?
At this point I don't care. If Trump doesn't win, America LOST. After what NYC did to Trump today, if anybody out there DOESN'T vote for Trump...YOU deserve everything that happens when he is gone.
At what point does Freder admit he is the batshit crazy one here?
Maybe he thinks all of EU is batshit crazy. By the way, the NATO countries agreed with Trump. And even perennial deadbeat Germany is paid up now.
The point would be giving all but the very rare few time to find out that they're pregnant, so that there are not many horror stories resulting from the prohibition.
Mostly against not keeping track, irregular periods, having no suspicion that you could be pregnant and the like.
Voting popularity also from showing a fetus as cute on a sonogram, whenever that happens around that time.
You also want avoid horror stories after the time limit, which would mostly be something gone wrong with the pregnancy.
It's a horror story minimization problem.
Tom T. said...
It's obviously frustrating for those who oppose all abortions, but Trump's right; that position doesn't have the votes, and pursuing it ultimately results in more abortions, not fewer."
Agree completely. When you offer the choice of only the extremes, the public will choose "unlimited abortion" over "no abortion."
I think 20 is more round and I'm for it, but 16 is closer to what other countries do. Make it so, secure the border, and let's get on to being serious about governance.
Probably the federal number should be one of the durations of Treasury bills: 4, 8, 13, 17 or 26 weeks.
I think what Trump has in mind is a two part national law:
1) No abortions permitted after X weeks, other than the three exceptions (maybe X=16).
2) Abortions permitted until X weeks. Everywhere.
This would be a huge win for pro-choice people, relative to the status quo. But the media insists on painting it as a threat to "womens rights" by only mentioning the first part.
Why do I think that's what he has in mind? The various vague comments he's made about making deals, etc seem to indicate a 2 part law more than they indicate just a ban. But of course, no one can ever really know what he intends to do.
Blogger Kay said..."The rape exception may not be a real exception because it’s going to be hard to legally prove the father is a rapist in only four months, no?"
Prior to 4 months you wouldn't have to prove anything. (Right?)
What about the decision to fine Trump $355m over a "fraud" that didn't cost anybody, especially the lenders, anything?
How is this justice? does he get to appeal?
You know why the public health "experts" like 6 foot social distancing? It's a round number.
16-20 weeks coincidence with the appearance of the baby bump... A nice round number.
Now do we believe that the House can pass that?
Seems like the zero abortions folk dominate there and have been unwilling to entertain exceptions for rape, incest, and health of mother that are robust.
So this is just empty promises.
Speaking of round numbers, we need to consider the $2 billion advanced to Jared Kushner's Affinity Partners global equity firm by the sovereign wealth fund controlled by Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Now with the $363 million disgorgement ruling against the former president and his useless sons in hand, we can expect that Affinity Partners will provide the funds for repaying the State of New York and the $88 million judgment in favor of E. Jean Carroll. As a result, the Trump properties in New York will remain in the hands of the family. Expect that Ivanka will assume the "CEO" title of Trump Companies for at least three years.
For the "conservatives" in the comment fray: which provision of the Constitution provides the federal government with the authority to implement any abortion ban--at 16 weeks or sooner?
I thought overturning Roe just meant that the issue was being returned to the states. Was I wrong?
It's a middle ground that few want. Why not keep it up to the states like a true federalist? I know the answer. Pro Life will hate it because it is 16 weeks too long. Pro Choice will hate it because they can't abort whenever.
I don't get it. You can only abort in the first sixteen weeks, but if it rape or incest you can abort in the ninth month? If not, what difference does it make? You can abort under any circumstances in the first 16 weeks.
“Trump privately supports a nationwide 16 week abortion ban” — but won’t say that out loud until after the primaries. It doesn’t matter what state you live in; women’s rights are on the ballot in November.
I don't see how 16 is a magic number. I don't recall it being in the Bible. Anyway, if abortion is murder, we should treat it as we do other forms of murder, by degrees. Taking contraception as OK and abortion just before birth as first degree, we could have a sliding scale of punishment--say, life in prison for actual infanticide, 30 years for abortion at 18 weeks, 15 years at nine weeks, etc. Let the punishment fit the crime!
16 is not a round number. It is a square number.
Does it even matter what a President thinks the “right” number should be? The Supreme Court turned the matter back to the states, where, from a Constitutional standpoint it belonged in the first place. Trumps opinion matters about as much as my dog’s does.
I watch some of them without the exceptions, etc., etc. Other than certain parts of the country, you can’t — you’re not going to win on this issue. But you will win on this issue when you come up with the right number of weeks.
Because Democrats don’t want to be radical on the issue; most of them, some of them do. They don’t want to be radical on the issue. They don’t want to kill a baby in the seventh month or the ninth month or after birth. And they’re allowed to do that, and you can’t do that.
Donald Trump, Sep 2023
@Joe Smith --
More large round numbers. The Trump Civil Fraud judgment has already advanced to $450 million because of 9% interest which started as far back as five years ago. And if Trump appeals, he has to post 120% of the disgorgement, so up we go to numbers above half a billion dollars.
At what point will you admit that Trump is batshit crazy?
Trump is crazy, but far less crazy than his opponents. (And far more entertaining.)
Six weeks to biological and legal viability in all 50 states. Lose your Pro-Choice ethical religion, your transhumane ideology, your wicked solution. #NoJudgment #NoLabels
That said, since human life begins at conception, human rites performed for social, clinical, criminal, political, and fair weather progress should be discouraged.
I would like someone to define for me the number of abortions that come from:
The state of Florida requires the woman to declare why she's having the abortion.
Here are the figures for 2023.
Excuse me, but wasn't the whole idea of the Supreme Court's decision that abortion is a matter for State law? Or is Trump now running for Governor? I assume of Florida.
I don't agree with him, but it ought not to be a federal issue anyway.
1. Surprising for a business man. If you ask a person to define 1/4 of a year, most would say 3 months. If you ask a businessman/accountant, they will tell you 13 weeks. To a DR. 13 weeks is the 1st trimester. 13 weeks is the comfortable "number"
2. As a conservative, Dobbs rightly found the Federal government is barred, by the constitution, from interfering in the States power to regulate Abortion. If voters of Virginia want to kill babies, up to 6 hours after the umbilical cord is severed, that's up to the voters, not the Federal government. The left absolutely squeal with glee, when a State amends their constitution to allow killing babies up to the time of birth. Strange thing to find joy in, but that is up to the people of the State.
Trump is not a conservative, he probably doesn't check enough boxes to be identified as a Republican. The box he checks is putting the People first, in front of the Government, and putting the United States first, in front of the GOPe, Chamber of Commerce, and the nations we are in negotiation with. Trump ask the hard question, Why are NATO countries not meeting their Treaty obligation. That's why I vote for him. Why is the United States protecting Europe from Russia, with 20% of the population compared to rest of Europe's population and the GDP of Italy That's why I vote for Trump Not because he is/isn't a conservative, but that he prioritizes right thing.
If you can’t get what you want, you get the best you can. If Trump wants 16 weeks because it’s a nice round number, it isn’t necessarily because he personally likes nice round numbers himself. He just knows that a nice round number will be easier to sell.
Not sure what the most likely path would be to justify a federal regulation that would get through the current USSC. Probably as an interstate commerce thing.
"Repay the State of New York"? Did Trump defraud the State of New York out of $355 million, gadfly? If so, I'd be interested in hearing how he did that.
gadfly said...
And if Trump appeals, he has to post 120% of the disgorgement, so up we go to numbers above half a billion dollars.
And the judgement could be overturned or reduced.
The vast majority of European countries have a 12 week limit.
For those talking about Dobbs taking the federal government out of the abortion law business, I agree, and in my earlier comment I said nothing about a federal law. I was talking about Republicans politicians in general. Republican candidates for national office, i.e. Congress and the presidency should encourage talk about 12-16 weeks at the state level, and reject discussion of bans whether state or national, and stress that post-Dobbs, abortion is a state issue and the federal government should stay the hell out of it.
The only way to end “abortion as we know it” is education and changing minds; once that is having substantial effect, that will be the time to start tightening the state laws. But that will take a few generations. Successful politics is compromise, and when outright bans don’t have the support of anywhere close to a majority…time to compromise. As I said earlier, realpolitik, aka, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Blogger Donald said...
For the "conservatives" in the comment fray: which provision of the Constitution provides the federal government with the authority to implement any abortion ban--at 16 weeks or sooner?
I would presume the same one that let's them compel people to purchase healthcare. Though if I had my druthers neither would be done by the Federal Government.
Now with the $363 million disgorgement ruling against the former president and his useless sons in hand, we can expect that Affinity Partners will provide the funds for repaying the State of New York and the $88 million judgment in favor of E. Jean Carroll. As a result, the Trump properties in New York will remain in the hands of the family. Expect that Ivanka will assume the "CEO" title of Trump Companies for at least three years.
And NY real estate developers, owners and lenders will head for Miami and Las Vegas.
we need to consider the $2 billion advanced to Jared Kushner's Affinity Partners global equity firm by the
You mean the money the Saudis are having him invest in Israeli business to foster peace in the region? The monies that were on the brink of creating trade routes that would have been in direct competition with China's Belt and Road? The deal that Iran and Biden hinked just as it was coming to fruition?? But maybe you know better. We are far better off with the Saudis making a deal with China for their nuclear plant that will have no checks on nuclear warhead material i guess. Having a nuclear conflagration in the mideast is far superior to giving Trump or Kushner credit for anything.
You stupid fuck.
'And NY real estate developers, owners and lenders will head for Miami and Las Vegas.'
Any business should get out of every liberal state.
It would be grounds for firing a CEO at this point if they didn't.
The question is if each state should judge and label human lives disparately a la slavery, DEI, political congruence, redistributive change, granny and baby, etc.
National Lampoons European Vacation: My family & I are looking for sex
Sex... six. Sixteen? Kinky.
16 weeks means it is far enough to get information from your ultrasound telling you the fetus is the wrong sex or has malformations but you will have to decide quickly what to do.
Technically, removing a fetus after 12 weeks gets more difficult because the bones are harder, so suction abortion doesn't work, and a D and E can easily perforate the uterus, so the safest way for mom is to induce miscarriage with drugs, meaning the mom might actually see the baby, with all the emotional damage to mom.
KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation) elaborates on abortion bans:
"What kinds of exceptions do abortion bans contain?
Exceptions to state abortion bans generally fall into four general categories:
to prevent the death of the pregnant person,
to preserve the health of the pregnant person,
when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest,
and where the embryo or fetus has lethal anomalies incompatible with life."
More at the link.
The squishy exception is "to preserve the health of the pregnant person," which could be either psychological or medical. Defining it can be nebulous; that's a feature, not a bug.
Notice the criticism of Trump’s policy statement is about how he said it, not what he said, because most of the country agrees.
Meanwhile, Biden has to pander to his party’s extreme.
Advantage Trump.
Life deemed worthy of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. #LoveWins
Also, the People and our Posterity.
No cruel and unusual punishment.
Due process before capital punishment... for social, clinical, criminal, political, and fair weather progress?
So Trump actually gives an honest answer, to a difficult and polarizing question, even though he knows that answer might alienate a substantial fraction of his base.
I guess the leftists are right. Trump is NOT a politician.
Just doing the math and ignoring politics and morality for a moment, Trump would legalize more than 95 percent of abortions in America.
In other words, he would outlaw 5% of the worst abortions.
Trump is a very bad pro-lifer. And he's a sloppy fucker. Nonetheless, outlawing the worst abortions -- the ones that are most obviously homicides -- is a big improvement over the status quo.
5% of 60 million = 3 million babies saved.
Socialist dirtbags on the left don't believe in individual lives, and routinely end up mass murderers. Contrast and compare Trump's irrational OCD number with the "kill them until birth" crowd.
For the "conservatives" in the comment fray: which provision of the Constitution provides the federal government with the authority to implement any abortion ban--at 16 weeks or sooner?
"nor shall any State...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"
person = live human being
I thought overturning Roe just meant that the issue was being returned to the states. Was I wrong?
"I thought the Missouri Compromise resolved the fight over slavery. Was I wrong?"
So smart for Trump to make sure abortion is front and center in the election and that he is a strong advocate for national rules regulating access.
It's been such a winning policy the last year and no one ever has a worry about the Donald changing his word.
All those motivated young women will stay home now that the Donald is here to speak for them.
I doubt that either the pro-abortion hardliners or their anti-abortion opponents would really want to confront the idea that they’re just arguing about the last 5% to 10% of abortions that actually occur.
I wonder if Texas is willing to restart abortions and negate the bills they passed restricting access.
We have been told again and again by the GOP that this is a state by state decision. Trump's statements here contradict that and just are not believable.
Trump is just making a wild claim that he has zero chance of turning into law. And you all just eat up his lies like candy, pretending this is feasible, passable, and not going to cause massive GOP revolt.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा