"If you look at what DeSantis did, a lot of people don't even know if he knew what he was doing. But he signed six weeks, and many people within the pro-life movement feel that that was too harsh."
Trump didn't say his 6 week abortion restriction was too harsh. He said that the pro-life movement felt that it was too harsh. When directly asked if he thought it was too harsh; he was non-comittal.
So yeah, this is actively false. OP didn't intentionally lie, but Fox News did.
Simple: 6 week bans aren't going to be popular nation wide. It is also a pretty good play to destroy republican support even in conservative states, specifically because it gives the Left an issue to make.
We saw this in Kentucky and Kansas as both state's abortion restrictions were rebuffed, because it is a huge motivator for the Left. They care about abortion more than the economy, more than war, and way more than crime. To your average Democrat, it is better that 10 child killers go free, than one fetus go murdered by it's mother.
Look at what happened with Montana. Montana failed to pass a law that would make it a crime to leave a baby to die if an abortion didn't succeed. This is a perfectly reasonable measure. But due to Left-wing propaganda, it failed based on the assumption that dying babies would be beaten to death by doctors.
Ohio even had a trigger law that passed a 6 week abortion ban. It's been jammed up in the courts after a crazy account where doctors just assumed that they couldn't preform abortions on rape & incest victims despite there being nothing saying that in the law.
The Democrats want more than anything to frame the entire election around abortion because it's all they are actually doing okay on with their own base. They even claim that the reason the Republican midterms weren't bigger was because abortion rallied bajillions of democrats from every area to beat back the Handmaid's Tale Nazis.
Not pushing hard on abortion is perfectly reasonable. Go win that part of the culture war if you want to make an impression. Please note: you'll need to win it in Republican states.
I'm sick of the left extremists and the right extremists, they both sit in a room jerking themselves off about how they're going to demonstrate power by ruining peoples control over their own lives.
Abortion is one of those things that has been ingrained into female psyche by the left that means pushing it back even a little can cause a massive backlash.
Just look at the 2022 results after months if neocons talking about banning it, they erased A LOT of gains doing that. The only way to do it is slow boil and remove it gradually. If you're smart, include it WITH trans shit so when the left try the 'you're forcing women to give birth!' You can counter with 'this is part of a package to save children from harmful surgery' so you can slowly turn Abortion from 'women's health' to protecting children from malicious surgery.
Abortion is one of those things that has been ingrained into female psyche by the left that means pushing it back even a little can cause a massive backlash.
You have it backwards, women tend to be narcissistic sympaths, and because of this they believe bring a child into any life that could be inconvenient to them is a reason to kill that child. Illegal abortion was fairly common and frankly not policed that heavily in comparison to other crimes like drugs/ gambling/ etc. This is also why any diagnosis of a medical condition pre birth increases abortion rates as the mothers themselves call it a “mercy killing”. This phenomena has occurred throughout human history, women’s greatest fear is responsibility, abortion is just how far they are willing to go to avoid responsibility at the expense of others.
Probably my luck of being raised around tomboys all my life that I never got that mentality from women, it was being surrounded by women who didn't mind getting dirty (in a mud sense, not onlyfans) to get the job done.
But there's no denying that it's a issue to remove this demonic 'safety net', it's why I think it shouldn't be done by itself, combine it with trans issues with stopping surgery on kids then make women fight trans even more than they do already so that they can't focus on abortion come election day.
I had a balance of both growing up, but even my own sister was/is a hardcore narcissist to the point she probably would have been an AOC if she didn’t become a trophy wife
If a woman wants to do an illegal, very painful and often deadly coat hanger abortion because it’s illegal in our nation, then they can suffer the consequences.
Overturning roe v wade before securing election integrity was idiotic. The moral rot underpinning widespread abortion is a cultural issue that will require decades of hard work after we reacquire broad institutional control. Spending virtually all of your political capital on this one issue, in the middle of an election cycle that features recently normalized voter fraud, was so strategically retarded that it almost had to be deliberate.
Just look at the 2022 results after months if neocons talking about banning it, they erased A LOT of gains doing that. The only way to do it is slow boil and remove it gradually.
Why do you keep trying to push this failing narrative?
This is pushed by people who are completely out of touch and playing the evil game of "If it's a choice I make it, but if it goes bad I take no responsibility that's your problem".
I have a deep suspicion that neocons KNEW saying they would ban abortion would cause that backlash and did it to stop maga aligned Republicans getting in
Abortions is an extremely effective weapon by the establishment to retain power
Trump also confirmed in the interview that he supported exceptions in abortion legislation for "the life of the mother, raping and incest."
"Just as Ronald Reagan was a believer in the exceptions, but I'm a believer in the exceptions," he added.
DeSantis' abortion bill, signed in mid-April, bans most abortions beyond six weeks but includes exceptions for rape and incest. Existing state exceptions for the life of the mother also remain in place.
I don't understand how you could be pro-life and support exceptions for rape and incest. What does that have to do with anything? The life of the mother, I can understand. But rape and incest are just two random crimes that could lead to a pregnancy.
Failed birth control could lead to an accidental pregnancy too, what's the difference between an accidental pregnancy from rape/incest and an accidental pregnancy from failed birth control?
This is a very simple one. If you disallow abortion in the case of rape and incest, then you incentivize both rape and incest as legitimate methods for propagating a genetic line.
If the state tries to force my daughter to bring to term her rapist’s baby, then I will do everything in my power to defeat the state. My family doesn’t tolerate violent incursion.
You also make abortion legal for only people that are willing to lie about being raped.
"in the event of rape" Does that mean a successful conviction for a rape? what if that rape didn't cause the pregnancy? doesn't matter anyway because most convictions last longer then 9 months so it's pointless.
So you have to do it on her word alone, does it require a conviction after the fact to be legal? or does someone just have to be arrested for it to be a "rape" before an abortion is legal?
The underlying problem comes to the fore pretty quickly if you spend longer then 5 seconds thinking about it.
Again, philosophically, there's no material difference with regard to whether the baby has a right not to be murdered. Politically, the material difference is that voters are emotionally more responsive to appeals that it should be allowed for rape and incest. Since our system runs on emotional appeals to voters in order to justify the determined election outcomes, that matters.
Because we live in an insanely gynocentric society to the point that the moral question of do we punish the children for the crimes of the father is yes, but only if it impacts women.
The right to deny rapists entry into your genetic line is not irrational.
If a horde of immigrants descend upon your small town and rape a bunch of your women, should you accept an entire generation of replacement children along with the total destruction of your genetic line?
If a horde of immigrants descend upon your small town and rape a bunch of your women, should you accept an entire generation of replacement children along with the total destruction of your genetic line?
If you let a horde of immigrants descend upon your wives/mothers/ sisters and rape them then you deserve the results
Once again you’re making an example that doesn’t exist in reality, most abortions are elective, the rape abortions aren’t from foreign marauders. If you had to experience the difference you would know it.
Aborting a rape baby is punishing the father. The father's line shouldn't benefit from rape unless you feel like rape is a moral thing to do and should be encouraged through eugenics.
No sweetie, it’s killing the child, rapists don’t rape to procreate in the overwhelming majority of cases, unless you’re talking historically which has no value in current America.
You're just reducing it to one thing when it's more complicated than that because if you admit it's more complicated then your black and white ideology wouldn't hold up. It's killing the child and it's also punishing the father and his line.
You don't think there's any genetic component to rape huh? Like impulse control, delayed gratification for instance?
Leftists are the only people that still believe in their blank-slate theory.
You don't think there's any genetic component to rape huh? Like impulse control, delayed gratification for instance?
If that was truly the case than Germanics would have the highest rape stats as they did a thousand years ago…
You're just reducing it to one thing when it's more complicated than that because if you admit it's more complicated then your black and white ideology wouldn't hold up
You’re claiming nuance when you are in fact just killing a child for the actions of the father
You're not improving, you're just replacing out-of-touch-women with out-of-touch-old-people who are to old to get pregnant so it's a non-issue for them.
The counter argument to that (not my counter argument but one that the absolute pro-life side will make) is why should the baby be punished based on the nature of their conception? Rape and incest is bad obviously but the baby had no part in that, so there is no need to punish the child for the sins of the father.
Again not my argument, just one I have seen the pro-life side make.
In such cases, the aborted baby is a victim of the crime perpetrated by the rapist. If the rapist had not attempted to force his child on another family, then there would not have been an abortion.
This is similar to property rights. If a person tries to steal your stuff and ends up getting shot, whose fault was it? If the person who got shot was an “innocent” child, does the fault suddenly switch to the shooter? No. It switches to the guardian(s) of the child.
You have a right to defend your genetic lineage and that of your family. If your adult children choose to fuck things up, that’s on them. But no one should be permitted to force acceptance of violent incursion on your family line.
I lean pro-life and can understand exceptions for rape (not necessarily for incest, but let's set that aside for now).
...
Let's say you were walking home one day and a man pops out of an alley and knocks you unconscious. When you awake you discover that your circulatory system has been hooked up to a stranger in such a way that if you remove the linkage the stranger will die.
The link is onerous to you, interfering with your everyday life and sapping your energy. Worse yet, you know that if you maintain the link for the full nine months required to save the stranger's life there is a small but real chance that you may die when it is removed as well as a 100% chance that your body will be changed forever afterward.
What would you do? Would you endure the cost and risk to your own health to save the life of the stranger? Perhaps you would. But should you be forced to?
Obviously this is a metaphor for pregnancy via rape. I view bodily autonomy as sacrosanct. The state should not be able to demand that I give of up any part of my own body (life) even to save the life of another person. It's fine if I choose to do so (and perhaps that would even be the moral thing to do) but if the state demands it, well, that is tyranny, pure and simple.
Some pro-abortion people try to extend this bodily autonomy argument to every pregnancy, but I strongly disagree that it applies except in cases of rape. Ordinary pregnancy is the consequence of a woman's choice and that choice means they are responsible for the consequence (delivering the baby). Bringing it back to the analogy we started with, it would be as if the mother found a stranger and forced them to tie their circulatory system to hers. If she did that arguments about bodily autonomy fall away as she specifically chose to make the stranger dependent upon her own body. Removing the link at that point could only be viewed as murder, regardless of how she feels about the downsides or dangers of maintaining the link.
DeSantis' abortion bill, signed in mid-April, bans most abortions beyond six weeks but includes exceptions for rape and incest. Existing state exceptions for the life of the mother also remain in place.
If Trump didn't think he could get away with lying to his supporters, he would never have said this.
And of course, he went to some left-wing rag to push this lie, knowing that they'd never fact-check him.
Attacking DeSantis from the left on abortion harms Trump in the Iowa caucuses badly.
DeSantis needs to show the world that winning a primary against Trump is possible so winning Iowa is a must for him to build some momentum.
Trump had the reputation as the man who killed Roe. This is gold in a state like Iowa.
Trump saying this shit today shows he doesn't want that title and evangelicals will take notice and take action appropriately.
Trump won 2016 primary based on apolitical people willing to register R and give him a shot, business friendly conservatives who are social moderates holding their noses for him and evangelicals getting behind him. He is risking losing one leg of his coalition with attacking pro-life.
Trump has already lost many of the squishy pro business Rs over J6 and Stop the Steal.
This is a bold move cotton for Trump since he has to win the primary before worrying about the general election and losing evangelicals will hurt a lot in the primary.
"He has to do what he has to do," Trump said when asked about Florida's six-week ban. "If you look at what DeSantis did, a lot of people don't even know if he knew what he was doing. But he signed six weeks, and many people within the pro-life movement feel that that was too harsh."
When asked about whether he would support a six-week ban, Trump replied, "I'm looking at all options."
Considering he then goes on to talk about how Roe V. Wade was overturned under him, it's clear what Faux News is trying to do. This whole fucking thing is a psyop to push DeSantis who, may I remind you, signed a bill in a foreign state that violates the first amendment.
This place is full of shit at the best of times. They'll screech about "slippery slope" before arguing that we should have government ID to access porn sites.
Post Reported for: Rule 12 - Falsehoods
Actually, yeah...
Trump didn't say his 6 week abortion restriction was too harsh. He said that the pro-life movement felt that it was too harsh. When directly asked if he thought it was too harsh; he was non-comittal.
So yeah, this is actively false. OP didn't intentionally lie, but Fox News did.
That’s a trumpism though, he never directly says anything, it’s always people say, people tell me etc
Yes, but that's the point. That's how he would always answer any question. There's nothing here suggesting that Trump opposes a 6 week abortion ban.
On top of that, there's nothing in this that is an attack. The wording "hits" is inappropriate.
Trump coming at DeSantis from the left, again
90's Democrats gonna 90's Democrat. Just like Neocons gonna Neocon.
I just wonder how the cultists will defend this one.
Simple: 6 week bans aren't going to be popular nation wide. It is also a pretty good play to destroy republican support even in conservative states, specifically because it gives the Left an issue to make.
We saw this in Kentucky and Kansas as both state's abortion restrictions were rebuffed, because it is a huge motivator for the Left. They care about abortion more than the economy, more than war, and way more than crime. To your average Democrat, it is better that 10 child killers go free, than one fetus go murdered by it's mother.
Look at what happened with Montana. Montana failed to pass a law that would make it a crime to leave a baby to die if an abortion didn't succeed. This is a perfectly reasonable measure. But due to Left-wing propaganda, it failed based on the assumption that dying babies would be beaten to death by doctors.
Ohio even had a trigger law that passed a 6 week abortion ban. It's been jammed up in the courts after a crazy account where doctors just assumed that they couldn't preform abortions on rape & incest victims despite there being nothing saying that in the law.
The Democrats want more than anything to frame the entire election around abortion because it's all they are actually doing okay on with their own base. They even claim that the reason the Republican midterms weren't bigger was because abortion rallied bajillions of democrats from every area to beat back the Handmaid's Tale Nazis.
Not pushing hard on abortion is perfectly reasonable. Go win that part of the culture war if you want to make an impression. Please note: you'll need to win it in Republican states.
My odds are on "call him a DeSantis shill" as if I think that neocon cloaking himself in the culture war wouldn't be a worse version of Dubya.
Why would anyone need to defend it?
I'm sick of the left extremists and the right extremists, they both sit in a room jerking themselves off about how they're going to demonstrate power by ruining peoples control over their own lives.
How is being anti baby murder 'extreme right'?
"baby murder" is as absurd as "trans genocide".
Abortion is a losing issue for Republicans. He knows it. Roe vs wade was abolished, that's all the victory anyone needs on abortion at this point
Roe v Wade being stuck down means nothing if the governors of the states don't sign bills into law.
everything is losing issue for Republicans
Yes, because their role in the false binary is to lose gracefully, but that's a separate argument.
At least one too few
Abortion is one of those things that has been ingrained into female psyche by the left that means pushing it back even a little can cause a massive backlash.
Just look at the 2022 results after months if neocons talking about banning it, they erased A LOT of gains doing that. The only way to do it is slow boil and remove it gradually. If you're smart, include it WITH trans shit so when the left try the 'you're forcing women to give birth!' You can counter with 'this is part of a package to save children from harmful surgery' so you can slowly turn Abortion from 'women's health' to protecting children from malicious surgery.
You have it backwards, women tend to be narcissistic sympaths, and because of this they believe bring a child into any life that could be inconvenient to them is a reason to kill that child. Illegal abortion was fairly common and frankly not policed that heavily in comparison to other crimes like drugs/ gambling/ etc. This is also why any diagnosis of a medical condition pre birth increases abortion rates as the mothers themselves call it a “mercy killing”. This phenomena has occurred throughout human history, women’s greatest fear is responsibility, abortion is just how far they are willing to go to avoid responsibility at the expense of others.
Probably my luck of being raised around tomboys all my life that I never got that mentality from women, it was being surrounded by women who didn't mind getting dirty (in a mud sense, not onlyfans) to get the job done.
But there's no denying that it's a issue to remove this demonic 'safety net', it's why I think it shouldn't be done by itself, combine it with trans issues with stopping surgery on kids then make women fight trans even more than they do already so that they can't focus on abortion come election day.
I had a balance of both growing up, but even my own sister was/is a hardcore narcissist to the point she probably would have been an AOC if she didn’t become a trophy wife
Damn, I had it easy a kid in rural then high school city so that's when I saw the difference and gained my 'charming outlook' lol
If a woman wants to do an illegal, very painful and often deadly coat hanger abortion because it’s illegal in our nation, then they can suffer the consequences.
Good comment.
Overturning roe v wade before securing election integrity was idiotic. The moral rot underpinning widespread abortion is a cultural issue that will require decades of hard work after we reacquire broad institutional control. Spending virtually all of your political capital on this one issue, in the middle of an election cycle that features recently normalized voter fraud, was so strategically retarded that it almost had to be deliberate.
Why do you keep trying to push this failing narrative?
This is pushed by people who are completely out of touch and playing the evil game of "If it's a choice I make it, but if it goes bad I take no responsibility that's your problem".
It's not the neocons who give a shit about abortion, its the bible thumpers. But one can be both a neocon and a thumper, see W.
I have a deep suspicion that neocons KNEW saying they would ban abortion would cause that backlash and did it to stop maga aligned Republicans getting in
Abortions is an extremely effective weapon by the establishment to retain power
It’s certainly possible. I’ve seen establishment politicians put out legislation to sand bag their own side.
This is the correct analysis, and frankly, why I think DeSantis is doing it.
One cannot be both a neocon and a Christian, but a neocon can cynically use Christian imagery for personal gain.
The fact that he still stands by the vaccine is more proof of that.
I don't understand how you could be pro-life and support exceptions for rape and incest. What does that have to do with anything? The life of the mother, I can understand. But rape and incest are just two random crimes that could lead to a pregnancy.
It's philosophically incoherent, but strategically useful in the battle to reduce the amount of baby murders.
Failed birth control could lead to an accidental pregnancy too, what's the difference between an accidental pregnancy from rape/incest and an accidental pregnancy from failed birth control?
This is a very simple one. If you disallow abortion in the case of rape and incest, then you incentivize both rape and incest as legitimate methods for propagating a genetic line.
If the state tries to force my daughter to bring to term her rapist’s baby, then I will do everything in my power to defeat the state. My family doesn’t tolerate violent incursion.
You also make abortion legal for only people that are willing to lie about being raped.
"in the event of rape" Does that mean a successful conviction for a rape? what if that rape didn't cause the pregnancy? doesn't matter anyway because most convictions last longer then 9 months so it's pointless.
So you have to do it on her word alone, does it require a conviction after the fact to be legal? or does someone just have to be arrested for it to be a "rape" before an abortion is legal?
The underlying problem comes to the fore pretty quickly if you spend longer then 5 seconds thinking about it.
Again, philosophically, there's no material difference with regard to whether the baby has a right not to be murdered. Politically, the material difference is that voters are emotionally more responsive to appeals that it should be allowed for rape and incest. Since our system runs on emotional appeals to voters in order to justify the determined election outcomes, that matters.
Because we live in an insanely gynocentric society to the point that the moral question of do we punish the children for the crimes of the father is yes, but only if it impacts women.
The right to deny rapists entry into your genetic line is not irrational.
If a horde of immigrants descend upon your small town and rape a bunch of your women, should you accept an entire generation of replacement children along with the total destruction of your genetic line?
Absolutely not.
Christians need not be fucking cucks.
If you let a horde of immigrants descend upon your wives/mothers/ sisters and rape them then you deserve the results
If the horde of immigrants couldn't protect their rape babies, they deserve abortions.
Once again you’re making an example that doesn’t exist in reality, most abortions are elective, the rape abortions aren’t from foreign marauders. If you had to experience the difference you would know it.
Aborting a rape baby is punishing the father. The father's line shouldn't benefit from rape unless you feel like rape is a moral thing to do and should be encouraged through eugenics.
abort the rapist.
No sweetie, it’s killing the child, rapists don’t rape to procreate in the overwhelming majority of cases, unless you’re talking historically which has no value in current America.
You're just reducing it to one thing when it's more complicated than that because if you admit it's more complicated then your black and white ideology wouldn't hold up. It's killing the child and it's also punishing the father and his line.
You don't think there's any genetic component to rape huh? Like impulse control, delayed gratification for instance?
Leftists are the only people that still believe in their blank-slate theory.
If that was truly the case than Germanics would have the highest rape stats as they did a thousand years ago…
You’re claiming nuance when you are in fact just killing a child for the actions of the father
Does the rapist's line continue if the baby is not aborted? Yes, Darling.
This is simple a fact of life. If you raise a rape baby you are rewarding the rapist and his family line.
You're simply delusional if you believe there's only one consideration here.
You're not improving, you're just replacing out-of-touch-women with out-of-touch-old-people who are to old to get pregnant so it's a non-issue for them.
It's like how gun control advocates support complete bans but will take what they can get. A war isn't won in one fell swoop.
In the meantime, there's plenty of people on the ground who speak out to pregnant women about keeping the baby in cases of rape/incest.
The counter argument to that (not my counter argument but one that the absolute pro-life side will make) is why should the baby be punished based on the nature of their conception? Rape and incest is bad obviously but the baby had no part in that, so there is no need to punish the child for the sins of the father.
Again not my argument, just one I have seen the pro-life side make.
In such cases, the aborted baby is a victim of the crime perpetrated by the rapist. If the rapist had not attempted to force his child on another family, then there would not have been an abortion.
This is similar to property rights. If a person tries to steal your stuff and ends up getting shot, whose fault was it? If the person who got shot was an “innocent” child, does the fault suddenly switch to the shooter? No. It switches to the guardian(s) of the child.
You have a right to defend your genetic lineage and that of your family. If your adult children choose to fuck things up, that’s on them. But no one should be permitted to force acceptance of violent incursion on your family line.
I lean pro-life and can understand exceptions for rape (not necessarily for incest, but let's set that aside for now).
...
Let's say you were walking home one day and a man pops out of an alley and knocks you unconscious. When you awake you discover that your circulatory system has been hooked up to a stranger in such a way that if you remove the linkage the stranger will die.
The link is onerous to you, interfering with your everyday life and sapping your energy. Worse yet, you know that if you maintain the link for the full nine months required to save the stranger's life there is a small but real chance that you may die when it is removed as well as a 100% chance that your body will be changed forever afterward.
What would you do? Would you endure the cost and risk to your own health to save the life of the stranger? Perhaps you would. But should you be forced to?
Obviously this is a metaphor for pregnancy via rape. I view bodily autonomy as sacrosanct. The state should not be able to demand that I give of up any part of my own body (life) even to save the life of another person. It's fine if I choose to do so (and perhaps that would even be the moral thing to do) but if the state demands it, well, that is tyranny, pure and simple.
Some pro-abortion people try to extend this bodily autonomy argument to every pregnancy, but I strongly disagree that it applies except in cases of rape. Ordinary pregnancy is the consequence of a woman's choice and that choice means they are responsible for the consequence (delivering the baby). Bringing it back to the analogy we started with, it would be as if the mother found a stranger and forced them to tie their circulatory system to hers. If she did that arguments about bodily autonomy fall away as she specifically chose to make the stranger dependent upon her own body. Removing the link at that point could only be viewed as murder, regardless of how she feels about the downsides or dangers of maintaining the link.
If Trump didn't think he could get away with lying to his supporters, he would never have said this.
And of course, he went to some left-wing rag to push this lie, knowing that they'd never fact-check him.
🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿
It looks like Trump is trying to combat his electability problem for the general.
u/onetruephilosoraptor
Attacking DeSantis from the left on abortion harms Trump in the Iowa caucuses badly.
DeSantis needs to show the world that winning a primary against Trump is possible so winning Iowa is a must for him to build some momentum.
Trump had the reputation as the man who killed Roe. This is gold in a state like Iowa.
Trump saying this shit today shows he doesn't want that title and evangelicals will take notice and take action appropriately.
Trump won 2016 primary based on apolitical people willing to register R and give him a shot, business friendly conservatives who are social moderates holding their noses for him and evangelicals getting behind him. He is risking losing one leg of his coalition with attacking pro-life.
Trump has already lost many of the squishy pro business Rs over J6 and Stop the Steal.
This is a bold move cotton for Trump since he has to win the primary before worrying about the general election and losing evangelicals will hurt a lot in the primary.
Considering he then goes on to talk about how Roe V. Wade was overturned under him, it's clear what Faux News is trying to do. This whole fucking thing is a psyop to push DeSantis who, may I remind you, signed a bill in a foreign state that violates the first amendment.
Trusting anything from Faux. Like we’re forgetting already.
This place is full of shit at the best of times. They'll screech about "slippery slope" before arguing that we should have government ID to access porn sites.