The other possibility here is to take a state's rights stance on this, which is a pathway to opposing abortion at the state level, while allowing the national election to be about other issues like border security, inflation, foreign policy, etc. I think that is a pathway that could bring the pro-life Christians and the mainline and Catholic voters who would vote Republican if the pro-life issue was not emphasized at the federal level.
A state is nothing more than a slightly smaller fed. Why should someone in Alabama not have the liberty to choose? Again, in one scenario, it is up to you to decide. Decide as you will. In the other it is a few dozen people with no connection to you.
You miss understand. The point the SC turned over RvW was because they said it was a states rights issue. So pubs should not have it on their platform as a federal issue. Personally I don't care who has an abortion as long as it is not paid for with tax dollars.
Except I do understand. SCOTUS used the exact same logic. “Alabama” doesn’t “want” abortion. That is an absurd idea. Of course some individuals in Alabama want that choice. A few dozen people in Alabama decided for millions that choice is not an option, due to their own biases. Those biases may even be correct, who am I to say? But they are most certainly not provable. So who are they to say? It is an individual torment.
And even after she did do so she's still not invited to the Republican National Convention. Apparently she was punished for waiting too long to kowtow to the Dear Leader. Nikki Haley wasn't invited to RNC, spokesman confirms Maybe she's hoping for a last minute invite.
It was never about " pro life" that is a bullshit talking point. It has been and always will be about power and control over everyone, even those who do not share their beliefs. The rest is just noise. Vote accordingly.
To the extreme so called prolifers overturning Roe v Wade was only the first step towards a human life amendment under which human life begins at conception. It was a very important first step but still only a first step. As far as the states rights argument is concerned I'm so old to remember when Dixiecrats argued that whether schools should be integrated or whether there should be Jim Crow segregation laws should be left up to the states. In fact the formal name of the Dixiecrat Party under which the late Strom Thurmond ran for the presidency in 1948 was the States Rights Party.
And yet, we all know from the games DeSantis played that as soon as they're elected, they'll push a national abortion ban. BTW, Republicans really need to address their racism problem:
Did you ever really think Trump was really anti abortion? Or that he cared about religious right issues at all? I’d be willing to bet there were more then one aborted Little Trumps over the years.
He unequivocally promised to nominate justices that would overturn Roe vs. Wade, and I was willing to give him a chance to deliver on that promise. I was not sure if he would deliver, but he did. I don’t know if you remember, but right before the 2016 election one of the biggest mistakes Hillary Clinton made IMO was she came out and said one of the goals of her administration would be to promote abortion globally beyond the borders of the US. She wanted to make abortion a right available to every woman in the world. I had lingering doubts about how I was going to vote in 2016 up until that point. When I heard that…my decision was made. I had all the motivation in the world to cast that vote for a potential flaky promise to overturn Roe vs. Wade vs a promise to expand Roe vs. Wade to the entire world. I took both candidates at their word.
It's amazing what rubes people are. Did the SCOTUS justices confirmation hearings where they said Roe was settled law matter when they got the chance to eliminate it? No. The GOP has been beaten over the head in elections since Roe was overturned with pro choice campaigning. They have lost elections where they were polling as winning by double digits because of it. They are just trying to hide what they plan to do here. It's no different than Trump publicly disavowing Project 2025. It's sleight of hand. Why would anyone fall for believing this again?
Nobody clarified, but I’ll just say, if the former platform called for a federal ban on ALL abortion, including any exceptions, then that is an extreme position and they needed to abandon that a long time ago. Off the top, I know Reagan, Bush Sr, Trump have always supported exceptions and they were the respective heads of party when they held office. So that position needed to go a long time ago.
I mean every law does this. We all have a little less liberty because of most laws. We can dictate speeding, property taxes, having to wear clothes in public, but something as big as limiting the termination of human life should have no law? Banning 3rd trimester abortions limits liberty too. I say this here all the time. We all want to limit liberty. We just have different lines in the sand. At some point, we are all "pro-birthers"
You can do the research yourself, but there are dozens of GOP pols calling for national abortion bans since Roe was overturned. The "states rights" lie was no more truthful than SCOTUS saying Roe was settled law.
