Donald Trump Speaks On Abortion – And It’s Just As Bad As You Imagine

Filed in National by on March 30, 2016

Via The Daily Beast:

There must be “some form of punishment” for women who have abortions, Donald Trump said Wednesday afternoon

Adding…

“you go back to a position like they had where they would perhaps go to illegal places, but we have to ban it.” and the exact punishment would “have to be determined.”

And the finishing touch…

Asked whether men would be held responsible for abortions under the law as well, Trump replied, “I would say no.”

This hardly surprises me. It is right in line with the Republican platform and would be the easiest (and first) law passed during a Trump/Cruz/Kasich Presidency. These are not side issues.

 

Tags: ,

About the Author ()

A stay-at-home mom with an obsession for National politics.

Comments (46)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. jason330 says:

    The longer this charade (the Trump candidacy) goes on, the more confident I am that the Democrat will obliterate his ass in November.

    Trump is the disaster for Republicans that everyone says he is. He will not be the disaster for American that I feared he’d be.

  2. pandora says:

    I agree, Jason – even if they somehow stop him from getting the nomination they’ll lose.

    What’s concerning is the fact that Trump said out loud the GOP platform on abortion – right down to punishing women, but not men – and Cruz and Kasich will come out strongly against imprisoning women and be praised as reasonable. Keep in mind the “pro-life” position on women getting abortions is that they’re victims who don’t know what they’re doing – you know, children. That said, you can bet money if these guys succeed in outlawing abortion there would be a punishment for women.

  3. puck says:

    This Trump comment will put the rest of the party in an interesting position. Denounce Trump’s comment. and explain why women shouldn’t be penalized for abortions. Or endorse Trump, and face the wrath of women who might otherwise have voted for them.

    This has always been the cognitive dissonance in the pro-life position. I’ve always been able to silence an abortion debate by asking “If abortion is murder, what penalty should the woman get?” They really have no answer. In their fucked-up view of women, women who get abortions are victims of evil doctors who won’t tell them the truth, or are coerced by the father. And of the left, of course.

  4. bamboozer says:

    Conservatives eternally thirst for revenge on the perceived enemy of the moment, the women who would vote for Trump will probably have no problem with this comment and for that matter far worse. Trump will not get the votes of most women, the ones he does get will most likely be Evangelicals and perhaps strict Catholic as well. But I certainly agree, Trump has alienated and offended large swaths of the electorate and cannot win. The real question is the house and senate, can he doom the Republicans there as well? Here’s hoping so.

  5. Brooke says:

    Well, I don’t see any reason why Catholic women would vote for Trump, particularly this year, when Pope Francis has expanded forgiveness for women who have had abortions. http://www.nbcnews.com/news/religion/pope-francis-priests-can-forgive-abortion-if-women-are-contrite-n419321

    The evangelicals…well I never understand what makes that frog jump.

  6. kavips says:

    I’ve been chagrined lately by all the negative talk about Trump, almost as if he wasn’t the overwhelming favorite of Republicans everywhere to lead his party…. Trump, if he truly did not represent the BEST Republicans had to offer, would not be winning..

    He IS what Republicans want… WE can now point to Charlie Copeland, and say: There is another Donald Trump. WE can point to Priscilla Rakestraw (bless her heart) and say: There is another Donald Trump. WE can point to Rick Jensen and say: Look, there is another Donald Trump. Because if you support the Republican values, you are secretly supporting Donald Trump.

    Oh, they may publicly deny it, as did Peter do to Jesus, but as with Peter, it is for their own safety from the mob that leads them to do so. Because the truth is, Republicans are their party. They associated with them, They cultivated them. They led them….

    Personally none of these may agree with him, and some may be supporting other candidates. But that does not excuse the fact that they and every other Republican, represent exactly what Trump has been saying as long as they remain a Republican….

    He is the front runner for one reason: the majority of Republicans who’ve voted so far, want him as their president… And if that is so, he should win the nomination and then we all can vote, and see once and for all, which direction America wants to go… Trumps way or another way…. Do we want to punish abortionists? I’d say 80-20 that would be a NO. Which means if you vote for any republican at all in this election cycle, you are voicing your support for Trump. Your actions speak louder than your words to the contrary.

  7. Falcor says:

    “He is the front runner for one reason: the majority of Republicans who’ve voted so far, want him as their president…”

    Yeahhhh… So this isn’t actually true.

    “He IS what Republicans want…”

    Some, poorly educated ones, not all… But ok

    “Trump, if he truly did not represent the BEST Republicans had to offer, would not be winning..”

    So you’re telling me Hillary Clinton, a warmongering, disaster of a Secretary of State who is an outed Wall St shill is the best Democrats have to offer? C’mon, we both know that isn’t true.

  8. Ben says:

    Whatever you want to call Clinton, she is also what the majority of democrats want. You can’t deny popular vote totals… For either party.
    Here’s what I want to know. Republicans have always longed to outlaw abortion. What was their plan when women still got them? I can’t make it any clearer how much I disagree with that…. But, wouldn’t there have HAD to have been ” some sort of penalty” for breaking such a law? Trump just says what the GOP has been implying for decades. They have shunned intellect and championed hate. I imagine he just increased his lead in the primary polls.

  9. pandora says:

    Of course Trumps views on abortion line up 100% with the GOP and their other candidates. We are already charging and locking up women for having miscarriages. Punishment has always been part of the GOP agenda. How could it not be?

    Sure, they dance around it, but it’s the end game. First, they pass laws that close down clinics (that’s happening at an alarming rate). Then they’ll arrest doctors – in the name of “protecting” women – and then they’ll arrest women who are forced to pursue “at home” remedies.

    Donald Trump just said the plan out loud. He didn’t use the approved GOP lingo, but he got the message and stated their platform correctly. Republicans and anti-abortionists know they can’t speak that truth due to votes, but explain to me how outlawing abortion (the clearly stated goal of Rs and anti-abortionists) wouldn’t result in punishment?

    The line about not holding men responsible is so damn predictable and reveals everything you need to know about the GOP. Control women. Men? Not so much.

    Go take a look at the laws Republicans are actually passing or trying to pass at the state and federal level. Notice a theme? Abortion is their priority. It’s what they do.

  10. puck says:

    Republican opposition to abortion is just another wedge issue, although maybe the biggest. The Republican elite isn’t burning up with the need to control women or their bodies. Like any other wedge issue, they are using abortion to assemble an electoral coalition that votes against their own economic interest and for the corporations and plutocrats. That is where their interest in opposing abortion ends. As soon as opposition to abortion no longer serves their electoral goals, they will drop it like a hot potato and leave it back in the hands of the religious kooks where it belongs. The 1% would be just as happy to become Democrats, who have proved to be very responsive to their money.

  11. Ben says:

    Puck, I think you underestimate the number of republican voters who support banning/punishing/shaming abortion. The republican elite is dead. They are no longer in control. If they want to keep winning their local elections (because the more national elections get, the less of a chance they stand) they will have to fully embrace Trumpism. And they will.

  12. pandora says:

    It most certainly is not a wedge issue. It’s an issue with actual legislation being passed across the country and impacting women. This isn’t like “calls” to privatize social security. This is actually happening. Sheesh, in 2015 over 400 anti-abortion bills were introduced and many passed.

    It infuriates me that you dismiss this issue, puck. An issue that is, you know, actually happening, unlike some of your nightmare scenarios. BTW, that’s not me dismissing your issues, but it is me asking how many more bills/laws have to be passed for you to stop calling women’s reproductive rights a wedge issue.

  13. Brian says:

    “As soon as opposition to abortion no longer serves their electoral goals, they will drop it like a hot potato and leave it back in the hands of the religious kooks where it belongs.”

    I don’t really see abortion becoming useless as a wedge issue for the GOP anytime soon. Look at the 2 front runners. One IS a religious nutjob who needs the votes of those for whom abortion is a wedge issue, and the other is a bag of hot air who also needs those wedge issue voters.

  14. pandora says:

    What really bothers me is calling abortion a wedge issue. It implies it’s not important and it’s just a tactic to drum up votes while completely ignoring all the laws being passed. In fact, if you judge a parties priorities/agenda/platform on the number of bills introduced and laws passed (which seems the best way – judge what they do, not what they say) then abortion is pretty much the #1 priority – which makes it a main issue, not a “wedge” issue.

  15. Jason330 says:

    Is Gay Marriage still controversial?

    That said, in the pro-life universe you have can artists and the conned. I don’t see the conned waking up to reality anytime soon. Maybe they’ll die off, but that is a long slow process.

  16. puck says:

    ” Look at the 2 front runners. One IS a religious nutjob who needs the votes of those for whom abortion is a wedge issue, and the other is a bag of hot air who also needs those wedge issue voters.”

    So if the Republicans lose the general in a landslide, will you agree I was right and opposition to abortion is a wedge issue that is no longer working for the right?

    If there is a Dem landslide up and down the ticket, I expect Republicans everywhere will be reevaluating all their social conservative positions.

  17. pandora says:

    Nope. Not going to agree with that. I grew up taking my reproductive rights for granted. Won’t ever do that again. I am not a wedge issue.

  18. I’m starting to wonder whether Trump, realizing that he actually could be the nominee, and possibly the president, is beginning to deliberately destroy his own campaign.

    Hear me out. He’s been enjoying this reality show of his own making for almost a year now. We’ve seen, through many of his other ventures, that his bluster and bravado often mask the hollowness of his claims and his ‘accomplishments’.

    Maybe he doesn’t want to BE President. To me, this entire last week suggests that this could be the case. It’s one thing to dominate the news cycles, it’s another thing to dominate the news cycles when the news does you no favors. And that’s what this last week has been. He couldn’t do a better job of sabotaging his campaign if he tried.

    Maybe he’s trying to do just that. Just something to think about.

  19. puck says:

    @pandora: So what do you think should be done to stop red states from passing anti-abortion laws? Because if there is a Dem landslide, there will still be red states, and boy will they be pissed.

  20. Dave says:

    I think he is a hostage to his own reality show and arrogance. Initially the reality show was to give Trump his biggest audience, which he dearly loves. As he began to win, it was no longer about the biggest audience it became more about winning because Trump hates to lose. So now, not losing means being President. If he throws the election, he’s a loser. If he loses legitimately, he is a loser. And if by some blind squirrel finding an acorn chance he wins, he’ll be forced to be the best President that ever was because to be anything less, means he is a loser.

    That’s the real danger in Trump, his driving need to come out on top. Diplomacy requires compromise. Getting bills through Congress requires compromise. Anything and everything in government requires compromise. That’s not Trump and that’s the real danger. He will not talk softly but carry a big stick. He will talk loudly and use the stick.

    The upside is that he will be one and done because he will hate the office and its constraints so bad that he will decide not run for re-election, preferring instead to go out on top.

    As far as abortion goes, Trump could care less about it either way. What he cares about is winning. So he will says what he needs to say during the primary and then say something different during the general. Don’t make the mistake that Trump has any real values and principles. He is not like most people. He values success. That’s it. That’s all. Well, almost anyway. He does seem to value his family, but even then I’m not sure how much of that is for show.

  21. puck says:

    Trump values his family so much he has three of them.

  22. Dave says:

    And speaking of abortion, I do wish we would expend as much energy on preventing unwanted pregnancy as we do on abortion. But as a nation we seem to have a penchant treating symptoms rather than causes. A symptom is an effect. It’s the result of a cause. There are a zillion interrogative techniques used to explore cause-and-effect relationships. In all of them their sole purpose is get to the root cause(s).

    We have a poor record of applying those techniques any of our social ills, which is one reason why we make so little progress towards alleviating and eliminating those social ills.

  23. Ben says:

    “So what do you think should be done to stop red states from passing anti-abortion laws?”
    Elect a president who will appoint non-ass hats to the SC. Go through legal fights and overturn every single one of the MANY MANY laws in effect right now that restrict women’s rights to their own bodies. Someone DOES need to be punished for this, and it’s red states. If Dems ever re-take congress, pass laws that make rights to health care iron-clad. Finally, treat violent protesters at PP like the terrorists they are.
    Fuck their opinions and voices.

  24. pandora says:

    Question: If we could enact 100% of Bernie’s economic platform (including free college tuition and single payer) but, in order to do so, we’d have to agree to concede to longer waiting periods for abortion and a smaller window/time frame in which to have them (Roe v Wade stays) would you agree to that? Just curious.

  25. puck says:

    Yes, the Supreme Court is the way to go, just like it was (and still is) for LGBT rights. We already have a ruling establishing the right to an abortion; now we need test cases and rulings to beat back all the de facto end runs around it.

    But none of that takes away the fact that abortion is a prime Republican wedge issue used by the 1% to dupe people into voting against their economic interests. Just like Repubs won the 2004 presidential election by running an anti-gay marriage amendment in Ohio to drive turnout.

    But the tide has turned in the culture wars, even as the battles continue. Now Repubs are trying to run the same wedge game with these “religious freedom” laws, but it isn’t going well for them. I hope and expect the same thing will develop for anti-abortion laws.

  26. Ben says:

    I take issue with that question, since Sander’s platform includes better access to health care, including reproductive services. In that scenario, do you include STD screening (men and women) , access to birth control, (men and women… condoms should be covered) and everything else PP does? Would be 99% of his plan, minus that one thing?

  27. mouse says:

    It’s always sexual oppression with these freaks. Gays, marriage, transgender restrooms, birth control, medical coverage, sex education..

  28. Ben says:

    Either way, I dont have an answer.
    Your question from a different angle….. Would I let the practice of forcing 10 of thousands of dollars of debt onto 18 year olds with the false promise of good employment continue? What about continuing fracking and allowing energy companies to destroy our planet? What are those being traded for?

  29. pandora says:

    It’s a thought experiment, Ben. I was just wondering, especially given puck’s responses and how he rates issues.

  30. Ben says:

    yeah, it’s a toughie.
    I gotta say, taking personal feelings and my emotions out of it…. approaching it like a “pro-con list”, I gotta take 99% of Sanders’ agenda. I dont feel super great about that choice, but there it is…. now to shower and donate money to PP.

  31. puck says:

    “If we could enact 100% of Bernie’s economic platform (including free college tuition and single payer) but, in order to do so, we’d have to agree to concede to longer waiting periods for abortion and a smaller window/time frame in which to have them (Roe v Wade stays) would you agree to that?”

    No – because I don’t agree with 100% of Bernie’s platform. Also, it’s clear that Roe v. Wade is not enough, or at least isn’t defended against being chipped away.

    If you could give up your children’s and healthcare and educational plans in exchange for a guarantee against those abortion restrictions would you?

    Let me put it another way. Suppose there were a pro-life Democrat running for the US Senate, and Democratic control of the Senate hung in the balance. Would you work for that candidate?

    Replace “pro-choice” with “pro trickle-down,” and you see we have welcomed those pro trickle-down Democrats many times. So we all compromise our principles.

    How about this – I won’t make dumb hypotheticals for you, and you won’t make them for me. Deal?

  32. pandora says:

    But see… I’m not the one grouping things into real issues and wedge issues. That’s you. So I consider my question fair. I’m just trying to figure out where you draw the line.

    Thanks for the honesty, Ben. It makes me sad, but it’s honest. I think it’s this undercurrent that I feel when it comes to the Sanders’ campaign – that one issue matters above all else and in order to achieve it then we’d have to compromise on “wedge” issues. What’s really scary is that’s probably the only successful path in enacting any of Bernie’s policies.

  33. puck says:

    It is not dismissive to call abortion a wedge issue, which it is. Republicans created Reagan Democrats when they added pro-life planks to their platform for the first time in 1976. It is dismissive to call my analysis dismissive.

  34. Ben says:

    Why do you say “one issue?” I stated multiple issues (single payer health care, tuition-(and therefor loan)-free college, environmental protections….. and by extension, investments in renewable energy…… and do add to it (also a part of his agenda) CJ and prison reform, investment in infrastructure…. thats 5 or6 MAJOR issues… are they not?
    FWIW, im not trying to “bring you to my side” or win an argument… but it is important that you understand that I sided where I did for more than “one issue”

  35. pandora says:

    If I wasn’t clear, Ben, I said this above: “I was just wondering, especially given puck’s responses and how he rates issues.”

  36. Jason330 says:

    This supports El Som’s theory:

    APPLETON, Wis. — Donald Trump believes American troops are afraid to fight for fear of violating the Geneva Conventions, he said Wednesday.

    “The problem is we have the Geneva Conventions, all sorts of rules and regulations, so the soldiers are afraid to fight,” Trump said at an afternoon town hall during remarks on torture.

    Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/donald-trump-geneva-conventions-221394#ixzz44UbnpBef
    Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

  37. puck says:

    “I think it’s this undercurrent that I feel when it comes to the Sanders’ campaign – that one issue matters above all else and in order to achieve it then we’d have to compromise on “wedge” issues.”

    That train left the station long ago. In fact that is what is meant by “triangulation.” Bernie is the antidote.

  38. Ben says:

    Naw, you were clear on that.. I’m just continuing the thought experiment. I think it’s a good exercise to examine which, among many import issues, is MOST important.

  39. aaanonymous says:

    @pandora: You apparently misunderstand the term “wedge issue.” It’s any issue that splits people, regardless of whether it really affects people or not. A “real” issue can also be a wedge issue.

  40. pandora says:

    I get that, aaa. I think I’m coming from puck’s comments on previous threads about social issues mattering too much.

  41. puck says:

    “puck’s comments on previous threads about social issues mattering too much.”

    (spits put mouthfuls of straw)… I said we give social issues too much weight in determining who is a progressive and who is not. Very narrow context, don’t extend it past what I said.

    But Democrats HAVE already chosen between social issues and economic issues. Roe v. Wade still stands, gay marriage is legal – but tax rates on the rich are around historic lows, our pensions are gone, and our jobs are offshored. Mostly all accomplished with Democratic votes. What kind of Democrat do you want to be?

  42. Ben says:

    Row V Wade still stands, though individual states still find ways around it…. same with LGBTQ rights… look what Mississippi just did. I WOULD be for “winning” the culture war definitively. Imposing rules on states that wont willingly play ball. Screw the South if they want to continue living in the 1860s…. doing all of that, if it meant moderate dems like Carper and Co were next on the ‘hit list” (i dont want to kill anyone, NSA lackey reading this site)… We make some final, and irreversible victories on social issues, then go after…. what I very much consider to be a social issue… income inequality.

  43. puck says:

    Incremental pragmatism seems to be a much more effective strategy on social issues than on economic issues. You can tell the pragmatists don’t really put their heart into the economic issues. Sometimes they are on the wrong side entirely (see Carper, Carney, Coons).

  44. Ben says:

    I’m a sweeping-change, make-them-eat-veggies activist all across the board kind of progressive. If it’s something that should be done, make it happen. If people complain about it, they are probably causing the problem you are trying to fix and therefor, dont matter.
    Mississippians who hate teh gayz… they dont matter. Wall st execs who think they pay too much in taxes… screw em. Oil company execs who pay scientists to fudge data, F them and their “scientists”. At some point, we need to admit that tolerance and inclusion of the wrong people is counter productive to a tolerant and inclusive society.

  45. puck says:

    As the poorest state in the union, Mississippi is probably immune to boycott threats.

  46. Jenr says:

    El Somnambulo says:
    March 31, 2016 at 9:20 am

    “I’m starting to wonder whether Trump, realizing that he actually could be the nominee, and possibly the president, is beginning to deliberately destroy his own campaign”

    I have been wondering the exact same thing. He doesn’t want the responsibility of being President.