- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Donald Trump’s plan for a 16-week, national abortion ban wasn’t supposed to be public. Democrats are ready to pounce
LATE LAST WEEK, the New York Times reported that Donald Trump privately told his allies he backs a 16-week national abortion ban with some exceptions. Inside the Trump campaign, the news was immediately met with deep annoyance, anger, and a scramble for damage control, two people familiar with the matter tell Rolling Stone.
Prior to the report, the former president and 2024 GOP frontrunner had repeatedly stressed to advisers that he wants to avoid announcing specific abortion policy positions, at least during this stage of the election cycle, sources close to him say. This is, of course, largely because he understands the dismantling of Roe v. Wade — which he engineered — has become a grave political liability for Republicans.
Members of Trump’s senior staff were maddened by the leak to the Times, venting to one another that whoever blabbed to the media about this wasn’t being helpful, the two sources recount. They weren’t the only ones upset by it: The report also served to inflame some of the anti-abortion movement’s most uncompromising figures, who lashed out at Trump for being insufficiently “pro-life.” Some Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill winced at the news too; they, like Trump, hoped to spend the first half of 2024 talking about abortion as little as possible, according to one GOP lawmaker who bemoaned the recent string of conservatives’ election losses that have largely been attributed to “the Dobbs effect.” Democrats, on the other hand, were thrilled.
To be fair here, the article states that “some exceptions” apply in this “proposal” that is apparently not even written down as of yet, so your criticism is a little too early. There might be exceptions for illnesses or such.
Fuck Trump and his cronies to hell and back and then to hell again, but we can’t lower ourselves to the same shady tactics of baseless outrage and assumptions we see doing so much harm when the GOP employs them.
“Might be exceptions” was said about all the state laws that don’t have exceptions for rape, incest, or the health of the mother.
We know there won’t be exceptions based on the actions previously taken by Republicans.
They’ll make exceptions for a national ban, and design them in such a way that they’re mostly only available to rich people.
Even without exemptions the rich will just travel outside the US.
I don’t think I need to be fair to these folks who have neither a worry or a care of the consequences of their actions. However, it is already more than generous to mock someone who makes a healthcare decision en masse based upon the stated reasons. Mocking ridiculous statements is the minimum. And honestly, we already know how the exceptions are playing out in states with 6-week bans. How would you like to be on deaths door before reviving care because biology wasn’t your side? Or just allowed to die because you lack the resources to flee reprehensible policy? Yeah, I was already being overly generous. Thank you though.
If I or my wife ends up in an American inquisition because she had a miscarriage, we leave. Regardless of the outcome. Leave the States, leave the continent, run to Australia or somewhere far, far away from here.
To be fair?