Why Doesn't the GOP Primary Candidates Take Notice on Abortion?

[Agit8r]

The moderate position would be placing restrictions on the latter part of pregnancy, and not restricting the early term (in accordance with judicial common law).

All of the GOP candidates have taken a far-right position on the issue.

 

[GHook93]

Not intending to derail your thread but every extremist hard right view is losing the GOP Independents whether it be abortion, immigration, gay marriage, whatever.

Political parties are entitled to take positions on issues but they need the center in order to obtain the power to implement their policies.

Like it or not this nation is equally divided on abortion and neither side gets to prevail and impose it's position on the other.

Making it a deal breaker in the primary simply eliminates viable and electable candidates from becoming the nominee IMO.

I agree with gay marriage and abortion losing them the center, but in ILLEGAL immigration they need to hold the line. Independents want the border secured also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JakeStarkey]

The election may force both parties to come to agreement in 2017 on reform of immigration, business hiring, and border.

 

[GHook93]

Abortion is a distraction issue used by democrats to change the subject from their failed economic policies.

Well it works. When they got a guy to say a woman's body can prevent a pregnancy during a legit rape, that Democrats won in what should have been an easy contest for the Republicans to win. When they get tools to say no exceptions for rape or incest moderates and even right learners shake their heads. I mean Huckabee and Cruz have provided a ton of ammo in the swings states for the Dems if they win by saying they agreed with Paraguay.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Derideo_Te]

Not intending to derail your thread but every extremist hard right view is losing the GOP Independents whether it be abortion, immigration, gay marriage, whatever.

Political parties are entitled to take positions on issues but they need the center in order to obtain the power to implement their policies.

Like it or not this nation is equally divided on abortion and neither side gets to prevail and impose it's position on the other.

Making it a deal breaker in the primary simply eliminates viable and electable candidates from becoming the nominee IMO.

I agree with gay marriage and abortion losing them the center, but in ILLEGAL immigration they need to hold the line. Independents want the border secured also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everyone wants a solution to the problem of illegal immigration across the board.

However in order to find one you need a compromise that takes into account all of the variety of factors.

Mindlessly believing that erecting a 50' wall is the "solution" and then deporting 11 million people, some of who are citizens, is not a compromise.

What we need are representatives willing to compromise on finding a solution rather than those who just want to pander to the xenophobes in order to be elected.

 

[GHook93]

Not intending to derail your thread but every extremist hard right view is losing the GOP Independents whether it be abortion, immigration, gay marriage, whatever.

Political parties are entitled to take positions on issues but they need the center in order to obtain the power to implement their policies.

Like it or not this nation is equally divided on abortion and neither side gets to prevail and impose it's position on the other.

Making it a deal breaker in the primary simply eliminates viable and electable candidates from becoming the nominee IMO.

I agree with gay marriage and abortion losing them the center, but in ILLEGAL immigration they need to hold the line. Independents want the border secured also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everyone wants a solution to the problem of illegal immigration across the board.

However in order to find one you need a compromise that takes into account all of the variety of factors.

Mindlessly believing that erecting a 50' wall is the "solution" and then deporting 11 million people, some of who are citizens, is not a compromise.

What we need are representatives willing to compromise on finding a solution rather than those who just want to pander to the xenophobes in order to be elected.

Amazing how you presented a red herring argument on illegal immigration, how democratic of you.

The solution should involve a wall, clamp down on the employers, eVerify, taking away the incentive and amnesty for some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not intending to derail your thread but every extremist hard right view is losing the GOP Independents whether it be abortion, immigration, gay marriage, whatever.

Political parties are entitled to take positions on issues but they need the center in order to obtain the power to implement their policies.

Like it or not this nation is equally divided on abortion and neither side gets to prevail and impose it's position on the other.

Making it a deal breaker in the primary simply eliminates viable and electable candidates from becoming the nominee IMO.

I agree with gay marriage and abortion losing them the center, but in ILLEGAL immigration they need to hold the line. Independents want the border secured also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everyone wants a solution to the problem of illegal immigration across the board.

However in order to find one you need a compromise that takes into account all of the variety of factors.

Mindlessly believing that erecting a 50' wall is the "solution" and then deporting 11 million people, some of who are citizens, is not a compromise.

What we need are representatives willing to compromise on finding a solution rather than those who just want to pander to the xenophobes in order to be elected.

Amazing how you presented a red herring argument on illegal immigration, how democratic of you.

The solution should involve a wall, clamp down on the employers, eVerify, taking away the incentive and amnesty for some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"amnesty for some" that includes the parents and family of citizens.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Not intending to derail your thread but every extremist hard right view is losing the GOP Independents whether it be abortion, immigration, gay marriage, whatever.

Political parties are entitled to take positions on issues but they need the center in order to obtain the power to implement their policies.

Like it or not this nation is equally divided on abortion and neither side gets to prevail and impose it's position on the other.

Making it a deal breaker in the primary simply eliminates viable and electable candidates from becoming the nominee IMO.

I agree with gay marriage and abortion losing them the center, but in ILLEGAL immigration they need to hold the line. Independents want the border secured also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everyone wants a solution to the problem of illegal immigration across the board.

However in order to find one you need a compromise that takes into account all of the variety of factors.

Mindlessly believing that erecting a 50' wall is the "solution" and then deporting 11 million people, some of who are citizens, is not a compromise.

What we need are representatives willing to compromise on finding a solution rather than those who just want to pander to the xenophobes in order to be elected.

Amazing how you presented a red herring argument on illegal immigration, how democratic of you.

The solution should involve a wall, clamp down on the employers, eVerify, taking away the incentive and amnesty for some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you for admitting that you don't understand the concept of compromise.

 

[jwoodie]

Compromising with dishonest people is rarely a good idea. For example, the Reagan compromise was amnesty in return for strict border enforcement, a promise the Democrats never intended to keep. Similarly, Liberals make specious arguments that a border fence won't work or will cost too much when their real objection is that it might work too well. As for the abortion issue, they realize that, if put to a vote, a large majority of Americans would favor substantial restrictions after the first three months of pregnancy. In order to prevent this democratic outcome, they insist that this is a federal issue which must be decided by nine political appointees on the Supreme Court.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is already a fact almost everywhere. Most Americans are quite willing to accept the way things are now. I myslef would go for a 12 week limit and exceptions for crimes and anytime for health/life of the mother and birth defects. jwoodie: As for the abortion issue, they realize that, if put to a vote, a large majority of Americans would favor substantial restrictions after the first three months of pregnancy.

The wall requires a roving military patrol bhind it with drone suveillance. Bring out troops home. E-verify and business hiring reform. jwoodie: Liberals make specious arguments that a border fence won't work or will cost too much when their real objection is that it might work too well.

 

[jwoodie]

The wall requires a roving military patrol bhind it with drone suveillance. Bring out troops home. E-verify and business hiring reform. jwoodie: Liberals make specious arguments that a border fence won't work or will cost too much when their real objection is that it might work too well.

B.S. The Border Patrol is not the military, and their agents are not troops. Also, what is wrong with drone surveillance? If you favor an open border, please be honest enough to admit it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Compromising with dishonest people is rarely a good idea. For example, the Reagan compromise was amnesty in return for strict border enforcement, a promise the Democrats never intended to keep. Similarly, Liberals make specious arguments that a border fence won't work or will cost too much when their real objection is that it might work too well. As for the abortion issue, they realize that, if put to a vote, a large majority of Americans would favor substantial restrictions after the first three months of pregnancy. In order to prevent this democratic outcome, they insist that this is a federal issue which must be decided by nine political appointees on the Supreme Court.

Ironic given that you have just lied about the Dems and specious arguments while ignoring the specious arguments used by the GOP to block the Senate immigration reform bill in the house.

And you are also lying about abortion. The nation is split evenly on the abortion issue. There can be no "democratic outcome" because individual rights are not subject to the tyranny of anti-abortion zealots like you and your ilk.

 

[JakeStarkey]

jwoodie is getting his ass spanked, and he likes it!

 

[jwoodie]

jwoodie is getting his ass spanked, and he likes it!

Ironic given that you have just lied about the Dems and specious arguments while ignoring the specious arguments used by the GOP to block the Senate immigration reform bill in the house.

And you are also lying about abortion. The nation is split evenly on the abortion issue. There can be no "democratic outcome" because individual rights are not subject to the tyranny of anti-abortion zealots like you and your ilk.

If you are going to accuse me of lying, please quote me and back up your assertion with facts.

As for abortion, the American public opposes it 64-27 after the first three months:

Here’s what happened a year ago, when Gallup asked this question for USA Today:

Tell me again who's lying?

 

[jwoodie]

jwoodie is getting his ass spanked, and he likes it!

This is why I seldom bring you off of my IGNORE list.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Because I tell the truth. Go study the current laws, and you will see they match what the general percentage favored by the electorate.

In fact, I am more stringent that that: no abortions during the first 12 weeks except pregnancy caused by crimes, and the entire pregnancy for birth defects and life or heath of the mother.

 

[GHook93]

Not intending to derail your thread but every extremist hard right view is losing the GOP Independents whether it be abortion, immigration, gay marriage, whatever.

Political parties are entitled to take positions on issues but they need the center in order to obtain the power to implement their policies.

Like it or not this nation is equally divided on abortion and neither side gets to prevail and impose it's position on the other.

Making it a deal breaker in the primary simply eliminates viable and electable candidates from becoming the nominee IMO.

I agree with gay marriage and abortion losing them the center, but in ILLEGAL immigration they need to hold the line. Independents want the border secured also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everyone wants a solution to the problem of illegal immigration across the board.

However in order to find one you need a compromise that takes into account all of the variety of factors.

Mindlessly believing that erecting a 50' wall is the "solution" and then deporting 11 million people, some of who are citizens, is not a compromise.

What we need are representatives willing to compromise on finding a solution rather than those who just want to pander to the xenophobes in order to be elected.

Amazing how you presented a red herring argument on illegal immigration, how democratic of you.

The solution should involve a wall, clamp down on the employers, eVerify, taking away the incentive and amnesty for some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"amnesty for some" that includes the parents and family of citizens.

Nope, much smaller


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Derideo_Te]

jwoodie is getting his ass spanked, and he likes it!

Ironic given that you have just lied about the Dems and specious arguments while ignoring the specious arguments used by the GOP to block the Senate immigration reform bill in the house.

And you are also lying about abortion. The nation is split evenly on the abortion issue. There can be no "democratic outcome" because individual rights are not subject to the tyranny of anti-abortion zealots like you and your ilk.

If you are going to accuse me of lying, please quote me and back up your assertion with facts.

As for abortion, the American public opposes it 64-27 after the first three months:

Here’s what happened a year ago, when Gallup asked this question for USA Today:

Tell me again who's lying?

You are because you taking what Gallup polled out of context!

The question above does not ask Americans whether they are pro-choice or pro-life.

This one does;

Americans Choose "Pro-Choice" for First Time in Seven Years

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Half of Americans consider themselves "pro-choice" on abortion, surpassing the 44% who identify as "pro-life." This is the first time since 2008 that the pro-choice position has had a statistically significant lead in Americans' abortion views.

• Americans divide 50% "pro-choice," 44% "pro-life" on abortion
• Majority of women, 54%, now pro-choice, vs. 46% of men
• Pro-choice ID among Democrats has swelled since 2001

 

[longknife]