I believe that Trump knows that anti-abortion is a loser, so avoids it. Democrats hopefully will run ads including clips of his bragging about getting rid of Roe.
Or why any reputable publican does. Facts is facts, and abortion has fanaticism on both sides of that issue, as do voting rights, immigration, and all the other hot button issues. Personally, I’ll vote for any Democrat over even the most centrist Republican.
Isn't Trump still running his cat-anus mouth about how women are having their nine-months-into-pregnancy babies chopped up or yanked out and smothered or something? Am I hallucinating that or is he not still yammering about it?
And people who are all in on Trump are all in on Trump. But there's a vast electorate out there who might not be all in on Biden but would appreciate not having the government all up in people's genitals (this goes for abortion rights as well as trans issues).
I truly believe the Times is just trolling us all at this point. They want to spark "debate," but in the form of people screaming at each other. So...well done?
I'm not sure of the Times' endgame. The people they are all in for hate them and will do everything in their power to destroy them if they get the opportunity.
They. Need. Content. That’s what all these silly NYT pieces are about. You need Trump in every article, then a position that’s either absurd or mostly absurd. Abortion will be a central issue next year. It may not be THE issue, because many states are ratifying the right to choose in their constitutions. But it’s one of several Trump is a dumpster fire on. The media doesn’t want a Biden win because it doesn’t sell or generate clicks. He’s just a rational civil servant. Boring. Trump is a clickbait carnival. Everything he says is somehow worse than the day before. He’s very nearly openly calling for violence against his many enemies. He’s asking for a “citizens arrest” of the DA and judge.
" Abortion isn’t an “issue” in the Republican primary because the Republican candidates are all forced-birth extremists who support the Dobbs decision and just quibble over the tone of voice to use when further restricting abortion access" All 100% true, but also, Trump has sort of neutralized every issue in the republican primary by declining to participate.
Looks like the New York Times wants to become the new New York Post. Weird goal to have...
In all honesty I think this hate campaign has everything to do with Biden being a strong pro union president. We haven't had a strong pro union president from either party in several generations. Big money is getting scared and it shows through the New York Times treatment of Joe Biden.
It's weird, because an overall centrist like Biden is exactly the kind of statesman and even-tempered president that the New York Times would normally be farting all over. Tripping all over their shoes to praise him. But now the New York Times likes fascism. I don't get it. It must've been a slow change, but the difference between how they are now and how they were only a few years ago is stark . They still do good journalism, which is part of their Stealth... you can't just dismiss them out right on every thing they do. .they just don't do good journalism where it matters the most. The fact that the New York Times isn't at the front of the line screaming about the dangers of a Trump presidency....
They've always loved Nazism and fascism. See their gushing coverage of 'Herr Hitler' in the Thirties. However, now they're owned and whored out by total Reichwing billionaire sociopaths.
"Last week’s elections would challenge the theory that voters don’t prioritize abortion rights."
I would argue that it's the only issue big enough to get lazy voters off their fucking asses into the polls. Many people who voted to keep abortion rights are people that are not regular voters. For some and many that is the only issue bringing people to the polls. Which is fine, I just wish they paid more attention to the other stuff too, but you take what you can get
"While avoiding taking specific positions himself, Trump said in an NBC interview that if he is reelected he will try to broker compromises on how long into pregnancies abortion should be legal and whether those restrictions should be imposed on the federal or the state level.
“'I would sit down with both sides and I’d negotiate something and we’ll end up with peace on that issue for the first time in 52 years,' he said.
"The former president targeted GOP primary rival Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in his criticism of how the Republican party has handled the issue, calling Florida’s six-week ban 'a terrible thing and a terrible mistake.'” -- CNN in September.
.
Trump has been 'vague' like that for some time. He's also been openly anti-abortion. But this is what Trump does: he takes all sides on an issue so his audience thinks he's on theirs regardless of their position.
I believe that Trump knows that anti-abortion is a loser, so avoids it. Democrats hopefully will run ads including clips of his bragging about getting rid of Roe.
Every tune I read comments from Trump supporters, I want to hunt them down and give them a brain transplant.
Oh god, don't do that! Who are you gonna saddle with the defective ones?
"It’s like a writer I worked with once who kept quoting his own work. “As you might recall from my book, White Man Has Opinions …”
Made me LOL.
I don't understand why the nyt continues to insist this is just a regular election and not a five-alarm fire
Or why any reputable publican does. Facts is facts, and abortion has fanaticism on both sides of that issue, as do voting rights, immigration, and all the other hot button issues. Personally, I’ll vote for any Democrat over even the most centrist Republican.
Really? "Both sides are crazy, but I guess I'll vote for the Democrat?" That's what you're going with?
Grrr
"abortion has fanaticism on both sides"
examples noticeably missing from this absurd claim.
"Voting rights has fanaticism on both sides"
Yes, we've all seen those radical "get out the vote" efforts...
Isn't Trump still running his cat-anus mouth about how women are having their nine-months-into-pregnancy babies chopped up or yanked out and smothered or something? Am I hallucinating that or is he not still yammering about it?
And people who are all in on Trump are all in on Trump. But there's a vast electorate out there who might not be all in on Biden but would appreciate not having the government all up in people's genitals (this goes for abortion rights as well as trans issues).
Of course the one voter they quote is a cop....why not a hairdresser or a bellman?
A cop who gets fired for assault, brutality, kiddy porn (pick your poison) in 3, 2, 1...........
I truly believe the Times is just trolling us all at this point. They want to spark "debate," but in the form of people screaming at each other. So...well done?
I'm not sure of the Times' endgame. The people they are all in for hate them and will do everything in their power to destroy them if they get the opportunity.
They. Need. Content. That’s what all these silly NYT pieces are about. You need Trump in every article, then a position that’s either absurd or mostly absurd. Abortion will be a central issue next year. It may not be THE issue, because many states are ratifying the right to choose in their constitutions. But it’s one of several Trump is a dumpster fire on. The media doesn’t want a Biden win because it doesn’t sell or generate clicks. He’s just a rational civil servant. Boring. Trump is a clickbait carnival. Everything he says is somehow worse than the day before. He’s very nearly openly calling for violence against his many enemies. He’s asking for a “citizens arrest” of the DA and judge.
MAGFA. Make America Gynecologically Fascist Again.
" Abortion isn’t an “issue” in the Republican primary because the Republican candidates are all forced-birth extremists who support the Dobbs decision and just quibble over the tone of voice to use when further restricting abortion access" All 100% true, but also, Trump has sort of neutralized every issue in the republican primary by declining to participate.
Trump obviously does not give a shit about the issue.
Looks like the New York Times wants to become the new New York Post. Weird goal to have...
In all honesty I think this hate campaign has everything to do with Biden being a strong pro union president. We haven't had a strong pro union president from either party in several generations. Big money is getting scared and it shows through the New York Times treatment of Joe Biden.
It's weird, because an overall centrist like Biden is exactly the kind of statesman and even-tempered president that the New York Times would normally be farting all over. Tripping all over their shoes to praise him. But now the New York Times likes fascism. I don't get it. It must've been a slow change, but the difference between how they are now and how they were only a few years ago is stark . They still do good journalism, which is part of their Stealth... you can't just dismiss them out right on every thing they do. .they just don't do good journalism where it matters the most. The fact that the New York Times isn't at the front of the line screaming about the dangers of a Trump presidency....
There are no words...
They've always loved Nazism and fascism. See their gushing coverage of 'Herr Hitler' in the Thirties. However, now they're owned and whored out by total Reichwing billionaire sociopaths.
"Last week’s elections would challenge the theory that voters don’t prioritize abortion rights."
I would argue that it's the only issue big enough to get lazy voters off their fucking asses into the polls. Many people who voted to keep abortion rights are people that are not regular voters. For some and many that is the only issue bringing people to the polls. Which is fine, I just wish they paid more attention to the other stuff too, but you take what you can get
A 37 year old Detroit cop speaks for all of us I guess according to NYT.
and, apparently, a "he" to boot expressing his lack of concern for the removal of reproductive rights
“States rights”= cops shooting black people
In the back, and getting acquitted.
"While avoiding taking specific positions himself, Trump said in an NBC interview that if he is reelected he will try to broker compromises on how long into pregnancies abortion should be legal and whether those restrictions should be imposed on the federal or the state level.
“'I would sit down with both sides and I’d negotiate something and we’ll end up with peace on that issue for the first time in 52 years,' he said.
"The former president targeted GOP primary rival Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in his criticism of how the Republican party has handled the issue, calling Florida’s six-week ban 'a terrible thing and a terrible mistake.'” -- CNN in September.
.
Trump has been 'vague' like that for some time. He's also been openly anti-abortion. But this is what Trump does: he takes all sides on an issue so his audience thinks he's on theirs regardless of their position.
Perhaps Michael Yott ought not to have an abortion if he's so against it. I'm fine with that.
It’s like a writer I worked with once who kept quoting his own work. “As you might recall from my book, White Man Has Opinions …”
Bloody hell, you knew Martin Amiss?