Everyone knows that Donald Trump can’t be trusted on abortion policy (or many other things). But his particular lies on abortion are worth noting, as I explained at New York.
There is no exercise more exhausting and probably futile than examining a Donald Trump speech or social-media post for lies, half-truths, and incoherent self-contradictions. But itâs important on occasion to highlight some very big whoppers he tells that are central to his political strategy. Itâs well known that Trumpâs own position on abortion policy has wandered all over the map, and itâs plausible to suggest his approach is entirely transactional. Now that heâs staked out a âstatesâ rightsâ position on abortion that is designed to take a losing issue off the table in the 2024 presidential election, heâs telling two very specific lies to justify his latest flip-flop.
The first is his now-routine claim that âboth sidesâ and even âlegal scholars on both sidesâ of the abortion debate âagreedâ that Roe v. Wade needed to be reversed, leaving abortion policy up to the states:
This claim was the centerpiece of Trumpâs April 9 statement setting out his position on abortion for the 2024 general election, as CNNÂ noted:
“In a video statement on abortion policy he posted on social media Monday, Trump said: ‘I was proudly the person responsible for the ending of something that all legal scholars, both sides, wanted and, in fact, demanded be ended: Roe v. Wade. They wanted it ended.’ Later in his statement, Trump said that since ‘we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint,’ states are free to determine their own abortion laws.”
This is clearly and demonstrably false. The three âlegal expertsâ on the Supreme Court who passionately dissented from the decision to reverse Roe are just the tip of the iceberg of anguish over the defiance of precedent and ideological reasoning underlying Justice Samuel Alito in the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Womenâs Health Organization. The Society of American Law Teachers immediately and definitively issued a âcondemnationâ of the Dobbs decision. When the case was being argued before the Supreme Court, the American Bar Association filed an amicus brief arguing the constitutional doctrine of stare decisis required that Roe be left in place. None of these views were novel. Back in 1989 when an earlier threat to abortion rights had emerged, 885 law professors signed onto a brief defending Roe.
Sure, there was a tiny minority of âpro-choice, anti-Roeâ liberals over the years who claimed resentment of the power of the unelected judges who decided Roe would eventually threaten abortion rights (not as much, it turns out, as the unelected judges that decided Dobbs). And yes, there have always been progressive critics (notably Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) of the particular reasoning in the original Roe decision, but by no means have any of them (particularly Ginsburg) favored abandoning the federal constitutional right to abortion even if they supported a different constitutional basis for that right. So Trumpâs claim is grossly nonfactual and is indeed not one that any self-respecting conservative fan of Dobbs would ever make.
The second big lie that Trump has formulated to defend his latest statesâ-rights position is that heâs just supporting the age-old Republican stance on the subject, as he has just asserted at Truth Social:
“Sending this Issue back to the States was the Policy of the Republican Party and Conservatives for over 50 years, due to Statesâ Rights and 10th Amendment, and only happened because of the Justices I proudly Nominated and got Confirmed.”
Yes, of course a growing majority of Republicans have favored reversal of Roe as a way station to a nationwide ban on abortion, but not as an end in itself. The GOP first came out for a federal constitutional amendment to ban abortion from sea to shining sea in its 1980 party platform, and every single Republican presidential nominee since then has backed the idea. There have been disagreements as to whether such a constitutional amendment should include exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape or incest. But the last GOP presidential nominee to share Trumpâs position that the states should be the final arbiter of abortion policy was Gerald R. Ford in 1976, as the New York Times reported at the time:
“[Ford] said that as President he must enforce the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that forbids states to ban abortions. But he has come out in favor of a constitutional amendment that would overturn that ruling and return to the states the option of drawing up their own abortion laws.”
Ronald Reagan, who challenged Fordâs nomination in 1976 and was already a proponent of a âpro-lifeâ constitutional amendment, and the GOP formally adopted that position in 1980; four years later, it adopted its long-standing proposal that by constitutional amendment or by a judicial ruling the protection of fetal life under the 14th Amendment should be recognized and imposed on the country regardless of what states wanted. Anti-abortion leader Marjorie Dannenfelser noted this well-known history in a not-so-subtle rebuke to Trumpâs revisionist history, as NBC News reported:
â’Since 1984, the GOP platform has affirmed that 14th Amendment protections apply to unborn babies and endorsed congressional action to clarify this fact through legislation,’ Marjorie Dannenfelser, the president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement to NBC News. ‘Republicans led the charge to outlaw barbaric partial-birth abortions federally, and both chambers have voted multiple times to limit painful late-term abortion.âŻThe Senate voted on this most recently in 2020. In January 2023, House Republicans also voted to protect infants born alive during an abortion.’â
Itâs pretty clear that anti-abortion activists know Trump is lying about both Roe v. Wade and the GOP tradition and will support him anyway. But the rest of us should take due notice that the once and perhaps future presidentâs word on this subject, including his current pledge to leave abortion policy to the states, cannot be trusted for even a moment. Absent the abolition of the Senate filibuster (which, lest we forget, Trump backed as president out of impatience with the Senateâs refusal to bend the knee to his every demand), there isnât going to be a complete federal ban on abortion in the foreseeable future. But Trump can be counted on to use the powers of the presidency to make life miserable for women needing abortion services, among the many âenemies of the peopleâ he wants to punish.
phatcat… I share your view.. to win this election is quite a massive challenge. Bush has this place in such a mess that it will be hell to fix.
Kerry will age 15 years in the first four years, he will wish he had passed on this… but someone has to do it and Kerry raised his hand to do the job.. hence, he has to do it.
To leave it to Bush will mean that the deficit will reach figures that cant be counted… look what he achieved in four years. He will stay the course in Iraq and that will mean ever increasing disaster and growing hatred throughout the world… but bush really does deserve the opportunity to fix this crap he created. If people didnt matter, I would campaign for Bush… but alas, people matter to me… so I support Kerry.
standa has something…”What happened to Bush’s big lead ? ”
Repreat it over and over to everyone you know. This should be hammered over and over until the press picks it up and starts running with it.
tony –
9/11 doesn’t seem to have “stuck” on GWB, so why would something else stick on the next Prez?
Only one reason – because the rabid fascist (let’s just stop all the cutsie names like “freepers”) pundits and their slavering followers will howl and rant and rage nonstop if it happens.
We really are at a crossroads here. Four more years of Bush is a walk into a dark tunnel with no discernable exit. I will go through the next four years with dread in my heart in that case.
phatcat-
Amplifying two points here…
About the variability of polls. Some of it is that there are so *many* polls. Given that, it’s not surprising that some of them give you odd results.
About 2008. I’m inclined to think that you’re right. And that’s the one thing that makes me worry about a Kerry victory. Some true nastiness seems virtually certain to happen during the next presidential term. If Kerry is president, it will be stuck on him, and it’s likely that the media story line will be about how Democrats cause all the security problems. Yuck.
Legitimate polling companies are not in the business of trying to get a certain result. Its simply a matter of credibility – if your poll is accused of being biased, then it hurts your business. Remember, many of these polling companies are also market research companies, and their business depends on their reputation.
The reason why you get so many different results is that there are simply too many things that are difficult to control: response rates, sampling frames, non-response characteristics, etc. And its getting worse.
Seems to me you can get any result you want from polling 6-700 people. It just depends on how you define a “likely voter”.
There is no Kerry surge, just as there was no Bush surge. The political and media winds were blowing Kerry’s way in August, and now they’re blowing Bush’s way in September. But nothing has really changed fundamentally – the race is close nationally, there are only 10 or so state races truly in play (and you’re crazy if you think NY, NJ or IL are truly in trouble). Two months ago the punditry was all about how Bush was in big trouble, and now its the same for Kerry.
Stop the madness. Its close. It will be to the end.
But in the end, Kerry will win. I don’t envy him, quite honestly, because he’s going to inherit a terrible situation in Iraq and will get a lot of the blame when it blows up (and it will).
I’m of the mind that whichever party is not in power in 2008 is going to win.
What happened to Bush’s big lead ? Must have been a false perception.
According to the latest Harris Interactive poll Kerry secured 48 percent of the intended vote, compared with 47 percent for Bush.
Also more Americans must be waking up to the FACT that George W. Bush is a FAILURE, has NOT earned our TRUST, and should be FIRED.
The Kerry surge is very real and perfectly timed.
And the the debates will put Kerry on top for a victory on Nov 2.
Let’s not forget what ACTUALLY happened in FL. Gore did win there and it’s only because of the repubs dirty tricks and stopping the recount that made it possible for Bush to *get appointed by the supreme court*. What a disgrace for the supposed model of democracy for the rest of the world.
Let’s do everything in our power to make sure it doesn’t happen again. If you see anything fishy going on at your polling place Nov. 2nd report it. Volunteer to be an election judge to keep and eye on things from the inside. It wouldn’t hurt to bring a camera to the polls either, I did to my primary and got a picture of a poster that our Sec. of State (a fan of Katherine Harris) wanted posted that would have been discriminatory if enforced (luckily it wasn’t).
Here’s a great analysis of Harris’ dirty tricks in FL:
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=122&row=1
C’mon, guys, wait for the debates. A week is a lifetime in politics.
Gallup in mid September had Gore ahead 51 – 42. Two weeks later it had Bush ahead 50 – 42. At this point in 1980 Gallup reported Carter 44, Regan 40.
Besides, an administration report our today predicted a high likelyhood of civil war next year in Iraq. As you may have seen recently, the “liberal” (my ass) press has NOT been reporting how we have been losing control in Iraq (since ceding Fallujah, we have lost control of Ramadi, Samarra, etc.) Please recall that Richard Nixon won by a landslide in 1972, therefore destroying the democratic party forever and assuring perpetual dominance of the republican party, as we all know.
Can you say “Bush Impeachment”?
sorry Tim1965 you just don’t “Get It” so here’s my Reality Check post again for your edification đ
FACT: Many Americans are not that bright and are primarily persuaded by the gross image manipulation and false perceptions of Bushco.
FACT: There was plenty of gross image manipulation and false perceptions in 2000 and Gore/Leiberman almost beat Bush/Cheney
FACT: But in 2000 Bush/Cheney did not have a ABYSMAL performance record on the economy, jobs, healthcare, education, the environment, Iraq to be measured against.
FACT: Bush has been misleading the public, distorting fact, contriving false realities, and making excuses on virtually every major issue.
FACT: Bushco is relying almost 100% on gross image manipulation and false perceptions, and little on their abysmal and factual track record, to win in 2004.
Are more than 50% of Americans that stupid and gullable ?
I find it hard to believe that more than 50% of Americans cannot see that George W. Bush is a FAILURE, has NOT earned our TRUST, and should be FIRED.
Kerry/Edwards have a much better plan for America and Americans and should win on Nov 2.
Wow… Kerry is up by six in New York. Can’t wait for Ruy’s explanation on this one.
Seems like you dems have lots of faith in polls when they are favorable. Now that things have gone south — they’re “bullshit.”
4 more years.
The new Harris Interactive national poll has Kerry up by one point. It also shows 51% don’t believe Bush deserves re-election:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/0,,SB109526872487418642,00.html?mod=todays%5Ffree%5Ffeature
Standa,
“Almost beat Bush/Cheney”? As I remember, that result was an almost inconceivable upset. A sitting vp coming off 8 years of peace and prosperity knocked off because voters just didn’t like him.
They don’t like Kerry either. You guys are pinning all your hopes on the debates but the result will be the same. The more voters see Kerry, the more they dislike him.
C’mon, even partisan Dems don’t really like Kerry.
4 More Years!
I think everyone should be leery of the Survey USA polls coming out of Florida, New Jersey, Illinois and Nevada.
1) The poll sample is a little low. Good margin-of-error would argue for 1,000 respondents in the sample, and Survey USA often opts for just over 700.
2) I’m not seeing anything in Survey USA’s data which help me judge the reliability of the poll. What’s the R-to-D ratio of respondents? Is the poll being weighted to meet socio-demographic trends in the population? What’s the response-rate? Does the response-rate break down geographically or socio-economically? Not a clue.
3) A big problem for me, at this juncture, is that Survey USA is surveying likely voters — a subsample that is unlikely to give an accurate picture of the true state of the electorate at this point in time.
4) Survey USA’s data often seem out of line with most other polling data. For example, most other polls show Kerry ahead by 2-3 points in New Jersey — alarming, given the state’s strongly pro-Dem leanings. But still, Kerry is ahead. Similarly, most other polls show Bush ahead by 1-2 points in Florida, but Survey USA shows Bush blowing Kerry out and widening his lead over time. Do all the due-diligence you want, and still Survey USA’s data is off the norm most other polls are showing.
I, too, want to see an analysis of what the f**k is going on in New Jersey. Why is the race so tight there? What’s going on? Did the beheading of that New Jerseyean a couple months ago really roil state politics that much? (It can’t be McGreevey; almost every poll shows his support very high, and general support for Dems in general and particular Democratic candidates remain largely unchanged pre- and post-outing.)
It’s not “what’s wrong with Kansas.” It’s “what’s wrong with New Jersey”!
Jim, while there is a measure of truth in what you say many Americans are not that bright I cannot agree that more than 50% are primarily persuaded by the gross image manipulation of Bushco.
I think you’re selling more Americans short who actually see through the Bushco ruse
FACT: There was plenty of image manipulation in 2000 and Gore/Leiberman almost beat Bush/Cheney
FACT: In 2000 Bush/Cheney did not have a ABYSMAL performance record on the economy, jobs, healthcare, education, the environment, Iraq to be measured against.
The Net Net: George W. Bush is a FAILURE, has NOT earned our TRUST, and should be FIRED.
Forget the bullshit polls… Kerry/Edwards win on Nov 2.
what about florida……..
what are the voter distribution of the counties in
florida most impacted by hurricanes?
i belive that orlando(orange) , palm beach county , escambia(pensacola) are republican counties and that turnout willl be depressed due to the preoccupation of rebuilding.
thoughts from the experts?
The Annenberg survey gives 20 direct comparative impression questions. Counting All Voters (not just persuadables), Bush improved his margin over Kerry in 19 categories from August to September. [The 20th category, “Stubborn”, is equivocal.]
Alternative analysis: Bush swept August persuadables into September committeds, while Kerry leaked committeds into the persuadable compartment.
The residual September persuadables think more like Kerry, but don’t want Kerry.
Ruy, I got a call yesterday from a GOP pollster. I asked how they got their list. I’m not registered as a Republican…but officially as an Independent. He admitted he had a lot of independents on his list to call. I aggreed to listen to his questions. He then asked if I was pro-life, pro-2nd amnedment, and if I was voting for Bush.
Obviously, they’re trying to call and reach undecided independents through these “polls” (shades of South Carolina primary in 2000). I added this to the string to show people that THEY are mobilizing grass roots efforts on emotion-based topics. When I fired back questions about the actual facts and Bush’s record, he couldn’t answer my questions and he went away sputtering like a Model A.
We can take them out by POUNDING the facts of Bush’s record and dispelling the myth he is “virtuous,” “decisive,” & “humble.”
WE can demand that the media (via email, phone calls, etc.) report all the story and stop the meme that Kerry is sliding.
They WANT us to believe Kerry is doomed. We can win. We have to push hard…all of us. GET INVOLVED.
How hilarious that a guy with the handle “BJ Clinton” would talk about someone else being a fag.
My usual rule of thumb is: the more a conservative talks about Bill Clinton’s penis, the more he dreams about touching it himself.
There are so many closet gay right wingers it would make your head spin. They hate Clinton for the same reason they hated JFK: They want him.
Jim: I think you are dead wrong about the American people not being bright enough to see what Bush has done. They see plenty. I personally have talked to many, many people who usually do not vote but want to vote this year because of their disgust for Bush. The problem is their follow-thru. The problem is that some of them are not motivated enough to get out to the polls to vote. That is why I have been suggesting absentee ballots for anyone I fear will not be motivated enough to get to the polls on Nov. 2. Anyone can vote absentee ballot in Ohio and many Ohioans do not realize that. You have to put down a reason but they do not check and they do not care what your reason is. I was told this directly by my local Board of Elections. If you arrange for someone to receive an absentee ballot, then you can check up on them and make sure they send it in. I truly believe Ohio will not be in the Bush column this year.
“BJ Clinton”: I’ve got a special message, just for you: Go *uck yourself.
Standa,
FACT: The facts don’t matter. If they did, Bush would be at about 10% in the polls.
FACT: The American people, as a whole, are not that bright. They’re not persuaded by facts. They are persuaded by image manipulation, which the Bushies are geniuses at.
Reality Check….forget the polls and proceed to Nov 2.
FACT: Gore/Leiberman almost beat Bush/Cheney in 2000 winning the popular vote by 583,000. It came down to Florida…we know the story.
FACT: Bush has been misleading the public, distorting fact, contriving false realities, and making excuses on virtually every major issue.
FACT: Bush’s performance on the economy, jobs, healthcare, education, the environment, Iraq and more has been POOR to ABYSMAL.
I find it hard to believe that more Americans cannot see that George W. Bush is a FAILURE, has NOT earned our TRUST, and should be FIRED.
How can Kerry/Edwards lose since they have a much better plan for America and Americans ?
With all due respect, you fail to point out that while it is true that GWB’s support has softened among swing voters according to Annenberg, it may reflect a number of the prior undecideds coalescing around the President – Thereby making those swinge voerts still skeptical about GWB a larger portion of the remaining sample.
I’ve read your anlaysis of the various polls over the past few days, and cannnot help but notice that while you have highlighted Kerry’s lead to traditonal Dem states such as MN and MI, I see nothing from you regarding the following results:
FLA – (SUSA) GWB 51; Kerry 45
PA – (Wash Post/ABC) GWB 49, Kerry 46
NJ – (SUSA) GWB 49, Kerry 45
NY – (Quinnipiac) Kerry 47, GWB 41
IL – (SUSA) Kerry 49, GWB 45
OH – (SV) GWB 52, Kerry 40
WIS – (USAToday/Gallop) GWB 52, Kerry 44
MN – (USAToday/Gallop) GWB 44, Kerry 44
NV – (SUSA) GWB 51, Kerry 47
Please note that Kerry was up in NY by 26 points a few weeks ago, and was ahead in IL, MN, and NJ, by margins ranging from 10 to 25 points in various polls prior to the RNC. If Kerry has to fight for NJ, NY, MN and IL, he is in big trouble IMO
“The Dems will lose NJ because they got rolled by a fag (in a nice role reversal).”
Know what, BJ? We don’t mind your politics. But why don’t you just keep that sort of posts over at freerepublic. There are some decent places left on the web, you know.
2 New Polls out
Democracy Corps Bush 49, Kerry 48
Harris Interactive Kerry 48, Bush 47
I think it’s pretty clear it’s a tossup and whatever bounce Bush got has dissapated.
Delilah,
The Dems will lose NJ because they got rolled by a fag (in a nice role reversal). Their failure to boot McGreevey on principle, preferring to acquiese to his bookmarker protection of the seat for the party has disillusioned the moderates. Lot of Catholics in Jersey.
Dan Rather has hurt Kerry in the same way.
I guess it’s the law of unintended consequences at work. Or maybe just bad Karma.
Next time, do the right thing and voter support will follow.
My love to H-town
4 More Years!
Nah… Brian let the freepers froth.
Even if the polls are correct (and we’ve heard conflicting evidence about SUSA polls), those numbers will not hold. They will normalize very shortly.
That said, I have questions about all the polls myself… so many seem counter-intuitive.
I had the same question as “accomodatingly” plus others. The category of “persuadables” is extremely slippery methodologically and they did not make clear precisely how those voters were culled out from the general pool. I would assume that in a responsible survey they would have determined a solid bloc of ‘certain’ Bush voters and
‘certain’ or committed Kerry voters and then checked to see how that had changed, then checked overall leanings and then compared an apples to apples study of the “persuadables”. There’s no way of determining exactly what they did from their website. Please explain.
(I was always weak in methodology in my Sociology work)
CLOUDY
Ruy,
As soon as humanly possible, could you analyze the new SUSA poll results from NJ and IL?
I have no doubt that Kerry is going to win both states unless Bush wins in an epic lanslide, but it would be nice to hear some expert analyses on the polls. Perhaps some of the douchebags at freerepublic.com could read it and come back down to earth.
Regards,
Brian
I’d like to believe you. One problem with this argument: are the “persuadables” the same individual respondents in both samples, or are they different sets of undecided voters (as seems more likely)? If the latter, the survey certainly shows that we can still win, but it’s not necessarily good news: if undecideds predisposed to Bush in August became committed Bush voters after the RNC, while soft Kerry voters became undecideds, then Kerry’s ratings among “persuadable” voters went up between August and September, but only because he lost ground.