[BadKosh]

I wonder who's "dirty tricks squad" will deliver the more spectacular tricks?

[andi*pandi]

Perhaps like pepper-spraying a teenager?

[subego]

If Trump gets schlonged by the establishment, what's the probability he runs as an independent?

80%?

[The Final Dakar]

That requires money though. Is his sense spite high enough for him to spend money?

[subego]

Spite is only one leg of the tripod.

The second is maintaining the flow of endorphins from playing "sold out" venues on his "U.S. Tour".

Third? Abandoning America is a small-handed move.

[OAW]

First he vociferously defends his campaign manager who was caught on tape manhandling a female reporter. Even after they both swore on a stack of bibles the guy never even touched her. And now this. I'm starting to wonder if Trump is deliberately sabotaging himself or if he's been the teflon candidate for so long that he's utterly convinced that nothing can stop him?

Donald Trump: Ban abortions, punish women who get them - CNNPolitics.com

OAW

[The Final Dakar]

That might register on my meter if I thought he meant it and it had a chance of happening.

[subego]

If something is illegal, is devising a punishment for it that far off the reservation?

[andi*pandi]

How are you going to prove someone had a backalley abortion? no medical records. pay in cash, or whatever...

the only way I can see is if you get ratted out, which is hearsay he said she said... or if the place gets raided.

Or shall we just require women to be inspected every 3 months to be sure? And the inspection won't be covered under health insurance of course. Republican doctors only. Perhaps a local minister would suffice.

(sarcasmometer off the scale)

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

If something is illegal, is devising a punishment for it that far off the reservation?

I know, and he still backpedaled on it.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

"If abortions were outlawed". If something is "outlawed" then it's illegal, and people get punished for doing illegal things. Since abortions aren't going to be outlawed this is all moot. Trump's a dipshit but this is a non-issue.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

That requires money though. Is his sense spite high enough for him to spend money?

I also want to add that money is important if his victory condition is winning. If his victory condition is to "**** some shit up", he can run a lean campaign.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

"If abortions were outlawed". If something is "outlawed" then it's illegal, and people get punished for doing illegal things. Since abortions aren't going to be outlawed this is all moot. Trump's a dipshit but this is a non-issue.

I think it's a good idea to make that part of the discussion — even if what Trump professes to want is completely unrealistic. By that token, you can ignore most of what he says, e. g. “The Mexicans are going to pay for our border wall.” is equally ludicrous. You have to push back just to say that what he wants is not even remotely realistic.

The problem is not that Trump is calling for this, but that this resonates with a certain part of the electorate. And there are real problems that clinics performing abortions face: they are being pushed out by undue regulations under the guise of “making them safer for women.”

[P]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

"If abortions were outlawed". If something is "outlawed" then it's illegal, and people get punished for doing illegal things. Since abortions aren't going to be outlawed this is all moot. Trump's a dipshit but this is a non-issue.

It is an issue because it raises the question - if abortion is made illegal, should women who have one be punished. That is not a question that it is tactical for pro life supporters to ask. Support for punishing women who have had an abortion is far below support for the pro life cause in general, so framing the question in this manner is a tactical error. It exposes an underlying inconsistency in the platform, and that is never good.

[The Final Dakar]

...his retraction demonstrates it was an issue.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

If something is illegal, is devising a punishment for it that far off the reservation?

I thought this kind of explained the furor for both sides...

[subego]

I'm beginning to solidify a theory Trump's Achilles heel is policy. What bagged him here is having to translate his (not particularly out there) opinion into law.

He got nailed on this with Muslims, too (IMO). The killer wasn't bagging on Muslims, it was that "ban all visitors" policy which did him actual damage. Enough damage he pivoted back to Mexico.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I thought this kind of explained the furor for both sides...

This pic is talking out of both sides of its mouth.

Republicans don't talk punishment. Republicans put legislative punishment on the books. Which is it?

[The Final Dakar]

I think they're talking state vs federal. A lot of local quirks can get missed.

[subego]

I still have trouble buying this, and the author has my Spidey Sensor pinned.

The author attributes the strategy of not discussing punishment to the Republicans wanting to hide they're anti-women?

In your ****ing dreams author person.

ProTip: Republicans don't think they're anti-women. They have nothing to hide.

[The Final Dakar]

That's a better point. It depends whether you think invoking jail time takes it to the next level. I'd appreciate hearing from andi on this.

[subego]

If there's no punishment for the woman, self-inflicted abortions are de facto legal.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

If there's no punishment for the woman, self-inflicted abortions are de facto legal.

You're arguing law, when I'm pointing to emotional impact. After all, why would Trump back-pedal when as you point out that's completely logical?

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

You're arguing law, when I'm pointing to emotional impact. After all, why would Trump back-pedal when as you point out that's completely logical?

Well, I guess I'm doubling down on how "taking it to the next level" lies exclusively in the realm of emotional impact. Without consequences, the law would have no legal impact. If someone wants something to be illegal, that they call for legal impact shouldn't be grounds for an accusation of "taking it to the next level".

[The Final Dakar]

...and I would argue a lot of people haven't realized that if we outlaw abortion, it doesn't disappear, but we have to start jailing women. That might be a bridge too far for some.

It certainly not something that ever crosses my mind in these discussions.

[The Final Dakar]

Subego, what do you make of so many republicans condemning trumps self-evident abortion stance?

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Subego, what do you make of so many republicans condemning trumps self-evident abortion stance?

It's similar to how a trapped animal will chew off its own leg.

[The Final Dakar]

???

[subego]

Crap. Nothing ruins poetry more than the author trying to explain it.

Trump is the trap the Party is stuck in. They would rather chew off the part of them which believes there should be punishment for abortion than stay locked in Trump's jaws.

[The Final Dakar]

Ah, but here's the catch: don't the people who are disavowing Trump believe in that? Or is it a fringe position?

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Ah, but here's the catch: don't the people who are disavowing Trump believe in that? Or is it a fringe position?

It's a bait-and-switch.

No punishment is to get it passed. Once it gets passed, the effect will be to push everyone towards self-induced abortions. Then you bring up punishment.

Trump's moving straight to the endgame.

[The Final Dakar]

Ergo, wasn't that snippet I posted about Trumps crime being revealing what was under the mask accuarate?

[subego]

Not really. It has the cart before the horse.


Here's what the author is positing...

Republicans: that Trump is telling our secrets!
Republicans yell at Trump


Here's what's really happening...

Republicans: is there anything, and I mean anything where this Trump guy suffers blowback? Abortion?
Republicans yell at Trump


Trump's crime is being Trump. The charge will be "whatever sticks".

[Cap'n Tightpants]

^^ What he said. X2

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Not really. It has the cart before the horse.


Here's what the author is positing...

Republicans: that Trump is telling our secrets!
Republicans yell at Trump


Here's what's really happening...

Republicans: is there anything, and I mean anything where this Trump guy suffers blowback? Abortion?
Republicans yell at Trump


Trump's crime is being Trump. The charge will be "whatever sticks".

You just said they were mad for him undermining their bait and switch. Now you're saying they're mad because he's Teflon?

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

You just said they were mad for him undermining their bait and switch. Now you're saying they're mad because he's Teflon?

The "bait and switch" post was in response to the question "what is the Republican position on punishment for abortions... is punishment a fringe position?"

It wasn't supposed to be an analysis of why they're mad.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by subego 

The "bait and switch" post was in response to the question "what is the Republican position on punishment for abortions... is punishment a fringe position?"

It wasn't supposed to be an analysis of why they're mad.

What were the legal consequences prior to Roe?

[subego]

My impression is there were laws on the books, but they weren't enforced.

[subego]

If the Republicans somehow succeed in taking Trump down for being too hardcore on abortion, I'm going to start a religion based on irony being the the most powerful force in the universe.

I'd have evidence, baby.

[subego]

Match the candidate with the From Dusk Till Dawn quote.

1) Hillary Clinton
2) Bernie Sanders
3) Ted Cruz
4) Donald Trump

A) Are you such a loser you can't tell when you've won?
B) Psychos don't explode when daylight hits them
C) Are you a faithless preacher, or a mean mother****ing servant of God?
D) Welcome to slavery

No cheating if you've listened to this week's JuRY politicast.

[subego]

No takers? I thought people would like this idea.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

The "bait and switch" post was in response to the question "what is the Republican position on punishment for abortions... is punishment a fringe position?"

It wasn't supposed to be an analysis of why they're mad.

I have nothing left to give here other than my undying disagreement.

Originally Posted by subego 

No takers? I thought people would like this idea.

Sorry, haven't visited in some time.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I have nothing left to give here other than my undying disagreement.

I've said many things. This is so non-specific I'm lost.

[The Final Dakar]

Just assume a blanket disagreement. You know that thing you thought at 10:33 am Thursday? I disagree with that too. I disagree with your next post, for efficiency.

[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by subego 

Match the candidate with the From Dusk Till Dawn quote.

1) Hillary Clinton
2) Bernie Sanders
3) Ted Cruz
4) Donald Trump

A) Are you such a loser you can't tell when you've won?
B) Psychos don't explode when daylight hits them
C) Are you a faithless preacher, or a mean mother****ing servant of God?
D) Welcome to slavery

I tried, but most of them could go lots of different ways.

a) I can hear Trump's voice saying it (loser) but the meaning applies more to Clinton.
b) Could also be trump.
d) I'm not sure I'd apply this to any candidate, even in exaggeration. Trump again? /paranoid

The only one I'm certain of is C: Cruz.

[subego]

Here's how you did...

 

A is a question being posed to Trump, as in he's the one the question is posed to. He's winning every single primary. All he needs to do is sit back and keep winning... but he can't. He's spent his whole life overcompensating for his flaws, now that the time has come where he has accomplished something real, he has no idea what to do with it past behaving like his loser self.

This most emphatically does not apply to Hillary Clinton. While Hillary has lost things, she is not a loser.


B is the weakest IMO. It's about Trump, from the perspective of Cruz. Cruz, somehow, against all odds, became an establishment front-runner, but the problem is Trump, who on the surface is a mere psycho, turns out to be far more powerful. Cruz's only hope is to last until dawn, when Trump explodes.

Like I said, the weakest of the set. I'd give you a half-point.


C is a question to Bernie. He fully admits what he needs is a revolution. Time to start acting like a mean mother****ing servant of it.


D has only one choice left. You know how I said Hillary is not a loser? This is the ultimate meaning of that. You walk into her bar, she runs the show. Is her victory assured? No? Would her grinding all comers beneath her heel be a surprise? Not in the slightest.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Well, it's gone beyond being just a rumor. If the GOP primary is brokered, which is the most likely scenario now, Paul Ryan would be the top pick by the RNC, with Rubio as the most likely choice for running mate. Holy smokes, that's a shift. Who doesn't think he'd crush Hillary like an egg, given her escalating unfavorability rating?

[subego]

Under normal circumstances? Probably. With the party in open revolt? They may not have the juice.

Not to ignore the elephant in the room... Trump need merely say the word and Ryan's campaign explodes before it even gets off the pad.

[P]

IF it came to Ryan/Rubio against Clinton/whomever, no big third parties, then yes - the GOP would win. Rubio brings FL and shores up the western states, Ryan can win OH and PA and probably threaten a few more up in New England. Wouldn't even be close. But I don't think that will happen, because it would look like stealing the nomination. Even if they can beat the Trump loyalists, the first in line after is Cruz. I can't see how they'd outmaneuver both the Trumpists and Cruzaders - and if they do, expect at least one third party challenge.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by subego 

Under normal circumstances? Probably. With the party in open revolt? They may not have the juice.

Not to ignore the elephant in the room... Trump need merely say the word and Ryan's campaign explodes before it even gets off the pad.

Not really. In a lot of places it will be too late for Trump to get on the ballot.