Posted on 07/03/2018 1:24:55 PM PDT by xzins
Trump's base is not monolithically anti-abortion. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that if you polled only those people who supported candidate Donald Trump in the primaries, you'd find that abortion consistently ranked near the bottom of issues they cared deeply about.
Read the actual poll data. It does not show that at all. It only contains three categories to start.
Next get rid of the drug addicts , disabled, elderly,and homeless, thanks Margaret Sanger.
No. But I think this makes it settled science. Or a consensus.
I don’t know how to interpret this. There are so many older women who revere abortion and feel it is something that means WOMAN WONDERFUL. They don’t themselves quite understand why. They are purely brainwashed. As if women ever wanted, without men, a way to kill their babies.
And many men appreciate sweeping their affairs under the rug this way.
But maybe a lot of people are not admitting this to survey takers.
“So 82% say legal sometimes, 18% never.”
And the 35% who say that abortion should be illegal in “most” circumstances favor exceptions for things like cases of rape or incest, but some of them may have answered that way because they thought that an abortion law with an exception for the life of the mother would be a law that bans abortion in “most” cases.
In any event, anyone who wants abortion banned in all or most cases is in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade, which prohibits states from banning abortion in “most” cases.
I don't mean this is a mean way. It's true that you can get usable info from polling. But most people realize that your method of selection/randomizing and the wording of the questions can be tweaked this way or that to generate predictable results.
For instance, the same group that provides a majority saying they're "pro-choice" can, with other wording, agree that abortion is murder.
The same group that says they "support Roe vs Wade" can at the same time show majorities rejecting every separate provision of Roe vs Wade.
People calling themselves pro-choice can oppose 95% of abortions (those which are not for "rape, incest, life of the mother".)
People in favor of abortion for "fetal deformity" can be against abortion for "a baby with treatable health conditions."
It all depends on whom you ask, and how you ask it.
This should not be news to anyone.
OR
53% almost always illegal vs 47% always or almost always legal.
Both based on the same stats (below).
See how important wording is? On May 1-10 of this year, 29 percent said they thought abortion should be legal under any circumstances, 14 percent said they thought it should be legal under most circumstances, 35 percent said they thought it should be legal only in a few circumstances, and 18 percent said they thought it should be illegal in all circumstances.
It’s crazy to think western Europe has stricter abortion laws than the US.
Agreed. Meanwhile the pussy hat marchers think abortion was the only important issue of the election and Trump is going to ban abortion.
>>>Ban late abortions; exceptions for rape, incest or health<<<
Health of whom, the Mother or the Baby?
Sounds like Murder with special circumstances.
Depending on Interpretation, Roe v Wade restricted Abortion based on Viability. The Justices divided Abortion Rights into Trimesters, with the third Trimester considered a time where the Fetus could live outside of a Woman’s Body.
Even though their thoughts and writings prove their idea that Roe v Wade was not Absolute, those facts never made it into the final Ruling.
Of course, there have been major improvements in the care and sustainability of Premature Babies as well as Studies that show a Fetus may experience Pain from an Abortion at 20 Weeks Gestation, a fact unknown back in 1973.
Roe v Wade was also brought to the SCOTUS under a false Premise that the Woman involved had been subjected to a Gang Rape and found herself Pregnant. That was found to be a Lie. It was just an Unplanned Pregnancy and had nothing to do with Rape, committed by one or Multiple Rapists.
Why is that never mentioned when a SCOTUS Nominee is attacked and grilled by the Rats in the Senate?
I invite FReepers to negate or validate my thoughts here. This is what I gathered from multiple Online sources.
That’s what i understood from the methodology. They further broke down one of the categories
BTTT!
That tells me they are not concerned about pro-life voters in their home states.
I agree with that.
However, as a moral measure of the nation, that number of senators says a lot.
Maybe its mene, mene, tekel, parsin
That’s true. It’s also true that he wouldn’t be president without the Evangelical vote.
For me, the abortion issue is part and parcel of the restoration of the courts - whether we’re going to go back to real self-governance or some stripped down version of it within the left’s wacked out legal paradigm.
And yet we’re told that the new Supreme Court nominee had better not be pro-life.
My memory says they’re not supposed to discuss with the senate any cases that might come before them. Is that correct?
‘Are polls valid when they support our viewpoint and invalid when they don’t?’
yes, in all circumstances...
‘Poor graph two colors are too close to be sure what they reflect.’
yep, you can say that again...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.