Replies

Well, I'm willing to try it. But culturally I think we're cemented into a 52%-48% anti-abortion majority that is seeing no movement among that 48%, even with these videos. As Rush says, SOMEDAY some people will wake up (just like in Nazi Germany) and say "What are we doing?" But just as then, it will be too late to really affect the process.

That is why I think it has to come from exec orders (as Bush did with military bases & federal property), but with someone who would be even more aggressive than Bush. Trump HAS that aggressiveness, but I don't know about his commitment to this subject. He has 100% avoided discussion of these videos.

That's not a knock on him, as I'm sure the large majority of his supporters want him to "stay away from the social issues." Now, most of us at FR know ultimately you cannot---that right to life precedes right to property everywhere, so eventually he will have to deal with it for good or bad. I'm just saying that of all the candidates, I think he is uniquely capable of making a substantial impact if he chooses.

I would agree. If Trump is avoiding discussing the videos, then it is a sure bet that he will be asked about it on Thursday night. It might be Fox's attempt to "gotcha" Trump into saying something unthoughtful in the hopes of sinking him with it later. However, the double-edged sword is that it exposes the other candidates into having to discuss it, too. Once candidates go on the record about it, they can be held to their statements.

Cruz, Paul, and Rubio can say they voted against it. Trump and Walker can say it was a meaningless show vote because beltway insiders are controlled by lobbyists. Paul can say he wanted it in the highway bill where it would have counted; Cruz can say the highway bill was a sham bill to hide crony back-room deals that he fought against. They can all attack Graham for missing the vote entirely.

Then they can begin to separate from each other, and all can make statements that keep Trump from being isolated over the issue.

-PJ