Posted on 08/11/2015 8:20:38 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
This past weekend at the Red State Gathering, every Republican presidential hopeful demanded the defunding of Planned Parenthood in the wake of the undercover videos exposing their organ harvesting. That was at a minimum; more than one demanded a criminal investigation of the nation’s largest abortion-mill chain as well. However, Donald Trump got pushed into endorsing the status quo during an interview on CNN’s New Day, Breitbart’s John Nolte reports. Video picks up at 5:53:
“The problem that I have with Planned Parenthood is the abortion situation. It is like an abortion factory, frankly,” Trump said. “And you can’t have it. And you just shouldn’t be funding it. That should not be funded by the government, and I feel strongly about that.”
Actually, that’s not a bad answer, although Trump seems unaware that Planned Parenthood already argues that federal subsidies don’t fund abortions. However, Chris Cuomo then changed tactics by talking about the importance of the other services provided by Planned Parenthood, and Trump didn’t avoid the trap:
When pressed on non-abortion services Planned Parenthood allegedly provides, Trump said, “What I would do when the time came, I’d look at the individual things they do, and maybe some of the individual things they do are good. I know a lot of the things are bad. But certainly the abortion aspect of it should not be funded by government, absolutely.”
Trump continued, “I would look at the good aspects of [Planned Parenthood], and I would also look, because I’m sure they do some things properly and good and that are good for women, and I would look at that, and I would look at other aspects also. But we have to take care of women.”
Nolte raises the first obvious problem with that position, which is that the $500 million or so in government funding allows abortions to take place, whether it’s aimed at those services or not:
In other words Trump is open to a status quo many conservatives find unacceptable and immoral; also a typical federal government shell game to skirt around the law. If you give Planned Parenthood money for these so-called “other things,” the abortion provider can shift money from those “other things” to abortion.
Chris Cuomo tried the same argument on Trump that Mark Halperin used with Rick Perry a few weeks ago. Perry didn’t buy into the premise, and instead turned the question around on Halperin, to the delight of the Morning Joe panel at the time. Trump didn’t learn from that schooling, instead getting locked into Cuomo’s context.
Trump misses another point in this exchange too, which is that Planned Parenthood is hardly the only option for those other services that Trump wants to keep funded. In fact, no one is arguing that these services shouldn’t remain funded, but only that federal subsidies for them flow to other clinics that don’t perform abortions as their core business. The federal subsidies going to Planned Parenthood distort the market, boosting the largest player at the expense of smaller clinics more suited to deliver care in their communities. One would think that Trump would be particularly well positioned to explain that.
What makes this even more interesting is that Trump said he wanted a government shutdown to defund Planned Parenthood just eight days ago, during an appearance on Hugh Hewitt’s show:
HH: The word is that the Democrats will filibuster and the president will veto — that’s the only way to get rid of Planned Parenthood money for selling off baby parts is to shut the government down in September. Would you support that?
DT: Well I can tell you this. I would and I was also in support if the Republicans stuck together you could have done it with Obamacare also, but the Republicans decided not to stick together and they left a few people out there like Ted Cruz. You know, they left a lot of the people who really went in and wanted to do the job and you know what? If they had stuck together they wold have won that battle. I think you have to in this case also, yes.
That’s a mighty big shift from one week to the next. However, this doesn’t look like a flip-flop as much as it does a case of a candidate being unprepared. Trump’s initial response would have been solid, had he stuck to it, but he seems unaware that Planned Parenthood apologists rely on the argument that federal subsidies do not fund “the abortion aspect” of Planned Parenthood now, which is how they’ve fended off attempts to defund the company in the past. It’s not a fatal error, especially for Trump, who can certainly clarify and amend these remarks to the satisfaction of the base — as long as he remains consistent on it in the future. Even at that, though, it demonstrates the rather facile grasp on public policy issues that Trump has long demonstrated.
Besides, people who look for “fatal errors” from Trump miss the point. As I explain in my column at The Week, Trump’s popularity really isn’t about him — it’s about the voters who want to shake up a system that ignores them. That goes well beyond the fringes, and it’s happening in both parties:
Many Beltway pundits assumed that Trump’s “blood” remark would be a crash-and-burn moment. They clearly have a lot to learn about the conservative voters who will ultimately make that decision. While many of them understood and agreed with the unvitation in the immediate aftermath of Trump’s attack on Kelly, no one that I spoke to at the RedState Event had sworn him off as a candidate. These were not rabid Trump backers unwilling to tolerate criticism of a personal hero, but conservatives frustrated by a party that they feel has stopped listening to them, and largely talks over them. Many of these conservative activists see Trump as a man who breaks that pattern. They want to send a message to the GOP and force the party to pay attention to its base voters.
They aren’t alone, either. A similar dynamic has played out on the other side of the aisle. Hillary Clinton came into the race not just as a favorite, but as the only realistic option for Democrats. The Clinton team had made sure of that, packaging her as inevitable and locking up the majority of the party’s establishment donors. Yet the former secretary of state, the first woman in either party to seriously contend for the nomination, could barely fill her “reboot” event in June on New York City’s Roosevelt Island. Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders — who isn’t even registered as a Democrat — has 28,000 people cramming into venues to hear him speak. One of these two contenders has become a rock star, and it’s not establishment favorite Hillary Clinton. …
Candidates like Trump might be unserious or even clownish to the media and political analysts, but the large number of people who latch onto them as a vehicle for their frustration are not. This populist impulse on both sides of the aisle threatens to derail the two-party system. Unless the leadership in both organizations starts paying more attention to voters than the status quo which those voters are rejecting — and finding leaders in anyone who can give vent to their frustration — they may be the authors of their own demise.
Some of this may sort itself out as the GOP field narrows, but that won’t solve the problem. It just may lessen the symptoms, but even that’s a long shot. The first party to understand and integrate the Internet era of populism wins in 2016.
Update: Kurt Schlichter is less patient with Trump’s supporters.
I most certainly do. People are responsible for the government they have. Period. We get in trouble when we start differentiating a government from the people it represents. This is even true in North Korea. We struggle to declare wars now because of this error in thinking. The Afghan people ARE responsible for their government, same in Iran, same elsewhere.
This is like people who rage at bankers and won't put blame on the individuals, companies and nations that use the credit they extend. In this example bankers may be enablers, but they are not the core problem.
This Trump thing is nothing new, we saw it recently with Perot and we've seen it all through history - and it never ends well. This is supposed to be a conservative site with learned conservatives. I expect people who understand these issues to, at minimum, not blindly throw their support to someone who has no history of conservatism, clearly doesn't understand the issues, can get bamboozled by any network into saying he'd fund parts of PP (which we already do) because he doesn't know anything about the issue, etc.
The Trump thing is just not going to end well. It's really not. And "raging against the establishment" is not an excuse for conservatives to back a populist anti-intellectual.
As I posted on a related thread:
It’s true that PP offers other services than abortion. But abortion is their biggest moneymaker by far.
The fact that it offers other services that actually do help a woman maintain her health is really a smokescreen. They use that fact as cover, politically, to justify their federal funds. What should happen is that PP is denied all federal funds and that money is diverted to other programs for low income women that offer free exams and such, but don’t perform abortions.
Actually ideally the money should be cut off period, but good luck getting that passed. The reality of it is that the money will be spent on “women’s heslthcare”; the best most realistic thing to do is divert it away from PP.
I believe that’s what Ted Cruz wants to do because he knows that even if money given to PP is earmarked to “not be for abortions” they will just use that money to pay for things other piles of money are for now, and use money previously used for other things to offset the costs of abortions (the “fungible” argument others have brought up on this thread).
Trump should understand this concept as a businessman.
Jeb-backing
Really, haven’t heard that one.
Trump has not been a lifer dog politician. You know the lifer dog politicians who are seemingly powerless to defund PP.
It seems people’s anger is misdirected at Trump.
It is the lifer dog politicians, from the do nothing Party other wise known as the Republican Party, that people should be mad at.
I was quoting another poster.....in the first line.....and several other posters in the remainder of the message.
donnie is a poseur...
yes thats what I said
remember where you read this! come November next!
We know that about McConnell, but that liberal isn’t running for President. Lord Donald, the liberal who situationally spews conservative talking points when tactically useful (he’s in business, after all), is.
Ja, vee should not fund zee Schutzstaffel’s death camps but vee must continue to fund all zee other useful SS programs. Ein Volk! Ein Reich! Ein Obama!
Funding PP while telling them not to use the $$ for abortions is akin to funding ISIS while telling them not to wage jihad.
I will not argue that trump is not a liberal. But he has no authority to fund this butcher business with tax payer funds. Elected republicans fund the butcher business, why the double standard?
“The GOP does, and the GOP is fully funding Planned Parenthood.
Maybe complaints should be directed to them.”
And excuse Trump for yet another in a long line of policy flips, right? You are aware he’s running for the highest office in the land, are you not?
Total double standard form everywhere
Plus, PP funding comes from the Senate.
Trump might be a complete wingnut, He might become a hitlerian ditator on jan 20 2017, but no is talking about hypocrisy of the republicans the way he is, except Cruz, who, if Trump wasn’t there, would be getting so slammed right now, he’d think he was in a remake of “The Perfect Storm”
I thought we had Obamacare. Why is Planned Parenthood still around?
donnie is a poseur...
Yeah, again, which liferdog politician now serving isn’t?
Why have we lost nearly every round.How is it they are powerless to stop Obama?
Trump has just arrived on the scene.
He didn’t screw up America.
Actually, he has tangable proof of his accomplishments.
Unlike most of the pencil pushers, who are suppose to represent us, in DC.
Its looking more promising than it had been. Cruz and even Carson have risen to the top. While Bush is sinking fast.:)
I would like to think that Trump had a little to do with that.
BTW i do not support Trump for President but i do think he is providing a very useful service.
Imagine if Trump back Cruz.
Meanwhile, during this election year it is Congress controlled by Republicans that refuse to pull the funding for butchering and selling babies. Trump is not even the issue.
Yes, I am.
You are aware that the party that you keep voting for doesn’t support or pass or even attempt to pass anything in their platform and lies directly to your face every election cycle and is FULLY FUNDING Planned Parenthood right now?
Are you aware that the party you elect is in charge of federal spending and not the president?
If you don’t have a problem with the GOP funding Planned Parenthood, then I don’t see why you would have a problem with what Trump said, because he isn’t funding a damn thing except his campaign.
Read history. The electorate has ever been more reactionary than proactive. As long as there is peace in their community and they are eating, they are disinclined to upset the status quo. They may be aghast at Congress as a whole but their congressman must be going a good job for them. No change.
When the electorate perceives a problem, there is a reaction. The GOP has been swept into power in every congressional election since 2010, primarily to deal with Obamacare... and they broken every promise since. Trump’s support represents the electorate’s reaction to this uniparty reality.
It doesn’t mean he will win. In truth, he’s a light-weight saying shallow things... but he resonates with the dissatisfaction in the electorate. The smart candidates in this race will recognize what the electorate is saying through its support for Trump and run with it. Ted Cruz is the right man to do that as he has already shown his opposition to the Washington Cabal.
The truth of the IQ scale is that half of the population is below 100... that’s the way it is scored. They are easily led and oftentimes vote with their guts... that’s why carnal promises work so well. Trump is getting their attention and conservative ideas are breaking through their bubbles for the first time in a long time. Hopefully, they will be inspired to seek more.
Yeah but for someone like me, all I am saying is people should be careful. Obama, while a politician, ran as a populist who would change things. People bought in to the rhetoric. Both Trump and Obama are narcissistic. Both have either an aversion to or ignorance of constitutional and governing principles. Trump perhaps can play some beneficial role in changing things if he is sincere. I just am in no way convinced that role is potus.
Are you aware only two in the GOP voted not to defund? Are you aware any defunding bill would’ve had to be signed by the President, for whose position Trump is running? And you say TRUMP isn’t the issue surrounding his own comment? Please.
Trump wants to help poor women who can not afford private insurance. I see nothing wrong with that.
In the Senate vote, two of 54 GOPers voted to continue funding PP. How again is that considered a party’s supporting the butchering of babies.
Stop excusing Trump’s flip-flops. You know as well as I he’s nowhere near conservative.
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.