Trump Announces His "Position" on Abortion

Even Donald Trump is subject to certain realities of politics, and one of those is that you cannot be a neutral observer on the issue of abortion. And so, he promised to issue a statement on the subject; that is what he did yesterday.

Trump revealed his so-called position on abortion access in a video posted to his failing—but somehow still worth more than the GDP of 40+ countries—boutique social media site. If you want to watch the video, this link will take you to a copy that does not drive traffic to Truth Social (Monday close: $37.17/share). That said, we doubt that many readers will actually want to watch him talk for 4+ minutes (and struggle to get through the names of all six conservative justices, particularly Samuel Alito), so here's a transcript of the key portion:

Many people have asked me what my position is on abortion and abortion rights, especially since 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.

It must be remembered that the Democrats are the radical ones are in this position because they support abortion up to and even beyond the ninth month. The concept of having an abortion in the later months, and even execution after birth.

And that's exactly what it is. The baby is born. The baby is executed after birth is unacceptable, and almost everyone agrees with that.

My view is now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it. From a legal standpoint, the states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both, and whatever they decide must be the law of the land, in this case, the law of the state.

Many states will be different. Many will have a different number of weeks, or some will have more conservative than others. And that's what they will be at the end of the day. This is all about the will of the people. You must follow your heart or in many cases, your religion or your faith. Do what's right for your family and do what's right for yourself. Do what's right for your children. Do what's right for our country, and vote. So important to vote.

At the end of the day, it's all about will of the people. That's where we are right now. And that's what we want, the will of the people. I want to thank the six justices Chief Justice John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch. Incredible people for having the courage to allow this long term, hard fought battle to finally end this 50 year battle over Roe v. Wade, took it out of the federal hands and brought it into the hearts, minds and vote of the people in each state. It was really something.

Now it's up to the states to do the right thing. Like Ronald Reagan, I am strongly in favor of exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother. You must follow your heart of this issue, but remember, you must also win elections to restore our culture and in fact, to save our country, which is currently, and very sadly, a nation in decline.

Trump is utilizing several well-worn strategies from his bag of tricks here. To wit:

1. The Unreasonable Ones: Trump's priority is always to let you know how wicked his enemies, in this case the Democrats, are. And so, he presents the blue team as a bunch of extremists, willing even to execute babies after they are born. As 100% of readers of this site know, that is a 100% baldfaced lie. Which is, of course, par for the course for him.
   
   
2. The Reasonable Ones: The counterpart to the above is for Trump to portray himself and his side as the sane and sensible ones (though note that if he only has time to slur his enemies or laud his allies, he will always choose the slurs). Anyhow, the very beginning of the video (not transcribed here) asserts that Republicans are, in effect, the party that saved IVF. That's an interesting rendering of the facts, to say the least. Later he talks about how the overturn of Roe was something that ALL legal scholars, regardless of political stripe "wanted" and "demanded." That's an even more interesting rendering of the facts. And then he presents himself and the six conservative justices as heroes and patriots who did great things for the country.
   
   
3. Control, but... No Control: No politician, save Trump, would be allowed to get away with this, but as with so many issues, he takes all of the credit while simultaneously making clear he has no power over or responsibility for the matter, going forward. And so, he effectively claims sole credit for getting rid of Roe, but then turns around and says that now (once the issue just so happens to have turned into a hot potato), it's out of his hands and up to the states. It's interesting how his power rapidly goes from "enormous" to "zero," like the Headless Horseman after crossing the bridge, or Samson after his hair is cut.
   
   
4. Both Sides of the Street: Operating under the assumption that empty platitudes will enable him to please everyone, Trump puts forward mutually contradictory positions. For example, abortion is entirely up to the states... except that there better be exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother. Or "You must follow your heart of this issue, but remember, you must also win elections to restore our culture and in fact." So, which is it? Is Trump telling his followers to do what they want... or to do what's most politic?

There's one last strategy that he was planning on, and was able to deploy, but it had to wait a few hours. We'll get to it in a moment.

In short, Trump thinks he can thread the needle here by appealing to states' rights and washing his hands of the whole matter. He is very, very wrong about that. First, there is almost nobody who is happy with the current state of affairs; pro-choice folks want the federal government to step in and protect abortion access everywhere, while anti-choice folks want the federal government to step in and limit abortion access everywhere. We might add that, as a purely tactical matter, both sides are right about this. That is to say, there is much about the issue of abortion, like mifepristone via mail, that can really only be regulated by the feds. A state-by-state approach is going to create a big mess, and already has.

There is also a second problem for him. Even if everyone accepts that this is a states' rights issue, Trump's (new) home state is going to be voting on the matter in November. In other words, consistent with his alleged "position" on abortion, as unveiled yesterday, he himself needs to make a decision as to whether or not Florida's 6-week ban should be allowed to stand. If he votes "yes," he angers a huge number of voters he needs. If he votes "no," he angers a huge number of voters he needs. And there's no way he's going to be able to get away with not answering questions about which box he plans to check on his ballot.

Predictably, then, Trump's policy statement satisfied virtually nobody. Democrats said, quite reasonably, that he isn't really moderate on abortion access, and that if the opportunity presents itself, he will use his power to impose further restrictions. For example, the White House issued a statement that read, in part, "Let there be no illusion. If Donald Trump is elected and the MAGA Republicans in Congress put a national abortion ban on the Resolute Desk, Trump will sign it into law."

For their part, Republicans said, also quite reasonably, that he's waffling and is failing to firmly commit to the goals of the anti-choice movement. The loudest critics on the right were Mike Pence and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). And that brings us to the fifth strategy, which is "create a distraction." After Graham said that Trump's message was a "great disservice to the Republican Party, and to our country," Trump lashed out at the Senator:

Senator Lindsey Graham is doing a great disservice to the Republican Party, and to our Country. At first he wanted no Abortions under any circumstances, then he was up to 6 weeks, where you're allowed Abortion, now he's up to 15 weeks, where you're allowed Abortion, but what he doesn't understand, or perhaps he does, is the Radical Left Democrats, who are destroying our Country, will never approve anything that he or the Republicans want. They love this Issue, and they want to keep it going for as long as Republicans will allow them to do so. Terminating Roe v. Wade was, according to all Legal Scholars, a Great Event, but sometimes with Great Events come difficulties. Many Good Republicans lost Elections because of this Issue, and people like Lindsey Graham, that are unrelenting, are handing Democrats their dream of the House, Senate, and perhaps even the Presidency...

In that Graham and Trump are accusing each other of being chameleons whose "position" on key issues changes depending on which way the political winds blow, they are both correct.

There is also a small chance that Trump has thought all this out carefully and concluded that the evangelicals and anti-abortion voters are cornered. They can't accept a Biden presidency, no matter what, because he will push for a law legalizing abortion nationally. So despite the short-term pain, in the end they will have to vote for Trump. Trump knows this, and by being wishy-washy, he may pick up some moderate Republicans who can live with a 15-week ban.

In the end, we all know what Trump's real position is; he doesn't care about abortion rights one way or the other, but if he regains the Oval Office, he will crack down as best he can, to keep his base happy (and donating). What he's gambling on with this phony "moderate" approach is that would-be Trump voters who favor abortion access don't realize what's going on, while would-be Trump voters who are hardcore anti-choice types catch on to the wink-wink, nudge-nudge subtext here. For our part, we don't think it's going to work the way Trump hopes it will. (Z)

The RNC Continues to Circle the Drain

Speaking of things that are not going according to the Trump plan, the takeover of the RNC is not going too well. In addition to the financial woes and some chaotic national and state leadership situations, the Committee is now having a serious brain drain problem.

In short, some sizable number of RNC staffers were told their services were no longer required, while another sizable number were told they could resign and then re-apply for their jobs. Part of the point of this was to impress upon the staff that they were being given "the privilege" of working for the Trump-run GOP. And part of the point of this was to force them to go on the record as being 100% MAGA and, in particular, 100% committed to the notion that the 2020 election was stolen.

As it turns out, RNC Chair Michael Whatley and Co-Chair Lara Trump might not have thought this through all the way. To start with, the whole scheme is just generally insulting—making people jump through hoops like trained seals, and sign loyalty oaths, and things like that. Beyond that, however, a professional political operative might have another 20, or 30, or 40 years left in their career. And there will come a time in that span, probably sooner than later, when having a reputation as a die-hard Trump loyalist will not be great for their career prospects (see McDaniel, Ronna Romney).

And so, many key RNC staffers, particularly folks who work as part of the Committee's data operations, have chosen to walk away. Data-crunching is a big, big part of a modern presidential campaign, and Trump '24 will try to pick up the slack with its own data operation, which is based in Palm Beach, FL, near Mar-a-Lago. Will they be able to do the job as well as seasoned RNC pros? We would guess "no," but we really don't know for sure. Will they, as Trump super-loyalists, be willing to share bad news with the candidate when they have it? That may be the real problem here. People who are not "yes men" often don't stay in Trump's employ for long. (Z)

Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud

Yes, we use that phrase a lot, to the point that it's moving into cliché territory. But yesterday, there were either two or three really good examples of the phenomenon, so we're going with that headline.

First up is an example that comes courtesy of the RFK Jr. campaign. Given the candidate's Trumpy rhetoric, it's clear that the only thing about him that's really Democratic is his last name. And the donor class has figured this out, which is why most of Kennedy's funding comes from right-wingers. That said, he has to pretend to be an independent, which means that his New York State political director, Rita Palma, a devoted anti-vaxxer, definitely spoke out of turn.

What did Palma say? Well, she was doing a presentation for potential supporters in New York, as Junior tries to get on the ballot in the state that sent his father to the U.S. Senate. And after "making sure" that no Joe Biden supporters were in the room, she decreed:

The Kennedy voter and the Trump voter, our mutual enemy is Biden. I'm going to vote for Bobby, however, if I wake up on Nov. 6 and Trump wins, I'm not going to be overly upset. But if Biden wins, we're all going to be terribly upset.

Palma also believes that if Republicans vote for Kennedy, there's a chance of forcing a contingent election in the House. So, her understanding of civics is about as strong as her understanding of science.

The Kennedy campaign has already disavowed the remarks:

Rita Palma is a ballot access consultant responsible for scheduling volunteer shifts for our upcoming signature collection drive in the Empire State. She is not involved in electoral strategy, nationally or in New York. This was not a campaign event. Palma was speaking as a private citizen and her statements in no way reflect the strategy of the Kennedy campaign, which is to win the White House with votes from former Trump and Biden supporters alike.

It's interesting how all these staffers of the Kennedy campaign send out Trumpy fundraising e-mails or make Trumpy comments, and the campaign just can't figure out where this is coming from.

Our second example here is a bit simpler. Eric Hovde (R) is the Trump-backed candidate for the U.S. Senate seat in Wisconsin that is up this year. Despite that state's purple hue, the seat hasn't been won by a Republican since Joe McCarthy did it in 1952, and Hovde is apparently determined to keep it that way. He appeared on Fox this weekend, and said that one of the key sources of "fake" anti-Trump ballots is... nursing homes. And he suggested that the solution might be to ban nursing-home residents from voting, since they'll be dead soon anyhow and so ostensibly don't have skin in the game. Here are his exact words: "[Y]ou only have a 5, 6-month life expectancy. Almost nobody in a nursing home is in a point to vote." Apparently, he has not been informed which way the votes of senior citizens skew.

And our final example is the "maybe" example, since it comes from Donald Trump. On one hand, what he said out loud this weekend was not, on the whole, politically wise. On the other hand, he's been saying the quiet part out loud for a decade now, and hasn't paid much of a price for it, so maybe it doesn't really qualify. Anyhow, at his big-bucks fundraiser this weekend, Trump was talking about one of his favorite topics, namely immigration. And he said that he would prefer only to allow immigrants from "nice" countries into the U.S.

Is any reader struggling to figure out what kind of immigrant he means here? If so, we would ask "What, He Isn't Transparent Enough?" And we'd point out that, "Well, He Is Truly Erudite." And maybe that, when it comes to his speech, "We Heard It's To Edify." Anyhow, you'll figure it out eventually. For now, "Well, Here Is The End." (Z)

Fascism Watch: Enemies of the State

For a very, very long time, we were extremely hesitant to use the word "fascism" in the context of Donald Trump. You can go back through the archives, particularly the Saturday questions and answers, and see evidence of our reluctance. But man, the behavior of Donald Trump and his henchmen leave us with no choice. There's a point at which "trying to be fair" turns into "burying your head in the sand."

And so, we pass along two stories that speak to this worrying trendline. First, Republicans have largely realized that impeaching Joe Biden isn't going to fly. And, of course, they can't go after him criminally while he is in office, since there's no good way to bring charges, and since DoJ policy prohibits criminal indictments against sitting presidents anyhow.

But private citizen Joe Biden is a different matter. And so, Trump and some of his toadies are busily laying the groundwork for prosecuting the President once he is out of office. They figure that a Republican AG, at least one of the sort that would be chosen by Trump, will be more than happy to act on criminal referrals from House Republicans. The only blank that needs to be filled in is "what crime?" There's talk of something related to the classified documents, or maybe something connected to Hunter Biden, or possibly charging Joe Biden and several of his family members/associates with stealing the 2020 election. None of this will be able to get past a grand jury, much less a judge, but Trump probably doesn't understand that.

Meanwhile, Trump sycophant Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) is making sure to do his part for Il Trumpe. The Representative has noticed that many companies are not interested in having their ads appear on far-right platforms, since they don't particularly want to be associated with loony conspiracy theories, racism, sexism and other such things that tend to flourish on Parler or Gab or Truth Social or Breitbart. This has angered Jordan, and so late last week he sent out a bunch of letters to various CEOs telling them they better rethink their policies or they could be in big trouble.

What, exactly, is Jordan's basis for this (as a member, by the way, of a political party that ostensibly believes in free-market capitalism)? It's dubious, to say the least. The corporations he's targeting, like Procter & Gamble, Mars Inc., and Unilever are members of several consortiums that share information on advertising strategy. These consortiums, backed by much number-crunching, have concluded that association with crazypants content is not good for the brands. And Jordan declares that, in acting on those conclusions, the various corporations are guilty of violating the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Bet you didn't see that coming. For his next trick, Jordan will show you how wearing a Joe Biden t-shirt is actually a violation of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906.

Anyhow, plotting to put your political opponents in jail, even if they committed no crimes, and using government power to try to intimidate private corporations who do not follow the party line? That's Fascism 101. We don't like writing it, but there's no non-authoritarian form of government where such behaviors are acceptable. (Z)

Biden Announces More Student Loan Forgiveness

And finally, we can leave Donald Trump behind, and move on to some news about Joe Biden. The President appears to have noticed that he has a problem with younger voters. And so, he's whipped up yet another student-loan debt forgiveness plan, which he unveiled yesterday.

The new plan focuses on interest, as opposed to principal, and would forgive up to $20,000 in unpaid interest for borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan or other income-based loan-repayment programs. The White House estimates this will help about 25 million borrowers, with more than 90% of those getting all of their interest forgiven. Added to the borrowers who have been assisted by other Biden-administration loan-forgiveness initiatives, a total of 30 million people would end up with some amount of amnesty.

It is going to take several months for all the i's to be dotted and all the t's to be crossed on the new plan, and for all of the various administrative hurdles to be overcome. That means that the plan would kick in sometime in early fall of this year. So, 5-6 weeks before the election, either a bunch of voters are going to get good news about their loans, or else Republicans who oppose loan forgiveness will file suit, and then will get to run on that. Mayyyyyybe the Biden campaign has noticed that timing. But we're just spitballing here. (Z)

Ohio Threatens to Leave Biden Off Its Ballot

Thanks to the many readers who sent this story in to items@electoral-vote.com. As the headline notes, Joe Biden is potentially at risk of being left off Ohio's ballot in November, according to a letter sent to Ohio Democratic Party Chairwoman Liz Walters by Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R).

The problem here is that Ohio state law dictates that the deadline for candidates to qualify for the ballot is August 7, while the Democratic National Convention is not until August 19. So, LaRose is warning that he might just have to leave the Democratic line on the ballot blank. The two available fixes, according to LaRose's letter, are: (1) that the Democrats hold their convention earlier, or (2) that the (Republican-dominated) state legislature passes a resolution granting the Biden campaign a one-time exception to the law.

We will make a couple of observations here. First, if this was, say, New York and Donald Trump instead of Ohio and Biden, Republicans would be screaming bloody murder. "See," they would say. "We told you Democrats are trying to steal the election!" Similarly, if it was Ohio and Trump instead of Ohio and Biden, LaRose would discover yesterday that he has the authority to make a judgment call, and either to put the presumptive nominee on the ballot or to hold off until all the conventions have been held.

The second observation is that if it was some other red/reddish state, it might actually behoove the Biden campaign to stick to their guns and to let the President be omitted. If we were talking, say, Wyoming or Alabama or South Carolina, Biden and his surrogates could say: "Well, the Republicans have erased the Democrats from one presidential ballot this year. How many will it be in 2028? You know, the Southern states did the same thing to Abraham Lincoln in the 1860s..."

Because it's Ohio, however, Biden simply has to be on the ballot in case his coattails help Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) win reelection. So, maybe the Democrats will blink and move their convention. On the other hand, it would look very bad for Ohio to disqualify Biden on a silly technicality, especially since all 49 other states (including several with much larger populations than Ohio) are somehow able to pull their ballots together even if they have to wait until late August for the Democratic nominee to be official. Plus, the Ohio law might well be something that could be challenged in court. So the easiest resolution here, we think, is that the Ohio legislature steps in with a fix. But the Republicans control the trifecta in Ohio, so who knows. On the other hand, Gov. Mike DeWine (R-OH) is not a crazy MAGA-ite, so he might ask the legislature to change the date and they might comply. (Z)

Looking Forward to 2024, Part VII: Reader Predictions, Congress Edition

We have been trying to get back to this for SO long, but there's been SO much news that, well... In any case, we have three more sets of predictions, and we have to get them in this week, because we want to move on to other backlogged material next week. As a reminder, here are the sets of predictions we have already run:

• Looking Forward to 2024, Part I: Pundit Predictions
• Looking Forward to 2024, Part II: Our Predictions
• Looking Forward to 2024, Part III: Reader Predictions, Joe Biden Edition
• Looking Forward to 2024, Part IV: Reader Predictions, Donald Trump Edition
• Looking Forward to 2024, Part V: Reader Predictions, Elections Edition
• Looking Forward to 2024, Part VI: Reader Predictions, Economy and Finance Edition

And now, 10 reader predictions about Congress:

1. M.C. in Fresno, CA: Democrats will win the U.S. Senate seat in Texas, sending Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) to wherever... (Potential Bonus Points: 67)
   
   
2. J.J. in Johnstown, PA: Sherrod Brown and Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) will both win re-election, but the open seat in Michigan will flip to Republican. (Potential Bonus Points: 76)
   
   
3. K.F.S. in Lorton, VA: Two incumbent senators will lose reelection, but Sherrod Brown won't be one of them. (Potential Bonus Points: 50)
   
   
4. D.C. in Delray Beach, FL: Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) will win the Senate seat in Michigan by 8 points. (Potential Bonus Points: 50)
   
   
5. R.C. in Des Moines, IA: Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) will reverse course and not only bring the Senate immigration bill to the floor but will whip votes in favor. When asked why he changed course, he will say God spoke to him and this is His will. (Potential Bonus Points: 85)
   
   
6. The Great Bombini in Cincinnati, OH: You don't need the Great Bombini to tell you that Mike Johnson won't last through the end of the year. I give him until June, tops. (Potential Bonus Points: 50)
   
   
7. K.F.S. in Lorton, VA: The Democrats will retake the House with a healthy majority, saying goodbye to Lauren Boebert and Nancy Mace. (Potential Bonus Points: 51)
   
   
8. S.H. in Broken Arrow, OK: At least one member of The Squad will face a censure, likely over remarks about Israel, that will succeed based on a party-line vote. (Potential Bonus Points: 37)
   
   
9. O.E. in Greenville, SC: There will be scandals causing at least one member of each party to resign from Congress. (Potential Bonus Points: 55)
   
   
10. E.S. in Maine, NY: A fistfight will happen in Congress, on the floor of one of the chambers. Both people involved will be Republicans. (Potential Bonus Points: 63)

If the readers pull a sweep here, then they'll earn 1,000 points for 10 correct predictions, along with 584 bonus points for degree of difficulty. Although prediction #2 and #4 are in conflict, so there won't be a sweep.

The next set of predictions will be about foreign affairs, followed by a wildcard set. (Z)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend or share:

---The Votemaster and Zenger