No one can answer every question put to them in a debate, especially when there are so many issues to address. There are a whole, long list of things she COULD have said on a number of issues. And the abortion issue is a slam dunk win for her already, so not answering that single question didn't really hurt her at all. All her other answers on abortion were spot on, so she's fine on this issue.
PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION. What do you think that is? It's dispatching the baby at the moment of birth. Look it up. That's why she would not answer the question about whether she is for abortion in the 7th, 8th and 9th months.
It's also called "Intact dilation and extraction." "Intact dilation and extraction is a surgical procedure that terminates and removes an intact fetus from the uterus. The procedure is used both after miscarriages and for abortions in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. In abortions, a D&X can occur after feticide or on a live fetus." In other words the fetus has not yet been born and is partially removed as part of the procedure. So it hasn't already been born.
They know this issue is a HUGE loser for them so they're throwing every possible lie and distortion at the wall hoping some of it sticks. So far the answer is no.
She was asked multiple times at what point would she say is too late in the pregnancy for an abortion and she wouldn’t answer it. That’s a bad look. The majority of Americans are pro-choice but with limitations. Late term abortions are really despised by a wide majority of the public. On that one point re: this topic, she did come off as an extremist and I think that was her low point for the evening in an otherwise masterful performance of looking very presidential and throwing Trump off his game.
She said she would sign a bill that re-instituted Roe v. Wade and that decision said (according to Britannica):
"the Court formulated a timetable based on the notions of trimester and fetal viability (i.e., the “capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb”). During the first trimester of pregnancy, the Court ruled, the state could not intervene in a person’s decision to have an abortion under normal circumstances. During the second trimester the state could regulate abortion procedures to protect the health of pregnant persons, but it could not prohibit abortions altogether. From the end of the second trimester, which the Court identified as the starting point of viability, the state could regulate or prohibit abortions in order to protect the pregnant person’s health or to preserve fetal viability. In no case, however, could the state criminalize abortions that were necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person."
That's what the law had been and that's what Harris wants it returned to.
She was asked directly if she, personally, would be ok with elective abortions in the 7th, 8th or 9th month. That is an EASY question. Her answer should have been "of course not." But that is not what she said. She shook her head and went to make a separate point. Go back and watch it. Rs are already making a TV attack ad with her answer. I am sorry but she botched that question.
No one can answer every question put to them in a debate, especially when there are so many issues to address. There are a whole, long list of things she COULD have said on a number of issues. And the abortion issue is a slam dunk win for her already, so not answering that single question didn't really hurt her at all. All her other answers on abortion were spot on, so she's fine on this issue.
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
VIP MEMBER
, you are now a VIP member!
We thank you for your purchase!
VIP MEMBER
, Thank you for becoming VIP member!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!
