GOP Rep. Mace on Abortion: ‘Women Are Not Going to Vote for Us’ — 2024 Will Be a ‘Bloodbath’

[Right_in_Virginia]

????  So as conservatives are we supposed to surrender and allow abortions at any level, including partial birth and after birth abortions?  This isn't a matter of getting votes this is a matter of doing what is morally correct. 

No one is suggesting this.  But, there comes a time when the conservative individual has to step up and resist the continued demand that politicians solve the issue and control the outcome.

Conservatives won in the SC.  Now it's time to fight just as hard to win the hearts and minds of a generation that feels threatened.  Individuals, separately and in coordinated groups/organizations, must be willing to do what it takes to make abortion the rarely used option among many.

[LMAO]

What has cost us dearly is the country is moving hard to the left and conservative positions don’t have the same appeal as they did decades ago.  Gen-Z voters are streaming in large numbers into the electorate and they are decisively leftist across the board and among those liberal positions is a demand for legal abortion.  No, we as conservatives should not surrender our position on it, but let’s not fool ourselves into thinking this country is still center-right.  That train left the station long ago.

And maybe this is just part of our slow decline and decay. So we get desperate to find that one man who will “Make America Great Again” but maybe we had our time in the sun and now it’s someone else’s turn

Declining standard of living

Unsustainable debt

Fewer people getting married and more kids, if couples have them, are born out of wedlock

An open border that is slowly turning us into a third world county
A president that in a sane world would be living in an assisted living arrangement

Easy access to Internet porn And hook up sites

An educational and medical community that think it’s OK to butcher children
You get the picture

My fear is that a strong man will take power, promising the correct all this, and the public will end up supporting that person

[Bigun]

I disagree that they’ll gain ground.  Abortion is very popular in this culturally decrepit country, and anyone who pushes against it will pay a hard price at the ballot box.  That said, it still should be opposed, because saving the lives of the unborn is a noble cause.  There are other more important goals to be reached than those of winning elections.

This once great republic is nothing more than a rapidly fading memory already and that is 100% due to failure to uphold the Constitution.

[Bigun]

Abortion and “ MAGA Republicans”  kept the 2022 midterms from being a bloodbath for the Democrats

BS! Rampant cheating did that.

[libertybele]

No one is suggesting this.  But, there comes a time when the conservative individual has to step up and resist the continued demand that politicians solve the issue and control the outcome.

Conservatives won in the SC.  Now it's time to fight just as hard to win the hearts and minds of a generation that feels threatened.  Individuals, separately and in coordinated groups/organizations, must be willing to do what it takes to make abortion the rarely used option among many.

I understand your point but individuals and organizations have tried for years to stop abortions and it hasn't worked. Clean cut legislation denying abortion within parameters is what will work.

Abortion is obviously going to be a campaign issue in '24 -- there's no avoiding that.  Trump has already stated his stance last campaign, so what do you think is going to be his stance now??

Is anti-abortio popular?  No.  Is it morally right?  In my mind yes.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Maybe in the city. Not out here.

Unfortunately, the cities and suburbs hold most of the voters.

[ScottinVA]

So what you are stating is conservatism is absolutely dead, that liberalism is the way to go.  It has won in the past and it will now win in the future which may be the case.  I refuse to surrender my principles. 

We as conservatives have compromised and move to the left of center to gain votes.  Look where that's gotten us.

Nope.  Just sharing the reality of the political landscape in this country.  Conservatives will continue to win in some states, but let’s divest ourselves of the mistaken notion that we’re just a good messaging effort away from Reagan Revolution Part Deux.

[libertybele]

This once great republic is nothing more than a rapidly fading memory already and that is 100% due to failure to uphold the Constitution.

   That and failing to hold those that didn't uphold the Constitution responsible.

[roamer_1]

2022 election results speak for themselves.

REALLY?

[Kamaji]

But in mine, and many other swing states, voters will vote, especially young women, to keep abortion legal

I’m not saying the GOP needs to be for abortion all the way up to birth. But they have been successfully defined as being extreme on abortion

Exactly.  And the GOP has to come to terms with how they are going to approach that issue.

[libertybele]

Nope.  Just sharing the reality of the political landscape in this country.  Conservatives will continue to win in some states, but let’s divest ourselves of the mistaken notion that we’re just a good messaging effort away from Reagan Revolution Part Deux.

I'm not mistaken about anything.  As clear as day I am absolutely convinced that compromising conservative principles is why we continue to lose.  We've gone from honoring the sanctity of life and marriage to abortions, gay marriages, transexualism, etc. I could go further we've gone from respecting our law enforcement officers to defunding the police. Liberalism is winning because we haven't stood our ground!

Congress is pretty much worthless these days and the ONLY way that conservatism stands a chance is at the state and local level.  Thank you Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott.

[Bigun]

Exactly.  And the GOP has to come to terms with how they are going to approach that issue.

A national divorce is all but inevitable.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

After years of crushing defeats, taking a pessimistic stance is sort of emotionally protective, and seems like a safer bet these days. But yeah, i'm not optimistic.

[libertybele]

Exactly.  And the GOP has to come to terms with how they are going to approach that issue.

Ok, so let's come to terms with that @Kamaji what is a life worth?  OR, John Doe Republican wants to win an election so he'll side step the issue or say that he leans more pro choice than anti-abortion.  You can't have it both ways.

[libertybele]

After years of crushing defeats, taking a pessimistic stance is sort of emotionally protective, and seems like a safer bet these days. But yeah, i'm not optimistic.

No, I'm not optimistic either, but stepping to the left, curtailing to the left and trying to appease the left is why we lose.

Is it too late? Perhaps.  Again, it is most important IMHO that we win at the state and local levels.  Washington is beyond corrupt and is beyond fixing.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

So are we supposed to get in line and agree with abortions to get votes???  That very well may be how they will win, but for far too long conservatives have compromised their principles and it is now costing us our country.  We have allowed the liberal indoctrination of our youth and now that has carried over to those of voting age.  Meeting liberals in the middle and going against our own principles is what has cost us elections.

It's a tough question.

My concern is that if we take too hardline a position, we'll end up handing elections to Democrats and they'll pass something with no restrictions at all.

I think something in the range of 10-14 weeks probably passes muster with a majority of voters in a majority of states.  But I'm worried about things like the 6 weeks that Florida just passed, because some women may not even know they are pregnant until after that point.  So that may become a flashpoint issue where we will lose.  So instead of having a Republican-led 10 week cutoff, we'll get Democrats in power who are fine with up to 30 weeks.   So do you compromise to try to get the best bill, or do you go hardline and risk getting something much worse?

It isn't an easy question to answer.

[roamer_1]

Unfortunately, the cities and suburbs hold most of the voters.

Shouldn't matter if federalism is allowed to do what it does. Those blue cities have lost nothing - they can kill their babies with every bit of the abandon they always have.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

No, I'm not optimistic either, but stepping to the left, curtailing to the left and trying to appease the left is why we lose.

Is it too late? Perhaps.  Again, it is most important IMHO that we win at the state and local levels.  Washington is beyond corrupt and is beyond fixing.

Well, how about we leave it up to referendums and leave it there?

[Kamaji]

Ok, so let's come to terms with that @Kamaji what is a life worth?  OR, John Doe Republican wants to win an election so he'll side step the issue or say that he leans more pro choice than anti-abortion.  You can't have it both ways.

Well, Republicans have three choices - (a) figure out how to persuade a majority of voters that their position is correct, (b) realize that there will always be a difference of opinion and that the republican position is the minority position, or (c) get used to being permanently out of power and dancing to the whim of the hard-core leftists in the DNC on every issue.

It is just as simple as that.

And let's be a little more judicious about what sorts of life-ending activities we're willing to accept.  We allow people to drive automobiles at high rates of speed despite the fact that we know very well that doing so will result in a certain number of excess deaths every year over the number of deaths that would take place in the absence of strict limits on how fast vehicles can go.  A speed limit of 15mph is probably the fastest one could allow cars to go and still avoid those excess deaths.

So, let's turn the question around:  how much is one's convenience worth to one in getting to, say, one's destination on a 500 mile trip, given that the cost of that convenience will be a certain number of excess deaths - including of children - that would not happen but for the precedence one gives to one's own convenience.

If reducing the speed limit to 15mph would save the life of just one innocent child, isn't it worth doing?

Also, that "what's a life worth" argument is a very slippery slope that leads very quickly to a lot of the left's preferred political policies, such as making it illegal to use any form of violence in defense of property if that violence could conceivably lead to someone's death.  The liberals' favorite argument being:  "a person's life is worth a lot more than one's stereo/tv/jewelry/etc, so one should not be permitted to use violence to defend against a thief".

[DefiantMassRINO]

If abortion is truly a States Rights' issue, those that don't want it, don't have to have it.

Want to solve the issue?  Put a referendum on each state ballot, and let the people vote on it.

Oh, but when it was put to a popular vote in Kansas, Kentucky, and Wisconsin, the voters made their views on abortion access be known.

[libertybele]

It's a tough question.

My concern is that if we take too hardline a position, we'll end up handing elections to Democrats and they'll pass something with no restrictions at all.

I think something in the range of 10-14 weeks probably passes muster with a majority of voters in a majority of states.  But I'm worried about things like the 6 weeks that Florida just passed, because some women may not even know they are pregnant until after that point.  So that may become a flashpoint issue where we will lose.  So instead of having a Republican-led 10 week cutoff, we'll get Democrats in power who are fine with up to 30 weeks.   So do you compromise to try to get the best bill, or do you go hardline and risk getting something much worse?

It isn't an easy question to answer.

Headlines have read that DeSantis realizes that this may cost him., but at the end of the day, he is acting upon his conservative principles on the issue and I applaud him.  He signed the legislation; the state legislatures came up with the bill.  What kind of flack do you think he would get if he vetoed the bill??

No, this is not any easy issue and perhaps one of the most controversial issues in our lifetime.

[berdie]

This once great republic is nothing more than a rapidly fading memory already and that is 100% due to failure to uphold the Constitution.

As much as I hate to...I have to agree.

[roamer_1]

Good God, y'all... So it's fine to fight for what we believe in... We're just not supposed to win. Talk about lip service... 

Entertaining the murder of innocents as some sort of compromise is nothing short of demonic... And is not winning. Makes me damn happy I left Republicans behind.

[Bigun]

Good God, y'all... So it's fine to fight for what we believe in... We're just not supposed to win. Talk about lip service... 

Entertaining the murder of innocents as some sort of compromise is nothing short of demonic... And is not winning. Makes me damn happy I left Republicans behind.

  and 

[libertybele]

Well, Republicans have three choices - (a) figure out how to persuade a majority of voters that their position is correct, (b) realize that there will always be a difference of opinion and that the republican position is the minority position, or (c) get used to being permanently out of power and dancing to the whim of the hard-core leftists in the DNC on every issue.

It is just as simple as that.

And let's be a little more judicious about what sorts of life-ending activities we're willing to accept.  We allow people to drive automobiles at high rates of speed despite the fact that we know very well that doing so will result in a certain number of excess deaths every year over the number of deaths that would take place in the absence of strict limits on how fast vehicles can go.  A speed limit of 15mph is probably the fastest one could allow cars to go and still avoid those excess deaths.

So, let's turn the question around:  how much is one's convenience worth to one in getting to, say, one's destination on a 500 mile trip, given that the cost of that convenience will be a certain number of excess deaths - including of children - that would not happen but for the precedence one gives to one's own convenience.

If reducing the speed limit to 15mph would save the life of just one innocent child, isn't it worth doing?

Also, that "what's a life worth" argument is a very slippery slope that leads very quickly to a lot of the left's preferred political policies, such as making it illegal to use any form of violence in defense of property if that violence could conceivably lead to someone's death.  The liberals' favorite argument being:  "a person's life is worth a lot more than one's stereo/tv/jewelry/etc, so one should not be permitted to use violence to defend against a thief".

Nope not the same.  Terminating a life deliberately before it has a chance to exist is different that possibly saving a life by reducing the speed limit.