The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
Because the whole point of the issue is ending a pregnancy, whether by delivery or by termination. I think you're misunderstanding what that phrase refers to.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,283
I agree with those who say Hillary won the debate and base that on three things 1) Trump looked like a loser with that put-on frown 2) Calling Hillary a "nasty woman" 3) Trump saying he would not accept defeat if out-voted. Stupid move!
I think Hillary has it wrapped up.
What I don't get is why some people I know who were not only not HRC fans when she was running against Bernie but really didn't like her are now all of the sudden fawning over Hillary like she is the queen. What is with that?
The other thing about this election, these debates. Who is talking about the planet? No one. Total anthropocentrism. Lovely.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I agree with those who say Hillary won the debate and base that on three things 1) Trump looked like a loser with that put-on frown 2) Calling Hillary a "nasty woman" 3) Trump saying he would not accept defeat if out-voted. Stupid move!
I think Hillary has it wrapped up.
What I don't get is why some people I know who were not only not HRC fans when she was running against Bernie but really didn't like her are now all of the sudden fawning over Hillary like she is the queen. What is with that?
The other thing about this election, these debates. Who is talking about the planet? No one. Total anthropocentrism. Lovely.
Because she is rising above all of the bullshit being thrown at her? Because she went up against that orange fuckface three different times and destroyed him each time turning him into an insult generating baby-man?
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
I agree with those who say Hillary won the debate and base that on three things 1) Trump looked like a loser with that put-on frown 2) Calling Hillary a "nasty woman" 3) Trump saying he would not accept defeat if out-voted. Stupid move!
I think Hillary has it wrapped up.
What I don't get is why some people I know who were not only not HRC fans when she was running against Bernie but really didn't like her are now all of the sudden fawning over Hillary like she is the queen. What is with that?
The other thing about this election, these debates. Who is talking about the planet? No one. Total anthropocentrism. Lovely.
Hillary mentioned climate change and investing in clean energy last night.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I can't wait till The Don makes the Hildabeast cry like a little baby and walks over to her podium a gives her his handkerchief then fires that no good lying female dog....This is going to be must watch TV.
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
I'm not. A previous post used 24 weeks as a marker for late term abortions, through Wikipedia I think. I was responding to that.
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option. If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
I agree with those who say Hillary won the debate and base that on three things 1) Trump looked like a loser with that put-on frown 2) Calling Hillary a "nasty woman" 3) Trump saying he would not accept defeat if out-voted. Stupid move!
I think Hillary has it wrapped up.
What I don't get is why some people I know who were not only not HRC fans when she was running against Bernie but really didn't like her are now all of the sudden fawning over Hillary like she is the queen. What is with that?
The other thing about this election, these debates. Who is talking about the planet? No one. Total anthropocentrism. Lovely.
Last nights debate questions were all picked by the moderator not the candidates, I agree no climate talk is absurd
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
I'm not. A previous post used 24 weeks as a marker for late term abortions, through Wikipedia I think. I was responding to that.
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option. If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
She doesn't need to say that, because she knows that medically it would not happen. It just wouldn't, full stop. You're making up situations that don't exist and complaining that she didn't talk about them.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
I'm not. A previous post used 24 weeks as a marker for late term abortions, through Wikipedia I think. I was responding to that.
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option. If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
She doesn't need to say that, because she knows that medically it would not happen. It just wouldn't, full stop. You're making up situations that don't exist and complaining that she didn't talk about them.
To be fair, Trump invented the situation last night and even said it multiple times.
I've got to admit I didn't watch that part of the debate so I'm not sure exactly what was said, but the idea (floated by some) that a fetus would be aborted a day or two before the due date is medically ridiculous and deliberately inflammatory (big surprise there!). If a woman's life was in danger at that point from something like pre-eclampsia, they would simply deliver the baby by either induction or C-section.
This. I've read a couple of articles on late term abortions (and discussed with a family member who's a doctor) and there are no actual 'abortions' performed in the 9th month. Trump's description of ripping a full term baby out of the mother's womb is disgusting but can't say I'm surprised. Unless that's just his dramatic way of describing a c-section and I doubt that.
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
I'm not. A previous post used 24 weeks as a marker for late term abortions, through Wikipedia I think. I was responding to that.
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option. If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
She doesn't need to say that, because she knows that medically it would not happen. It just wouldn't, full stop. You're making up situations that don't exist and complaining that she didn't talk about them.
To be fair, Trump invented the situation last night and even said it multiple times.
That whole segment was bizzaro. Trump demonstrated a total lack of understanding about the issue. But I'm also troubled that both Wallace and HRC let him get away with it rather than correct it. I liked Hillary's answers on the subject, but she should also have gone after Trump's scenario and discredited it. Unfortunately there are plenty of fundies who believe that stuff, and Trump played right into that. At that point, no matter what Hillary said, they're convinced that those procedures happen and that Hillary is good with it.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
I'm not. A previous post used 24 weeks as a marker for late term abortions, through Wikipedia I think. I was responding to that.
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option. If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
She doesn't need to say that, because she knows that medically it would not happen. It just wouldn't, full stop. You're making up situations that don't exist and complaining that she didn't talk about them.
I guess I had a different impression from her remarks. She made it clear she supports late term abortion and wants to fight for the rights to have late term abortions. She referenced abortions at the end of the pregnancy. Combine what she said with the fact many states don't allow abortions after 20 or 24 weeks. To me her comments make more sense with the perspective she wishes to expand the term in which abortions are allowed.
She could have easily clarified this by responding to Trump with a statement that she wouldn't support an abortion beyond a period where the fetus could survive, or given a specific time frame. But she didn't, she responded by saying she supports abortions "at the end of the pregnancy" when parents make that difficult decision. Why would she say that if she didn't want a full term abortion? It's misleading if that isn't what she meant.
Discussing abortion is only a losing situation for her. Trump is totally ignorant about it and will say whatever in the moment and a lot of his followers are equally ignorant.
Discussing abortion is only a losing situation for her. Trump is totally ignorant about it and will say whatever in the moment and a lot of his followers are equally ignorant.
and you are voting for Hillary ? ignorant is sometimes self describing. why wouldn't you vote for one of the other people ? because Hillary has so much "experience" ?
Discussing abortion is only a losing situation for her. Trump is totally ignorant about it and will say whatever in the moment and a lot of his followers are equally ignorant.
and you are voting for Hillary ? ignorant is sometimes self describing. why wouldn't you vote for one of the other people ? because Hillary has so much "experience" ?
Godfather.
Yes, it's exactly why. And Trump is an incompetent fool, that's another good reason. The third is that the other candidates don't have a chance. So it seems pretty easy when you think through it rationally.
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
I agree but come November a choice will have to be made and I'm voting for Her there is no way I could ever vote for Trump , I hope in 4yrs will be have better choices I would of voted for anyone else if they were the choice either Kascik Rand or Bernie but as it stands I know who in voting for ..
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
I'm not. A previous post used 24 weeks as a marker for late term abortions, through Wikipedia I think. I was responding to that.
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option. If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
She doesn't need to say that, because she knows that medically it would not happen. It just wouldn't, full stop. You're making up situations that don't exist and complaining that she didn't talk about them.
I guess I had a different impression from her remarks. She made it clear she supports late term abortion and wants to fight for the rights to have late term abortions. She referenced abortions at the end of the pregnancy. Combine what she said with the fact many states don't allow abortions after 20 or 24 weeks. To me her comments make more sense with the perspective she wishes to expand the term in which abortions are allowed.
She could have easily clarified this by responding to Trump with a statement that she wouldn't support an abortion beyond a period where the fetus could survive, or given a specific time frame. But she didn't, she responded by saying she supports abortions "at the end of the pregnancy" when parents make that difficult decision. Why would she say that if she didn't want a full term abortion? It's misleading if that isn't what she meant.
It's only misleading if you don't take it in the context of what actually happens medically.
And, for the third time, when she's referring to difficult decisions later in pregnancy she's referring to situations in which the fetus is seriously, likely fatally, malformed. That is definitely a difficult situation in my books. It doesn't refer to a term healthy fetus.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
I'm not. A previous post used 24 weeks as a marker for late term abortions, through Wikipedia I think. I was responding to that.
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option. If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
She doesn't need to say that, because she knows that medically it would not happen. It just wouldn't, full stop. You're making up situations that don't exist and complaining that she didn't talk about them.
I guess I had a different impression from her remarks. She made it clear she supports late term abortion and wants to fight for the rights to have late term abortions. She referenced abortions at the end of the pregnancy. Combine what she said with the fact many states don't allow abortions after 20 or 24 weeks. To me her comments make more sense with the perspective she wishes to expand the term in which abortions are allowed.
She could have easily clarified this by responding to Trump with a statement that she wouldn't support an abortion beyond a period where the fetus could survive, or given a specific time frame. But she didn't, she responded by saying she supports abortions "at the end of the pregnancy" when parents make that difficult decision. Why would she say that if she didn't want a full term abortion? It's misleading if that isn't what she meant.
It's only misleading if you don't take it in the context of what actually happens medically.
And, for the third time, when she's referring to difficult decisions later in pregnancy she's referring to situations in which the fetus is seriously, likely fatally, malformed. That is definitely a difficult situation in my books. It doesn't refer to a term healthy fetus.
And for the third time the question wasn't about when a late term abortion is acceptable, the discussion started because someone said there's no evidence to suggest she wants abortions after 24 weeks period. You're the one that keeps bringing health into it, 3 times.
The only time we're talking about "abortion" is, by definition, before the fetus is viable, so before about 24/25 weeks at the earliest. A far cry from a day before the due date, which is 40 weeks.
You are precisely right. And the serious pro-life movement today is not happy with his arguments. They know damn well people aren't aborting fetuses days before delivery and so these points that he reinforced of "ripping the baby from the womb" actually do the movement a disservice. It mocks them by not understanding what they care about. The same thing happened with his MAJOR error when he said women must be punished back in the spring.
Then what does "late term abortion" mean, and why did Hilary say sometimes new information comes in the last weeks of the pregnancy that can influence a mother's decision if she was referring to 24 weeks? She clearly was not referring to 24 weeks and earlier.
How do you know she clearly wasn't referring to 24 weeks or earlier?
A late termination of pregnancy often refers to an induced ending of pregnancy after the 20th week of gestation. The exact point when a pregnancy becomes late-term, however, is not clearly defined. Some sources define an abortion after 16 weeks as "late".[5][6] Three articles published in 1998 in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association could not agree on the definition. Two of the JAMA articles chose the 20th week of gestation to be the point where an abortion procedure would be considered late-term.[7] The third JAMA article chose the third trimester, or 27th week of gestation.[8] The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions. However, viability varies greatly among pregnancies. Many pregnancies are viable after the 27th week, and no pregnancies are viable before the 21st week. Everything in between is a "grey area".[8]
Because didn't she say something along the lines of sometimes new information is revealed during the last few weeks of pregnancy? I don't have a transcript, but I remember her saying something very similar to that during that conversation, which would mean much later than week 24 if you're talking about the last weeks of a pregnancy.
So, that "new information" would be that the fetus had severe abnormalities, or a fatal medical condition.
Or a threat to the mother's life when the fetus isn't viable.
Definitely could be. That wasn't the question though, the question how did in infer she was for abortions passed 24 weeks.
The quote that is was pretty much every article was Clinton saying ""This is one of the worst possible choices that any women and her family has to make and I do not believe the government should be making it." That however left out the beginning of the sentence, I could not find a single article until I watched a video clip where she started the sentence with "At the end of a pregnancy..." And followed that statement again by saying "At the end of a pregnancy." I don't see how someone could mean 24 weeks and use the phrase "At the end of the pregnancy."
I can't read minds either but 24 weeks could be considered the end of pregnancy. Due to complications, my youngest was born at 28 weeks and spent 7 weeks in NICU. So 24 weeks was clearly in the latter stages for us. But I'm still not sure why you are using 24 weeks as your marker.
I'm not. A previous post used 24 weeks as a marker for late term abortions, through Wikipedia I think. I was responding to that.
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option. If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
She doesn't need to say that, because she knows that medically it would not happen. It just wouldn't, full stop. You're making up situations that don't exist and complaining that she didn't talk about them.
I guess I had a different impression from her remarks. She made it clear she supports late term abortion and wants to fight for the rights to have late term abortions. She referenced abortions at the end of the pregnancy. Combine what she said with the fact many states don't allow abortions after 20 or 24 weeks. To me her comments make more sense with the perspective she wishes to expand the term in which abortions are allowed.
She could have easily clarified this by responding to Trump with a statement that she wouldn't support an abortion beyond a period where the fetus could survive, or given a specific time frame. But she didn't, she responded by saying she supports abortions "at the end of the pregnancy" when parents make that difficult decision. Why would she say that if she didn't want a full term abortion? It's misleading if that isn't what she meant.
It's only misleading if you don't take it in the context of what actually happens medically.
And, for the third time, when she's referring to difficult decisions later in pregnancy she's referring to situations in which the fetus is seriously, likely fatally, malformed. That is definitely a difficult situation in my books. It doesn't refer to a term healthy fetus.
And for the third time the question wasn't about when a late term abortion is acceptable, the discussion started because someone said there's no evidence to suggest she wants abortions after 24 weeks period. You're the one that keeps bringing health into it, 3 times.
Reread your post that I am replying to. You specifically asked "Why would she say that if she didn't want a full term abortion?". I'm telling you why.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
Completely agree w/ this. The minute they stop talking policy and started fighting w/ each other, I had to keep turning it off. So completely embarrassing for this country.
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
Completely agree w/ this. The minute they stop talking policy and started fighting w/ each other, I had to keep turning it off. So completely embarrassing for this country.
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
Completely agree w/ this. The minute they stop talking policy and started fighting w/ each other, I had to keep turning it off. So completely embarrassing for this country.
How did we get here?
uh...because the GOP imploded and nominated a complete dipshit
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
Completely agree w/ this. The minute they stop talking policy and started fighting w/ each other, I had to keep turning it off. So completely embarrassing for this country.
How did we get here?
GWB opened the door to political buffoonery. we got used to it and learned to laugh at it instead of being disgusted with it.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
Completely agree w/ this. The minute they stop talking policy and started fighting w/ each other, I had to keep turning it off. So completely embarrassing for this country.
How did we get here?
GWB opened the door to political buffoonery. we got used to it and learned to laugh at it instead of being disgusted with it.
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
Completely agree w/ this. The minute they stop talking policy and started fighting w/ each other, I had to keep turning it off. So completely embarrassing for this country.
How did we get here?
GWB opened the door to political buffoonery. we got used to it and learned to laugh at it instead of being disgusted with it.
good point, his shit somehow became acceptable.
it's all SNL's fault! cancel that show!
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
Completely agree w/ this. The minute they stop talking policy and started fighting w/ each other, I had to keep turning it off. So completely embarrassing for this country.
How did we get here?
uh...because the GOP imploded and nominated a complete dipshit
And money, corruption and promises led to a terrible DNC candidate.
Knowing that she is corrupt. Knowing that she has sold influence and profited from her position. Knowing that she lied to us, the public and Congress. Knowing she did her best to destroy and belittle her husband's sexual harassment victims. These are all proven indisputable facts. You think she is fit for leading our Country? How?
Godfather.
He still lost the debate & election with his debate performances not just last night but combined, he could of won the WH if he was just remotely sane !
If you think he lost the debate last night you're a blinded fool...sorry but i cant put it much nicer
Clinton spewed lie, after lie, and if you defend a person who believes in late term abortions up to the due date then you're a sick individual..period
Clinton Foundations is corrupt, look no further than Colombia, not just Haiti
Im not even a Trump fan but this crap is getting ridiculous with the blind support for this criminal
and the media wants to talk about him not conceding if he loses as the main headline, thank god i no longer work in a worthless career as the media has become
Honestly - I don't know about win or lose technically, but I thought they both appeared to be losers. I'm completely out of sympathy when both candidates refuse accountability for their checkered pasts, instead opting to attack each other on (occasionally relevant) topics. There's only one position that's solidified in my mind from each and every one of these debates: America's current Presidential offerings are embarrassingly weak.
I have to say your're right...the losers are the American people
and i agree with what Jose said above too i wish the choices could have been someone like Rand (who was my choice) or even Kasich.....American people being tired of the bs is what got us Trump especially knowing the other option was Hillary
Comments
1) Trump looked like a loser with that put-on frown
2) Calling Hillary a "nasty woman"
3) Trump saying he would not accept defeat if out-voted. Stupid move!
I think Hillary has it wrapped up.
What I don't get is why some people I know who were not only not HRC fans when she was running against Bernie but really didn't like her are now all of the sudden fawning over Hillary like she is the queen. What is with that?
The other thing about this election, these debates. Who is talking about the planet? No one. Total anthropocentrism. Lovely.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
-EV 8/14/93
I get what you're saying, and that in your case 24 weeks was towards the end for you. I still don't think most people would use that term end of pregnancy unless they were trying to include 38 or 39 weeks also.
And there very well can be women whose health will be in danger if they give birth. But like a previous poster said, that's one major use for a C-section. Everyone I know who had a C-section was a direct result that they went beyond their term without going into labor, or the baby was abnormally big so V-birth was risky. Abortion should not be an option at that point if a C-section is an option.
If someone is going to advocate for late term abortions I would be much more comfortable if they emphasized it was a last and only option when health is being considered. Most babies born a month early are perfectly healthy, and to not consider it a life only because he/she hasn't made a journey through a birth canal doesn't make sense to me. I haven't heard Hilary say that, and she didn't say that in the debate last night.
She could have easily clarified this by responding to Trump with a statement that she wouldn't support an abortion beyond a period where the fetus could survive, or given a specific time frame. But she didn't, she responded by saying she supports abortions "at the end of the pregnancy" when parents make that difficult decision. Why would she say that if she didn't want a full term abortion? It's misleading if that isn't what she meant.
because Hillary has so much "experience" ?
Godfather.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
And, for the third time, when she's referring to difficult decisions later in pregnancy she's referring to situations in which the fetus is seriously, likely fatally, malformed. That is definitely a difficult situation in my books. It doesn't refer to a term healthy fetus.
Completely agree w/ this. The minute they stop talking policy and started fighting w/ each other, I had to keep turning it off. So completely embarrassing for this country.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
-EV 8/14/93
-EV 8/14/93
and i agree with what Jose said above too i wish the choices could have been someone like Rand (who was my choice) or even Kasich.....American people being tired of the bs is what got us Trump especially knowing the other option was Hillary