[bobo1]

It ended up “punishing women”. Trump stepped on it. Now it’s damage control.
The problem is, he answered a hypothetical and has not studied the issue.
Great job, though. He has united the Pro-life and Pro-abort against him.
Unfortunately, it also harms the pro-life movement.
All because he stuck his foot in his mouth.

[Thibodeaux]

women would be punished for breaking the law the same as if they were caught speeding or running a red light

the law is to blame not the law enforcer

and of course for mountainizing an and hill

[jobim]

Are you chastising Trump's response from a political vantage point, or from a prolife one?

If political, conventional wisdom says you are correct, why give them the soundbite of your lack of pre-thinking?

If prolife, his answer appeared to be honest, with an honest uncertainty about the righteousness of punishing the woman.

I stand every day outside an abort mill with 2 tough, committed guys. All 3 of us liked
what he said to Matthews (one is a Cruz supporter), and thought Cruz's answer was
political-speak. Now, we didn't like the walk-back, which strikes us as his kow-towing to
his advisors. But the interview itself showed a guy unafraid to speak honestly. Were
Matthews the Magnificent to walk anywhere in America asking the same question, he
would find 99.9% of the people (non-Liberal) would have mixed feelings on this as well.

We discussed the true possibility that he would gain many Christian women who had
been put off by him, who would now see him as genuinely finding his way to prolife,
perhaps offsetting those upset by the answer.