to an intractable issue in the country. But in the case of a Trump campaign strategy, his most advantageous course is to minimize talking about it to the extent possible. If he committed to the 15 week national rule (with serious protections for emergencies), that'd be admirable as in theory an honest effort at a compromise solution that might win as a national referendum. But putting forth something like that and standing behind it (with a big portion of the base objecting) elevates it and makes him have to talk about it more, backed by a party that doesn't even agree with it and has tried to restrict wherever possible so it's weak. If he sticks with "up to the states", he can then talk around it and show support for something like a 15 week line, indicate he favors a "safe legal rare" type of pov, but defer to states and try to change the subject to something else. Mealy-mouthed, but with the positive 15 week rule plan it becomes "this is how I am going to solve this issue", amplifies it, which is bad for him on an issue where he's already over a barrel.

[Post edited by hoodeyo at 04/09/2024 6:34PM]