Post the data you claim to have for each county or you are lying. Going to need the population of each county too. 38% showed up to vote in the entire State and you keep arguing with me. Seriously how fvcking dumb are you?
MAGA gets slapped again
- Thread starter moe
- Start date
Post the data you claim to have for each county or you are lying. Going to need the population of each county too. 38% showed up to vote in the entire State and you keep arguing with me. Seriously how fvcking dumb are you?
Population has nothing to do with it. It's called "VOTER turnout". Only eligible voters, registered, who showed up. Why are you so dumb? Go to "Kentucy.gov". Pretty easy stupid f**k.
I have the data because it's that easy to find. It's called "Election data" numbnuts. I've went through each county. You are making **** up, which is what you do best.
Yes I know. Population of eligible voters. 38% of eligible voters voted. Now how many of them was from the the two largest counties? You obviously don't have the real numbers and are just making **** up now. Like I said at the beginning. People were not excited to come vote for him. If Trump would have been on the ticket maybe he would have done better.
Kentucky.gov moron. Look it up. It's literally a click away. (Jefferson 41%; Fayette 43%)
And I posted the numbers MORON. Good grief. You lied.
EDIT 360,000 voters in those two combined, out of the 1.3 million statewide.
Wow. You can't navigate a website? You realize you have to click on things, right? Do you understand that it's under the "Secretary of State", since they handle elections? Literally an elementary school kid can find it.
And to make it even simpler, there's a "search" bar at the top of the freaking website. That takes 2 seconds to type and hit "enter" to find the results. Gunny, save everyone time. Just admit. You made it up. It's ok. People do that all the time. Even about property values. :joy:
The information you claim is on there I don't see. Since you won't post it I will have to assume you are lying. Not got wrong. But lying. Like I said numerous times. It was a very low voter turnout. The Republicans are going to have to get better at the ground game.
What information? It's all on there. You are just denying it. Pretty simple to click on a website. Well, for most. It's sad that people like you are eligible to vote, and you can't navigate a website.
https://vrsws.sos.ky.gov/liveresults/
Thanks that shows what I pointed out. Turnout sucked as a whole. I don't even remember what specific site I read last night but it was one the MSM trackers. That also only shows registered voters per county. Not eligible voters.
Eligible voters? Has nothing to do with how turnout is calculated.
If you find it, post it. If not, then STFU about it. But you just made up those numbers, we all know it.
FFS I'm starting to think you and the RNC doesn't understand that eligible voters that are not registered to vote need to be contacted. Like I said previously there's a huge gap in eligible voters and who actually voted.
It would make this even worse.
Registered Voters:
3,484,827
Ballots Cast:
1,326,801
Voter Turnout:
38.07%
Dig into the eligible population and voter turnout and you will probably find what I read last night. You're not a Republican but until they fix their ground game you probably don't have anything to worry about. Except the damage the New Democrat Party is doing to our country.
I would argue most women have no idea what actually happens during a late term abortion. It's not discussed...either in general or even specifically with them. Know why not? Because most of them would recoil in horror or abandon the procedure altogether if they were given accurate information about it.
I'm not sure about you? You seem to me to be pretty well informed based on what I read of you on here. However if you're not aware, I'm posting here exactly what an "intact dilation and extraction" (aka partial birth abortion) involves in all it's graphic detail. This isn't discussed with women signing up for the procedure nor is it ever shown or discussed on T-V (not as much as a "woman's right to choose")
However I'm posting it here undiluted just in case you also support her right to kill her Baby moments before it's born, which ironically is the optimal time this procedure is performed.
Watch what it is here:
read all about it below:
The Reality of Partial-Birth Abortion
For thousands of years, people have found ways to kill unwanted babies. From taking pills to tearing a child to pieces prior to birth to even throwing a baby off a cliff, it often seems that any method will do. Parents seek only the end result—being rid of the baby.All abortion is tragic because all abortions result in the loss of a unique human being. But one of the most heinous and horrific ways to kill a baby in the second or third trimester is commonly called a partial-birth abortion—or in medical terms, an intact dilation and extraction abortion (D&X).
What Is Partial-Birth Abortion?
In a partial-birth abortion, the abortionist begins delivering the baby but stops partway. Holding half of the baby’s body still inside her mother’s body, he then kills her by jamming scissors into her neck.
It sounds like something out of a horror movie, but it’s real. And it’s been around for decades.
Writing for the USCCB, Susan E. Wills states:
Although apparently a well-kept secret within the abortion community for over a decade, partial-birth abortion first came to most people’s attention in 1993. That is when a paper by Dr. Martin Haskell of Ohio, delivered at a September 1992 meeting of the National Abortion Federation (NAF), became public.
n 1992, Haskell, who claimed to have performed over 1,000 partial-birth abortions, detailed his procedure in a paper. To give readers a realistic view of this gruesome procedure, a 1996 congressional record factsheet entitled “A Closer Look at Partial-Birth Abortions” reprinted his directions.
According to Haskell:
With a lower [fetal] extremity in the ******, the surgeon uses his fingers to deliver the opposite lower extremity, then the torso, the shoulders and upper extremities. The skull lodges at the internal cervical os [the opening to the uterus]. Usually there is not enough dilation for it to pass through. The fetus is oriented dorsum or spine up. At this point, the right-handed surgeon slides the fingers of the left hand along the back of the fetus and hooks the shoulders of the fetus with the index and ring fingers (palm down). [T]he surgeon takes a pair of blunt curved Metzenbaum scissors in the right hand. He carefully advances the tip, curved down, along the spine and under his middle finger until he feels it contact the base of the skull under the tip of his middle finger. [T]he surgeon then forces the scissors into the base of the skull or into the foramen magnum. Having safely entered the skull, he spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening. The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents.
Take a moment to let that image fill your mind. These abortions are typically done in the second and third trimesters (13 weeks to full term), sometimes after the baby has reached viability. Because of improvements in medical interventions, a baby is viable after 24 weeks, and depending on the capabilities of the hospital, maybe as early as 22 weeks.
This sick and twisted method of abortion has rightfully been the source of contentious debate for decades. There really is no way to know how often this procedure has been done in the past, though according to Wills: “Dr. William Rashbaum of New York City admits that he has performed 19,000 late-term procedures and that he and his colleagues have used the partial-birth technique ‘routinely since 1979.’ Dr. Martin Ruddock of Ohio told a reporter that he uses the method, but he declined to say how often. The late Dr. James McMahon had done thousands and his partner is likely continuing the practice.”
A 2007 article in the National Library of Medicine states, “The number of [partial-birth] abortions carried out each year in the US is thought to be between 2200 and 5000. They are most often performed in the second trimester.” The number of these types of abortions is “unclear because of problems with definitions and the collection of statistics. Estimates are less than 1%, perhaps as low as 0.2%.”
We must remember that these numbers, though low, are only those that have been reported. Not all states report. And not all abortionists admit to performing them. Kermit Gosnell was an excellent example of this. His “house of horrors” in Philadelphia saw the deaths of an untold number of preborn babies. And he freely admitted to—and even joked about—killing babies with scissors.
Pro-abortionists want women to believe that partial-birth abortions in the second and third trimesters happen only when something has gone wrong with the baby or when the mother’s life is at risk. But we know that this is not the case.
According to Wills:
Dr. Haskell estimates that 80% of his procedures are ‘purely elective.’ One New Jersey doctor explained: ‘We have an occasional amnio abnormality, but it’s a minuscule amount. Most are Medicaid patients…and most are for elective, not medical, reasons: people who didn’t realize, or didn’t care, how far along they were. Most were teenagers.’
Further, by its very nature, a partial-birth abortion—because it takes two to three days to complete—cannot be done in an emergency situation. So if a mother’s life is in immediate danger, the doctor will not perform this type of abortion. In fact, if the mother’s life is in danger, the doctor will likely do all he can to save both her and the baby.
According to the latest CDC Abortion Surveillance Report: “In 2019, the highest proportion of abortions were performed by surgical abortion at ≤13 weeks’ gestation (49.0%), followed by early medical abortion at ≤9 weeks’ gestation (42.3%), surgical abortion at >13 weeks’ gestation (7.2%), and medical abortion at >9 weeks’ gestation (1.4%).”
The report does not break down the type of abortion after 13 weeks, but as we will read below, there are only two types of abortion that can be done after 14 weeks. So under what circumstances would a woman or doctor choose a partial-birth abortion?
There are only two methods of abortion that can be done after 14 weeks. These are the intact dilation and extraction abortion (the so-called partial-birth abortion) and a more common method called a dilation and evacuation abortion. Both types of abortion begin with the same preparation of the cervix. And because of the size of the baby, both require two separate visits to the abortionist’s office.
On the first visit for either type of abortion, the abortionist prepares the mother’s cervix to dilate. He will insert laminaria—a sterilized seaweed—into her cervix. This absorbs water and swells, which prepares and begins opening the cervix. Then, 24–48 hours later, the mother must return to the office so she can deliver the baby. When the mother’s body is ready, the doctor will further open her cervix so he has access to the baby.
In a dilation and evacuation abortion, the abortionist uses a suction tube to suck out the amniotic fluid. The baby is too big to fit through that tube, so she cannot be sucked out. The abortionist must pull her out in pieces. He does this with a tool called a Sopher clamp. Using this clamp, he grabs onto different parts of the baby and pulls until he has removed the entirety of her body. At this point, he must verify that he has gotten all the baby’s body parts, and he puts her together like a jigsaw puzzle outside the mother’s body.
Conversely, in partial-birth abortion, the abortionist follows the same preparations as described above, but instead of using the Sopher clamp and suction tube, he delivers the baby partway. He then stops the delivery and kills her by stabbing her neck with scissors.
You might wonder why abortionists would use the partial-birth method instead of the dilation and evacuation method. It comes down to the size of the child: “Some abortion doctors use PBA in the middle and last months of pregnancy, when dismembering a child becomes more difficult due to the child’s stronger bones and ligaments.”
If the abortionist cannot pull the child’s limbs apart because the child has grown too big and his bones have become too strong, the doctor may find it a better option to deliver the baby intact. Further, some doctors—and legislators—claim that delivering the baby intact is safer for the mother, as pieces of the baby will not be left inside her, which could lead to life-threatening complications.
Risks
Anytime a woman undergoes such a traumatic and invasive procedure as an abortion, she is at risk of encountering complications. The further along she is in the pregnancy, the more likely she is to have them.The Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, has reported that “the rate of maternal death for women having an abortion at 21 weeks’ gestation or later [the time frame during which a partial-birth abortion falls] is more than twice the maternal death rate in childbirth.” In addition, “a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reports 15 to 16 weeks’ gestation as the point at which abortion becomes more dangerous than childbirth.”
The organization A Woman’s Right to Know lists several side effects of a dilation and extraction abortion:
- Common side effects include cramping and bleeding.
- Other side effects can include blood clots, damage to the cervix, nausea, headaches, infection, blurry vision, and more.
- Rare complications include hemorrhage, perforation of the uterus, placenta previa in subsequent pregnancies, pulmonary embolism, and even death.
The National Center for Biotechnology Information addresses the risks of abortion in general, stating that major complications include “uterine atony and subsequent hemorrhage, uterine perforation, injuries to adjacent organs (bladder or bowels), cervical laceration, failed abortion, septic abortion, and disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC).” The NCBI then goes on to say that the risks continue to grow in the days and weeks after the abortion because the body has been through such a traumatic event: “The total abortion-related complication rate of all sources of care including emergency departments and the original abortion facility is estimated to be about 2%. The incidence of abortion-related emergency department visits within six weeks of the initial abortion procedure is about 40%.”
Due to the heinousness of partial-birth abortion, you might be asking yourself, Shouldn’t there be some sort of law against this? Yes, there should. And there is. But with exceptions.
Congress twice passed bills banning partial-birth abortion, but both bills were vetoed by President Clinton. During this time, notorious late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart was committing abortions in Nebraska.
At the time, Nebraska law banned partial-birth abortion. But Carhart apparently wanted to kill more preborn babies and babies of all gestational ages. Carhart fought the Nebraska law all the way to the Supreme Court. In 2000, in Stenberg v. Carhart, the Court decided that Nebraska’s ban was unconstitutional because it lacked an exception for the health of the mother.
Meanwhile, a new president took office. And in 2003, George W. Bush signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban into law. The ban “amends the federal criminal code to prohibit any physician or other individual from knowingly performing a partial-birth abortion, except when necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness, or injury.”
Undaunted by this 2003 ban, Carhart, the National Abortion Federation, and Planned Parenthood Federation of America filed a suit in federal court. These judges ruled the ban unconstitutional. The case eventually made its way before the Supreme Court. And in 2007, in Gonzales v. Carhart, the Supreme Court upheld the Nebraska ban, making it a federal ban.
According to Guttmacher, Gonzales v. Carhart “applies across the country, bans ‘partial-birth’ abortion except when the [mother’s] life is endangered and does not contain an exception to protect the patient’s health.”
Like all abortion laws that provide exceptions for the life of the mother, this leaves a lot open to interpretation. And it allows doctors to make a judgment call about the mother’s situation. That is why, up until the Dobbs case in June, abortion was legal up to the point of birth in the US.
Final Thoughts
Upon becoming president, Joe Biden appointed Xavier Becerra as the Health and Human Services secretary. In May 2021, the Catholic News Agency reported that a representative from Florida asked Becerra about partial-birth abortion. Becerra attempted to deflect the question by stating that partial-birth abortion is not the proper medical term, preferring instead dilation and extraction.He then went on to defend this type of late-term abortion saying it is meant to “protect” the health of mothers. He stated: “Perhaps, if you were to talk about what you probably know as ‘dilation-and-extraction’—which is a procedure used by OB-GYNs like my wife—to care for a woman who is having a difficult pregnancy where there’s a chance that the fetus will not survive, then we could talk about that.”
His comments clearly show what is wrong with the thinking of so many today. They believe that abortion is healthcare. Yet they overlook the fact that abortion kills a baby in a horrific manner.
Abortion is a terrible crime against the smallest and most vulnerable members of our society. Understanding this, we must give voice to the voiceless. If we are to return our culture to a Culture of Life, we must take action. We speak out against the evil of tearing a baby limb from limb and in stabbing scissors into her neck. We elect pro-life leaders. We defend all human beings. And we never shy away from telling the truth about these horrific actions.
Staying silent will only result in more dead children.
source:
Partial birth abortion: a complete description
So tell me @bornaneer, now that you've been made aware of exactly what's involved in a so called "late term" or partial birth abortion, do YOU still support a "woman's right to choose" to slaughter her unwanted unborn baby moments before it's born?
If you have a Soul or conscience you'll answer no after you've read all of this. If you refuse to read it, or answer, then you'll continue to justify exactly what this is.
Until you show me, then it's a lie (using your Trump logic from his tweet about the Constitution).
Late term abortion should be banned. Brutal.
Also abortions after a specified period of time. But who defines that period?
But the problem is that you have some that say "no exceptions" and that muddy's the waters. Medical emergencies? The definition of "emergency" is left up to many different viewpoints.
Also abortions after a specified period of time. But who defines that period?
But the problem is that you have some that say "no exceptions" and that muddy's the waters. Medical emergencies? The definition of "emergency" is left up to many different viewpoints.
FWIW I clicked on that link and this is the stat I read:
Voter Information
Registered Voters:
3,484,827
Ballots Cast:
1,326,801
Voter Turnout:
38.07%
Not defending you here, but isn't this what you've been arguing ITT?
Not just the poor turnout of registered voters. But the the lack of effort by the RNC to get them to go vote. Then how many doors did they knock on of unregistered voters? Not just in Kentucky but everywhere. They need to spend less money on nonsense and all of it on ground operations.
I figured that was your position, but I was hoping someone who supports the woman "being able to decide" if the baby lives or dies could explain why it should be restricted only to just moments before its born? If it's OK for her to kill the child two minutes from birth, why is not OK two minutes after it's born? Abortion with "no restrictions" means pre or post birth correct?
If it should be restricted to just moments before birth, why is that OK but moments after birth is not OK? If you support abortion with "no restrictions" why restrict it at all? What's the difference between that baby two minutes pre birth and two minutes post birth?
No one who supports "no restrictions" on abortion or a "woman's right to choose" can answer or explain that question. No one!
(btw, good for you and your position on it) [thumbsup]
Last edited:
You know what Gunny...it doesn't matter until it matters. How often have you been predicting the collapse of America? It's happening, and quite frankly to most folks it doesn't matter (unless you hate the country and want it to collapse)
By the time it matters to most folks, it'll be too late. I fear we've already crossed the Rubicon on that. Just be prepared for what's next, because it's not going to be pretty. You already know this!
You know what Gunny...it doesn't matter until it matters. How often have you been predicting the collapse of America? It's happening, and quite frankly to most folks it doesn't matter (unless you hate the country and want it to collapse)
By the time it matters to most folks, it'll be too late. I fear we've already crossed the Rubicon on that. Just be prepared for what's next, because it's not going to be pretty. You already know this!
I'm not predicting anything and I'm certainly not wanting the United States to collapse. I do understand Warfare and we are definitely under attack from alot of different directions with lots of useful idiots running around. I'm not saying go stock up on everything from prep sites. However I would encourage people to prepare for an emergency a little. Pick whatever emergency that makes you feel good about it.
A Nation that can't stand up for the sanctity of Human Life, can't stand for anything else that matters. May Almighty God have Mercy on us!
I definitely think people should stand up for it and educate people. It just comes down to what laws are responsible enough for everyone in specific States to agree on.
You're right. We get what we vote for. Apparently more of us wanted Joe Biden (according to the Left) and look what we got? They voted to kill babies in the womb in Ohio so let the baby killing begin! (no restrictions by the way)
It's the American way!
If and when America collapses, it will be from the inside. We’re seeing it now. I’m not saying it’s not influenced by foreign countries either. Our biggest battle is fought at home. Each and every home as parents to raise our children right and teach them. With the emergence of internet and social media, that threat is much larger and harder. The answer is to turn it all off.
Valid points and yes foreign governments are influencing it to be destroyed from within. Unfortunately people are willing to sell out to them and go along.
No one rational wants late term abortions moron. That is a MAGA telling point.I figured that was your position, but I was hoping someone who supports the woman "being able to decide" if the baby lives or dies could explain why it should be restricted only to just moments before its born? If it's OK for her to kill the child two minutes from birth, why is not OK two minutes after it's born? Abortion with "no restrictions" means pre or post birth correct?
If it should be restricted to just moments before birth, why is that OK but moments after birth is not OK? If you support abortion with "no restrictions" why restrict it at all? What's the difference between that baby two minutes pre birth and two minutes post birth?
No one who supports "no restrictions" on abortion or a "woman's right to choose" can answer or explain that question. No one!
(btw, good for you and your position on it) [thumbsup]
You don't have to call me names, just explain what "restrictions" on late term abortions were approved in that Ohio vote? Can you?
I'd post my runaway meme for you but I really don't have to this time, you'll do that on your own by not responding to this common sense question with an answer.
Last edited:
Oh I almost forgot, what restrictions on late term abortions do Democrats propose? Got anything?
@NYC_Eer
Damn you atl...you promised!!!!!!
I know, I know @NYC_Eer ... but just I couldn't resist watching you lift 'em up and put 'em down one more time...
left-right-left-right-left-right-left-right!!!!!!! :joy::joy::joy::joy::joy::joy:
Many states have passed late term abortions. That tells us many people wants it .
For pro lifers, last night was a gut punch. No sugar coating it. Giving up on the unborn is not an option. It's politically dumb and morally repugnant. Instead, we need to understand why we lost this battle so we can win the war. I was very involved in the "no" campaign for issue 1, so let me share a few insights. First, we got creamed among voters who disliked both Issue 1 and also Ohio's current law (heartbeat bill). We saw this consistently in polling and in conversations. "I don't like Issue 1, but I'd rather have that extreme than the other extreme." This is a political fact, not my opinion. Second, we have to recognize how much voters mistrust us (meaning elected Republicans) on this issue. Having an unplanned pregnancy is scary. Best case, you're looking at social scorn and thousands of dollars of unexpected medical bills. We need people to see us as the pro-life party, not just the anti-abortion party.Third, as Donald Trump has said, "you've got to have the exceptions." I am as pro life as anyone, and I want to save as many babies as possible. This is not about moral legitimacy but political reality. I've seen dozens of good polls on the abortion question in the last few months, many of them done in Ohio. Give people a choice between abortion restrictions very early in pregnancy with exceptions, or the pro choice position, and the pro life view has a fighting chance. Give people a heartbeat bill with no exceptions and it loses 65-35. (The reason we didn't lose 65-35 last night is that some people who hate "no exceptions" restrictions will still refuse to vote for things like Issue 1). Fourth, we've spent so much time winning a legal argument on abortion that we've fallen behind on the moral argument. I talked to so many decent people who voted yes on Issue 1, and their reasons varied. Some described themselves as "pro life" but hated the lack of a rape exception in Ohio law. Some were worried that Ohio law would prevent them from addressing an ectopic pregnancy, or a late term miscarriage. Some didn't understand the "viability" standard in Issue 1, and thought that of course you should be able to abort a "non-viable" pregnancy as that would be a danger to the mother. You can criticize the propaganda effort on the other side for lying to people about these issues or confusing the populace, but it suggests we have to do a much better job of persuasion. And I'm not just talking about 30 second TV commercials--I'm talking about sustained, years long efforts to show the heart of the pro life movement. Fifth, money. We got outspent big time on Issue 1, and across the country. Republicans are almost always outspent by Democrats. Relatedly, Democrats are better at turning out in off year elections. The national party should be focused on two, and only two issues: how to juice turnout in off year elections and how to close the finance gap with Democrats. A lot of people put their heart and soul into this campaign. The local right to life organizations in Ohio, The Center for Christian Virtue, SBA, Governor Dewine, and so many others. I tip my hat to them. A lot of people are celebrating right now, and I don't care about that. I do care about the fact that because we lost, many innocent children will never have a chance to live their dreams. There is something sociopathic about a political movement that tells young women (and men) that it is liberating to murder their own children. So let's keep fighting for our country's children, and let's find a way to win.
Late term is defined as after 21 weeks. Personally, I think that is too far, but I don't care much about the issue. Although, if you're being honest most MAGA people, like ATL, think people are pushing for abortions up until 2 minutes before birth. Most are not. That is a ridiculous talking point.
Its defined as viability, which is generally 22-24 weeks. Not anywhere near full term. So, you're stupid 2 min before birth argument is ridiculous.You don't have to call me names, just explain what "restrictions" on late term abortions were approved in that Ohio vote? Can you?
I'd post my runaway meme for you but I really don't have to this time, you'll do that on your own by not responding to this common sense question with an answer.
And a Trump cuck asking to stop the name calling is even more ridiculous.
Last edited:
Let me jump in. You are correct..."most are not"...but... "some are".
And we have stances like this that fan the flames of this issue:
Former VA Dem Gov. Ralph Northam, a pediatrician himself, is defending born-alive abortions:
“The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired.”
I understand. There are some kooks. There are some on the right that think there should be absolutely no abortion even in the case of rape or incest. They aren't a significant voice just as the kooks on the left aren't. The only reason they ridiculous views are even discussed are for talking points for either side.
A person arguing against murder is a kook? That’s a new one lol. You’re the kook lol