Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: My fear is that if they dump Trump and nominate someone else in 2020 [View all]Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)107. Can she appeal to young women while remaining anti-choice?
Here's the section of her Wikipedia bio on abortion, referring to her time in the South Carolina state legislature:
Haley describes herself as pro-life and has supported legislation to restrict abortion.[14][46][47][48] She has stated "I'm not pro-life because the Republican Party tells me, I'm pro-life because all of us have had experiences of what it means to have one of these special little ones in our life."[48]
Haley has consistently supported bills that give rights to a fetus and restrict abortion, except when the mother's life is at risk. In 2006, as a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives, Haley voted for the Penalties for Harming an Unborn Child/Fetus law, which asserted that an act of violence against a fetus is akin to a criminal act against the mother. She also voted for two separate bills that required a woman to first look at an ultrasound and then wait 24 hours before being permitted to have an abortion.[49] In 2016, she re-signed a new state law that bans abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy.[48]
Haley has voted in favor of some bills relating to abortion that were tabled or rejected, including the Inclusion of Unborn Child/Fetus in Definition for Civil Suits Amendment, Prohibiting Employment Termination Due to Abortion Waiting Period amendment, and Exempting Cases of Rape from Abortion Waiting Period amendment. The latter would have allowed specific cases of women to not have to wait the mandatory 24 hours before having an abortion.[50]
Haley has consistently supported bills that give rights to a fetus and restrict abortion, except when the mother's life is at risk. In 2006, as a member of the South Carolina House of Representatives, Haley voted for the Penalties for Harming an Unborn Child/Fetus law, which asserted that an act of violence against a fetus is akin to a criminal act against the mother. She also voted for two separate bills that required a woman to first look at an ultrasound and then wait 24 hours before being permitted to have an abortion.[49] In 2016, she re-signed a new state law that bans abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy.[48]
Haley has voted in favor of some bills relating to abortion that were tabled or rejected, including the Inclusion of Unborn Child/Fetus in Definition for Civil Suits Amendment, Prohibiting Employment Termination Due to Abortion Waiting Period amendment, and Exempting Cases of Rape from Abortion Waiting Period amendment. The latter would have allowed specific cases of women to not have to wait the mandatory 24 hours before having an abortion.[50]
If she sticks with those views, she'll alienate those young women you worry she'll attract (although she'll still have other electoral strengths). If she tries to tack toward the center on reproductive rights, she'll exacerbate the problem other posters have noted, namely the hard-right nutjobs who vote in GOP primaries.
ETA: I've seen speculation about a modified version of your scenario -- Trump runs for re-election but dumps Pence, who brings nothing to the ticket (the evangelicals who adore him will vote Republican anyway). The new VP candidate would be someone who might attract some swing voters, and Haley could be at the top of that list.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
138 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Countered by an even higher percent of men who will never, ever vote for a woman.
EleanorR
Dec 2018
#36
Just because Haley is a woman does not mean her policies will attract other women as voters.
TeamPooka
Dec 2018
#2
The racist, misogynist knuckledraggers that now comprise most of the GOP
The Velveteen Ocelot
Dec 2018
#3
Can't believe that this party of repugs would ever nominate a woman to run for president...
SWBTATTReg
Dec 2018
#10
Then why did they elect her to be governor of the red state of South Carolina? n/t
pnwmom
Dec 2018
#17
Given the choice, I would rather run against a wounded, weakened, and shamed Trump
elocs
Dec 2018
#12
Would you have expected her to win the Governorship of S. Carolina, a red state? n/t
pnwmom
Dec 2018
#32
I agree. Political parties have a strong will to survive. When Trump self explodes...
Tom Rinaldo
Dec 2018
#42
I'm not that worried about Democratic chances in 2020. Trump has soiled the Republican brand
Vogon_Glory
Dec 2018
#56
It's worth thinking about this. I have a feeling some women will start to do better soon
Quixote1818
Dec 2018
#64
That was part of the Republican logic in 2008 --young women would vote McCain/Palin because of Palin
karynnj
Dec 2018
#72
I thought Republicans were sexist and racist though, so why would they vote for an Indian woman? nt
mr_liberal
Dec 2018
#74
Don't stress yourself out, pnwmom. Trump has destroyed the Republican Brand for at least one
Nitram
Dec 2018
#85
I'm afraid you are mistaken. Haley resigned from her post as UN ambassador after
Nitram
Dec 2018
#113
They can push for whatever they want. Let not your heart be troubled. That ain't happening
DemocratSinceBirth
Dec 2018
#124
It would lead to a civil war within the party. They would be divided beyond imagination.
OrlandoDem2
Dec 2018
#130