The third presidential debate of 2016 is finally over and many are taking to their screens, to analyze the results. The question of who won the presidential debate has no real answer, now that the lines have been blurred between the national media and social media, where supporters for each candidate -- most of them for #Donald Trump -- will aggressively force mainstream media to report on and give relevance to that question. One example of this took place in Donald Trump's digital stomping grounds on Twitter, after the second presidential debate, with the hashtag #TrumpWon.
Nobody won the third debate
— Conservative Bad Boy (@NITWIT_in_WH) October 20, 2016Advertisements
The will of people who want to know who won the third debate, should be exhausted, as coverage on Donald Trump has mostly been about the odds against him for which he bears responsibility, as he has taken to allow Americans to be bombarded with less than savory statements against various groups and individuals with the regularity one would expect from normal rhetoric. And this happened again a couple of times in the last presidential debate, specifically when he said the following: "Well, I think it's terrible. If you go with what Hillary is saying, in the ninth month, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby."
"Rip the baby? Don't rip the baby!"
His follow up to this included him saying "rip the baby out of the womb" again, then ended with "this is not acceptable." But many would agree that his "rip the baby" statement even on Twitter, was not acceptable either. The differences between both candidates is that one seems to be able to use that kind of rhetoric, while the other one -- Hillary Clinton -- calls him out for it; which if she hadn't done, would have left a lot of questions. From a transcript published by The New York Times, Hillary appropriately pointed this out in her response. "Well, that is not what happens in these cases. And using that kind of scare rhetoric is just terribly unfortunate."
Again, the differences between the supporters of both candidates lies in how they respond with jarring and spontaneous statements like that, which makes either candidate's supporters cringe. Obviously, from what we've seen over the last year of the presidential race, even if Trump's supporters were also cringing, they will come up with a reason to dismiss the cringe, and embrace the statement, which could up-root the problem of why Hillary Clinton says that they are deplorable.
But these kinds of cringe-worthy statements or descriptions about #Abortion are also common among conservative politicians.
Donald Trump keeps conservative abortion myths alive
More specifically the process Donald Trump is referring to is what conservatives call partial-birth abortions, a non-medical term for a procedure that had been introduced in 1995. An article published in 2006 via NPR explains the origins of the term, saying that a group called the National Right to Life Committee took a procedure called "dilation and extraction" where the fetus is removed intact by dilating a woman's cervix and then pulled out through the birth canal, and re-framed it as partial-birth abortion. Clearly the "scare" tactic of describing such a procedure has been a tradition with the GOP ever since, as there have been plenty of cases where politicians explicitly describe the essential "ripping" of the baby out of the womb, also describing its removal in pieces to rally support for anti-abortion causes.
The debate moderator Chris Wallace, did not point out this "myth" when Donald Trump was describing it. Likely because as a conservative Fox News anchor, he also sides with the myth. But it is also likely that unless one specializes in abortion procedure research, most of what one knows about them is heresay which is why the myth has taken hold. But it was clearly a moment in the presidential debate, which confirmed that the Republican candidate is the perfect vessel for these kinds of ideas. #2016 Presidential Debates