tv The Rachel Maddow Show MSNBC October 16, 2012 1:00am-2:00am PDT
>> i'm trying to get my beauty sleep. look forward to it. >> i have a much bigger problem than anybody on that note. >> we can be self-deprecating together tomorrow. thanks to you at home for staying with us for the next pretty, pretty hour. election day is 22 days away. three weeks from tomorrow. but today was election day for at least one resident of the great state of illinois. first lady michelle obama posing with her absentee ballot. shortly before posting this photo, the first lady tweeted, hey barack obama, i just dropped my absentee ballot in the mail, i couldn't wait for election day, love you. what she's doing here is a form of voting that's typically more popular among republicans. for example, in florida in 2008, republicans enjoyed a 17-point edge among people who chose to vote by mail.
17 points. this year one of the early signs in this election that democrats are excited about is at least in florida democrats seem to be closing the gap with absentee ballot mail-in voters. democrats were still able to win. but this year in florida, democrats have shrunk down the republican advantage on absentee ballot voters from 17 points to just 4 points. remember they were still able to win with the 17-point gap last time around. so this this has democrats very excited. and it has the first lady doing her big voter photo-op today. now the other way to vote ahead of election day is not to mail in your ballot, but to vote early in person. and while michelle obama announced she was voting by mail, president obama announced today that he is going to be voting early and in person. he will be voting on october 25th, which would be next thursday.
that form of voting in person early voting has traditionally leaned more democratic. this year it appears to be following that trend. look at this headline from yesterday. obama grabs wide lead among those who have already voted. but the numbers are amazing. president obama leads mitt romney by 28 points among early voters. it should be noted that the romney campaign has been complaining about it and trying to discredit it. today mitt romney's political director released a memo attacking the methodology calling this flawed and untrue. nobody complains about the methodology when they are ahead. the romney folks have only recently stopped complaining about the methodology of all of the polling being done. their complaining stopped when romney started doing better in the polls a couple weeks ago.
in terms of the swing states, this is how things look. president obama in pennsylvania with a 4-point lead. the president down three points in just the span of a couple weeks. in ohio president obama up by 5 points in a poll released over the weekend. in florida it's mitt romney up by 1 point in north carolina. in virginia romney by 1 point. in iowa the latest poll shows the race to be tied. a new "usa today" gallup poll of the swing states shows mitt romney with an overall 4-point lead in the swing states combined. just as the romney campaign is complaining about the methodology of the poll of early voters that shows president obama with a nearly 30-point margin among early voters, now it's the obama campaign's turn to complain for the first time about the methodology in this new swing state poll. the chief pollster releasing a memo attacking this "usa today" gallup poll as unsound.
whatever you think about the methodology, you can see why the obama campaign would be worried about a poll like this. if other polls bare out this margin in swing states specifically, that would imply there's been a change in the race in mr. romney's favor. right now, though, that poll does sort of stick out. it's an outlier in terms of being more favorable to romney than everything else with polls like this at the combined state level. all of the national polls released today show the race is essentially a dead heat. tracking shows romney up by 2. the rasmussen poll has romney up by 1. investors business daily has the race at a tie. and the new abc news "washington post" poll shows obama up by 3. here's where it gets interesting. a ton of polling stuff comes out every day. every day there's at least one
super interesting thing. and right now the thing most important, i think most intriguing in the data out of all the snapshots of the race is this. this right here is probably the most interesting thing. abc news and "washington post" polled voters nape didn't just ask who do they like. they asked which candidate would be better on a series of issues. here's what they found. on the issue of the economy, it's president obama by 4. taxes, president obama by 5. handling health care, obama by 6. handling international affairs, obama by 10. handling a major crisis, obama by 12. medicare, obama by 15. the only issue where the president loses is this one. the issue of dealing with the deficit where it's mitt romney holding a 3-point lead over president obama. the president leading on every other issue.
it's because of the thing that lost president obama the first presidential debate two weeks ago which was him trying to explain how mitt romney can't be trusted on the deficit by trying to do the math for everyone live on tv. saying something that sounded in translation like you have a large number with a trillion in it and some smaller trillions that when you add them up you subtract and get a number that's positive. do you follow me? president obama during that first debate was trying to do the math over and over and over again as a way of explaining that what mr. romney is proposing would be a recipe for massive deficits. really there is no way you can do the things mr. romney says he's going to do without running up massive deficits. instead of making up memorable arguments that made him the more likable and effective of the two debaters president obama instead tried to prove that thing about the math.
president obama tried to explain what's so wrong with thinking that mitt romney is a guy who should be taken seriously on the deficit. he was trying to explain that without a white board, sound track, without a way to make it into a story people would remember. he just listed these large numbers over and over again an assume people could get the punch line. and mitt romney instead of trying to rebut president obama point by point simply made the assertion that, well, never mind your numbers, i have six studies that back me up. >> i will not under any circumstances raise taxes on middle income families. i will lower taxes. you cite a study, there's six other studies that say yours is completely wrong. >> i have six studies that say i'm great on the deficit issue. no worries. all the giant numbers stuff doesn't make any sense to me either. look. here's a small number.
i have six studies that say i'm fine. those six studies for the record are not actually studies. two are blog posts by a conservative think tank. one is a report by a think tank. one is a paper by a former george bush advisor. and the others are a blog post and a "wall street journal" op-ed by a mitt romney adviser. calling those things studies is like calling me the homecoming queen. it's very flattering, but come on. the romney campaign has been trying to wish away the math with this six studies magical incantation. they have been trying to use this six studies thing for so long that even the sunday morning show on fox is calling bullpucky on it. >> six studies have said -- >> those are very questionable. some of them are blogs. some are from an independent group. >> these are very credible sources. >> one is from a blog from a guy who was a top adviser to george w. bush.
>> see why ed gillespie doesn't look worried there? he's waiting for the interviewer to stop talking. he's just kind of waiting. i'm just going to go back to my talking points. there's a happy-go-luckiness. they don't get too stressed out because they know that politically, it doesn't matter what they say. they trust no matter what they are proposing and how it gets debunked, they know politically they will just seem like they are going to be good on the deficit. no matter what they propose. this is the most persistent myth in the modern politics in american money. the idea that republican presidents are good on the deficit. when, in fact, the exact opposite is our modern history. we learned the budget deficit topped a trillion dollars for the fourth year in a row. here's the context for that. here's our budget deficit in 2012.
just over a trillion dollars. and here's what it was last year. president obama actually cut the deficit by more than $200 billion from the year before. here's the budget deficit that president obama was handed when he walked in the door. your eyes are not deceiving you. you hear the republicans talk about how president obama increased the deficit? he cut the deficit during the four years in office. this graph was put together going through the data. and over the last four decades, only two presidents have reduced the deficit that much this quickly. and those presidents are bill clinton and barack obama. what do they have in common? both democrats. the democratic party has actually been the better of the two parties when it comes to the deficit. over the last 40 years, it's democratic presidents who have been the most fiscally responsible when it comes to the deficit. and republican presidents have been the most fiscally reckless. somehow republicans have
successfully cultivated this myth that they are the ones they should trust if you're worried about the debt and the deficit. even though voters trust barack obama on every other issue, they still trust mitt romney more when it comes to the deficit. they have great faith in mitt romney's deficit hawkishness. even if the studies are just stuff written on a bathroom wall. it's factually hilarious given that mitt romney is proposing this in terms of what we spend on the military. these are current levels of military spending. our biggest discretionary spending. that's what he's proposing to do. he's proposing adding $2 trillion extra in spending just on the military and he's proposing bringing in $5 trillion fewer in revenue in order to pay for that. barack obama is right. the math does not work. the math might be boring, but the math doesn't work.
if you're living paycheck to paycheck right now and you decide your going to quit your job and buy a new car at the same time. so you have less money coming in and lots more money going out. what does that make you? it makes you psyched because you got a new car and you don't have to work. but a decision like this, less money coming out and lots more money coming out. a decision like that puts you in deep, deep, deep debt. if you do that at the national level, you are a lot of things but you are not good on the deficit. except apparently people think that you're great on the deficit. and that distance in perception, distance between the perception and reality of mitt romney is a political problem. if you're that bad on an issue like this and people think you're great on the issue, that means something in our politics isn't working right. someone is not doing their political job at making people understand the reality. why is that? obama campaign senior adviser robert gibbs joins us next.
he totally got away with it. even though it's not true. the red bar is the deficit president obama inherited. the deficit will be over $200 billion smaller than it was last year when the deficit was already smaller than the one the president inherited. barack obama turns out to be a reducer of the deficit. but he gets zero credit for this in the press or it turns out with voters. joining us is the man who was supposed to stop problems like that from happening. senior adviser robert gibbs. thank you for being here tonight. >> thank you for having me. >> am i blaming you unfairly? >> i think that was quite an intro. i do think you make a series of great points. we forget that before barack obama ever walked into the oval office, president bush had spent a trillion dollars that year. they want to blame -- it's funny. you listen to them talk about it and you forget that that was all under their watch.
and so many of the policies that we're trying to unwind right now, we ended the war in afghanistan. we had to put more troops in afghanistan, now we're in the process of bringing more troops home. the bush tax cuts a lot of things that we're having to continue to pay for that are really the result of horrible economic and policy decisions made four or eight years ago. >> why does mitt romney get credit for being the guy handling the deficit. i get the mathematical point the president was trying to make. no way to account for it. that's a ton of red ink. i get the math. nobody else in the country is getting that math. people really think that the republicans will do better on this. what's the distance between what they are trying to do and what people believe about what they are trying to do? >> this is one of the things --
you mentioned the president mentioning this in the debate. this is something you'll hear the president mention tomorrow and it's something we have to talk about as a party and as the president's party every single day before this election. because you went through some of the math. you went through ed gillespie trying to go through the math. there's a tax cut that no study that actually looks at the real number can come up with a way to pay for it without raising taxes. on to that a trillion dollars in extending the bush tax cuts. that's how they want to start their deficit reduction conversation. this is all a big ruse. it's never worked. it didn't work under george bush. it won't work under mitt romney. we have to do something different. the president's plan to cut $4 trillion over ten years in a balanced way, yet still have enough money to make the needed investments in things like education and infrastructure
that we know will grow the economy. >> at the risk of fighting with you, mitt romney is proposing doesn't work without raising taxes on the middle class. mitt romney said i'm not going to raise taxes on the middle class and there's no way to fight about what he will or won't do. so the point is that it won't work to balance the budget without raising the taxes on the middle class. he can say he won't do it, but we know he's going to blow up the deficit reagan styly. why not make the argument on the basis of what he's going to do to the debt rather than asserting he'll have to raise taxes on the middle class. >> whichever way you do it, you understand it doesn't add up. we have to make sure people understand he will not enumerate the loopholes he's going to close. he won't talk about the deductions and extensions. the most credible study, if you take all the deductions and all
the exclusions for the upper end, for the very wealthy and take all those away and add in the great dynamic scoring, which you're talking about, the magical elixir if you cut taxes you'll have a skyrocketing great economy, ask yourself as an american voter, did that happen when we cut taxes in 2001 and 2003? the answer is no. months and months and months of negative job growth right after the 2001 tax cut. but when you start doing all of that, when you take away all those deductions, the math still doesn't work. >> and you end up with a giant debt. >> you're not making the argument about mitt romney equals giant debt. >> you'll watch the president, and i do it when i talk about this, when you get to the fact that you can't fill a $4.8 trillion revenue hole, there's one of two things that has to happen. either what we talk about a lot those deductions are going to
end up impacting middle-class families for things like their home mortgage, the other thing is, you could end up skyrocketing the debt just to pay for a tax cut for people that are as rich as mitt romney who, as you know, rachel, haven't had a bad day in this economy. they are not making decision the not to do things. they can do everything they want to do. they are either going to explode the deficit or raise taxes on middle-class families. none of which we know will do anything to provide real growth in the economy. we're only going to do it if we build this economy from the middle out. if we make those important education investments, important investments in manufacturing, bring jobs from overseas. sell more products overseas. if we do things like this, we can grow the economy. >> i think you will convince people you will get rid of the mitt romney advantage on the issue of handling the deficit if you start talking about the
would resinate well if they could just get past some of their biases that have been there from the democratic machines that have made us look like we don't care about this community. and that is not true. >> that is not true. the wife of mitt romney making the case that the reason her husband has trailed president obama with latino voters is because latino voters have bias, bias from the democratic machines. they can't get past their bias. pay attention to no self-deportation thing. the great rosie perez has a funny rendition. that's coming. [ cellphone rings ] [ female announcer ] with secret outlast, conquer your busy day. burn, let's do it... ♪ hi. [ female announcer ] outlast your day any day. with secret's 48 hour odor protection technology. secret outlast.
something this delicious could only come from nature. new nectresse. the 100% natural no-calorie sweetener made from the goodness of fruit. new nectresse. sweetness naturally. i guess i should get used to it. donald trump really is a major part of the mitt romney for president campaign. that is amazing. tonight right now just across town in new york city, donald trump is doing a fundraising event for the mitt romney campaign with paul ryan. they are at a closed-door fundraiser with donald trump. "the new york times" printed a letter from a man who was the campaign strategist for mitt romney's father for three campaigns back when george romney was governor of michigan. he's harshly critical of mitt romney and how mr. romney is running his campaign.
he says he was annoyed by mr. romney's references to his father as inspiration and influence on him. "i just don't see it." where is it? is it on issues? no. george would never have been seen with the likes of sheldon adelson or donald trump. regardless of the spit take it causes from your father's old friends as you try to wrap yourself in the mantle of your father's integrity, the fact is funds must be raised and the romney campaign announced that just last month in september they raised $170 million, which is a lot but is $10 million less than the obama campaign raised. the campaigns are closely matched with what they are raising. where the president and democrats are getting swamped is by the money spent by outside groups. the dark money. money spent outside the
campaign. since labor day the spending on the presidential election by outside groups, the proportion of that spending that's been pro-romney and anti-obama is almost three quarters a huge majority of the dark money spending is republican money. that's what's swamping the democrats. what the money is being spent on is tv ads. by the middle of august this year, we had already seen the same amount of spending as we saw in the entire election cycle in 2008. with all this dark money now, the only limit to the number of political ads that can be launched on swing state air waves is the number of hours in a day. people watch screens other than their television screens. and one of the things that's happened this year is outside groups that don't have a role in election year politics and grass roots groups, regular folks are making ads themselves and putting them up online outside the campaigns.
and there are some of these that are pro-romney and anti-obama like this gentleman singing about how the president is secretly gay, but the freelance video outbreak is a lefty phenomenon. there's a great putting up obama messages. they don't say who they are, they just call themselves a group of independent americans who have volunteered their time, but the videos are professional and very good. one is about women's rights. >> romney doesn't want insurance to cover your birth control? >> paul ryan sponsored a bill to force me to have vaginal probes. >> romney doesn't support legislation that would make sure i get paid the same as a man. >> i'm a 60-year-old woman and i'm voting democrat. president, senate, congress and i approve this message. >> i approve this message. >> and we all approve this message. >> that's we approve this message.
they are obviously for president obama and the democrats, whoever they are. they are anonymous. this one isn't. this is a professor who writes on health policy and has a disabled brother-in-law who relies on medicaid. he made his own campaign ad about how important medicaid and medicare are. >> i don't have a super pac, no one approved this commercial, it's just me. about eight years ago my wife and i faced the task of taking care of her brother after my mother-in-law died suddenly. he's disabled and has a number of problems. if you're like me, you probably never set foot into a building like the one behind me. right over there. that's a social service agency. my wife has spent many hours in buildings just like that one with a shoe box filled with his medicaid and medicare forms. i'm flabbergasted by proposals to cut medicaid by a trillion
dollars and along the way to deprive tens of millions of people the right to have insurance. >> that's one of the videos out there. john kerry's daughter launched a website to get regular people to contribute pro-obama and anti-romney videos on a website called ad your voice. the best one as judged by their judges will win $10,000. but there are also celebrity campaign ads being produced. the center for reproductive rights put together a big celebrity freelance ad that's about republican anti-abortion politics this year. >> this lawmaker in georgia is calling women farm animals. >> you've got to be kidding me. >> no. there's another guy that says this contraception thing
wouldn't be a problem. >> farm animals? that's not a joke. is that a joke? >> no, no, no, no, no, no. >> i mean animals have more sense than these people. >> holy mother of [ bleep ]. >> of course, i'll sign it. i'll sign it right away. what are you waiting for? >> getting people to sign on to a petition. today we got the first in what is promising to be a series of comedian videos from the jewish council for education and research. they are fact check videos about mitt romney. they are doing them in conjunction with a democratic-leaning pac. >> my dad, you probably know, was the governor of michigan and the head of a car company. but he was born in mexico. had he been born of mexican
parents, i'd have a better shot of winning this. >> actually mitt that is so true. the advantage is obvious. think of all of our hispanic-american presidents from jorge washington to jorge bush. >> that's part of the first video from actually.org which stars rosie perez. she's here next. hold on. rosie perez will be here
sleep train's best rest event is ending soon. don't miss your chance to get sleep train's very best mattresses at the guaranteed lowest price. plus, pay no interest for 3 years on beautyrest black, stearns & foster, serta icomfort, even tempur-pedic. and rest even better with sleep train's risk-free 100-day money back guarantee. but the best rest event ends soon at sleep train. superior service best selection, lowest price, guaranteed. ♪ sleep train ♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪
at actually.org, a group of comedians and celebrities are doing a profane fact check series about mitt romney's presidential campaign. here's the first one. >> my dad, you probably know, was the governor of michigan and was the head of a car company, but he was born in mexico. had he been born of mexican parents, i'd have a better shot of winning this. and i say that jokingly, but it would be helpful to be latino. >> actually mitt that is so true. all you have to do is look at the statistics and mitt's point becomes crystal clear. hispanics represent 17% of the population and account for less than 2% of all elected and appointed officials.
the advantage is obvious. think of all of our hispanic american presidents. from jorge washington to jorge bush and who can forget president jimmy spits. i mean all mitt needs is a little bit. didn't really need to go full john boehner on the spray tan. but a clean cut hispanic american like julian castro or ricky martin, oh my goodness, what if you were just a little bit gay, mitt? think of all the advantages that would provide. no, wait for it, what if you had a vagina? if you were a gay latina this election would be in the bag for you. unfortunately for you, mitt, you were cursed with the hard knock life of growing up as the son of a wealthy governor and auto executive. and when your father paid your
way through private school and bought your first house, i can't imagine how difficult that must have been for you. but the truth is the reason why latinos aren't voting for you is because your policies suck. being latino wouldn't win you the election. but saying jokingly that you wish you were might actually lose it for you. >> that video is part of a series called actually, which is an effort to use comedians to fact check mitt romney. the series is done by the american bridge pac which is a democratic-leaning pac and the jewish council for education and research. joining us is rosie perez. thank you for being here. >> it's my pleasure. i love your show. >> thank you. the punch line of this, which you deliver to the camera is latinos are not voting for you because your policies suck. do you think people attribute mitt romney not having support from latinos to something other
than his policies? is that why it's the point of the video? >> i think it's just about his policies. and i think that the icing on the cake was that video of him jokingly saying that if he was latino, he would have the election in the bag. so what are you saying, mitt? you know, it's just ridiculous. are you implying that things, you know, i got into college because i'm latin. it's just that easy. spray tan and things will magically happen for you. it's ridiculous and insulting and that's the reason i participated in it. our charity we give out a scholarship of $40,000 and have numerous students come in and apply. we had one girl that brought our entire board to tears. she was here illegally because her parents brought her here. she was a little girl when she came here.
she graduated high school with straight a's. got accepted on a partial scholarship to john j. criminal college, an exemplary civic servant for our charity and her biggest fear was that she was going to get deported. her second biggest fear was that she wasn't going to be a lawyer. and it just broke your heart. and so he does not believe in the dream act. if he's president, that girl is going back. so what does that say? the choice is very clear for me. and the choice is very clear for a majority of latinos here in america. and you know, i had to do this video because sometimes when the message gets heavy-handed, as it is now, people don't want to listen to you. but if you're hysterical like yours truly, people listen.
they listen. i had a twitter account just for a month, oh my god. the things -- the tweets, i mean, they were blowing up today. and it was just because i was making people laugh. but i was also making a clear point. like you said at the end, i got very, very serious because i wanted the point to be strong. >> you're talking about the dream act there. one of the things that i have found really interesting in republican politics, i grew up in california during the fight over prop 187. very anti-immigrant there. it's this anti-immigrant thing and it split the republican party. you had george w. bush leading the pro-immigration relatively pro-immigrant wing of the republican party. he got a lot of latino support when he got elected. but george w. bush had his compassionate conservatism thing was about the issue of immigration and being compassionate.
you saw rick perry try to make the case of being compassionate in terms of going to college and dream act kids and the way they need to be treated respectfully. and mitt romney played the pete wilson role. he was the hard liner and said you don't have a brain. it's not about having a heart, you don't have a brain if you're going to do that for these kids. i wonder how you feel about the republicans fighting amongst themselves on this issue. it seems like they haven't figured out which direction they are going to go. >> they haven't and it's sad. it really is sad because it's just -- where is the heart in the matter of all of this? these are innocent children. they didn't ask to be brought here, but they are here. so what do you want to do? take away the american dream from them? take away the american dream from a straight a student who is living in a two-room apartment with eight to ten people and
still believes that america could change her life? you want to send that girl back? are you kidding me? and i really think there are a lot of republicans that just do not have the courage to step forward and say, you know what, i do believe in the dream act. i do want to stand by this young girl and many like her. and for them to not just have the courage to do that, that's what's sad to me. >> rosie perez, actress, thank you for being here. i know you had a lot of other places to be. thank you for being here. >> thank you and i love your show, like i said. >> you were at a restaurant once and i walked past and saw you sitting in the window, and i was going to go in there, but i was so star struck so i went to a different restaurant. but any way, we'll be right back.
the term "hot seat" is one of those american idioms for which nobody really knows the origin. i think the most plausible case is maybe interrogation under bright lights so they would be hot and uncomfortably warm from answering questions from your interrogators, maybe. a chair that is too warm, that is something you have to be comfortable with in your mind. have you to put aside the literal weirdness of that imagine and not be distracted when that literal thing is the visual that is streaming behind this amazing interview. this amazing interview that i'm about to show you from the local fox station in fargo, north dakota. these are the stills from the tape that you're about to see.
and yes, that is a chair on fire. it's meant to convey the hot seat idea. other than that it is an immaterial piece of context. >> i didn't anticipate i would be answering this question when the campaign started but seeing how it became an issue in missouri, i know on the abortion issue, you're pro life. would you allow any exceptions. >> my position is pretty clear. i'm pro life. i'm concerned about the unborn and people that can't take care of themselves so i'm pro life. i would make an exception for the life of the mother. >> you would not make an exception for rape? >> no. >> why would you force a woman who has been raped to have to have that baby? >> you know, like i said jim, my position is pro-life. and i care about the unborn. and i feel, you know, that's really where we should be in our policy.
>> what would the appropriate sentence be if abortion was illegal and a woman did have an abortion? >> i'll leave that up to others to, you know, come up with that. >> should we put her in jail? should we fine her? i mean, do you have any thoughts on that at all? >> you know, those are things that need to be worked out through the, you know, through the legislative process. >> and that is why the democrats really might hold on to kent conrad's u.s. seat in north dakota. when kent conrad decided to retire, it looked like a shoe-in for the republican pickup in that year but the republican finds himself in a video loop of a burning chair squirming. and the government should force that woman to bear the rapist's child against her will. in any political campaign it is
a sure sign that you're not on your strongest ground when you are dodging questions about what your preferred jail sentence is for pregnant rape victims. the punishing rape victims line is an unpopular stance, it is possible to hold that stance and get elected. it has been done. it is in fact the record on which paul ryan ran in 1998. here's some color from that. he favors overturning the supreme court's decision that made most abortions legal, ryan said. he said he's never specifically advocated jailing women who have abortions or doctors who perform them but added if it's illegal, it's illegal. that's what paul ryan said about abortion rights in 1998. not only did he get elected, now he is right there at the top of the national republican presidential ticket. and that is as sure a sign as any that the republican party is trying to make this previously radical position the new normal.
there's paul ryan running for vice president who would have the government step in to force a rape victim against her will to bear the rapist's child. so would rick berg who we just saw in front of the burning chair. so would josh mandel in ohio. so would michael baumgartner, so would tom smith in pennsylvania, and so would everyone's favorite rape pundit, the gentleman from missouri. >> if it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. >> todd akin the republican senate candidate in missouri. like the republican vice presidential nominee this year, they all have the same position on what they want the government
to force rape victims to do against their will. which raises the question of what counts as being too creepy about rape now. what counts as an unacceptable level of creepiness when it comes to rape ideas from republican politicians? and that unanswered question set up a big new question mark. for thursday night's debate between paul ryan and joe biden. how would paul ryan hold to that position on stage. as mr. ryan and mr. romney try to make themselves over. would this be their turn to the center? no. >> in the past he has argued that there's rape in forceable rape. he's argued that in the case of rape or incest, it would be a crime to engage in having an abortion. i just fundamentally disagree. >> all i'm saying is if you believe life against at
conception, that therefore doesn't change the definition of life. that's a principle. >> he went on to say that mitt romney didn't necessarily agree with him on that, but if you're a victim and you get pregnant, paul ryan as vice president and if he ever becomes president, will try to shape federal policy to have the government force you against your will to bear the rapist's child. this is not new for him. he previously referred to rape as just another method of conception. he cosponsored 38 anti-abortion measures in congress. to give rape a new narrower definition so women would stop getting away with stuff like having access to abortion but not raped in the way that he thought was forceable enough to justify that special kind of treatment. paul ryan has always believed in forcing rape victims to give birth if they get pregnant. we know that would be his national policy as clearly as we know the policy of the entire
ticket would be to overturn roe v. wade and make abortion illegal. >> if the ticket is elected should those who believe that abortion should remain legal be worried? >> we don't think that unelected judges should make this decision, that people, through their elected representatives in reaching a consensus in society for the democratic process should make this determination. >> the court, the next president will get one or two supreme court nominees. that's how close roe v. wade is. just ask yourself with robert bork being the chief adviser on the court for mr. romney, who do you think he's likely to appoint? someone like scalia or someone else on the court far right that would outlaw aio