August 14, 2022

"Rarely has an issue been handed on a silver platter to Democrats that is so clear-cut. It took an election that was going to be mostly about inflation and immigration and made it also about abortion."

Said Anna Greenberg, a Democratic pollster, quoted in "Why Abortion Has Become a Centerpiece of Democratic TV Ads in 2022/Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Democrats have spent nearly eight times as much on abortion-related ads as Republicans have" (NYT).
Some abortion ads use the specific words and positions of Republican candidates against them. Some are narrated by women speaking in deeply raw and personal terms. Some use Republicans’ unyielding stances on abortion to cast them more broadly as extremists....

Democrats aim to connect abortion messaging to the broader argument that hard-line Republicans are seeking to strip away fundamental freedoms. “The arguments Democrats are using in those ads don’t stay contained to the abortion space,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the former White House communications director under President Barack Obama and a longtime party strategist. “You’re telling them something about their temperament, their judgment and their values.”

61 comments:

Saint Croix said...

Republicans can be honest and talk about partial-birth abortion and infanticide.

Or they can help Democrats hide the bodies.

Your choice, I guess.

Lem Ozuna from the Braves said...

Abortion on demand, without any restrictions, is the extreme position. Republicans had given up on the issue and their hesitancy to engage in defense of Doobs is a reflection of that.

Gusty Winds said...

He's right. Let's see what suburban white women do with abortion vs. a horseshit economy of the living.

art.the.nerd said...

> Some use Republicans’ unyielding stances on abortion to cast them more broadly as extremists...

Republican attempts to restrict abortion after 15 weeks, or after 6 weeks, are extremist. The previous Democratic position, permitting abortion up to and including labor, us not extreme. Do I have this right?

Buckwheathikes said...

Are you better off than you were 2 years ago? Is the country on the right track? Are you OK with the US fighting proxy wars the Congress never voted on against people with nuclear weapons pointed at your children? Are you happy with our government's energy policy where gas remains twice what it was under Republican Donald Trump?

If you're better off ... if you're happy with gas and grocery prices right now ... if you're OK with far-off proxy wars funding the weapons manufacturers ... if you're fine with $5-6/gal gasoline ... then you definitely should vote Democrat.

If you want an abortion, you can still get one. They're still legal. Not an issue.

On the other hand, if you fear for the future of the United States, as I do, you'd better get out and get these rat-fuckers out of office before they burn it right to the ground.

rcocean said...

Democrat voters are split into two groups. First, the identity politic voters. They just vote D based on who they are. What the D's or R's do is irrelevant. To these people the Democrats are the black party, the Gay party, the XYZ party, and that's that.

THe other group is the libtards. Almost always white. They're the NPR listeners, the school teachers, the Government workers, soccer moms and retired folk. They can be driven to the voting booth by scaring them about what those "Goddamn Republicans" - who are going to "Take away your right to do XYZ"

The problem is Dobbs did NOT take anyone's right to an abortion away in a blue state. Those blue states all have state level legalizaed abortion and that's not going to change. So, the impact will be minor. And if you live in a purple/red state, all you need to do is vote for abortion at THE STATE LEVEL.

I also disagree with the election being about "Immigration" aka illegal aliens pouring accross an open southern border. First, the republican party, bribed by the billionaire donors has NO record of opposing this. the LOVE cheap labor. Second, the American people will *say* they oppose illegal immigration, but they won't base their vote on it. It's only until illegal immigation affects THEM personally, they finally wake up. Before that, its some abstract issue that doesn't really impact their vote.

tim maguire said...

Some abortion ads use the specific words and positions of Republican candidates against them

There are a lot of assumptions in there that aren’t supported by polling. Republicans aren’t spending as much on the issue because they don’t have to.

gilbar said...

seeking to strip away fundamental freedoms.

Like,
the freedom to NOT be vacuumed up in pieces and thrown into a waste can?

But here's the thing.. The dems are trying to make this "also about abortion"???
I thought, that the overwhelming majority of people supported abortion, for any reason; and up to (and past!) the time of delivery? Shouldn't this election be ALL about abortion??

What's Going On? Shouldn't this be: THE BIGGEST ISSUE ON EARTH?? Where's the smoke? Where's the fire?

n.n said...

Roe was not overturned. In the best case, viability is restored to where baby meets granny, in state, if not in process. In the worst case, viability follows with the time of convenience, or baby... fetid fetus on a cold metal slab. #InStorkTheyTrust

That said, a civilized society has compelling cause to discourage elective abortion (e.g. murder, human rites) performed for social, redistributive, clinical, political, and fair weather causes.

#RecognizeHumanDignityAgency #FollowScienceNotCargoCult #HateLovesAbortion

MadisonMan said...

I await an honest journalist's question: Why, Democrat, when you were in power, did you not codify abortion into law? After all -- anti-miscegenation laws have been removed since Loving. Why were abortion rights not codified into law by Democrats when they were in power?

The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...

Fortunately, the Democrat-controlled House and Senate passed the Universal Abortion Rights Act with bipartisan support and President Biden signed it.

Black folks and women never tire of being played.

Buckwheathikes said...

TIL: Al "Boob Groper" Franken is still alive.

retail lawyer said...

Inflation and immigration are Federal Issues, abortion is for the States. So it is proper for abortion to be an election issue in State government. The Constitution is so hard for Democrats to understand. Or maybe it is hard to accept if they do understand it.

Sebastian said...

Of course, at the national level, Congress has no constitutional authority to regulate abortion, so it should be irrelevant for national elections, not that it will stop the Dems.

At the state level, it is fair game, and abortion will mobilize anti-GOP voters, particularly since the big anti-Biden issues can't really be handled there.

But the key question is if the nice women in the middle will choose abortion over the future of the country. I think they will.

Will Althouse split her ticket?

Gk1 said...

Yeah by all means run in those red states about allowing unrestricted abortions all the way up till birth. They will get annihilated. Oh and do that gun grabbing thing too. That should do it.

Jim at said...

Wishful thinking by the left.

Will abortion have an impact on some races? Yes. But it will be district by district and state by state. It's not a national referendum. Inflation and immigration is.

It's not going to move the needle as much as they think/hope it will.

"Gee. I'm paying 140 bucks for groceries when I used to pay 80. And I just filled up the car for 95 more.

"Abortion? Whatever. Will it pay my fucking bills?"

Aggie said...

I think this is not quite true, or is perhaps more true for Progressive Liberals and Independents than it is for Conservative Republicans. And the Independents will swing the elections in '22 and '24, so the question becomes: Do RINOs despise Trump so much, that they'll slit their own throats just to stack the deck against him?

Michael K said...

They, of course, will have to lie about the Dobbs decision but that has never been a problem for "Inflation Reduction Act" Democrats.

ALP said...

Let's see. Isn't it true that voters lean older - the younger demographic doesn't turn out like the older folks do? Fertility issues are not front and center for those over 40 (unless it's an issue of infertility I would imagine). I would speculate that the majority of older voters are more concerned about health care in the context of geriatric issues.

I predict this doesn't help the Democrats one bit. FFS how can they fuck up the message so damn consistently???

Kevin said...

The Dems control both Houses of Congress and the White House.

What are they going to pass after the election that they can't pass today?

Mary Beth said...

They can hope it works. What someone may need in the future is not going to be as pressing as the daily needs. It's hard to ignore inflation when you are reminded every time you get gas or go to the grocery.

Kevin said...

Democrats aim to connect abortion messaging to the broader argument that hard-line Republicans are seeking to strip away fundamental freedoms.

Do they really want to get into a pissing contest about which party is stripping away more freedoms?

I don't think that would go well.

SteveSc said...

"You’re telling them something about their temperament, their judgment and their values"

Yeah. Like Gay Marriage. Men with dicks in female sports. Keep going.....

JK Brown said...

Unfortunately, for Democrats, abortion is now a fight in the state capitals. Whatever the federal Democrats say, they will be unlikely to do anything. On the state level, I expect Republicans will see some churn as hardline abortion ban absolutists are replaced. Until Roe was overturned, being total abortion ban wasn't something voters had to worry about when they elected someone. Now it matters.

"hard-line Republicans are seeking to strip away fundamental freedoms"

I'd like to see the argument that now's the time for Hispanic and black conservatives to assert themselves and "fight inside" the Republican party rather than just go hat in hand to Democrats. Of course, I don't believe the "strip away" nonsense, but if groups Democrats believe they "own and operate" started slowly taking over the "declining" white Republican party....

The Vault Dweller said...

Whichever party gets to the middle-ground position of abortion being legal until about 14-15 weeks will do the best politically. Neither party will ever get there though.

Joe Smith said...

If lib parents want to kill their future D-voting kids, I won't stop them.

Just don't ask me to pay for it...

Inga said...

Fundamental freedoms and the fundamental trust of a POTUS to keep the US safe, these and more in jeopardy.

ccscientist said...

But of course abortion is not that simple. If you ask what % think it is ok to abort a baby at 9 months, not many will think it is ok. But the dems are framing this (as with everything) as either/or. So they are pushing for an absolute right any time for any reason, right up to birth. If people understood that, as opposed to an abstract "right" it would not be a winning issue for them.

Maynard said...

This is what democracy looks like.

Republicans who take themselves to an extreme abortion position will lose votes.

Democrats who stake themselves to an extreme abortion position will be hailed as heroes.

Jeff Weimer said...

We'll see how that works out for them. I suppose if they keep banging the drum and showing *exactly* where they stand, the polls might move.

Iman said...

The Party of Chaos and Death…

JRoberts said...

Here in Georgia, I've seen multiple airings of a pro-abortion/anti-Governor Kemp ad. In addition to weaving in falsehoods about banning all birth control and arresting women for having a miscarriage, there has been a not too subtle threat that the only way to protect women's rights is to "take out" Governor Kemp. In the current environment, I fear for his safety.

This from the same people who were outraged by the "target ads" they blamed for the shooting of Gabby Giffords.

chuck said...

Gosh, why do the Democrats need to lie about it if it comes to them on a silver platter? Honesty should be sufficient.

cfs said...

On all the polling I've seen, the issue of abortion ranks very low on the list of concerns. Anyone whose single issue in voting is a right to kill their child would never vote for a GOP candidate anyway, so I can't see it moving the needle one way or the other.

dawn remade said...

I live close enough to Kansas that I saw a lot of the ads for the Value Them Both amendment. The messaging here for voting No were focused on Kansas already having adequate "common sense" restrictions for abortion in place (late term abortion and mandatory parental consent for minors being two frequent examples) and that if the Yes won the legislators would ban abortion in ALL instances, including the life of the mother.

On the flip side, the Yes vote ads were focused on "common sense" restrictions and explicitly denied the claim that future restrictions would eliminate a "to save the life of the mother" clause.

Common sense was thrown around a lot, no ad was pro-abortion in the sense of "no restrictions" or pro life in the sense of "banning all abortions" and both sides accused the other of lying about what the amendment would do.

Here's the language of the failed amendment if anyone wants a refresher:

“§ 22. Regulation of abortion. Because Kansans value both women and children, the constitution of the state of Kansas does not require government funding of abortion and does not create or secure a right to abortion. To the extent permitted by the constitution of the United States, the people, through their elected state representatives and state senators, may pass laws regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, laws that account for circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, or circumstances of necessity to save the life of the mother.” https://sos.ks.gov/elections/22elec/2022-Primary-Election-Constitutional-Amendment-HCR-5003.pdf

I'm not sure if either of these stories made national news, but here are two Kansas news stories I think are relevant to the messaging in the final days before the amendment vote:

Some voters report receiving an anonymous text reading “Women in KS are losing their choice on reproductive rights. Voting YES on the Amendment will give women a choice. Vote YES to protect women’s health.” https://fox4kc.com/news/kansas-news/kansas-voters-confused-over-anonymous-abortion-amendment-texts/

Woman attacks teenager who was knocking on doors in support of the “Value Them Both” amendment. https://fox4kc.com/news/kansas-teen-attacked-while-knocking-on-doors-for-value-them-both-amendment/

Jersey Fled said...

Even Democrats are awakening to the fact that Dobbs did not outlaw abortion. It's amazing how many educated white women thought that it did. Some might even question why the Democrats lied to them for all these years.

Tag: What is it about college that makes white women so stupid?

Michael K said...

Blogger Inga said...

Fundamental freedoms and the fundamental trust of a POTUS to keep the US safe, these and more in jeopardy.


Yup, for once I agree with you. Too bad we lost it in the 2020 election.

Cato said...

Identify one person in the US who wants an abortion and cannot get one. Just one person.

M said...

“ JRoberts said...
Here in Georgia, I've seen multiple airings of a pro-abortion/anti-Governor Kemp ad. In addition to weaving in falsehoods about banning all birth control and arresting women for having a miscarriage, there has been a not too subtle threat that the only way to protect women's rights is to "take out" Governor Kemp. In the current environment, I fear for his safety.

This from the same people who were outraged by the "target ads" they blamed for the shooting of Gabby Giffords.”

They need to be sued. Now. Even Moore just won a defamation case against a Dem PAC’s ad lies and he is a creep. Just not the creep they painted him as.

Mike said...

Well there are those who hope that, with sufficient lying and obfuscation, the Dobbs decision will save the midterms for the Dims. Maybe. Certainly out here in Los Angeles the boys and girls (and maybe two or three other flavors of sexual orientation) who write for the LA Times have their panties in a twist. Why Dobb means that "the right to abortion and all other fundamental freedoms are now at risk" because--three Trump judges.

I think it was H. L. Mencken who said you could never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people--and the Dims better hope that's true in their "Dobbs is the Devil" routine.

Lance said...

"Democrats aim to connect abortion messaging to the broader argument that hard-line Republicans are seeking to strip away fundamental freedoms."

This is dishonest. Justice Thomas said substantive due process is bad law. He didn't say that birth control or gay sex should be banned. He didn't even say abortion should be restricted.

Freder Frederson said...

Republican attempts to restrict abortion after 15 weeks, or after 6 weeks, are extremist. The previous Democratic position, permitting abortion up to and including labor, us not extreme. Do I have this right?

No you are not right. First of all, there is nowhere where there is unrestricted right to abortion "up to and including labor". Secondly, 6 weeks is indeed extreme. As for 15 weeks, show me a Red State that is attempting to pass a 15 week ban. Indiana's, that just passed, bans all abortions except in very limited circumstances, and even then the ban is from 10 weeks.

Mason G said...

"It's amazing how many educated white women thought that it did."

Credentialed, not educated.

Butkus51 said...

I tell most dems I know, Hey, dont be so glum. Im sure you can go to the closest abortion facility and they'll let you snip the neck. After all, its just an abortion. If youre lucky maybe you can bring home a souveneir of the abortion.

Then they have such contempt for me. I have few dem friends. Life is good.

I call Biden voters groomer supporters because thats what they are. Then I misspell their name on purpose. They take issue with the name thing. Never the groomer accusations..

Im talking to you Inger

Readering said...

Periodical reminder that it was the mainstream Protestant, GOP majority that overwhelmingly voted in Roe v Wade in 1973. Burger, Blackmun, Powell, Stewart, Brennan, Douglas, Marshall.

Jersey Fled said...

Identify one person in the US who wants an abortion and cannot get one. Just one person.

All of those men who call themselves women.

Freeman Hunt said...

Why has it become the centerpiece? What, pray tell, might the other options be? The economy? Education? Hiring 87,000 IRS agents? Wanting to make energy more expensive? Options seem tightly limited.

Freeman Hunt said...

Other tempting centerpieces edged out by this one:

"We want to teach your kindergartner all about sex and how this country is evil!"
"I hereby dub you Latinx,and by this moniker you shall ever be known."
"Inflation isn't that bad if you don't count food and energy."
"Let's make the power grid less reliable and more expensive!"
"The outdoor lifestyle is good for drug addicts. They should camp all over town."
"Is crime really so unpleasant? What's a little rape and murder when you can stick it to the evil police?"
"Everything is racist. Literally everything. What are you doing? Just look at you. Do the work, Racist McRacistface."

Creola Soul said...

I still call BS on this as an issue. All polling shows that Carville was right….it’s the economy stupid. Climate, abortion, etc are noise compared to paying for food and gas.

Drago said...

Readering: "Periodical reminder that it was the mainstream Protestant, GOP majority that overwhelmingly voted in Roe v Wade in 1973. Burger, Blackmun, Powell, Stewart, Brennan, Douglas, Marshall"

LOL

Readering is apparently unaware that republican Presidents have nominated many "republican" justices that swung left and hard left after joining the SC.

Just wait until readering learns about Souter! What a revelation that will be!

dawn remade said...

Frederson said...

First of all, there is nowhere where there is unrestricted right to abortion "up to and including labor".


What do you mean? According to what I can find, only 35 states in the US ban abortion after a specified point in pregnancy, according to abortionfinder.org. Unless I'm missing something, that means in 15 states in the United States alone it's not illegal to have an abortion during labor, which is still a stage of a pregnancy.

realestateacct said...

So odd to call this issue clear cut when more than half the electorate thinks unlimited abortion is wrong.

MalaiseLongue said...

Michael K at 5:17 wins the thread.

wendybar said...

As long as the SERFS can murder babies, they don't care if you take their whole paycheck and let our border get invaded. Nothing matters as long as there is a pile of dead babies.

Freder Frederson said...

Unless I'm missing something, that means in 15 states in the United States alone it's not illegal to have an abortion during labor, which is still a stage of a pregnancy.

You are missing that there are almost always restrictions on late term abortions. To say a woman can go to a clinic at 8 1/2 months and simply say, "I changed my mind, get rid of this for me", is just ridiculous.

Rusty said...

Freder Frederson said...
"Unless I'm missing something, that means in 15 states in the United States alone it's not illegal to have an abortion during labor, which is still a stage of a pregnancy.

You are missing that there are almost always restrictions on late term abortions. To say a woman can go to a clinic at 8 1/2 months and simply say, "I changed my mind, get rid of this for me", is just ridiculous."
Proof? I'll save you the trouble. There isn't any. Because, "almost always", means hardly ever in yourspeak.
BTW How rare are abortions? Remember when you were selling this national abattoir abortions were supposed to be rare. Up until recently "the procedure" was available on any street corner.

What's emanating from your penumbra said...

Should pro-abortion and global warming panic ideologies create cognitive dissonance?

In the former case, the ideology is based on an assumption that a certain specific person (or future person, if you like, who at least has been conceived) doesn't have the right to live if it inconveniences another person, and the second case is based on the idea that we all should be forced to curtail our activities because they might hurt future people who haven't even been conceived.

What is the rationale that resolves that cognitive dissonance?

dawn remade said...

Freder Frederson said... "You are missing that there are almost always restrictions on late term abortions."

That's a pretty different claim to me than "there is nowhere where there is unrestricted right to abortion "up to and including labor" I have a couple of follow up questions so I can better understand what you are referencing, if you don't mind.

Could you clarify what you mean by late term? 8 1/2 months is 34 weeks, but do you mean third trimester (starting at 27-29 weeks according to google) or something different?

It's hard for me to follow along with all countries laws everywhere, so I'm just going to focus on the United States if that's ok, since I feel like I have the better grasp of how federal law vs state law might work.

I didn't got through every state is considered to have more permissive abortion protections, but here are a few:

"Almost always" doesn't apply to Colorado, which according to abortionfinder.org again - allows an abortion at any time for any reason.

And New York and California have restrictions after viability (usually 24-26 weeks) but allow for the exception of "To preserve the pregnant person's general health (can include mental health)." Would "I changed my mind would be distressed to have a living child or give birth to a living baby" not fall under mental health reasons?

My current understanding is that there is no federal law that successfully bans abortions past any point during pregnancy.

It looks like the "Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003" was an attempt to stop the practice of late stage abortion (I'm assuming aimed at elective though I can't find specific language either way) but since it referred specifically to a fetus still alive during delivery, doctors will inject "a solution of potassium chloride or digoxin" into the living fetuses heart and officially record a time of death before inducing labor and delivery as a workaround to protect the doctor from that law.

Note: Partial Birth Abortion is a considered by some to be controversial language, and abortionists don't recognize it as a medical term and use "intact dilation and extraction" instead.

Sorry I don't have more diverse sources - but if you can point in my the right direction of the specific restrictions you're talking about (at least for the United States) I'd love to look at them! I do find the concept of third trimester abortions for anything short of non-viability or the life of the mother to be pretty monstrous, so that would be a relief if that was already illegal.

Free Manure While You Wait! said...

"Jim at said...
Wishful thinking by the left.

Will abortion have an impact on some races? Yes."

Especially for black and brown folk.

Saint Croix said...

Ah, the internet ate a couple of my posts again.

When it's not losing posts, it's doubling up posts for no damn reason.

Man. I think they are lost unless Althouse can find them. I can't even remember what I said. It was pretty good though (I think).

Saint Croix said...

You are missing that there are almost always restrictions on late term abortions. To say a woman can go to a clinic at 8 1/2 months and simply say, "I changed my mind, get rid of this for me", is just ridiculous.

I won't speak of the legal situation now (I have no idea), but under Roe v. Wade there was a constitutional right to an abortion for "health" reasons until birth.

And "health" was defined broadly, to include psychological well-being, as well as "financial" considerations.

Basically, according to Blackmun and the Supreme Court, if you had a note from your doctor you could do an abortion until birth.

Of course there was pushback against this. And lots of states outlawed abortion and continually fought against this evil-as-fuck law.

Freder if you want the legal history, you can check out my book. It's free on the Kindle. But your blithe assumption that no babies were killed late in the 3rd trimester is simply wrong.

They classified all our unborn children as non-persons, as sub-human property. Do not whitewash this.