Politico asks Was abortion a wave-stopper for Democrats in 2010?
By branding Republican challengers as outside the cultural mainstream on the issue, Democrats managed to hold on to at least a slice of the political center by courting and winning over moderate women in a handful of key states.
The strategy ran counter to the one that enabled the party to broaden the political map in 2006 and 2008, when Democrats thrived by running candidates whose positions on abortion were closely attuned to the socially conservative areas where they sought office.
This year, however, Democrats adopted almost the opposite approach late in the 2010 campaign. As many of the anti-abortion Democrats elected over the last four years were going down in defeat, the party made abortion a central concern in a handful of battleground Senate races — and they ended up in the Democratic column as a result.
One reader wrote to me to make this point too.
In New York, EVERY statewide contest was won by Dems because they used abortion rights to drive the women’s vote. Gillibrand started it in her Senate contest against DioGuardi, then Schneiderman used it in the AG race against Donovan. Paladino’s website stated he would end Medicaid funding for abortion, which even got me annoyed.
Although the country is evenly divided on the question of abortion, it is a bottom line issue with many voters.
I have talked to a number of Jewish woman who tell me they get incensed over the idea that women might be denied the choice.
While it is true that Palin said she wouldn’t legislate against abortion but she would advocate against it. She made a point of endorsing candidates who were pro-life and as President she could make a point of appointing Justices who are likewise, prolife.
While I am at it, I talked to a brilliant Jewish woman this weekend who said that Obama won on “smoke and mirrors” but that she remains a committed Democrat. Jews are hot wired to stand up for social justice which means providing a good safety net. They are also hot wired to resist dictates of the Christian religion. No way do they want to be ruled by their stand on Abortion. Jews by their nature are progressive. For centuries Jews were oppressed by the status quo so sought progressive policies.
When Jews must choose between their attachment to progressive values including abortion rights and their attachment to Israel, many of them would sooner abandon Israel or convice themselves that Obama or Democrats are not anti-Israel that abandon progressiveness.
It is wrong to label such Jews as stupid. They simply didn’t want to vote against their progressive values. Dershowitz is a case in point.
It is not only Jews who are protective of their choice but the whole feminist movement is.
Palin only hurts her chances by being anti-abortion. I can easily see the Democrats making abortion a central issue in the next election.
Palin should declare herself early that she would not make abortion illegal but she would make it rare. This would help her enormously.
Another big divide is on the question of the safety net. Democrats campaign on being their brother’s keeper. Conservatives campaign on freedom and never complicate their platform by discussing the safety net. They can’t avoid this issue forever. Bush campaigned as a “compassionate Conservative.”.
Its time for Palin to write another facebook entry on her views on the appropriate safety net. She should dispell any notion that she is for a dog eat dog world.