By Dave Andrusko
Editor’s note. If you are not currently receiving NRL News Today in your inbox, you can sign up at www.nrlc.org/join_our_mailing_list.htm
Everybody has their list of “lessons.” Whether they are grounded in wish fulfillment or something more substantive is the difference. Here are five takeaways (from a single-issue perspective) from Tuesday night.
1. By way of background, we were told incessantly, ceaselessly, unendingly that there were about nine undecided voters remaining in the entire 50 states. According to Rasmussen Reports (a) 18% decided in the last month, (b) 5% decided within the last week, (c) 3% decided in the last few days, AND (d) 4% decided Election Day. “[T]his means 12% of voters decided whom to vote for in the last seven days of the race.” You can interpret that in many different ways but the bottom line is this may be one important reason the popular vote totals were so close. President Obama was a deeply flawed candidate but my guess is (as it’s been for a long time) that many Americans would struggle to find a reason—any reason—to re-elect our first African-American president.
2. Another mythunderstanding, promoting by pro-abortionists and repeated without challenge by their friends in the media, was that abortion/”war on women” was a decisive factor in President Obama’s winning a second term. Forget for a moment that Democrats have traditionally enjoyed greater support among women, doesn’t the 11 point advantage (55% to 44%) prove the point? No, it doesn’t! Mr. Obama lost by a whopping 14 points among white women, who made up 38% of the electorate: 56% went for Mr. Romney, 42% went for Mr. Obama. Obama’s 11 point advantage among women was provided entirely by women of color—96% of African Americans, who made up 8% of the electorate, voted for him; 76% of Latino women, who made up 6% of the electorate, did likewise.
3. If you look at numbers provided by Obama’s core constituencies (pro-abortion feminists, teachers, labor, etc.), even if you discount the numbers they provide, clearly they were very busy on behalf of the President. That is one important reason they were able to turn out their vote, even though it was considerably smaller than 2008 (Obama’s total was more than 9 million fewer). The Pro-Life Movement—you—was one of the principal (if not THE principal) group that educated, motivated, and turned out voters for pro-life Mitt Romney. Speaking of which
4. Everyone under the sun ran television ads, which are colossally expensive and which were so abundant they likely off-set each other. National Right to Life made an enormous grassroots effort to identify, educate, and motivate millions of pro-life voters. As we talked about earlier this week, NRLC distributed 5.7 million educational flyers. Moreover your support enabled our political action committee to run 50,000 radio ads! But radio is only one example of a wide variety of campaign techniques. There were also approximately ten million mailings, literature drops, phone calls, emails and many other ways we used this year to inform voters about which candidates were pro-life. We spent your donation money wisely to defend the unborn! We can honestly say we did everything we could to elect Mitt Romney. Your generosity, your faithfulness, and your support of unborn babies were unmatched and deeply appreciated.
5. Coming full-circle, it’s hardly a surprise that pro-abortionists would insist their agenda was, in a sense, “ratified” by the re-election of pro-abortion President Obama and the election of pro-abortion senators such as Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin and Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts. It was nothing of the sort, but it is part of the [never-ending] mantra that (a) being pro-life is a net negative because (b) it is an inherently “extreme” position. The penultimate takeaway for pro-lifers is that there will be elections you are not fated to win, because of larger forces at play. The ultimate takeaway is that by now, most pro-lifers have already rolled up their sleeves and are back at work.