NARAL tries desperately to pretend Trump’s pro-life stance did not help him

By Dave Andrusko

NARAL President Ilyse Hogue

As an end-of-the-year fundraiser (“Your year-end gift will be doubled”), NARAL offered up an argument that is puzzling even by its customary incoherent standards.

The first part of the email is evasive and misleading. Quoting a headline from the Washington Post, “Roe v. Wade may be doomed. Dark days are ahead for reproductive rights,”

Ilyse Hogue, President, NARAL Pro-Choice America, tells us, “The argument is simple—with Roe v. Wade hanging on by a 5–4 majority, and with three pro-Roe justices at ages 78, 83, and 80, the chances that Trump will get to appoint the deciding vote on Roe are frighteningly high.”

Perhaps pro-life President-elect Trump will be able to. We certainly hope so, beginning by appointing a pro-life successor to Antonin Scalia. But as he told 60 Minutes’ Leslie Stahl, referring to the overturning of Roe and the rightful restoration of the right of states to write their own abortion laws, “That has a long, long way to go.”

(And by the way it is true that the headline appeared in the Washington Post. But it was not the newspaper itself that foretold gloom and doom for the anti-life forces. That was the conclusion of an op-ed written for the Post by a pro-abortionist. )

The real deception comes later and combines leading the reader astray, blatant untruths, and self-deception. Hogue writes

We know we can win this fight because most people who voted for Trump didn’t support him because of this issue.

In fact, Hillary Clinton ran as the most unapologetically pro-choice candidate we’ve ever seen, and Trump didn’t run a single campaign ad attacking her for it.

As we have documented on several occasions, including earlier today (“A National Referendum on Abortion”), Trump’s pro-life position was a huge advantage to him. As NRLC Executive Director Dr. David O’Steen wrote

A national poll of voters taken on election day, November 8, by the polling company Inc./Woman Trend found that essentially half of all voters (49%) said that abortion affected their vote. How did they vote – 31% said they voted for candidates who opposed abortion while only 18% said they voted for candidates who favored abortion – a 13% advantage for the pro-life side. When you think how close the vote was in Pennsylvania and other states which determined the election, it is clear that abortion made a clear difference in the election.

Likewise we have posted several times about what was found in the exit polls. Of the 21% who said the appointments to the Supreme Court was the most important factor in their vote, 56% voted for Trump compared to 41% for Hillary Clinton–a huge difference and indicative of how significant the next appointments to the Supreme Court are to the pro-life community.

And who cares about campaign ads? In the third debate, the whole world saw Mr. Trump espouse his pro-life views and criticize Hillary Clinton’s unabashedly extremist views on abortion. If he was “afraid” of the abortion issue, it was a strange way of showing it: roughly 72 million people were watching.

NARAL is desperate, and should be. But they might want to impart a little less false news in freaking out their supporters.