By Dave Andrusko
There was a boatload of fascinating insights in Politico’s “Dems face facts: They need a November turnaround to save Roe,” written by Sarah Ferris and Marianne Levine.
Democrats have access to the same polls we have and a ton more. The consensus outlook is grim, starting with the precipitous drop in pro-abortion President Biden’s job approval. Monmouth has his favorables at 39% while Rasmussen (which uses Likely Voters) has him at 41%. No one this month has a survey that exceeded 42% approval.
Having just lost their second vote on the so-called “Women’s Health Protection Act,” Democrats reached the not so startling conclusion that to do anything legislatively to “save Roe,” they need more pro-abortion Democrats, especially in the Senate.
However, Ferris and Levine observe,
While Democrats are counting on the expected reversal of Roe to motivate voters in November, they know they’ll have to work to maintain attention on the court’s opinion over the next six months. Many lawmakers and senior aides admit it could be hard to keep the faith of a frustrated base that wants to see more concrete abortion action before heading to the polls.
Pro-abortion activists want action now!
There are numerous ways to try to get the base fired up and (of course) simultaneously paint Republicans as woman-hating extremists. Yet all risk backfiring. For example, a reminder that even though Democrats control both Houses of Congress and the presidency, they have next to nothing to show for it.
As Democrats look for an answer, “uncertainty continues to cloud a central piece of Democrats’ strategy on abortion: messaging. Ten days after POLITICO first reported on a draft majority opinion overturning Roe, they don’t yet agree on how best to talk about the highly complex and emotional issue to voters.”
“Messaging,” the pro-abortion answer for everything. Ferris and Levine write
A group of House Democrats are leading a push to modernize the party’s language on abortion, some of which has remained the same since Roe came before the Supreme Court 49 years ago. In recent guidance to Democratic offices, the Pro-Choice Caucus urged members to use the word “decision” instead of “choice” — a pivot urged by activists who argue not everyone has the “choice” to seek an abortion.
And instead of former President Bill Clinton’s 30-year-old refrain calling for abortions to be “safe, legal and rare,” Democrats would prefer the term “safe, legal and accessible.”
So, what’s the catch?
Those attempts to update Democrats’ rhetoric have vexed some in the party, who worry that now is not the time to be rebooting their abortion message and risk confusing — or worse, alienating — their own voters.
Democrats are reaching, yet again, for the “magic bullet” which allows them to deceive the public while energizing their impatient grassroots.
Good luck with that!