In short, one faction, led by presidential candidate Donald Trump, believes that to win in the next election cycle, political battles over abortion should be disincentivized — even if that means borrowing a bit from Bill Clinton’s “safe, legal and rare” messaging. The others think that moderating on this issue is not only morally unjustifiable, but also strategically incoherent. Republicans “let the Democrats set the terms of the debate. They play defense. They play scared. And they lose,” suggests the Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh.

Although broadly speaking, Walsh’s sentiment is in the right place, his analysis misses the bigger picture. It may be true that staunch pro-choicers aren’t running to the right with a moderating Trump — and sure, many pro-life organizers aren’t ecstatic. Still, the logic for his position is not moderation for the sake of the individual battle; it’s about neutralization in pursuit of a broader agenda. 

In pursuing this strategy, Trump is absolutely right. The facts are inescapable: pro-choicers have won every post-Roe abortion ballot initiative. For better or for worse, when elections become referendums over abortion, the enthusiasm gap favors Democrats. While you could blame this on Republicans being gutless and dumb, a time-sensitive analysis indicates that deprioritizing the issue heading to the 2024 election is the safer choice. The assertion that abandoning the conversation altogether benefits the pro-choice movement has some truth to it, yet the results speak clearly.