Green Room

War on women: Was Obama’s victory a victory for “choice”?

posted at 10:53 am on November 14, 2012 by

Sure was, if your interest in “choice” is confined to one very specific area of reproductive policy. If not, you’ve got problems. Something new from Reason TV and Kennedy.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Hello, we lost by less than 5 points!! We don’t have to change everything about our party. Obama won because racist blacks turned out more than normal to vote for Obama because he is black.

Dollayo on November 14, 2012 at 11:07 AM

If so many women are that shallow and gullible, then maybe the Founders knew what they were doing (as is usually the case). Like the blacks of this country, they too will pay dearly for their lack of judgement.

cajunpatriot on November 14, 2012 at 11:19 AM

That’s because they never think past the intent of their decisions, and that’s if I’m being charitable.

I know some of you are gearing up for a fight, but I’m still in the mindset of letting them burn it all down. Give them everything they think they want and then some. You can’t educate people who think we’re killing Santa Claus, so stop trying.

My only regret now is that we kept the House. Better for the Dems to own all of this.

Esthier on November 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Young people should never have been allowed to vote. Even as a dumb 18 year old I was wise enough to know that I knew jack about politics and public policy so I abstained from voting until was older and more educated.

jawkneemusic on November 14, 2012 at 11:41 AM

According to Rasmussen, after several years of rising support for the Pro-Life platform, this year the number of Americans to identify as Pro-Life has fallen to 35%.

I thinks its face to say that individuals like Santorum, Akin, and Mourdoc, hurt the brand this year.

This year, the pro-life movement morphed back into its the same form it had in the 1990′s. It took on an angry, shrill, irrational tone that offended all those that saw it.

The Pro-Life movement is at its best, when it prompts individuals to make their own moral judgements. When it asks people to get ultra sounds, when it calmly informs people when an unborn child develops a heart beat, or its own finger prints.

Instead, we had a series of angry old white guys yelling about the power of their own moral rectitude.

Sorry SoCons, I actually agree with you on this issue, but please, please, please, PLEASE! Do not run anymore candidates like Santorum, Akin, and Mourdoc! We need advocates for this cause that win people over, rather than actively hurting the cause.

WolvenOne on November 14, 2012 at 11:48 AM

WolvenOne on November 14, 2012 at 11:48 AM

It didn’t help that the media deliberately distorted and lied about what they meant.

jawkneemusic on November 14, 2012 at 11:53 AM

It didn’t help that the media deliberately distorted and lied about what they meant.

jawkneemusic on November 14, 2012 at 11:53 AM

Yeah, but even in-context their statements were cringe worthy. Keep in mind, they tried to catch Paul Ryan in the same trap a couple times, and he managed to come out undamaged without actually dodging the issue.

In other words, Ryan, a pure numbers guy who isn’t used to talking about social issues, did a better job talking about it than the so called social issues candidates.

WolvenOne on November 14, 2012 at 12:03 PM

WolvenOne on November 14, 2012 at 12:03 PM

True dat.

jawkneemusic on November 14, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Government Choice? Yes.

Personal Choice? No.

Some people just won’t ever get it.

Lawrence on November 14, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Sorry SoCons, I actually agree with you on this issue, but please, please, please, PLEASE! Do not run anymore candidates like Santorum, Akin, and Mourdoc! We need advocates for this cause that win people over, rather than actively hurting the cause.

WolvenOne on November 14, 2012 at 11:48 AM

If I don’t run the candidates I want, then what’s the point?

Asking Conservatives Republicans to run Moderate Liberal candidates just to win an election makes no sense. We might as well save our efforts and just go along with whatever nutty candidate the Democrat party supports.

Lawrence on November 14, 2012 at 12:28 PM

The war on women was not only about abortion and birth control. Too every young single horny guy it was about being forced to pay child support if she didn’t take the pill or couldn’t get an abortion.

meci on November 14, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Lawrence on November 14, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Missing the point entirely!

I’m not asking to run only socially liberal candidates. I’d like us to, first, not run candidates that only run on social issues. One trick wonders like that have no place in a modern campaign. Second, and most importantly, I want candidates that can talk about their socially conservative views, without offending or alarming voters who feel less strongly on the issue.

Basically, I want candidates that are both socially conservative, and whom can win. Akin couldn’t even win in a Bible Belt state, that should tell you just how ill equipped candidates like these are for modern campaigns.

WolvenOne on November 14, 2012 at 12:42 PM

If I don’t run the candidates I want, then what’s the point?

Asking Conservatives Republicans to run Moderate Liberal candidates just to win an election makes no sense. We might as well save our efforts and just go along with whatever nutty candidate the Democrat party supports.

Lawrence on November 14, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Yes, the reason the GOP lost this cycle across the board is that they just needed more Akins, Santorums and Mourdocks out there doing their thing.

Seems legit.

Good Lt on November 14, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Kennedy!

She used to be a VJ on MTV, one of very few outspoken conservatives in pop culture during the Clinton years. I wondered where she went. Reason is a good fit for her.

Caiwyn on November 14, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Hello, we lost by less than 5 points!! We don’t have to change everything about our party. Obama won because racist blacks turned out more than normal to vote for Obama because he is black.

Dollayo on November 14, 2012 at 11:07 AM

From what I’m seeing, we lost because too many Republicans stayed home. The tea party mobilized just 2 years ago over opposition to Obamacare. It seems to me that if Romney had made a stronger case for why Obamacare is an awful law, and how he would have stopped it, more of those people might have come out to vote. I know he said he would work towards repeal, but he never spent much time on it. Obamacare was a big issue for an awful lot of people before the election. I know pundits said Romney couldn’t attack Obamacare because of Romneycare, but I always disagreed with that. People wanted him to attack Obamacare. He barely did. Now we are seeing polls claiming more people support Obamacare. Don’t believe it.

mbs on November 14, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Now we are seeing polls claiming more people support Obamacare. Don’t believe it.

mbs on November 14, 2012 at 1:07 PM

That pollster has a long history of trying to push support of Obamacare, don’t buy it. Just a few weeks ago, Rasmussen had a poll that showed support for repeal holding steady at above 50%.

I know, the libs will point out that Rasmussen was wrong about the election this time. Well they were only a few points off, not twenty plus!

WolvenOne on November 14, 2012 at 1:39 PM

PS

As far as anybody can tell, the bulk of the missing white vote comes from a drop in Independent Voters, with some on the Republican side coming from low-income blue collar Republicans.

Basically, Obama’s immense summer smear fest drove a large number of independents to tune out. On top of that, some low income Republicans decided to stay home rather than voting for a reach guy like Romney.

Turnout among evangelicals and the activist types, was very high. However, this simply isn’t a large enough part of the party to carry things when other demographics stay home.

WolvenOne on November 14, 2012 at 1:45 PM