Goodreads Bookshelf
Is it that baffling?
Over the weekend, I seemed to hear a lot of political talk, and one thing that came up over and over were the "surprising" findings that John McCain--despite being consistently and staunchly "pro-life" in his voting record and public stances--was the overwhelming favorite in Florida among pro-choice Republican voters. What could this possibly mean?!
The commentators at least got (eventually) to one obvious possibility: the electorate just isn't that informed. McCain has made his reputation as a "maverick" who is willing to stand against his party when he disagrees with them, so people just assume that he must be pro-choice, parting ways once again with his elephantine peers. Of course, if he really differed so much from Republicans he'd be, well, a Democrat. So do we really chalk this up to ignorance among primary voters?
Maybe people really do believe--despite all the clear evidence to the contrary, that McCain is pro-choice. However, I'd like to throw out another explanation, which none of the commentators suggested: maybe--just maybe--they're not casting their votes around one issue? How many people in either party would count abortion as their top issue in 2008? Does it even make the top three? Five? I'll be for most voters, the war, national security, and the economy--in whatever order--are far more important. What about health care or climate change, energy independence or immigration?
Your thoughts are, as always, most welcome.
I read an article in the local paper recently that pointed out that it
doesn't matter where a candidate stands on abortion. Abortion is the law
of the land until the Supreme Court overturns Roe V. Wade and then it
throws the question of legality back to the states to regulate as they see
fit.
We also had a friend who voted strictly on the issue of abortion. Honey really belittled her narrow vision because what was the use of voting for an anti abortion candidate if that candidate also believed in amnesty for all illegal aliens, deporting all women, and only white males can vote. There are other more important issues.
While I am staunchly pro-chioce, as you rightly pointed out a candidates
stand is irrelevant. That's why McCain is still a (remote) possibility for
me.
Right now, my number one issue is health care. I am pro-choice,
unsurprisingly, but that's not a make or break issue for me.
Abortion issues have taken the back seat to all the major problems facing
us al as you have mentioned.
If George W. Bush (backed by a Republican Congress with a conservative
majority on the Supreme Court) wouldn't change the legality of abortion,
then it is clearly not a meaningful piece of the Republican Party platform.
The opportunity was there for six years, and it didn't happen. I have
believed for many years that a number of politicians use the issue of
abortion only as a divisive talking point in an effort to rally support by
playing on voters' emotions. It's a sad commentary when all talk and no
action still wins elections in this day and age.
Golly. While the issues for me are the economy, the war, health care reform
and our standing in the world (sort of in that order), I would never vote
for a candidate who didn't support a woman's right to choose. We're one
Supreme Court nominee away from losing that, as well as one Supreme Court
nominee away from so many right slipping irretrievably away. I think the
same nominee can protect all of those rights and that we need a Dem doing
the nominating. JMHO.