Why wasn't abortion and "women's reproductive rights" more important to voters?

[j brown's body]

Maybe it was, just not in the way the left thinks (that all women who care about it take the kill the baby side of the issue).

A belief based on faith: Abortion kills babies.
A fact: abortion allows women the right to control their own bodies.

I'll take fact over faith.

 

[ttwtt78640]

People tend to think an infringement of a right on others won't lead to infringements on their own rights.

I think they will be surprised.

Yep, but many say that’s an invalid position (slippery slope fallacy) concerning the reduction of 2A rights.

 

[Josie]

Because the women that are most effected by the restrictions on abortion don't vote.

They don't? Why not? There was a HUGE "Roevember" movement out on Twitter and TikTok. Lots of younger women were being very vocal about it.

The women who do vote have no trouble accessing abortion no matter what their state's abortion laws are. And, sadly, most don't care how the law impacts the the poor and low wage working women who don't vote.

Well, that's just not true. I and countless others didn't vote for Harris but still care very deeply about other humans, especially children.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Looking back at the campaigns, election and everything in between, why do you think abortion wasn't more important to voters?

Easy, when you ask people if they are better off now than 4 years ago, then the answer ensures votes.

Harsh reality for Democrats, even progressives suggesting more authoritarianism can dictate the issues driving voters, social issues lost to economic issues. When you remind people that inflation coming down did not erase the pains of their checkbooks affording less for their families Democrats lost.

Even though it is "selfish" to think about how a family economically survives.

 

[Josie]

It's a silly argument if you ignore the rest of my comment. Which you did ...

Where you implied that I was ignorant about the topic?

 

[Kblaster49]

Where you implied that I was ignorant about the topic?

LOL, you are running through the gamut of logical fallacies today! Kudos!

 

[ttwtt78640]

Several Supeme Courts had affirmed it as a constitutional right.

Both the Roe and Casey decisions included allowing states to impose limitations (restriction?) on abortion based on the level of fetal development. The SCOTUS simply made up a federal abortion law to attempt to define ‘acceptable’ limitations - not based on anything within the Constitution.

 

[Josie]

LOL, you are running through the gamut of logical fallacies today! Kudos!

You mean this wasn't you?

Of course it does, that was the point of my post. And to repeat, people are just too shortsighted or too worried about controlling women's bodies to acknowledge it.
And I will also repeat - if you want more info about the issue you can Google the consequences of unintended pregnancies.
Have a good one.

 

[Helix]

Well, you know that we disagree on the issue of abortion. So why do you keep inserting yourself into these conversations with me if you don't want to talk about it?

You posted the thread for whatever reason, and I responded. We both know that the issues concerning women go way past abortion. You are an intelligent person, so if you're still running interference for the far right, that's just stunning.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Because people are too stupid to vote their own interests.

It's that simple.

If women weren't prepared to defend their own rights...

Don't know what I can really do about it now.

 

[Josie]

You posted the thread for whatever reason, and I responded. We both know that the issues concerning women go way past abortion. You are an intelligent person, so if you're still running interference for the far right, that's just stunning.

And you always make a snide comment and then say you don't want to talk about it. So......... stop talking about it.

 

[Helix]

And you always make a snide comment and then say you don't want to talk about it. So......... stop talking about it.

Ok. Peace.

 

[Josie]

Because people are too stupid to vote their own interests.

It's that simple.

If women weren't prepared to defend their own rights...

Don't know what I can really do about it now.

My own interests don't include abortions, though. Calling most of the country stupid just because they didn't vote for your candidate isn't a great look.

Maybe you should consider that it's something your side did wrong to lose.

 

[Kblaster49]

My own interests don't include abortions, though. Calling most of the country stupid just because they didn't vote for your candidate isn't a great look.

Maybe you should consider that it's something your side did wrong to lose.

Most of the country didn’t vote for Trump. It was only about 30% of those eligible to vote.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

They don't? Why not? There was a HUGE "Roevember" movement out on Twitter and TikTok. Lots of younger women were being very vocal about it.



Well, that's just not true. I and countless others didn't vote for Harris but still care very deeply about other humans, especially children.

You care so much about other humans that you want the government in their doctor's office. You want a say in another woman's healthcare. Apparently, you think other women are too stupid to even make their own healthcare decisions. How could you possibly believe they would be strong enough or smart enough to run the country?

 

[Josie]

You care so much about other humans that you want the government in their doctor's office. You want a say in another woman's healthcare. Apparently, you think other women are too stupid to even make their own healthcare decisions. How could you possibly believe they would be strong enough or smart enough to run the country?

I do not care what a woman does in her doctor's office nor do I want the government involved in that. Just one exception - when another human is involved and the doctor is going to kill that human. Just as you think the government should step in when someone wants to kill a 2 month old born baby.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

Several Supreme Courts had affirmed it as a constitutional right.

And several of the conservative justices during their confirmation hearings declared Roe v Wade 'settled law.' In other words, they committed perjury during those hearings.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

I do not care what a woman does in her doctor's office nor do I want the government involved in that. Just one exception - when another human is involved and the doctor is going to kill that human. Just as you think the government should step in when someone wants to kill a 2 month old born baby.

So, can I conclude you make no exceptions regarding abortion when it comes to rape, incest, life of the mother?

 

[NatMorton]

Several Supeme Courts had affirmed it as a constitutional right.

"Several Supreme Courts" affirmed Dred Scott and Plessy.

 

[j brown's body]

Both the Roe and Casey decisions included allowing states to impose limitations (restriction?) on abortion based on the level of fetal development. The SCOTUS simply made up a federal abortion law to attempt to define ‘acceptable’ limitations - not based on anything within the Constitution.

All rights have restrictions, except the one about guns, of course.

"This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether to terminate her pregnancy."

— Roe, 410 U.S. at 153.[123]

 

[j brown's body]

"Several Supreme Courts" affirmed Dred Scott and Plessy.

Indeed they did.

The Supreme Court’s recent Dobbs decision...echoes and parallels Dred Scott in its reasoning and in its results.

Plessy was overturned due to new information that contradicted the original decision.

Roe was overturned simply because the justices are opposed to abortion.

 

[ttwtt78640]

All rights have restrictions, except the one about guns, of course.

"This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether to terminate her pregnancy."

— Roe, 410 U.S. at 153.[123]

OK, yet somehow that “right to privacy” and/or 9A isn’t enough to allow the use of recreational drugs.

 

[Josie]

So, can I conclude you make no exceptions regarding abortion when it comes to rape, incest, life of the mother?

You conclude incorrectly. It's not a black and white topic.

 

[MAGAnificent]

Looking back at the campaigns, election and everything in between, why do you think abortion wasn't more important to voters?

Because the majority of voters understand and accept that the issue is now where it belongs.....at the state level.

 

[Stealers Wheel]

This election proved that Harris was a lousy candidate. Seriously, she ran a campaign centered around empty platitudes and "I hate the orange man". No substance at all.

But I suppose it's comforting to blame the loss on an "ism" so you go with that. Feelings are important.

Exit polling proved it. Once they had cast their vote, people were far more willing to discuss their reasoning.

Men don't vote for women and women don't trust other women.