How to win

[Speedwell]

Pro life is the key to it. The other issues are mostly paranoid fantasies spun by the right and can be dealt with (gun control) or which have become less important to a younger demographic than aging conservative leadership will admit (LGBT). But abortion is the issue and I think it's time the Left made a strategic retreat. How many times have I heard (and many of you too, I'll bet) "I like some of the things Democrats stand for but they're baby-killers and I can't vote for them."? If the Democrats dropped their militant pro-choice stance, Doofuss Donald wouldn't have a chance, and a lot of his sycophants in the Senate wouldn't either.

And what's the downside? Not much. Middle-class and wealthy women have always had access to medically safe abortions and always will, no matter what laws get passed. Increasingly, the ready availability of pharmaceuticals means that working-class women will too--no more straightened out coathanger wire in a back alley.

It's sure fire, if the Left had the guts to do it.

 

[tall73]

Pro life is the key to it. The other issues are mostly paranoid fantasies spun by the right and can be dealt with (gun control) or which have become less important to a younger demographic than aging conservative leadership will admit (LGBT). But abortion is the issue and I think it's time the Left made a strategic retreat. How many times have I heard (and many of you too, I'll bet) "I like some of the things Democrats stand for but they're baby-killers and I can't vote for them."? If the Democrats dropped their militant pro-choice stance, Doofuss Donald wouldn't have a chance, and a lot of his sycophants in the Senate wouldn't either.

And what's the downside? Not much. Middle-class and wealthy women have always had access to medically safe abortions and always will, no matter what laws get passed. Increasingly, the ready availability of pharmaceuticals means that working-class women will too--no more straightened out coathanger wire in a back alley.

It's sure fire, if the Left had the guts to do it.

If you mean they drop it from the party platform, but still allow candidates to come from various perspectives, that would probably help.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Pro life is the key to it. The other issues are mostly paranoid fantasies spun by the right and can be dealt with (gun control) or which have become less important to a younger demographic than aging conservative leadership will admit (LGBT). But abortion is the issue and I think it's time the Left made a strategic retreat. How many times have I heard (and many of you too, I'll bet) "I like some of the things Democrats stand for but they're baby-killers and I can't vote for them."? If the Democrats dropped their militant pro-choice stance, Doofuss Donald wouldn't have a chance, and a lot of his sycophants in the Senate wouldn't either.

And what's the downside? Not much. Middle-class and wealthy women have always had access to medically safe abortions and always will, no matter what laws get passed. Increasingly, the ready availability of pharmaceuticals means that working-class women will too--no more straightened out coathanger wire in a back alley.

It's sure fire, if the Left had the guts to do it.

And if they backtrack on abortion the 'Women's Rights' groups and their supporters will feel betrayed and some 3rd party ultra-leftist (Gillibrand?) will run and drain the democrats voting pool.

This is what happens when the platform consists of a bunch of single issue talking points that only truly matter to individual groups. Cut their issue from the platform and they are gone.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Pro life is the key to it. The other issues are mostly paranoid fantasies spun by the right and can be dealt with (gun control) or which have become less important to a younger demographic than aging conservative leadership will admit (LGBT). But abortion is the issue and I think it's time the Left made a strategic retreat. How many times have I heard (and many of you too, I'll bet) "I like some of the things Democrats stand for but they're baby-killers and I can't vote for them."? If the Democrats dropped their militant pro-choice stance, Doofuss Donald wouldn't have a chance, and a lot of his sycophants in the Senate wouldn't either.

And what's the downside? Not much. Middle-class and wealthy women have always had access to medically safe abortions and always will, no matter what laws get passed. Increasingly, the ready availability of pharmaceuticals means that working-class women will too--no more straightened out coathanger wire in a back alley.

It's sure fire, if the Left had the guts to do it.

That would have worked back in 2015. However, I don’t think it would work now because moderates and independents are abandoning the Democrat Party in droves.

Adopting a prolife platform now would be putting a Band Aid on a bullet wound.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Adopting a prolife platform now would be putting a Band Aid on a bullet wound.

Self inflicted no less......

 

[redleghunter]

It's sure fire, if the Left had the guts to do it.

But they can't. Abortion is a pillar of the Democratic Party.

 

[redleghunter]

If you mean they drop it from the party platform, but still allow candidates to come from various perspectives, that would probably help.

It would not help (D) candidates who need money to campaign. Just ask Al Gore who was pro-life as a senator from Tennessee, but once running for POTUS changed his position.

 

[Speedwell]

And if they backtrack on abortion the 'Women's Rights' groups and their supporters will feel betrayed and some 3rd party ultra-leftist (Gillibrand?) will run and drain the democrats voting pool.

That's what I meant when I said "If the Left has the guts" including women's rights groups on the left.

This is what happens when the platform consists of a bunch of single issue talking points that only truly matter to individual groups. Cut their issue from the platform and they are gone.

Exactly so. Abortion is a single issue for many who have sided with the Right. A preemptive surgical strike by the Democrats will remove that issue and they will be gone.

 

[Speedwell]

But they can't. Abortion is a pillar of the Democratic Party.

It doesn't need to be. The Democrats stand for other issues which are more important to the nation long term. Abortion is not the hill to die on.

 

[Sparagmos]

Pro life is the key to it. The other issues are mostly paranoid fantasies spun by the right and can be dealt with (gun control) or which have become less important to a younger demographic than aging conservative leadership will admit (LGBT). But abortion is the issue and I think it's time the Left made a strategic retreat. How many times have I heard (and many of you too, I'll bet) "I like some of the things Democrats stand for but they're baby-killers and I can't vote for them."? If the Democrats dropped their militant pro-choice stance, Doofuss Donald wouldn't have a chance, and a lot of his sycophants in the Senate wouldn't either.

And what's the downside? Not much. Middle-class and wealthy women have always had access to medically safe abortions and always will, no matter what laws get passed. Increasingly, the ready availability of pharmaceuticals means that working-class women will too--no more straightened out coathanger wire in a back alley.

It's sure fire, if the Left had the guts to do it.

Democrats don’t need to convert conservatives or independents to win, they just need to mobilize their own base. Register voters and get them to the polls.

 

[redleghunter]

Exactly so. Abortion is a single issue for many who have sided with the Right. A preemptive surgical strike by the Democrats will remove that issue and they will be gone.

I don't think so. For many Christians the Pro-Life stance is not a 'single issue' but the actual screening criteria. There's a reason for that....It involves in actually identifying the sanctity of human life at all stages of life.

Plus on the flipside your proposal is infeasible. Look at the money coming in from NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Let me know that without that money if any of those candidates would have a remote chance at even leveling a nomination campaign. The current reality is NARAL and PP do their own candidate screening and the likes of a 1985 Al Gore would have never got passed his first primary without the nod of NARAL and PP.

 

[Halbhh]

Pro life is the key to it. The other issues are mostly paranoid fantasies spun by the right and can be dealt with (gun control) or which have become less important to a younger demographic than aging conservative leadership will admit (LGBT). But abortion is the issue and I think it's time the Left made a strategic retreat. How many times have I heard (and many of you too, I'll bet) "I like some of the things Democrats stand for but they're baby-killers and I can't vote for them."? If the Democrats dropped their militant pro-choice stance, Doofuss Donald wouldn't have a chance, and a lot of his sycophants in the Senate wouldn't either.

And what's the downside? Not much. Middle-class and wealthy women have always had access to medically safe abortions and always will, no matter what laws get passed. Increasingly, the ready availability of pharmaceuticals means that working-class women will too--no more straightened out coathanger wire in a back alley.

It's sure fire, if the Left had the guts to do it.

Haven't we always known that most all the Democrats we know, like 90% or 98% of them, would never support an abortion of convenience of a late term baby, where the mother and baby are healthy.

But, for political purposes, there is a political debate that is totally unconnected to majorities of Republicans and Democrats in their actual views.

In the fake debate, a person has to be either 'pro life' in a fake way where they'd willingly allow a mother to die rather than abort (which is a rare viewpoint, that hardly any people have; perhaps less than 5%, (polls don't usually make this a clear question, but instead something much more vague is asked)) vs the equally fake and unreal viewpoint, even though it seems the viewpoint of a tiny minority most people are happy to avoid and don't want in control of their party, that even an abortion of a perfectly healthy late term baby when there is no risk to the mother of carrying the child to term is just fine (that's the view of some tiny minority).

2 viewpoints which only some tiny percentage of typical people would ever agree with.

A totally fake contest of ideas, for only political purposes -- a made up debate.

The goal seems to be to attempt to lie and paint the radical pro-death position of a tiny minority onto the Democrats, which viewpoint Democratic voters overwhelmingly reject.


And also on the other side, less common, even rare perhaps, any attempt to paint onto 'pro life' that they are really fine to just let a mother die rather than accept that rare abortion that would save the mother's life. A point of view the overwhelming majority of Republicans would reject.

 

[redleghunter]

It doesn't need to be. The Democrats stand for other issues which are more important to the nation long term. Abortion is not the hill to die on.

Abortion is the hill which most of the money comes from. Why do you think smart candidates like Al Gore and John Kerry in the past would not rock the boat?

 

[Speedwell]

Democrats don’t need to convert conservatives or independents to win, they just need to mobilize their own base. Register voters and get them to the polls.

Maybe. But the political power of the Christian right will still not be broken.

 

[civilwarbuff]

It doesn't need to be. The Democrats stand for other issues which are more important to the nation long term. Abortion is not the hill to die on.

And yet every single D running so far have staked themselves out on that hill....which means if they change their position they will certainly die on it.

 

[redleghunter]

Haven't we always known that most all the Democrats we know, like 90% or 98% of them, would never support an abortion of convenience of a late term baby, where the mother and baby are healthy.

You mean the Christians who are Democrats right? Because I can't find a secular Democrat who adheres to this. There was one on an abortion thread a few months ago, but I would find that to be rare.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Maybe. But the political power of the Christian right will still not be broken.

You don't even have to be Christian to recognize the fact that killing the unborn is killing a human being. So much for the left's stance on human rights, huh?

 

[Speedwell]

Haven't we always known that most all the Democrats we know, like 90% or 98% of them, would never support an abortion of convenience of a late term baby, where the mother and baby are healthy.

But, for political purposes, there is a political debate that is totally unconnected to majorities of Republicans and Democrats in their actual views.

In the fake debate...

Right. It is to a large extent a fake debate. Democrats should withdraw from it unilaterally.

 

[redleghunter]

The goal seems to be to attempt to lie and paint the radical pro-death position of a tiny minority onto the Democrats, which viewpoint Democratic voters overwhelmingly reject.

According to the above we should not have 25 of 25 POTUS candidates from the Democratic Party supporting the extreme view. Yet they all do. What does that tell you of the demographics of the party in general?

 

[civilwarbuff]

The goal seems to be to attempt to lie and paint the radical pro-death position of a tiny minority onto the Democrats, which viewpoint Democratic voters overwhelmingly reject.

Then let's hear those D's running for office repudiate it......so far all I have heard is crickets from them....