Skip to comments."Pro-Choice" Americans at Record-Low 41% [May 2012]
Posted on 01/22/2013 10:05:31 AM PST by lonestar67
PRINCETON, NJ -- The 41% of Americans who now identify themselves as "pro-choice" is down from 47% last July and is one percentage point below the previous record low in Gallup trends, recorded in May 2009. Fifty percent now call themselves "pro-life," one point shy of the record high, also from May 2009.
(Excerpt) Read more at gallup.com ...
It absolutely points to the power of propaganda and manipulation going on in this nation. How can the two polls be reconciled? It is also foolish to thin the public cannot be persuaded on this issue.
For all we know, in May of 2012 Gallup felt like over-stating the issue. A good number of people were feeling at the time that Romney couldn’t lose.
Something else I hope Freepers will take note of:
1. The NBC poll out today actually uses Gallup data in its historical data.
2. The NBC poll finds the same thing Gallup found in may— it simply spins the data for abortion rights. Here is an example of how the media work it:
“Polls show most Americans still support the Supreme Court’s ruling. According to a 2012 Gallup Poll, 77 percent think abortion should be legal in some or all circumstances. The battle at the Texas Capitol centers on just how far abortion rights should go.”
That is the same poll that shows the pro-choice label faltering. But yes 77% do think there should be some legal abortion— which for these manipulators includes the exception for the life of the mother!
“Pro-Choice” Americans at Record-Low 41% [May 2012]
Big deal: while pro life Catholic voters voted overwhelmingly for Bam.
Romney won White Catholics, but it was the demographic flood of Latinos that gave Obama the Catholic vote.
Great! Abort ALL your kids, Americans ... ALL of them ...and then let’s all just get old and die. What a life.
Meanwhile, the newly arrived immigrants are pushing them out every 10 seconds.
Slaughter the unborn? No way! Oh, where’s my Obamamoney?
The same way blue = conservative, republican until it was switched during the 96 elections
Meaningless polls to the contrary are just that...meaningless.
They said abortion should be safe, legal, and RARE. But how do they ensure it’s RARE...? Is there a way of assuring it’s not abused as a form of contraception?
I propose an agency that keeps a permanent record of abortions, the better to assure there are no serial aborters:
Identification, biometrics, waiting period, quiz for license, records subject to inspection by trained regulators.
This would deter junk abortions, or assault abortions.
We already do this for something in the Constitution, why not for a life and death matter that’s NOT in the Constitution...?
PERMANENT RECORDS. For safety. For quality.
FOR THE CHILDREN.
"Pro-Choice" Americans at Record-Low 41% [May 2012]
NBC/WSJ poll: For first time, majority thinks abortion should be legal in all or most cases
A nation who care about abortion wouldn’t reelect the pro-abort Obama. You don’t get more pro-abortion than Obama.
But a thread about another poll today stated that 70% opposed the overtuning of Roe v. Wade. Doesn’t seem to add up.
The republicans should have ran a pro-life candidate, it would help to distinguish the two major parties.
What, you mean like a pro-life woman who walks her talk? Karl Rove forbids it! < /s >
Well, of course that's true.
There are millions who will tell their friends and any pollster that they oppose abortion, but when they get in the voting booth and contemplate losing their government cheese, the unborn get conveniently forgotten.
You forget the power of propaganda. Every time there is even a mention of any kind of "restriction" on abortion (even if it is just a common-sense measure like forcing abortionists to be truthful), the pro-abortion fanatics start screaming about how restrictions on abortion will cause contraceptives to become illegal. They also howl about how pro-lifers want women to remain barefoot and pregnant. Pro-life people who don't pay much attention to the issues hear the screeching, become convinced that the legality of contraceptives depends on abortion remaining legal, and for that reason support continued legal abortion.
They said abortion should be safe, legal, and RARE
The question that should be asked by someone who says this is, “Why do you care if abortion is rare?” If it’s not a life then why be concerned with how often someone has one?
It's all about how they phrase the question.
Remember, polls are not science. They are opinion surveys and, while using some scientific techniques, polls are not designed like a scientific study. Poll results are about opinions, which are subject to frequent fluctuation, and media reports of poll results are nothing more than propaganda. Media uses poll results to bolster the seeming validity of their propaganda, but it is still just propaganda. Don’t take the media reports seriously and make it clear to other people that the media is simply spreading propaganda. When someone mentions something they heard or read in the media as if it is a fact, remind them of Pravda.
Similar to OUR stand on the Second Amendment issue, with one important distinction. We can show historical precedent for our concern; they are simply lying.
What, you mean like a pro-life woman who walks her talk? Karl Rove forbids it!
...if by that you mean Palin, then Obama would have garnered 347 EC’s, and won by 6 or 7 percent of the electorate...it may in fact have distinguished the parties, but would be regressive in helping Repubs win...and ditto for Newt, as well...it’s clear that Romney won over middle of the road voters, in whose minds Palin or Gingrich represent harshness and confrontation, thus rendering them unfit...remember, women that Mitt won over aren’t all warm and fuzzy about Newt, and Palin turns a lot of them off as well
...under those circumstances, any votes against Obama have even less meaning that in the last election, as the verdict would be evident at the start...