And how much power does a single president have to change the makeup of SCOTUS? Unless something happens and the entire bench is wiped out suddenly, the most any president ever nominates is one, maybe two, to the bench. And that nominee has to go through Senate hearings and be voted on, and likely won't make it through that gauntlet. Remember Bork? So we end up with some weak justice who was "moderate" enough to make it through a leftist Senate, or we end up with some leftist radical justice. So the power the president has in this regard is extremely weak.
“Educating women” is not a job that requires the President. I think we’ve been doing that and gotten as far as we can. We need the PP funding cut off and anti-abortion laws. The left is campaigning hard for abortion and they control the education and the media. We have a much easier time taking over government and passing laws than taking over all schools and all media.
We are doing quite well with educating women. I think the education could be far more effective (teaching girls to remain virgin until marriage and never have sex unless they intend to get pregnant is a non-viable tactic, for example), but it does have an effect. At its peak, there were around 1.7 million abortions per year. That number has dropped to less than a million. That means that 800,000 more women per year choose not to get pregnant.
As a result of the education efforts, many pro-aborts complain about the "stigma" of having abortion. They try to combat that stigma by efforts such as the one I read about in L.A., where women who have aborted would go door to door to show people that "ordinary" women have abortions. Of course, they cannot erase the stigma, for the simple fact that most people (including many pro-aborts) do know that abortion kills babies and they really are not comfortable with baby killers. Along with the stories about women who regret killing their babies, or who became unable to have a baby after abortion, the stigma helps. Complaints about being stigmatize for having an abortion have an effect on other young women, who may feel more inclined to use birth control (and to use it properly) because they don't want to experience that kind of judgment for the rest of their lives.
The president presents budgets to Congress, but it is the house that takes the budgets and puts it into the final form, which then has to go to the president for approval before they can start apportioning the money. So the responsibility for "defunding" Planned Parenthood (which is a matter of removing its line item from the budget, not "defunding") falls mostly on the Congress. Although it is a start, it will not stop abortion.
Making laws to make abortion illegal across the board is a non-starter: Congress won't do it, and none of the states can until SCOTUS completely changes. Furthermore, such a move would play right into the abortion industry's hands. Perhaps you are unaware of this, but abortion advocacy groups often distribute "self-abortion" kits, and they publish details of how to make them on the internet. Their purpose with this is two-fold. One, is the use of such kits as fear-mongering tools to scare women about the pro-life zealots who want to deprive them of making their own decisions about their own bodies. The other, is that should a law outright forbidding abortion ever be passed, zealous pro-aborts will happily encourage women to get pregnant and use those "self-abortion" kits--which will likely injure them seriously or kill them--providing ample proof that making abortion illegal kills women. And poof, legal abortion becomes forever enshrined in law.
This is a war. We will not win it through sudden measures, but through patience. In order to win this war, it is necessary to understand the pro-abortion position as well as you understand the pro-life position. Otherwise, you have no hope of effectively fighting this war.
While it is morally repugnant to put a cost on human life, we have evolved into a society where most responsible people simply cannot afford more than 2-3 children. Regrettably an additional unwanted child may mean not just a burden, but economic ruin. It is a reality that has to be factored into this when one considers banning the small percentage for rape or medical reasons.