Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pro-Life Voters Will Determine if Pro-Abrotion Republican Gets the Nod ^ | May 28, 2007 | Maggie Gallagher

Posted on 05/28/2007 10:02:16 PM PDT by monomaniac

Must a GOP presidential candidate be pro-life to win the party's nomination?

Rudy Giuliani is betting the answer to that question is "not anymore" -- at least not in a crowded and divided GOP field, where Sen. John McCain and Gov. Mitt Romney (not to mention 9 zillion minor candidates) split the pro-life vote. Rudy's supporters take heart from national polls that continue to show him leading the GOP field, despite several very public abortion controversies.

But if the latest Gallup Poll is any indication, that may be the wrong question. The real question is: Can a pro-choice GOP candidate win the general election?

Turn the conventional wisdom on its head, and the problem for Rudy may not be getting the nomination (we'll see about that) but putting together a winning national coalition without the support of committed pro-life voters.

What's the problem? In the first place, the latest Gallup Poll confirms that the "pro-choice" brand has lost a lot of its power with the general public.

As recently as 1995, the American public strongly preferred the "pro-choice" over the "pro-life" label, 56 percent to 33 percent. Over the last 10 years, the partial-birth abortion debate appears to have changed the public's perceptions dramatically. In the Gallup Poll taken May 10-13, 49 percent of Americans call themselves "pro-choice" compared to 45 percent of Americans who identify themselves as "pro-life."

Almost six in 10 Americans say they think abortion should be legal in only a few instances (40 percent) or illegal in all cases (18 percent).

In a separate recent poll conducted by Ayres McHenry Associates for the Ethics and Public Policy center, a majority of Americans still say they support Roe v. Wade. However, when voters are informed about all the different abortion restrictions and regulations that Roe prevents states from passing, Americans' support for the Supreme Court decision drops substantially.

Gallup asked: "Thinking about how the abortion issue might affect your vote for major offices, would you -- only vote for a candidate who shares your views on abortion? Or consider a candidate's position on abortion as just one of many important factors? Or not see abortion as a major issue?"

Almost a quarter of pro-life Republicans say they will not vote for a candidate who does not share their views on abortion compared to just 8 percent of pro-choice Republicans. In a 50-50 nation, with public support for the war in Iraq evaporating, can a GOP candidate have a prayer of victory without their vote?

Democrats have come to see that in the heartland, neutralizing the GOP advantage on abortion is key to Democrat victory -- think Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa). 2008 will be a hard year for Republicans. There is no particular reason to think the rest of Rudy's platform -- support for the war in Iraq, fudging on immigration reform, "leadership" -- will pull these pro-life voters to the polls in spite of his pro-choice label.

Oh, and that nomination thing? That also may not be a cakewalk. The Des Moines Register reports that a new poll of likely caucus-goers released this Sunday shows Mitt Romney taking an impressive lead with 30 percent, and Rudy slipping into third place (17 percent) behind McCain (18 percent). In New Hampshire, a May 15 Zogby poll shows Romney poll-vaulting to a 16 percentage-point lead, with 35 percent favoring the former Massachusetts governor, compared to just 19 percent each for Giuliani and McCain.

Intensity matters.

TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Iowa; US: New Hampshire
KEYWORDS: 2008; abortion; elections; prolife

1 posted on 05/28/2007 10:02:18 PM PDT by monomaniac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: monomaniac
"Intensity matters."

BS Polls DON'T.

If Rudy is the nominee, the GOP will be one card-carrying member short from now on. Don't really think I'll be the only one.
2 posted on 05/28/2007 10:11:00 PM PDT by pillut48 (CJ in TX --Soccer Mom, Bible Thumper and Proud to be an American! RUN, FRED, RUN!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

I fully expect the media to succeed in getting Rudy nominated. The Republican base have become a bunch of sheep.

3 posted on 05/28/2007 10:17:14 PM PDT by TeenagedConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac
>>>>>Must a GOP presidential candidate be pro-life to win the party's nomination? Rudy Giuliani is betting the answer to that question is "not anymore" -- at least not in a crowded and divided GOP field ...

The GOP is already severely fractured. If Rooty thinks he can take the primary election phase with sub-40% and then go onto win the general election, he's deadwrong! The GOP would be split for certain and that is not likely to garner Rooty the WH.

4 posted on 05/28/2007 10:21:01 PM PDT by Reagan Man (FUHGETTABOUTIT Rudy....... Conservatives don't vote for liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pillut48
I rather doubt Rudy will be the nominee. While he still carries pluralities in most national polls, he also has more definite votes against his nomination than any other candidate save possibly McCain. He'll not win a majority in any state outside of the northeast, and I doubt he'll win all that many delegates in the deep South and the West.

It's simply a matter of finding a candidate the "No Rudy" vote can rally behind. You and I agree on one, but even if Fred by some chance doesn't run, I think we'll find someone. I for one am willing to hold my nose and vote for Romney if that's the only way to keep Rudy from being the nominee. I doubt that will be necessary, however.
5 posted on 05/28/2007 11:14:34 PM PDT by The Pack Knight (Duty, Honor, Country. Thompson/Franks '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

Oh pulease. Rudy is a piece of beef jerky by now — he’s been flamed so much.

Rudy? Give it up. It’s over dude.

6 posted on 05/28/2007 11:29:55 PM PDT by Sleeping Beauty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

The question, never mentioned, is whether taxpayers should be forced to pay for the abortions of others

As for abortion itself, the people who argue loudest for abortion rights are their own best arguments in favor of abortion.

7 posted on 05/29/2007 3:50:26 AM PDT by R.W.Ratikal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac
Has anyone ever done any studies to find these swing voters that allegedly make Rudy the most electable?

I’ve met a lot of pro-abortion voters who otherwise lean Republican. The thing about all of them, though, is that abortion isn’t a big deal for them. It falls so low on their list of priorities that it never becomes an issue — you just can’t get two candidates so closely matched that their position on abortion will be the “tie-breaker.”

Every time I’ve met someone who claims that they’d vote Republican “if only they’d drop the pro-life plank,” it turns out that person ends up preaching the Democrat party line. (Kinda like how Hillary claims she backed Goldwater in 1964. Yeah, we all believe that, right?)

So, who are these mythical voters that supposedly only Giuliani can get?

8 posted on 05/29/2007 4:57:25 AM PDT by lgwdnbdgr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson