Pro-Life Leader Says Oz Lost Because He Wasn’t Consistently Pro-Life

Life News ^ | November 9, 2022 | Mary Margaret Olohan

[Morgana]

Mehmet Oz’s failure to capture a Pennsylvania Senate seat is due, in part, to his refusal to position on abortion in a “mature, deliberative, and principled manner,” a major pro-life leader said on Wednesday.

Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser applauded those candidates who aggressively defined their own stances on abortion, explained their opponents’ extreme stances, and then exploited the contrast between the two.

“Works every time,” she said.

“Candidates who conversely adopt the ostrich strategy, which is putting their head in the sand and hoping the reality goes away, or the possum strategy, which is to pretend dead and hope nobody notices your body is lying there, they lose,” Dannenfelser added. “And I think that our candidate in Pennsylvania is an example.”

The United States Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade during the election cycle of candidates like Oz—who lost because he “hoped that the issue would go away” rather than facing it head on, according to Dannenfelser.

Dannenfelser said that Oz, who conceded the race Wednesday morning, took political advice from leadership in Washington, D.C., which reportedly urged Oz and fellow candidates to pretend the abortion issue did not exist and avoid the topic as much as possible.

“There should not be involvement from the federal government in how states decide their abortion decisions,” Oz said in late October, when asked whether there should be a federal ban on abortion. “As a physician, I’ve been in the room when there’s some difficult conversations happening. I don’t want the federal government involved with that, at all.”

Oz repeatedly stuck with this doctor reference throughout the election cycle, questioned by conservative and liberal media alike on his abortion record (his past comments indicated that he supported abortions, though he insisted that he was pro-life).

But he didn’t go much further than that.

“Define who you are, define who they are, exploit that contrast, it works every time,” Dannenfelser insisted. “But instead they engaged in what is really political malpractice and that is to advise the ostrich or the possum strategy or all sorts of other analogies which lead to a dysfunctional political environment, one in which those contrasts can’t be made. And the positive contrast can’t be leveraged into marginal wins at polls.”

Dannenfelser presented examples of candidates who positioned “very effectively,” including Marco Rubio and Ron DeSantis in Florida, J.D. Vance in Ohio, Ted Budd in North Carolina, Herschel Walker in Georgia, Greg Abbott in Texas, Brian Kemp in Georgia, Mike DeWine in Ohio, Kevin Stitt in Oklahoma, and Kristi Noem in South Dakota.

“We win when we take a position that is popular and clear and confident, and we contrast that position with our opponents,” Dannenfelser explained. “And in this environment, that is a contrast that wins because our popular position over and over contrasts well with 100% abortion up until the end, paid for by taxpayers.”

“Those are very important highlights because they have been so high profile and there’ll be a lot of analysis of why they landed where they have,” she added. “Brian Kemp signed the heartbeat law, won by 8%. Mike DeWine signed a heartbeat law, won by 26%. Greg Abbott signed the same, which was a trigger law complete with protections, and won by nearly 12%. Ron DeSantis signed a pain capable law at 15 weeks and won by nearly 20%.”

“This basic political rule works,” she insisted: “find your position, contrast with your opponent, and make sure that gets communicated over and over again.”

[No name given]

I agree with Marjorie on this one.

[Tijeras_Slim]

I think it’s more likely the huge number of mail in votes for Lurch before the debate was the factor.

[Jonty30]

I’m sure some people reacted to Oz’s imperfections and the media slander of him.

However, there is no way that Doughhead Fetterman won on his merits.

[Brian Griffin]

I’m not in favor of baby murder.

Be blunt!

[FLNittany]

Yeah...either that or massive voter fraud. One of the two. I’ll go with massive voter fraud.

[plain talk]

Oz wasn’t from PA ... and he didn’t have a D by his name.

[Halls]

I agree with you, but I also believe Oz was not pro life. If the would have had the debate earlier and Oz would have been more solid pro life this outcome might have been different.

[semimojo]

Anyone who doubts the abortion debate today is largely about political power, on both sides, should read this article.

[Travis McGee]

Nope. Not even close.

It's because "The Stupid Party" could not figure out that the Rats would take the wide-open no-controls no-checks mass-mail-in ballot policy left over (on purpose) from the Covid pandemic and drive 18 wheelers full of fake ballots through it.

How stupid does a party have to be not to see that 50% mail-in ballots for the Rats, vs. 10% for the GOP, did not "just happen" naturally and organically?

The Rats had the PA election won before election day. And other states as well.

It will take "The Stupid Part" weeks to figure it out. And they will be so afraid of being called "insurrectionist election deniers" that they won't even bring it up.

Why did Florida go 20 points for DeSantis? His handsome face? NO. Because FL outlawed mass-mail-in balloting, ballot harvesting, etc. To get a mail-in ballot in FL, you have to specifically request it, in writing, with ID proof. No mass-mail-in balloting, no Rat mass cheating.

[Travis McGee]

Please see #10 above.

[Morgana]

I very much agree and Oz was not as prolife as people want.

[Freee-dame]

If the establishment Republicans in DC were only the stupid party, we would have a chance for them to become educated. But since they are also the complicit party, there is no chance.

[dforest]

I agree. Fetterman didn’t win because he was pro life.

[Tijeras_Slim]

I agree Oz wasn’t as pro-life as conservatives wanted.

[BlackAdderess]

No. He lost because he ran a bad campaign and treated his supporters like sad b******* by trying to manipulate them with endless appeals to sympathy.

Doug Mastriano was suitably unambiguous on his pro-life stance, yet he lost by a far larger margin

[Chgogal]

So Pro Lifers in Pa. didn't vote Oz because his pro life language wasn't strident enough. Instead they allowed pro death Fetterman win the office. Brilliant strategy Pro Lifers.

[Boogieman]

Oz lost because he chose to run as a Republican in a statewide race in Pennsylvania.

[Aut Pax Aut Bellum]

Or the Left just cheated, again.

[Southside_Chicago_Republican]

She may be right, but for pro-life voters to withhold their votes from Oz for that reason is pretty shortsighted. No matter how mushy Oz was on this issue, there is no way he would ever be worse than Fetterman. Oz might come around on this issue. The are no pro-life Democrats that I know of. There was one in Illinois, Rep. Dan Lipinski, but he was booted out by the “progessives” in the 2020 primary. His pro-life stance was one of the major reasons why his own party wanted him out.