Abortion activists challenge candidate

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 3/16/02 | Carla Marinucci

[BibChr]

Still, I hope this article is incorrect. It is a VERY POOR response to say "We'll just change the subject." That implies they're on the defense, they're apologetic, they're embarrassed by his position. Simon must maintain the OFFENSE.

Now, by that I don't mean that he should try to win everyone over to the prolife position as a campaign feature. I only mean that he should turn the tables on the McCarthyites when they play their "Are you now or have you ever been...?" persecution of prolife citizens. Davis and crew must be revealed as the real "extremists."

Details available on request.

Dan
(c8

[pray4liberty]

I agree. Bill Simon should not shrink from this like a wuss, but just state, "Yes, I am prolife, I am a Catholic. I have the right to believe what I want, and you guys can just shut up!" He'd win the Catholic and Hispanic vote hands-down. Voters want to see someone who cannot be intimidated by the likes of Kate Michelman and her ilk. They figure if he can stand up to her, he'll stand up to a lot of other things, too.

Witness how Rumsfield stands up to the press and earns the respect of the people, even as he doesn't answer all their questions. Simon should do the same. What does he have to lose? The press is already writing his election obituary. "Pro-choicers" may not agree with him, but there are enough people who are on the fence about the issue and who may just vote for him anyway. If he passes on this, he'll just look like that wussy, Trent Lott.

[pray4liberty]

Yes, he can't avoid the issue completely. But he shouldn't play their game. They want to make it THE ONLY issue, and I just think it's going to backfire on them.

If they do this, Bill Simon could (not that he would) skillfully turn it so that it looks like they are attacking him on his religion (Catholicism). He should start exposing them to be the strident and irrational people that they are. Voters don't like to see anyone attacked on their religion, even if they aren't religious themselves...and the religious ones might get angry enough to get off their duffs and vote.

[Gophack]

Any person who feels that strongly about this issue wouldn't vote for Simon in any event.

Actually, most polls show that people who vote on the abortion issue at more likely to vote for the pro-life candidate than the pro-abortion candidate. Lungren vote the "abortion vote" 13% to 12% according to an L.A. Times poll. This is consistent with other elections.

But you're right ... most people DON'T vote on the abortion issue. Those who do, give Simon the edge. What most people -- especially liberal Republicans -- fail to realize, is that people who are passionately pro-abortion are liberal Democrats who are liberal across the board. They would NEVER vote for a liberal Republican (or moderate Republican, whatever the press wants to call them) because these people are RABIDLY LIBERAL on guns, abortion, taxes, the environment, education, unions, etc., etc.

Simon needs to focus on the issues that are going to destroy Davis ... energy, the economy and education. The election must be about Davis' failures. Then Simon wins. Davis knows this, and that's why he wants to harp on abortion. However, it's a different year and I think that it will backfire on Davis.

Go Simon!