Whatever political guru advised the No campaign in Kansas, should immediately be hired by the DNC to do ALL its messaging for the upcoming mid-terms.
That said, though, we shouldn't underestimate the belittlement, disrespect and anger American women feel at being told we have no innate right to privacy and bodily autonomy; that we can't…
Whatever political guru advised the No campaign in Kansas, should immediately be hired by the DNC to do ALL its messaging for the upcoming mid-terms.
That said, though, we shouldn't underestimate the belittlement, disrespect and anger American women feel at being told we have no innate right to privacy and bodily autonomy; that we can't be trusted to make our own decisions; and that what goes on in OUR lives is subject to scrutiny by strangers and politicians in a way that men's lives are not. The No campaign put all of that in 'conservative speak' in their ads, and it was astoundingly effective. But it wouldn't have worked without Kansas women meeting them more than half way. It also wouldn't have worked without the last few months of republicans pushing ever more extreme restrictions on women, including proposals to control women's travel out of state, banning contraception, and even allow rapists and their families to collect civil bounties if their victims - including children - dare have an abortion.
Women aren't stupid. They see what's happening, and what's coming. They used their power as voters to say 'ENOUGH!'
"even allow rapists and their families to collect civil bounties if their victims"
Welcome to Famous Potatoes. In Idaho, being extreme is not even close to being extreme enough. Guns. Rebellion. Toxic misogyny. And libertarianism [sic] that is but a simple strain of overt fascism. The state's got it all. Welcome. To where rapists and friends rule the roost.
"Whatever political guru advised the No campaign in Kansas, should immediately be hired by the DNC to do ALL its messaging for the upcoming mid-terms."
Absolutely they should! The No campaign was done in a brilliant manner, and should be a blueprint for other states (and maybe on the national level). The DNC should also listen to Sarah Longwell. Or just hire her.
Making all abortions illegal sics prosecutors who are political opportunists and extremists on women. Medical records will be subpoened, bounty hunters will hunt down women, pregnant women will have to draw their penultimate breath before doctors can save their lives but not their health with an abortion. The laws are based on terrorizing pregnant women and doctors.
Women being forced to draw their penultimate breath before doctors can save their lives is already happening. There have been several cases of women in miscarriage being forced to wait, while nearly bleeding out, until a fetal heartbeat was no longer detected.
"Pregnant women will have to draw their penultimate breath before doctors can save their lives but not their health with an abortion."
Brilliantly succinct. This is the problem I anticipate. For each horror story ending in death that gets media traction, there will a dozen disabling outcomes that destroy families and leave women unable to care for their kids. It keeps me awake at night.
I don't know anyone who excitedly looks forward to the day they can get an abortion. An abortion means that something went terribly awry in one of the systems of which the woman has no control: criminal justice; reproductive physiology; socio-economics. The last thing a woman needs at a time like that is to hear someone say, "Oh no, you are having that baby!"
I absolutely agree with the idea that the strategy used in Kansas be used everywhere.
Agreed that the messaging in Kansas was excellent. The problem lies in its universal application. Republicans were all over "my body, my choice" when it came to vaccines, while Dems took the "we know what's best for you" position. I'm glad the campaign in Kansas worked, but how will it help on the issue of the threats to democracy that should be the focus of the 2022 midterms?
I wouldn’t want to conflate the vaccine mandates with mandating a woman carry a pregnancy against her will. Vaccines addressed a community crisis; failure to get vaccinated could result in the deaths of others and allows for rapid dangerous mutations that negatively affect the whole community. Mandating that a pregnancy be carried against one’s will affects that woman and her family, but if affects them forever. A vaccination causes a couple days of malaise; not at all close to the lifetime despair of having an unwanted child.
But consider that hundreds of neighbors may die from one person’s lack of vaccination. Suddenly vaccines are deplorable? After we have been requiring them for other diseases for decades without division?
Plus, someone who gets a vaccine against their inclination, isn’t putting their life at risk at the same rate as carrying a pregnancy. Not even close. Getting a vaccine doesn’t cost you real money and lack of opportunity as does raising an unwanted child.
I think you left out the word “white” when you wrote about a shortage of adoptable babies.
And forcing someone to carry an unwanted pregnancy is surely exercising one’s religious ‘rights’ over the rights of someone else’s personal rights to end an unwanted pregnancy.
And saying pregnancy is a voluntary act (short of rape) ignores failure of birth control, and also ignores the element of coercion in any relationship, especially when an imbalance of power is so very common. Been there.
Then there’s the larger consideration of women’s agency, writ large. This is a slippery slope, as evidenced by the anti-abortion movement’s plans to outlaw birth control next. Most Republicans in the House voted against codifying the right to contraception. That’s personally painful to me, even at age 70. It’s my agency slipping away. I remember when I couldn’t get a credit card without the signature of a man. I remember when birth control was unavailable to unmarried women. I remember when “help wanted” ads were segregated by sex, and all the “women” listings were low-paid service jobs. I don’t want to go back! I’d rather be dead.
Selfishness is clearly in the eye of the beholder.
Using their own conservative ideology in opposing arguments is excellent strategy. I try it myself, in micro-units of commentary. I’m especially fond of pointing out the long term economic consequences of their schemes; more than anything, they hate losing money.
I am not a fan of abortion and, in an ideal world, it wouldn't be necessary at all. People would be able to get birth control without cost, quality prenatal care would be accessible for everyone, companies would included paid family leave, parents would be paid a decent wage so they can support their families.
And all those things cost money.
Republicans don't like to spend money and are traditionally opposed to spending on social programs. (See Ron Johnson's recent comments on social security and Medicare. See Rand Paul's reasoning for not supporting the PACT ACT - "We don't know that they got those sicknesses while serving, so why should we pay for it?")
Republicans are all about the bottom line, so identifying the rising costs is powerful.
As far as my comment about the increasing number of children in foster care, I'm not talking about the babies that might have been aborted. Many of those who are given up for adoption will be adopted. Although those who are born with special needs can take longer to place.
There are, on average, over 400,000 children in foster care. Over 100,000 of them are eligible for adoption. Older children are less likely to be adopted than babies. Plus, as maternal mortality rates go up (which they will), it's reasonable to say the number of children that enter the foster care system will increase as well. There will likely be more instances of abuse and drug use leading to children in foster care.
I pray every day that I'm wrong, but I'm not holding my breath.
Totally agree. I think the prospect of banning contraception was a shock on top of a shock (repeal of Roe). In a way it was an unexpected gift, by revealing the true extent of Republican plans to go full reverse on social progress. And the revealing vote in the House, when most Republicans refused to vote in favor of protecting contraception! Kudos again to Pelosi. Nailed it.
And it didn’t help their case when Republicans (and the Bulwark’s Cathy hinted the same) quickly pounced on that story about the 10 year old child as “fake news”. Oops.
Yes, they said enough, but they did so in language they speak and understand in Kansas. That is a point which activists for any cause should consider, soberly.
Completely agree. The other point, which politicians should consider soberly, is that this vote wouldn't have been so lopsided if there wasn't plenty of republican support.
There's a different type of message that's effective in reaching different audiences. And neither side is particularly good at developing messaging that reaches the other. These ads are the best I've ever seen at doing that.
I fully expect some states to try for travel bans, and it will get ugly. I live in Texas, so it won't surprise me at all if they try to do stupid things like require a negative pregnancy test to get on an airplane.
I already know my husband's not going to be happy when I go full Karen and get arrested for civil disobedience if they implement that one. 😖
There are many people in the state (like me!) who do not vote for them. Voter turn-out is key.
I live in THE most diverse county in the country and they just gerrymandered the districts so badly that a significant portion was grouped with part of Harris county (Houston) and my area was added to a VERY red rural district. There's no hope in switching my district but full state elections would be up for grabs if everyone votes.
Whatever political guru advised the No campaign in Kansas, should immediately be hired by the DNC to do ALL its messaging for the upcoming mid-terms.
That said, though, we shouldn't underestimate the belittlement, disrespect and anger American women feel at being told we have no innate right to privacy and bodily autonomy; that we can't be trusted to make our own decisions; and that what goes on in OUR lives is subject to scrutiny by strangers and politicians in a way that men's lives are not. The No campaign put all of that in 'conservative speak' in their ads, and it was astoundingly effective. But it wouldn't have worked without Kansas women meeting them more than half way. It also wouldn't have worked without the last few months of republicans pushing ever more extreme restrictions on women, including proposals to control women's travel out of state, banning contraception, and even allow rapists and their families to collect civil bounties if their victims - including children - dare have an abortion.
Women aren't stupid. They see what's happening, and what's coming. They used their power as voters to say 'ENOUGH!'
"even allow rapists and their families to collect civil bounties if their victims"
Welcome to Famous Potatoes. In Idaho, being extreme is not even close to being extreme enough. Guns. Rebellion. Toxic misogyny. And libertarianism [sic] that is but a simple strain of overt fascism. The state's got it all. Welcome. To where rapists and friends rule the roost.
Wasn't Planet Idaho home to Randy Weaver and his merry band of crazies?
"Whatever political guru advised the No campaign in Kansas, should immediately be hired by the DNC to do ALL its messaging for the upcoming mid-terms."
Absolutely they should! The No campaign was done in a brilliant manner, and should be a blueprint for other states (and maybe on the national level). The DNC should also listen to Sarah Longwell. Or just hire her.
Well, I See her more and more places, some are listening to her at least
I'll second that motion to hire Sarah Longwell!
Making all abortions illegal sics prosecutors who are political opportunists and extremists on women. Medical records will be subpoened, bounty hunters will hunt down women, pregnant women will have to draw their penultimate breath before doctors can save their lives but not their health with an abortion. The laws are based on terrorizing pregnant women and doctors.
Women being forced to draw their penultimate breath before doctors can save their lives is already happening. There have been several cases of women in miscarriage being forced to wait, while nearly bleeding out, until a fetal heartbeat was no longer detected.
"Pregnant women will have to draw their penultimate breath before doctors can save their lives but not their health with an abortion."
Brilliantly succinct. This is the problem I anticipate. For each horror story ending in death that gets media traction, there will a dozen disabling outcomes that destroy families and leave women unable to care for their kids. It keeps me awake at night.
True story. I can't think of anything worse than having cruel, corrupt Ken Paxton prosecuting women and doctors. And you know he will!
I don't know anyone who excitedly looks forward to the day they can get an abortion. An abortion means that something went terribly awry in one of the systems of which the woman has no control: criminal justice; reproductive physiology; socio-economics. The last thing a woman needs at a time like that is to hear someone say, "Oh no, you are having that baby!"
I absolutely agree with the idea that the strategy used in Kansas be used everywhere.
Agreed that the messaging in Kansas was excellent. The problem lies in its universal application. Republicans were all over "my body, my choice" when it came to vaccines, while Dems took the "we know what's best for you" position. I'm glad the campaign in Kansas worked, but how will it help on the issue of the threats to democracy that should be the focus of the 2022 midterms?
I wouldn’t want to conflate the vaccine mandates with mandating a woman carry a pregnancy against her will. Vaccines addressed a community crisis; failure to get vaccinated could result in the deaths of others and allows for rapid dangerous mutations that negatively affect the whole community. Mandating that a pregnancy be carried against one’s will affects that woman and her family, but if affects them forever. A vaccination causes a couple days of malaise; not at all close to the lifetime despair of having an unwanted child.
But consider that hundreds of neighbors may die from one person’s lack of vaccination. Suddenly vaccines are deplorable? After we have been requiring them for other diseases for decades without division?
Plus, someone who gets a vaccine against their inclination, isn’t putting their life at risk at the same rate as carrying a pregnancy. Not even close. Getting a vaccine doesn’t cost you real money and lack of opportunity as does raising an unwanted child.
Straw man?
I think you left out the word “white” when you wrote about a shortage of adoptable babies.
And forcing someone to carry an unwanted pregnancy is surely exercising one’s religious ‘rights’ over the rights of someone else’s personal rights to end an unwanted pregnancy.
And saying pregnancy is a voluntary act (short of rape) ignores failure of birth control, and also ignores the element of coercion in any relationship, especially when an imbalance of power is so very common. Been there.
Then there’s the larger consideration of women’s agency, writ large. This is a slippery slope, as evidenced by the anti-abortion movement’s plans to outlaw birth control next. Most Republicans in the House voted against codifying the right to contraception. That’s personally painful to me, even at age 70. It’s my agency slipping away. I remember when I couldn’t get a credit card without the signature of a man. I remember when birth control was unavailable to unmarried women. I remember when “help wanted” ads were segregated by sex, and all the “women” listings were low-paid service jobs. I don’t want to go back! I’d rather be dead.
Selfishness is clearly in the eye of the beholder.
You would benefit from the art of brevity.
Using their own conservative ideology in opposing arguments is excellent strategy. I try it myself, in micro-units of commentary. I’m especially fond of pointing out the long term economic consequences of their schemes; more than anything, they hate losing money.
100% this. The cost of educating, the number of children that will end up on Medicaid, the growing # of kids in foster care,...
It's also a pretty strong argument against secession. And I'm embarrassed that I even have to seriously say that word, but I live in TX. 😳
I am not a fan of abortion and, in an ideal world, it wouldn't be necessary at all. People would be able to get birth control without cost, quality prenatal care would be accessible for everyone, companies would included paid family leave, parents would be paid a decent wage so they can support their families.
And all those things cost money.
Republicans don't like to spend money and are traditionally opposed to spending on social programs. (See Ron Johnson's recent comments on social security and Medicare. See Rand Paul's reasoning for not supporting the PACT ACT - "We don't know that they got those sicknesses while serving, so why should we pay for it?")
Republicans are all about the bottom line, so identifying the rising costs is powerful.
As far as my comment about the increasing number of children in foster care, I'm not talking about the babies that might have been aborted. Many of those who are given up for adoption will be adopted. Although those who are born with special needs can take longer to place.
There are, on average, over 400,000 children in foster care. Over 100,000 of them are eligible for adoption. Older children are less likely to be adopted than babies. Plus, as maternal mortality rates go up (which they will), it's reasonable to say the number of children that enter the foster care system will increase as well. There will likely be more instances of abuse and drug use leading to children in foster care.
I pray every day that I'm wrong, but I'm not holding my breath.
Yep.
In 2016 my wife was ruby red.
COVID made her purple.
But Dobbs made her Karla Marx.
I'll drink a toast to your excellent spouse!
Love this!
Great comment!
I say I was radicalized by Trump but the opposite direction. I used to be pretty purple but now I'm blue.
Me too. Pragmatism.
Totally agree. I think the prospect of banning contraception was a shock on top of a shock (repeal of Roe). In a way it was an unexpected gift, by revealing the true extent of Republican plans to go full reverse on social progress. And the revealing vote in the House, when most Republicans refused to vote in favor of protecting contraception! Kudos again to Pelosi. Nailed it.
The spectacle of an Ohio 10-year-old child having to cross state lines to terminate a pregnancy that resulted from rape was also an eye-opener.
And it didn’t help their case when Republicans (and the Bulwark’s Cathy hinted the same) quickly pounced on that story about the 10 year old child as “fake news”. Oops.
100%. It was horrible how many people piled on, suggesting the story was a hoax.
Yes, they said enough, but they did so in language they speak and understand in Kansas. That is a point which activists for any cause should consider, soberly.
Completely agree. The other point, which politicians should consider soberly, is that this vote wouldn't have been so lopsided if there wasn't plenty of republican support.
Absolutely agree with every single word of this.
There's a different type of message that's effective in reaching different audiences. And neither side is particularly good at developing messaging that reaches the other. These ads are the best I've ever seen at doing that.
I fully expect some states to try for travel bans, and it will get ugly. I live in Texas, so it won't surprise me at all if they try to do stupid things like require a negative pregnancy test to get on an airplane.
I already know my husband's not going to be happy when I go full Karen and get arrested for civil disobedience if they implement that one. 😖
And just wait until they start going through your mail…
"start"
Cynic, indeed!
;)
There are many people in the state (like me!) who do not vote for them. Voter turn-out is key.
I live in THE most diverse county in the country and they just gerrymandered the districts so badly that a significant portion was grouped with part of Harris county (Houston) and my area was added to a VERY red rural district. There's no hope in switching my district but full state elections would be up for grabs if everyone votes.