« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Abortion will not drive California elections this year

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  July 22nd, 2010 at 03:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Carly Fiorina San Diego Jobs

The Orange County Register ran a doom and gloom article on abortion, saying that a Field Poll release suggests abortion will drive statewide elections this year. This is important because Carly Fiorina is a three-exception pro-life Republican.

But there’s one big, honking problem with that theory, and the Register‘s Dena Bunis even mentions it:

Among Boxer supporters, 82 percent support abortion rights. Of those who back Fiorina, 55 percent favor them.

If 55% of Carly Fiorina’s backers are pro-Roe v. Wade, then that undercuts any theory that abortion is driving the election in California this year.

And it gets worse for the abortion-victory premise than that. Catch this tidbit from the San Francisco Chronicle on the same poll:

The abortion factor: Boxer has made her support of abortion rights a linchpin of her campaign against Fiorina, who opposes abortion rights. The survey results were mixed: 30 percent were more likely to vote for a candidate who opposed abortion rights, 37 percent were less likely and 33 percent thought it made no difference.

The margin of error on that poll was 2.8. If you’re like me and have grown up seeing abortion drive election after election in California, these numbers are incredible. As in literally: I don’t want to believe them because they sound too good to be true. But unemployment is sky high in this state; most counties wish unemployment were as low as 10%. Some conservatives (including this one) scoffed at Mitch Daniels for offering a truce on abortion, but it looks like the squishy pro-abortion middle in California is doing the same.

So really, the Field Poll seems to reject the very title of the Register‘s piece. Californians, at least this year, are not backing abortion, not when two thirds are neutral or negative on a candidate running for abortion. It’s one thing to make noises for Roe, but talk is cheap and votes matter.

Carly Fiorina is running on jobs and the economy, and California is ready to follow her. Unemployment is crippling this state, and Californians want better. That’s why I’m convinced Carly can and will win this fall, and California of all states will send a pro-life woman into the United States Senate, on a mission to reverse the failed Boxer-Obama economic policies.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • itsjoanne

    She supports partial birth abortion, and was the sponsor of the Freedom of Choice Act.

    When asked if she believes a baby has a right to life if he or she survives a botched abortion, Boxer said the baby has the right when the infant leaves the hospital. That’s evil, and I think even many “pro choice” people would agree that is way out of the mainstream.

    But I think with unemployment so high, and the economy in shambles that is probably the reason why many “pro choice” people are willing to support someone like Carly who is pro life.

  • Rich Fader

    …I mean, totally, utterly, Operation-Rescue-grade pro-life, all else remaining equal, would I vote for her over Carly Fiorina?

    Hell, no. Not a chance. Because the abortion thing is just the sauce on the urinal cake. I ain’t eating it.

  • Joe_Cor

    But hardly out of the pro-choice mainstream. Our President voted 3 times to deny medical care to premature babies who survived late-term abortions.

  • itsjoanne

    I think many people, when they heard about his vote against supporting babies born after a botched abortion, many simply refused to believe it.

    I think a lot of “pro choice” people still believe in some restrictions, and certainly in supporting babies born alive. When Congress voted on it, even abortion radicals like Hilllary Clinton either voted yes or abstained. Otherwise, it’s supporting infanticide. Dont know what else you could call it.

  • http://www.veronicaestrada.com Veronica
  • Menlo

    Any poll available on the question (that I’ve seen) confirm that. If anyone can show otherwise, in California or elsewhere, I would love to see it. In fact, I think most people, especially Democrats, would love for the issue to just go away, much as it has in other pro-abortion countries. In the case of this election, it was Ma’am Boxer, not Fiorina, who put it on the table.

    Anyway, I would be surprised if it EVER made any difference in more than 5 percent of any electoral outcome in California or anywhere else. And today, I doubt you’d even see that at a whole percentage point.

  • SirGladiator

    If those numbers were accurate, that would mean, what, slightly over 2/3 of all California voters support abortion? No state is that liberal/evil, especially not one with such a large Hispanic population. The numbers are clearly flawed in some way, but the basic point is still accurate, of course abortion won’t be a huge factor in the race, what with the economy being so badly in the tank right now. Its the economy, economy, economy, although there’s also a poll that says among Hispanic voters that immigration is the #1 issue, but for everybody else its the economy. Abortion was a huge issue in the GOP Primary because there was a radical pro-abortion guy running against two pro-lifers and had a real shot at winning because of the divided vote, happily Sarah Palin solved that problem for us. It won’t be an issue in the general, those of us who are strongly pro-life will vote Fiorina, the smaller number of major pro-abortion voters will vote Boxer, and the rest of the voters will vote majority GOP due to the economy/jobs. That is how Fiorina is going to win this thing.

  • Menlo

    The poll itself found 70 percent are pro-abortion. Other polls have shown that the Hispanic population is no exception. That would be even more the case in California, where even half of Republicans do.

    Immigration is not much of an issue to Hispanic voters either, at least not more than it is to other Democrats.

    But even in the Republican primary, it was by no means a “huge issue” to the voters, only the political groups, writers, and campaigners.