I hope that everyone had a good Latinx Heritage Month (September 15-October 15 because the Mayan calendar is used?). The Democrats seem to have rebranded themselves the “Abortion Care for Pregnant People Seeking Reproductive Health Care Party”. We flipped on the TV after school last month so that the kids could enjoy a U.S. Open match. A commercial for Val Demings came on. Mx. Demings is challenging Marco Rubio for a U.S. Senate seat. During a spot that mentioned no issues other than abortion care, our 7-year-old learned the following words and phrases: abortion, rape, abortion, incest, abortion, sexual assault, incest, and abortion. The ad was then repeated multiple times during the match. No ads for Mx. Demings that were not abortion care-related were shown. I’m sure that the transition to focus on abortion care over all other issues has been carefully tested by Democrats with respect to motivating voter turnout, etc., but I wonder how well it will work with the Latinx. Consider that in Latinx America, where democracy is the prevailing form of government, abortion care for pregnant people in all stages of pregnancy, as is available as part of reproductive health care in a variety of Democrat-run U.S. states, is not available. In fact, voters in many Latinx American nations have settled on near-total bans on abortion care for pregnant people in reproductive health care settings. If the Latinx in Central America are not passionate about offering abortion care to every pregnant person, why will the Latinx in the U.S. vote for politicians whose principal promise is abortion care for every womb?
And she was again “fighting like hell” four days later:
In case Twitter implodes one day, screen shots of some of the above:
The statement that Rubio wants to “ban abortions” seems to be a lie, unless he has said something different in the meantime:
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/14/rubio-federal-abortion-ban-florida-dems-00056724
According to that article he wants to ban abortions after 15 weeks, which is more generous than in, e.g., Germany.
Of course, Democrats will get the votes of white, potentially pregnant people with this tactic, so perhaps Republicans should keep a low profile on this issue before the elections (unless they absolutely need to mention it to get their own base to the voting booth …).
Do you have any thoughts on the Harvard boathouse kerfuffle you’d like to share?
It’s a focus-group tested message and the Political Consultant Division of the Laptop Class is recommending that since it is the most reliable way to move the needle in this election, not only should the claims be amplified, they should be greatly distorted as well. All the way to “11”. I’m sure they wouldn’t spend the money unless they thought they’d get a few points from somewhere, anywhere, by doing it.
Val Demings has a big fat “F” rating from the NRA and as of October 4th, Newsweek reported that the polling between her and Rubio was essentially a deadlocked tie at 46% each with 8% undecided. The DSCC therefore decided back in September that she should pursue this avenue of attack to change the momentum of the race – probably not among Latinx voters but rather the few percent of Undecideds she can scrape together.
https://www.newsweek.com/val-demmings-chances-beating-marco-rubio-florida-polls-1748716
“Make the Bastards Deny It” is an old tool in the political playbook, but it can work in tight races – especially if the claims are loud and lurid enough where the candidate is losing. They only have to stick until election day, and it consumes time and resources for Rubio’s side to refute them. To the victors go the spoils, as it always has been, and everyone usually forgets about the messaging used to get there. So it’s a very blunt but effective shiv of a weapon, if you will.
Since Demings would be the first Black Senator elected from Florida, my best guess is that these messages are not specifically targeted at Latinx, but rather Black voters and white, suburban undecided women. If I were a DonkOp, that is exactly what I would have recommended as the cudgel, given her standing in September. Hence their appearance during the U.S. Open. Tennis is still mostly an upper-middle to upper-class white fascination and the big ad buy tells you why they spent the money there: in less than a month, they apparently changed the momentum.
As for the main question posed by the title of this post: “Will the Latinx vote for the Party of Abortion Care?”
The answer is: it depends in a fine-grained way about *which* cohort of Latinx we’re talking about. In my experience, once a person has been “captured” by the programs-and-benefits system, they usually either do not think much about the rest of the things in the “Big Tent” they’re being asked to swallow, or they begrudgingly accept them, look aside, and just decide “well, that’s not me, necessarily, but I like the money and the benefits.” Those are very persuasive, and many folks will put aside their other concerns when the money starts flowing their way. Once you’ve established a certain level of dependency, the other stuff tends to fade into the background.
It’s like: “Well, I personally disagree with abortion on demand, but this pile of money over here sure looks nice too.”
It’s the same, more or less, in my Deplorable Area of MA. I know lots of people who express their tepid outrage and claim they can’t stand the Democrat tax-and-spend policies but that dissonance is not ultimately reflected in the way they vote. Why? “My sister is a public school teacher. And my brother in law works for the State Highway Department. My cousin is a cop. And I was thinking of opening a marijuana dispensary. The construction business is feast-or-famine, and my knees are blown out, so I’m going on disability soon.”
Once you get 1/2 the population dependent on the government – at any level – the rest is easy. In the real world, a lot of people are very malleable. Overall, demographically the United States is almost (if not already) at the point where more than 1/2 the population is dependent on the government for some important aspect of their daily life, especially financially. Voting becomes more of a financial transaction, and people ultimately don’t want the trouble within their own families. So they claim they hate the “system” but it all fades away when they’re in the booth with the ballot in front of them.
Finally, and I know – too many posts – but in another life I once knew a guy who was a seasoned Democrat operative in the Windy City. At the time, I didn’t really disagree with him very much, but was just beginning to. One day after work we stopped into a local semi-upscale bar and grill in the Loop, to share a tall glass of malted beverage and some hors d’oeuvres. I said something to the effect of: “How is Illinois ever going handle its deficit spending without growth? The state should cut taxes, and expand businesses so they can employ more people and grow the economy…” etc., etc. He just looked at me, smiled and said: “Tax Cuts Mean Program Cuts, End of Argument.” I looked at him with a kind of puzzlement on my face. He felt a little backhandedly sorry for me and offered to pay for my beer. I said: “No, that’s OK, I’ll buy yours, that’s how it’s going to be, isn’t it?”
It really never ends. It’s always the same story.
The way to remove resistance to abortion by religious Conservatives is to properly educate them in Theory of Evolution (and natural selection particularly).
If they understood how this works, they’d be all for liberals eliminating their genes from the humanity’s gene pool.