Well for one thing, too many Democrats thought abortion was a national issue based on the mid terms but found out that it absolutely wasn’t in the general election. The only things that really matter in any general election is the economy and national defense.
EVERY bit of evidence accumulated across the decades shows that abortion is an issue that elicits a truckload of emotions and opinions - and doesn’t really move the needle at all in electoral politics. I’ll grant it might possibly could flip a House seat if a ruling came down
right before the vote and a candidate had an extreme “no abortion ever” position. I’ve asked for years for the specific races where it can reasonably be argued that abortion was the knockout issue and the only one anyone ever cites is Todd Akin. But Akin didn’t lose because he was against abortion, he lost because of how he answered a question about abortion, with the cringeworthy “legitimate rape” verbiage. For all her huffing and puffing, Claire McCaskill lost the 2004 MO Governor race to pro-life Matt Blount and her Senate seat to Josh Hawley, right after Kavanaugh got voted onto the bench to solidify the pro-life block. And she didn’t win in 2006 because of abortion, she won against a generally ho-hum incumbent with zero accomplishments as part of a blue wave of frustration with Bush at a time MO was more purple than now. (Remember - Romney carried Missouri the same day McCaskill beat Akin, so again, how does this put abortion as the top issue?)
It is a perfect issue on the Vin diagram that hits all points of science, religion, personal autonomy, and about a dozen other issues, but it has never been the third rail issue pundits like to tell me.
Ronald Reagan ran in the wake of legal abortion with code speak of judges, who would respect “the sanctity of life” - and he opposed it in all instances except to save the mother’s life. He won 44 and 49 states. His designated heir won 40 against the guy who tried to make abortion a national issue.
And Trump managed to get elected after appointing three judges that overturned the abortion precedent in the wake of “now you’ll see, with abortion threatened everyone will come out and vote on that issue” while running against a candidate who made no bones about that particular issue. She lost. He gained percentage points in every single state.
So how, given all of this evidence of the most recent election AND every election previously, can anyone even continue to believe this?
If abortion was ever going to be the kill issue in an election, if you can’t make it one against the guy who appointed three of the judges that overturned it, how in the hell can you ever say it’s a winner?
(The “but states tried to legalize it” is a separate issue in terms of electoral politics. Very few proposals on a ballot to take something away from people will ever pass regardless).
