409

Republican strategists are exploring a shift away from “pro-life” messaging on abortion after consistent Election Day losses for the GOP when reproductive rights were on the ballot.

At a closed-door meeting of Senate Republicans this week, the head of a super PAC closely aligned with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., presented poll results that suggested voters are reacting differently to commonly used terms like “pro-life” and “pro-choice” in the wake of last year’s Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, said several senators who were in the room.

The polling, which NBC News has not independently reviewed, was made available to senators Wednesday by former McConnell aide Steven Law and showed that “pro-life” no longer resonated with voters.

“What intrigued me the most about the results was that ‘pro-choice’ and ‘pro-life’ means something different now, that people see being pro-life as being against all abortions ... at all levels,” Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., said in an interview Thursday.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said the polling made it clear to him that more specificity is needed in talking about abortion.

“Many voters think [‘pro-life’] means you’re for no exceptions in favor of abortion ever, ever, and ‘pro-choice’ now can mean any number of things. So the conversation was mostly oriented around how voters think of those labels, that they’ve shifted. So if you’re going to talk about the issue, you need to be specific,” Hawley said Thursday.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] dudinax@programming.dev 164 points 1 year ago

"Pro-Life" is the best branding in the history of branding. If you've screwed that up there's no where else to go.

[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 101 points 1 year ago

Especially since in reality they are pro-birth only, they don't care about providing adequate pre-natal care to all pregnant women, they don't believe that safe birth conditions are a basic right, and they lose all the interest in the kids' well being as soon as they are out.

It's almost like they are only doing it to control women or something. /s

[-] Alto@kbin.social 63 points 1 year ago

“Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're fucked.”
― George Carlin

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

Thank you. I've been saying that about pre-natal care for years. Really, they are not even pro-birth because if you want to give birth under safe hospital conditions, that's on you and your insurance company, if you have one.

They're not pro-anything except punishing women.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Poayjay@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

It reminds me of subways five dollar footlong. They made a slogan so piecing and effective that they can’t escape it. Every time I go to subway I notice how much more a sub costs than the five dollars it used to be and every time I hear “pro-life” I think of a very “particular” kind of person.

[-] morphballganon@lemmy.world 101 points 1 year ago

"Am I out of touch? No. It's the voters who are wrong."

[-] mo_ztt@lemmy.world 87 points 1 year ago

The first rule of pursuing abhorrent policies for performative reasons is, they need to stay performative. The GOP used to understand this, and carefully pursue anti-abortion policies while carefully not achieving them. But now there's too high a proportion of people who are such nutcases that they genuinely don't understand or don't care that this will lose them elections, and the strategic Republicans are struggling more and more to keep control of their party.

It used to be the same with "anti-immigration" policies that were surgically careful to preserve the vulnerable workforce while making the right type of performative gestures, until DeSantis came in being enough of a true believer that he's willing to damage Florida's economy pretty significantly as long as it lets him be cruel to spanish people.

The safeties are getting disabled, basically.

“Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.” -Barry Goldwater

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 82 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How about “anti choice?”…? “Anti -women.” ?

Or maybe “theist zealots”?

“Asshole” seems too generic.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 53 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Many voters think [‘pro-life’] means you’re for no exceptions in favor of abortion ever

Remember that scene from The Boys where Stormfront said:

People love what I have to say, they just hate the word Nazi. That's all.

Now why would a party that bans abortion with no exceptions in many states, even to the point of banning abortions after a raped 10-year-old got one in a state because she couldn't get one in hers, not be thought of as "pro-life"?

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago

There's a lot to unpack in this article, I encourage you all to actually read it. It sounds like a fundamental disconnect between Republican Congresspeople (who enact laws at the Federal level) and the State-level Republicans. These Senators supported overturning Roe specifically did it to "send the matter back to the States", and did not propose any law at the Federal level to replace it, only to find that those Republican states enacted extremely strict laws that are now affecting the Republican brand elsewhere. (Because of a simple reason: Republicans in those states really are that extreme!)

But, they're stuck with it now. Their messaging is tied to what actually happened in those states. And these Senators can say all they want that they wanted exceptions all along, but you know they will never make a Federal law that weakens the strict bans in those states. They would never win a primary after that. But the strict bans are not popular outside the statehouses where they were enacted.

As long as there are states like Texas, who aim to criminalize abortion to the point that they will be monitoring the roads going out-of-state for pregnant women to harass, there will be no chance to define the pro-life movement as anything else.

[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 54 points 1 year ago

It's really not a lot to unpack. It's disingenuous bullshit from Republicans who are trying to back track after decades of campaigning on banning abortion. It's happened and now it's wildly unpopular and they are about to pay that bill that's come due. So now they are trying to spin it like "that's not what we meant".

They don't have principles. It's about retaining power and control.

For what it's worth, they could pass a law right now that would give access to abortions (aka give women the right to control their own body). So this is all bullshit.

[-] Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago

There’s no disconnect. The cruelty is the point.

Were there truly a disconnect, Republicans in Congress would work on a bipartisan bill that would get enough Republicans on board to pass the House. From there, it will almost certainly pass the Senate and Biden will almost certainly sign it.

The Republicans want to say they’re being hamstrung by Texas while doing absolutely nothing about Texas, because in reality they want everywhere to be like Texas.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] cedarmesa@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago

“Pro forced birth” is much more accurate. If they were truly pro-life they would champion universal healthcare that included at the minimum abortions when the woman’s life is in danger and when the fetus couldn’t possibly survive.

[-] ohlaph@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

They don't care about women at all, only controlling them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AssPennies@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

"How can we trick the voters into thinking we're less shitty than we know we really are?"

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

You're not pro-baby unless you're for universal post-natal care.

Which they are not.

[-] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'd allow the term pro-fetus but that's about it.

To be pro-baby they should also be for parental leave at birth, and investment in making early childhood care easier and affordable for everyone.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] thal3s@sh.itjust.works 37 points 1 year ago

“Many voters think [‘pro-life’] means you’re for no exceptions in favor of abortion ever, ever”

But, that’s true… Every GOP state legislature has passed bills without exceptions.

So their argument is what exactly?

[-] Solumbran@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago

They argument is "We are evil, but we don't want to sound evil - it limits recruitments"

[-] TheJims@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

Forced Birth is more accurate

[-] PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Pro Gestational Slavery. Let’s not pretend it’s less grotesque than it is.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Eggyhead@artemis.camp 34 points 1 year ago

Yeah, they never were really into pro life, were they? It’s more about neo-slavery:

  1. Ensure less fortunate people end up so overburdened with financial trouble that they desperately take a pittance from “job creators” with a smile.
  2. Cult-of-personality the shit out of idiot billionaires so that people overlook their evils for moment-to-moment trivialities and hot takes.
  3. Make up culture war bullshit to ensure the fighters end up just expending their angst on the other less fortunate people rather of those who actually manufacture their hardships.
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.sdf.org 33 points 1 year ago

I've seen "Anti-Choice" thrown around, I think it fits them pretty good

[-] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Anti-freedom will go down well with hillbillys

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

Yes the specific marketing term for it is what people aren't resonating with. That must be what is wrong.

[-] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes. In Republican eyes what you said is literally correct.

The long-term goal of Republican leadership is to ban all abortion from the moment of conception, ban all hormonal birth control (because it can prevent implantation of a fertilized embryo and therefore cause abortion), and return the question of whether to ban condoms and other barrier methods to the states.

Republican leadership realizes the American people don't support a complete abortion ban.

Republican leadership believes the American people are wrong and it's their responsibility, as Christian leaders, to protect the innocent children of America and impose a complete abortion ban anyway.

And Republican leaders know if they go hood off and call for a complete abortion ban they'll lose power in the backlash and abortion will become even more normalized.

So they're gradually restricting abortion rights while heavily pushing right-wing propaganda to children and teenagers - fucking PragerU is partnering with the Florida and Oklahoma Departments of Education to produce videos for school children, did you know that? - in order to shift the cultural consensus away from abortion is a right and towards abortion is a sin so that future generations of Republican leaders can complete their work and impose a total abortion ban.

So, yes, the Republican leadership is very much aware that what they need is marketing. They know abortion bans are unpopular. They're walking a fine line, trying to work towards a highly unpopular policy goal while still protecting their legislative control of Congress and the states, knowing their control of government would be at risk if the American people realized their actual policy goal.

And so you have Republicans talking about "pro-baby policies" now. Because who doesn't love babies? That sounds like WIC and infant nutrition programs and daycare and better neonatal care and all those good things that Democrats support. Hard to tell that the Republican is actually talking about forcing women to give birth to babies dead in the womb and babies with fetal defects incompatible with life, but that's the state of the national dialogue in the year of our Lord 2023.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jordanlund@lemmy.one 31 points 1 year ago

The problem is, if they legit want to go "Pro-Baby" then they have to explain this:

https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-house-republican-proposals-hurt-children-students-and-borrowers-and-undermine-education

But I guess nobody ever forced them to explain how they could be Pro-Life but also Pro-Death Penalty...

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Kahlenar@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

This feels like 10 years ago when people said gops have a presentation or communication problem. Fox was all like "people just aren't understanding what the republicans have to say" but the whole time is obvious that their message was clear, just fucking awful.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] deconstruct@lemm.ee 28 points 1 year ago

Clearly it's the messaging that's the problem /s

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] cultsuperstar@lemmy.ml 28 points 1 year ago

They have a marketing problem that they're trying to fix. They're not trying to fix their stance on abortion. It's the same shit, just trying to make it sound not as extreme.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] fubo@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

They're not pro-life; they're rape-prolongers.

They want to make sure that every rape can last at least nine months.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Fisk400@feddit.nu 24 points 1 year ago

Getting a win in the abortion case is probably the worst thing to happen to the GOP. They chased the car fruitlessly to get the crazies on board and the rest quietly tolerated it because they knew they would never actually catch the car.

Well. They have their jaws around the bumper now and no plan on how to let go without getting hit by the car behind them.

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl 22 points 1 year ago

"Anti-Women"? Because that's what Republicans are...

[-] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 21 points 1 year ago

Call it what it is, Anti-choice

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 20 points 1 year ago

Proof once again that Republicans don't stand for anything.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Hazdaz@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

"Freedom Fries!"

Oh wait. That ones already taken.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Anti-choice/women/freedom is a good option

[-] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

How does pro-fascism sound? For once in the history of modern republican party, it is also accurate.

[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 17 points 1 year ago

"Facist"

It's got great brand penetration.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] LucasWaffyWaf@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

How about pro-birth, anti-woman, anti-choice, anti-healthcare?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] son_named_bort@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Comcast becoming Xfinity didn't help their image as a shitty cable company, and I don't think changing from pro-life to something like pro-baby is going to help mask their abortion policies.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Maybe they shouldn't have rebranded from "anti-abortion" to "pro-life" in the first place.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 15 points 1 year ago

Anti-Women? Yeah, let's go with that.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2023
409 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers
5514 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS