It seems that some right-wing activists see signs of hope in a couple of special elections in Louisiana where two anti-choice candidate recently won seats in Congress, seeing them as evidence that “the country may be enamored with Mr. Obama, but not necessarily his pro-abortion values”:
“After every single election – no matter what happens – a number of political pundits proclaim the pro-life movement dead,” said Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “There are people in this debate who have a vested interest in killing the [pro-life] movement, and they will drum up any reason to try and discredit it.”
…
“I think it is very encouraging that the Republicans are turning out voters when the candidates they are running are unequivocally pro-life,” said Colleen Holmes, executive director of Eagle Forum.
…
Both Ms. Holmes and Mrs. Dannenfelser contend it is wrong to view the 2008 presidential election as a referendum of the life issue, as the economic crisis muscled the abortion issue, as well as other issues, off the national stage in the waning days of the campaign.
Of course, as we’ve pointed out repeatedly, there were three anti-choice initiatives on the ballot this election, each one of which went down in defeat by substantial margins. You think that if the anti-choice position was so popular among the voters, they’d turn out to pass these sorts of initiatives when they appear on the ballot instead of regularly rejecting them. But that doesn’t seem to be the case, which is why we keep seeing anti-choice activists like Holmes and Dannenfelser reduced to spinning their obvious losses as somehow resulting from their pet issue being pushed off the national stage.
When you go 0-3 on your anti-choice measures, it is not because the issue wasn’t in front of the voters – it was obviously right there on the ballot – it is because it was rejected by the voters.
