They're Following Their Leader— To Perdition
On Friday, in this deceitful, manipulative post on his pretend Twitter platform, Señor Trumpanzee urged the Arizona GOP-controlled legislature to save Republicans’ asses by doing something about the 1864 law that the state’s reactionary Supreme Court used to justify ending all abortions. So, while the most adamant anti-Choice faction of Trump’s coalition was singing hosanna and thanking the lord, Trump was urging the legislators take that joy away from them. That wasn’t their instinct. When a bipartisan group of reps brought up a repeal last week, the Republicans nixed a debate, let alone a vote.
On The View Friday, Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, who advocates repealing the statute, said “I am pretty tired of cleaning up Donald Trump’s messes in Arizona. This is really nothing but political opportunism coming from these folks who wanted this. This is what they wanted when they worked to overturn Roe v. Wade.”
The Arizona Republic made sure all its readers knew exactly what the Republicans had wrought: “Under the ban, any medical personnel who perform this procedure will face imprisonment for two to five years, along with the person receiving the abortion or anyone else knowingly involved, according to the 1864 law. The legislation itself predates statehood by 48 years, as Arizona became a state on Feb. 14, 1912. This law existed in the first legislative assembly, named ‘The Howell Code,’ that the Arizona Territory had created after it was separated from the New Mexico Territory.
CNN reported that Republicans in swing district races “are shifting how they talk about the issue. On social media, in public comments and in talking points on their websites, candidates are shying away from past hard-line positions and softening their stances. In some cases, the changes have been overt, with candidates reversing course on supporting outright bans on abortion or even denying they ever opposed it. But in others, the shift has been more subtle and nuanced, with candidates altering or deleting previous statements, or de-emphasizing stances that had been more central to their platform just a few years ago.”
CNN gave several examples, starting with Kari Lake, the Arizona Senate candidate who has shifted from being an outright cheerleader for the 1864 law— “I’m incredibly thrilled that we are going to have a great law that's already on the books”— to saying she opposes the ruling and calling on the governor and the legislature to “come up with an immediate common sense solution.”
Floridian Mike Rogers is running for the open US Senate seat in his old state, Michigan. When he served in the House he vocally opposed exceptions for rape and incest— like the 1864 law— but now… “The people of Michigan spoke in a loud voice in 2022 and this is a settled issue in our state. I will take no position as their voice in Washington that is at odds with the Michigan Constitution.”
A wealthy Californian running for the Senate in Wisconsin, Eric Hovde, campaigned on a total anti-abortion platform in 2012 (when he last ran and lost). Now, sensing the political winds have changed in the Badger State, he’s calling for exceptions for rape and incest and said “There should be a period of time at the beginning of a pregnancy for a woman to make a decision.” No one knows what he really believes or how he'll actually vote if he ever gets into office.
And for the Connecticut multimillionaire running for the Pennsylvania Senate seat (again), Dave “life begins at conception” McCormick went from “I believe in the very rare instances there should be exceptions for the life of the mother” to opposing to a national abortion ban and supporting exceptions in the cases of rape, incest, saving the life of the mother and agreeing that “abortion is legal through 24 weeks.” Last cycle McCormick dumped $5,429,900 of his personal fortune into his primary and then lost to Dr. Oz. So far this cycle, he’s spent another $2,000,000 of his own money in his obsession of buying himself a seat in the Senate. Maybe he should start with the Southport Connecticut town council first.
The Texan who is running for the Nevada Senate seat, Sam Brown, supported a Texas ban at 20 weeks with no exceptions for rape or incest during his failed race for the state legislature there. When he then ran for the other Senate seat in Nevada 2 years ago, he was still preaching no exceptions for rape and incest. Now he claims to embrace Nevada’s 24 week ban with the rape and incest exceptions.
Even the most extremist lunatic the GOP is running for anything anywhere— North Carolina gubernatorial candidate Mark Robinson— went from “For me, there is no compromise on abortion. It makes no difference to me why or how that child ended up in that womb” to pledging to sign a bill with exceptions for rape and incest.
CNN also reported that congressional hypocrite David Schweikert went from proudly touting “his pro-life record on his website from 2014 to 2020: ‘100 percent pro-life throughout his career, David Schweikert is committed to protecting and defending the rights of the unborn’” to removing all mentions of abortion on his campaign website. Unfortunately for Schweikert, his opponent is Conor O’Callaghan, who is already reminding voters that Schweikert, a member of the Republican Study Group and a sponsor of the Life at Conception bill, is one of Congress’ most anti-Choice members. “David Schweikert is the ultimate hypocrite on many issues— veterans benefits, the budget, and pharmaceutical pricing to name a few— but nowhere is his hypocrisy more evident than with abortion rights,” O'Callaghan told us yesterday. “As MAGA extreme as they come, Schweikert referred to himself on his website as “100% pro-life throughout his career” for YEARS before recently scrubbing ALL mention of abortion. He sponsored the ‘Life At Conception Act’ 6 TIMES, as recently as 2021; this draconian bill would ban abortion nationally and restrict access to IVF. David Schweikert must be held accountable for his extremist stances and I will make sure AZ-01 voters know his real record this November. Thankfully for the women in your lives, David Schweikert’s reign of terror will soon be over.” If you'd like to help O'Callaghan replace Schweikert in the House... please consider contributing to his campaign here.
Other congressional flip-floppers they called out:
Michelle Steel (CA-45)
Zach Nunn (IA-03)
MAGAt Joe Kent (WA-03)
Alison Esposito (NY-18)
Tom Barrett (MI-07)
Yvette Herrell (NM-02)
Mayra Flores (TX-34)
Monica De La Cruz (TX-15)
Jen Kiggans (VA-02)
Wonder how this is polling? So did the very conservative Wall Street Journal— so they commissioned one. The key takeaway was very clear: “Abortion is the most powerful issue driving suburban women who could decide the presidential election… A recent Wall Street Journal poll of seven battleground states found that 39% of suburban women cite abortion as a make-or-break issue for their vote— making it by far the most motivating issue for the group. Nearly three-quarters of them say the procedure should be legal all or most of the time, and a majority thinks Trump’s policies are too restrictive… According to the Journal poll, 57% of suburban women thought Trump’s policies on abortion were too restrictive. Just 20% said Biden’s policies weren’t restrictive enough… Trump, meanwhile, has struggled to find his footing on the issue. While he has repeatedly bragged about the 2022 decision, saying Friday, ‘We broke Roe v. Wade,’ he has also sought distance by saying decisions should be made by the states. But the Arizona ruling underscored the risks with that strategy: After initially saying it was a state issue, Trump later said the Arizona court had gone too far and that the governor and state legislature should ‘remedy what has happened.’”
