Stanek wkend Q: Are you voting for any pro-abortion candidates?
With the November 4 election around the corner, and early/absentee voting in full swing, have you or will you be voting for a pro-abortion candidate? If so, why?
The photo, right, is of pro-abortion Republican Bruce Rauner, who is running for governor in Illinois against pro-abortion Democrat incumbent Pat Quinn.
Pro-life Republicans have been told to vote for Rauner despite his stance on abortion because he is the lesser of two evils. Illinois is deeply in debt, and he’s a great businessman, we’re told. He’ll save the state.
Meanwhile, Rauner’s wife Diana is a contributor to EMILY’s List, a pro-abortion PAC that only supports Democrat women. Diana sent an email to pro-abortion supporters yesterday complaining that an Illinois abortion PAC is unjustly castigating Bruce, adding, about her husband:
He won the primary despite his pro-choice stance, in part by convincing pro-lifers to put aside their views on this issue in favor of economic ones….
Terry Cosgrove’s decision to attack Bruce is driven by politics, not the issues, and it sickens me because I believe that it is ultimately destructive to our cause. By attacking a pro-choice Republican candidate, he virtually assures we will never see another.
Well, hm. If the Republican pro-abort loses, the GOP machine will get the message not to give us pro-abortion candidates? Is this worth four more years of Democrats fiscally bankrupting my state?
This scenario is similar to one pro-lifers face in just about every pocket of the country.
What would you do? What will you do? Why? Be sure to answer the poll question…
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I will not vote for an Anti-Life candidate. Would you vote for a really good businessman who also happens to be a mass murderer? What is more difficult is getting the message to the idiot who thought I would.
Not an issue for me, as I don’t live somewhere that has an election on November 4. However, hypothetically I would just vote for the candidate I agree with most on other issues. The damage is already done by the time two pro-choice candidates are on the ballot, so one might as well see to it that some good comes out of a given election.
I’m in Wisconsin – our US house race – I can’t find anything related to abortion on either of their websites. On the governor, Walker is more pro-life, but he’s been an absolute train wreck as a governor – so can’t vote for him. I voted for him before, but he’s been a terrible disappointment.
Ex-RINO,
You stand with Planned Parenthood. Own it. You can make up for all the state funding Scott Walker took away from Planned Parenthood by sponsoring a few abortions yourself with voluntary donations.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/25/planned-parenthood-wisconsin_n_5881600.html
Scott Walker is also all about protecting women by providing them with the services necessary to make informed choices..
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/scott-walker-signs-new-abortion-restrictions-into-law-planned-parenthood-pr
I feel bad for the people in Illinois. In Wisconsin we have a real pro-life choice.
This the kind of DemocRAT tactic that turns so many voters away from them. Where I live in Wisconsin they used the worst kinds of intimidation to try and get Walker recalled. Unionistas visiting shop owners and threatening them if they wouldn’t put anti-Walker signs in the windows of their shops.
http://journaltimes.com/news/local/numerous-union-grove-shops-threatened-with-union-boycott/article_aba5a224-5b8c-11e0-88b7-001cc4c03286.html
And this kind of intimidation is going on in NewYork today:
http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/10/31/dems-send-threatening-letters-election-day-we%E2%80%99ll-know-if-you-didn%E2%80%99t-vote
Will NOT vote for Rauner!
Remember the previous suggestion to write in the name of Mother Teresa or St. John Paul II.
Walker has been great for Wisconsin. I’m sorry that you don’t like him.
The Democrats have been a sea-anchor, dragging the recovery in Wisconsin slower than the rest of the country. No employer in his right might would dare to invest or hire more help against the uncertainty of recall election. And everyone was uncertain about the cost of Obamacare.
After those two events were safely behind us, employers could make plans. Jobs began to grow at an accelerated pace. The reduction in property taxes (do to savings in local education costs) have been a boon to most Wisconsin families and communities.
Truly, I am sorry that you do not praise Walker for his service to Wisconsin.
Even so, Mary Burke will unleash the vengeance of pro-abortion caucus. Her executive power will funnel plenty of money to Planned Parenthood, and our Republican legislature will not be able to stop her.
Meanwhile, in Illinois: Our hearts go out to you.
You have no gubernatorial candidates who will protect live, nor will any of them work to solve your fiscal problems.
I would be tempted to vote for Quinn, so he can be the next one in jail.
And let’s make it clear to both parties that we demand pro-life candidates.
Here is a video where Josh Brahm interviewed Scott Klusendorf and they addressed this very question: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XCoAp5PQlHE
My Senate race in NH: Shaheen must go. No more seniority for her, period. That means I’m voting for Brown. Few of my colleagues agree with me. Either way, we have the ongoing challenge of nurturing better candidates for the next election.
Del –
A few questions –
How have the Democrats dragged down a recovery in Wisconsin? They are the minority party in both the Assembly and Senate and the Governor is a Republican.
If the recalls stalled growth, wouldn’t it reason that there was pent up hiring that would then have realized after the recall? If a person said “I’m not hiring until after this is resolved’ – then we would have seen the numbers after it was resolved. Given your theory, I would think it would be more accurate to say that since we didn’t see those large gains after, employers were hoping Walker would be bounced.
How rich are you? Property taxes were a moot point to most. Ours went up a bit because we needed a referendum to help make up for the lack of state funds.
Mary Burke doesn’t excite me. I just look at Walker, and the data doesn’t support four more years. He’s been a train wreck on job growth, and I’m tired of seeing other states make gains while we don’t go anywhere. His turning down of Medicaid funding is another huge minus for him – many GOP governors accepted the money. It is further hurting our economy that he didn’t. If I didn’t look at and understand statistics, that would be one thing – but the numbers don’t support giving him four more years.
truth
And how many planned parenthood locations in Wisconsin that perform abortion have closed?
Walker shuffled the chair decks around and is a pro-life hero. Would be interesting to see politicians actually make a meaningful difference in the numbers before being hailed as great.
Ex-Gop, do you actually live in Wisconsin or don’t you? Because I would think someone who was actually living there would be aware that Walker attempted to put a major pro-life law into effect and has been stymied by the courts. I would say if someone was aware of that fact and still insinuated that Walker hasn’t tried to accomplish anything regarding the pro-life agenda, that would be rather deceptive.
Jonathan, I agree, that is deceptive, but it is actually part of the pro-abort strategy to spread deception; especially to try and keep people from rallying around the pro-lifers like Scott Walker that have the fortitude to make an actual difference.
“And how many planned parenthood locations in Wisconsin that perform abortion have closed?”
He cut state funding to Planned Parenthood ‘because’ they perform abortions and the results have already been the shutting down several of the abortuary feeder clinics.
We have the same situation in Mass. Charles Baker (R) pro-abort against Martha Coakley (D) pro-abort. But there is an independent, Scott Lively (I) who is right down the line pro-life and pro-family but he can not win. So what? I’m voting for Lively.
Absolutely not voting for proabortion candidate Mary Burke! I already voted for SCOTT WALKER!
There is a clear choice! And we all love our choices don’t we??
One need only Google Scott Walker’s record on life.
http://5859d7f0f30e9c1373ac-76f52f45edd080d6d6d41139c312cfe3.r43.cf2.rackcdn.com/uploaded/g/0e3369441_1403728580_gov-scott-walkers-record-on-life.pdf
Jonathan –
Yes – I live in Wisconsin.
I’m aware that funding changes have occurred and admitting laws are making their way through the courts.
I’m also massively skeptical that the changes that have been made in Wisconsin would result in more than a few percent change of the numbers.
I’m not saying he made no gains – but for having full control of all three branches of government, it’s a lot of moving around of the deck furniture. He also seemed to strongly imply in an interview last month that abortion doesn’t matter to most people these days that he talks to (after getting several questions on abortion): Honestly, I challenge you to come out with me. You’re not gonna find a day that goes by where any of the details you’re asking me about are things that are asked of me in great detail. So you can ask them, but we’ve got a limited amount of time, and I would think people would want to hear about the issues that matter most to them.”
truth
Zero
Thanks,
Ex-RINO, It is exciting having a governor that knows how to get things done. Re-electing Governor Scott Walker will mean cutting even more funding from Planned Parenthood in the next Wisconsin two year budget.
If Walker would have taken the Medicaid money, and ditched Voter ID and drug testing welfare folks (his two bridge to nowhere initiatives – big spending programs with little to no results) – I would have highly considered him.
I feel like he’s running for President as our governor. He’s truly not put Wisconsin first in numerous decisions (medicaid, light rail). I’m not enamored by Burke – I might skip that vote or take a lesser option – but I can’t vote Walker. He’s been terrible economically for this state.
“I’m in Wisconsin – our US house race – I can’t find anything related to abortion on either of their websites.”
Ex-RINO, When the vote came up to defund Planned Parenthood not a single Democrat voted for defunding but every Republican voted to defund. You have to be a moron to claim there is no difference in who you vote for.
truth –
The house could pass a defunding bill every day of every week they are in session for the next two years, and you know it wouldn’t go anywhere.
Furthermore, I think you need a lesson in supply and demand. The thought that if Planned Parenthood goes away, all of the sudden nobody will seek an abortion in this country -that is a pretty naive and juvenile thought.
If Republicans win the Senate nationally and elect Walker for president in 2016 then we can defund Planned Parenthood federally too :) Your vote makes a difference! That would stop the onslaught of Planned Parenthood mega-abortion centers that are being opened all over the US.
truth –
Ha. Federal government does nothing interesting – not with 60 votes needed to pass anything substantial.
Plus, Democrats will have control in the senate again in 2016. House will be GOP. President, who knows – but we’re going to have split control against starting in 2016 (GOP will run the senate 2014-2016).
“Ha. Federal government does nothing interesting – not with 60 votes needed to pass anything substantial.”
Ex-RINO, Harry Reid showed us last year that the Senate rules can change any time; including the rules requiring a 60 vote majority to get things done.
“Plus, Democrats will have control in the senate again in 2016”
You are conceding that the Democrats will lose at least six more Senate seats then!!! Wow! Why do you think Democrats are going to get voted out in such high numbers? I wish I had your confidence but these are the same electorate taht voted Obama a second term :(
Ex GOP,
You say the judicial branch ruled against him on one hand and say that he had control of all three branches on the other. Those two things contradict one another. With the federal rulings on abortion, it ties the hands of pro-life legislators and governors on what exactly they can and cannot do. Your “deck furniture” is them working within the parameters they have been boxed into by both state and federal courts. Can you give specific examples of what more Walker could be doing on the abortion issue that he hasn’t done that is within the parameters set by the courts? The bottom line is what he has done has closed abortion clinics and what he attempted to do and was prevented from accomplishing by the courts would have closed others.
Scott Walker for president and Ted Cruz for Senate majority leader and you will see a federal government that ‘gets things done’.
“but I can’t vote Walker. He’s been terrible economically for this state.”
That’s because you don’t like government budgets that show fiscal responsibility or government that isn’t growing in size. Not enough freebies and cronyism for your liking when things are done that way.
“Scott Walker for president and Ted Cruz for Senate majority leader”
Yeah, that’s a nice thought. But I see no chance that a majority of GOP senators votes to select Ted Cruz as their majority leader. It would be nice. But unfortunately, I believe that is a pipe dream.
“Yeah, that’s a nice thought. But I see no chance that a majority of GOP senators votes to select Ted Cruz as their majority leader. It would be nice. But unfortunately, I believe that is a pipe dream.”
Maybe. But literally anybody the Republicans would make Senate majority leader would be better than anybody the Democrats would give the job to.
truth – I’ll take your first two posts together (since I last responded).
2008, the country was mad at the GOP, and it was a general election. This resulted in the Dems winning seats they had very little business winning – look at some of the states the Dems are up for re-election in (typical red states)- Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, North Carolina, South Dakota, Montana – just look through the list.
These folks are now coming up for election in a mid-term (less voters) with the President of the same party (you rarely find that the President in power picks up senate seats).
2016 is shaping up much, much differently though. General election (more voters) – 34 seats, 24 which the GOP is defending. 7 of those states that the GOP are defending are states Obama carried – so if the GOP doesn’t become much more centrist, 2016 could be a massively ugly night for the GOP. It’s still early, but the numbers are very tough for the GOP – mirror opposite of the 2014.
Jonathan – I said it wrong – I meant the three components – governor, assembly, and senate.
You are probably right on Walker doing everything he could – which is a good point on why Governor elections and abortion don’t matter. A few clinics closed that didn’t perform abortions, and abortion providers fill out more paperwork.
Good point Jonathan.
truth –
Economically – I’m talking about how we’re slipping behind other midwestern states. If you are an informed voter, I’m sure you know what I’m talking about. Walker has been a failed experiment.
A pipe dream…but such a wonderful dream. A government that would actually work.
“I think you need a lesson in supply and demand”
If there is no supply, it doesn’t matter how big the demand is.
Of course, there will always be those who go to the black market to fulfill their demand. This will open up new jobs for those who will be needed to shut down these operations.
Ex-RINO,
When politifact checked the ‘truth’ of Walkers claim that September 2014 was the largest Wisconsin September jobs growth in a decade it turns out to be true.
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2014/oct/29/scott-walker/scott-walker-says-september-job-growth-largest-sep/
Ex-RINO, what do you make of this jobs report?
http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/newsreleases/2014/140818_state_by_state.htm
Ex-GOP,
No, actually that wasn’t my point at all. But thanks for attempting to put words in my mouth. Should I return the favor?
It’s funny that the Wisconsin NARAL seems to tell a very different story of the recent changes on abortion access from what you portray:http://www.prochoicewisconsin.org/what-is-choice/abortion/a-crisis-in-access.shtml
My point was that Walker is making the most progress he is able. My point was NOT that he wasn’t making any. Because I believe he is. His major pro-life accomplishment that has been temporarily stymied by the courts isn’t dead yet either. So it also still has a chance to bring even more momentum than NARAL has even recounted in their link.
Prax
Can you name a product that had high demand but the supply side didn’t come through or exist?
truth
I have no doubts that Walker has had individual months that have been strong.
He has served for four years though.
“7 of those states that the GOP are defending are states Obama carried”
In my estimation the Obama voters buyers remorse should continue to grow more and more emphatic all the way thru his ouster in 2016.
Jonathan
Of course the pro-choice and pro-life sides are going to yell and scream – they both exaggerate gains and losses because they are running big money marketing campaigns to fund budgets, sway minds, and influence politicians.
Let’s just cut to the chase – do you think anything that Walker has done, or will do, will influence abortion numbers more than 5%?
“A pipe dream…but such a wonderful dream. A government that would actually work.”
No arguments there!
truth –
If your last post is your summation, then you aren’t as smart as I previously thought.
Google 2016 senate elections, read a few articles, and then come back.
What did they exaggerate exactly? Did the number of abortion clinics plummet or didn’t they? Additionally, the number of abortions decreased from 7825 the year Walker was elected to 6462 this past year. That sounds like an extremely sizable drop during his term to me; much more than 5%. What say you? (By the way, I got the abortion numbers from the Wisconsin department of health.)
“Can you name a product that had high demand but the supply side didn’t come through or exist?”
Slaves.
Those numbers mirror trends across the nation, regardless of political affiliation.
Here’s a good read to understand the difficulties of making abortion predictions based on laws:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its-really-hard-to-measure-the-effects-of-abortion-restrictions-in-texas/
Prax –
Slavery was a system – the demand was workers, and workers were still found.
What’s interesting though is, take a read on some of the prison systems that popped up after slavery – Convict lease is a term you can research.
Back to my original point though, if demand exists, you can be sure somebody will step in on the supply side.
Yet, before I gave you those hard numbers, you acted like there hadn’t been a change in Wisconsin. Hmmmm I believe asking me whether Walker’s changes could have a change in abortion numbers of 5% and then arguing you can’t measure the numbers after I submit evidence is known in debate terms as “moving the goalposts”.
Jonathan –
Not at all. Wisconsin has less abortions over those years – but it isn’t significant in difference from the drops in other starts. You’ll see further evidence in that since the rate dropped the first couple of years, before Walker did anything abortion related.
Look – you can believe whatever you want to believe – a lot of people in this nation have beliefs that I don’t agree with, and that’s okay. I’m just saying for the right to parade around and say that voting Walker is this massive step for babies everywhere is a joke to me. Sure, he’s made some ground. He’s also made it a lot harder, and wants to make it worse on low and middle class people in the state, and when the number one reason for abortion is tied to economics, I see that as a step back.
“the demand was workers, and workers were still found.”
How is this different than what I said? I said slaves were the product and I also said there will be (and there was prior to Roe vs. Wade) a black market for abortion.
“he’s made some ground”
If you are prolife like you say you are, making ground in saving humans from death should be a positive. But instead you focus on money. There is no need to worry about money and dividing people into different economic classes when you are DEAD.
“when the number one reason for abortion is tied to economics”
No, the number one reason for abortion is hedonism.
Prax
I would simply rephrase what you said to “no cost or low cost workers”. The demand was still there afterwards, and a channel was invented.
Making ground is saving lives – and that’s awesome. I just can’t attribute that to Walker. And on the money part – what I’m saying, is, let’s pretend for a second that abortion was locked in (let’s say it is in the constitution). The argument would then be, how do we create an environment in which not having an abortion is the better choice. I’m highly skeptical a political solution will ever occur in this country – to me, it’s about making that choice more favorable to having the baby. With that being said, improving health care, education, and the economics of all is great.
On your last point – can you send me the study that proves your point? I’ll then post backing for my point of view. Deal?
“I just can’t attribute that to Walker.”
You said, “he’s made some ground.” but now you say you can’t attribute that to Walker.
“can you send me the study that proves your point?”
Nope. Done conversing with a head-game player.
Prax –
Ha – yes – because to conservatives, stats and studies are “head-games”
Love it.
Have a good day.
Stats and studies say abortion kills humans.
Ex-GOP says: “Can you name a product that had high demand but the supply side didn’t come through or exist?”
While seeming intelligent, this is a disingenuous argument.
There are three other factors involved.
First, in classic “supply and demand” economics, there is “utility,” or “preferences.”
In no economics textbook is demand static.
A fundamental principle of economics is that neither demand nor supply is static.
Second factor: can behavior, or “consumption,” or demand, be regulated?
Yes. Perfectly? No.
The price of driving above the speed limit has not stopped everyone from speeding, but it prevents a lot of us from speeding.
It is a leading argument and idea of liberals that behavior can be regulated. So, for a pro-choicer, usually liberal, to pretend behavior cannot be regulated just doesn’t make sense.
Third, there are morals.
Abortion is legal and acceptable to some because there are counter-arguments to the argument that an abortion is immoral.
As people consider the arguments on either side, their “preferences” or “utilities” will change.
Driving an SUV can be really cool. but if a driver spends time thinking about the pollution it generates relative to the coolness, the morality involved can change a person’s view of what behavior will be followed.
We liberals think of this effort as “consciousness-raising:” making people more aware of the moral dimensions of behaviors.
TLD –
One note – I’m not saying supply and demand related to abortion becoming illegal – I made that point that if abortion was still legal, and planned parenthood went away, it isn’t as if all abortions just all of the sudden dry up.