I don't have much to say on the Kansas vote, but for folks wondering to what extent abortion will be a motivating issue for voters in the remaining primaries and general election, Steve Kornacki from MSNBC has some interesting figures on turnout[1].
And from this morning's Bulwark newsletter[2], Will Saletan:
"The ballot measure was supposed to be helped by the timing of the vote. It was put on the ballot for primary day, not for the general election. In Kansas, registered Republicans outnumber Democrats by almost 2 to 1, and Republican primaries are more heavily contested than Democratic primaries. So turnout was expected to be a lot healthier on the Republican side."
"Theoretically, that should have helped the ballot measure."
"But look at the numbers. As expected, turnout in the Republican gubernatorial primary was much higher than in the Democratic primary—roughly 450,000 to 275,000, with some precincts still to be counted. But turnout on the ballot measure blew those numbers away. More than 900,000 people voted on the abortion question. Even if you assume that everyone who voted in the Democratic gubernatorial primary also voted for the ballot measure, that leaves more than 250,000 “no” votes—roughly half the “no” constituency—that didn’t come from Democrats. And even if every “yes” vote on the ballot measure came from a Republican, that leaves at least 75,000 people who voted in the GOP gubernatorial primary but didn’t support the ballot measure."
Turnout was much higher among all parties in Kansas, but the GOP enjoyed the expected advantage due to registration supremacy. HOWEVER, while Democrats are largely voting as a bloc on abortion, the same is not true for the GOP and independents. It'll be interesting to see if GOP politicians double-down on pro-life messaging OR start to push that off to the side to keep a significant number of their voters from defecting to Democratic candidates in the next few elections.
Couldn't agree more Chris. This November vote should have seen the dems ass kicked from one end of the country to the other. Now it appears as if the Supreme Court decision could become the catalyst for a wholly different outcome. Maybe too early to project, but this Kansas turnout most assuredly signals what we will become perhaps the hot button issue this fall.
By the way Steve, is that 97% figure empirical data, or just your opinion?
Not to be argumentative Steve, but i went through the link provided and i didn't find that 97% figure. Nor did i find anywhere in the report supporting the rest of your claim: "I think 97-plus percent of abortions are unnecessary, and given how our youth today struggle with even considering kids, are used as an emergency measure. The issue really is one of medical clinics and providers profiting off the removal, dissection, and sale of unborn fetuses. That’s a dark, ghoulish, and grotesque misuse of the medical profession, and not related to saving lives (when it is, then do it with a clear conscience)."
This suggestion the clinics and providers exist to sell unborn fetuses. That's nowhere in the link you posted. In fact, the surveys you cited suggests nothing of that. Two surveys were identified, one from 1987, one from 2004. Both were fairly limited in size and numbers of respondents, however both were consistent. Curious where you got the 97% and the whole system existing to sell fetus? Maybe provide the section that says that. Thanks.
Spoiler: his opinion. The interesting thing is how there's the explicit preference for this being a State-level decision as opposed to Federal, but not an individual preference over the State. I find that to be interesting because in many/most things there's a preference for the individual over the State.
And that's where the ideal is to have what is ultimately a good universal compromise position: limit abortions to a specific time frame (~24 weeks is my preference), with exceptions for health/rape/incest, and perhaps additionally rule out abortion after say 32-36 weeks if delivery is considered safe by the doctor as that would mainly just be an early delivery.
Another thing I'd like to point out (with a h/t to Dee Snider) is that one can't "choose life" if they don't have the choice to do otherwise: it's instead imposing someone else's choice upon the individual.
The worst part about this attempt to make a State constitutional amendment is that it's happening during the mid-term primary and not the mid-term general election: it was a blatant attempt to take advantage of the lower turnout. This is to say nothing of the typical lower turnout of a mid-term vs a presidential election year as well.
It’s possible that the effort backfired because of the wording or the question. It could be read that voting “yes” allows the legislature to fund abortions. However, that would indicate a shockingly bad voter education and engagement strategy by the very people who got it on the ballot.
GOP consultants may have also outsmarted themselves[1] if they sent these to GOP voters:
"The text messages arrived on Monday, the day before Kansans were set to vote on an amendment that would excise abortion protections from their state constitution."
"The text claimed that approving that measure, which could allow the Republican-controlled legislature to outlaw abortion, would safeguard 'choice.' If the amendment fails, constitutional protections would remain in place, buttressing current law that allows abortion in the first 22 weeks of pregnancy."
"'Women in KS are losing their choice on reproductive rights,' the text warned. 'Voting YES on the Amendment will give women a choice. Vote YES to protect women’s health.'"
"The unsigned messages were described as deceptive by numerous recipients, including former Democratic governor Kathleen Sebelius, who also served as health and human services secretary in the Obama administration. She told The Washington Post that she was 'stunned to receive the message, which made clear there was a very specific effort to use carefully crafted language to confuse folks before they would go vote.'"
Man the GOP punditry really think lowly of their voters. A vote in Michigan is completely due to democrat money and the voters of Kansas are too stupid to vote the correct way. I mean you are correct but still that's harsh to think your allies are so remarkably idiotic.
I don't have much to say on the Kansas vote, but for folks wondering to what extent abortion will be a motivating issue for voters in the remaining primaries and general election, Steve Kornacki from MSNBC has some interesting figures on turnout[1].
And from this morning's Bulwark newsletter[2], Will Saletan:
"The ballot measure was supposed to be helped by the timing of the vote. It was put on the ballot for primary day, not for the general election. In Kansas, registered Republicans outnumber Democrats by almost 2 to 1, and Republican primaries are more heavily contested than Democratic primaries. So turnout was expected to be a lot healthier on the Republican side."
"Theoretically, that should have helped the ballot measure."
"But look at the numbers. As expected, turnout in the Republican gubernatorial primary was much higher than in the Democratic primary—roughly 450,000 to 275,000, with some precincts still to be counted. But turnout on the ballot measure blew those numbers away. More than 900,000 people voted on the abortion question. Even if you assume that everyone who voted in the Democratic gubernatorial primary also voted for the ballot measure, that leaves more than 250,000 “no” votes—roughly half the “no” constituency—that didn’t come from Democrats. And even if every “yes” vote on the ballot measure came from a Republican, that leaves at least 75,000 people who voted in the GOP gubernatorial primary but didn’t support the ballot measure."
Turnout was much higher among all parties in Kansas, but the GOP enjoyed the expected advantage due to registration supremacy. HOWEVER, while Democrats are largely voting as a bloc on abortion, the same is not true for the GOP and independents. It'll be interesting to see if GOP politicians double-down on pro-life messaging OR start to push that off to the side to keep a significant number of their voters from defecting to Democratic candidates in the next few elections.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0DV1ymBWR8
[2] https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/the-good-bad-and-very-ugly
Couldn't agree more Chris. This November vote should have seen the dems ass kicked from one end of the country to the other. Now it appears as if the Supreme Court decision could become the catalyst for a wholly different outcome. Maybe too early to project, but this Kansas turnout most assuredly signals what we will become perhaps the hot button issue this fall.
By the way Steve, is that 97% figure empirical data, or just your opinion?
It came from a Guttmacher Institute study.
https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/pubs/psrh/full/3711005.pdf
Not to be argumentative Steve, but i went through the link provided and i didn't find that 97% figure. Nor did i find anywhere in the report supporting the rest of your claim: "I think 97-plus percent of abortions are unnecessary, and given how our youth today struggle with even considering kids, are used as an emergency measure. The issue really is one of medical clinics and providers profiting off the removal, dissection, and sale of unborn fetuses. That’s a dark, ghoulish, and grotesque misuse of the medical profession, and not related to saving lives (when it is, then do it with a clear conscience)."
This suggestion the clinics and providers exist to sell unborn fetuses. That's nowhere in the link you posted. In fact, the surveys you cited suggests nothing of that. Two surveys were identified, one from 1987, one from 2004. Both were fairly limited in size and numbers of respondents, however both were consistent. Curious where you got the 97% and the whole system existing to sell fetus? Maybe provide the section that says that. Thanks.
Spoiler: his opinion. The interesting thing is how there's the explicit preference for this being a State-level decision as opposed to Federal, but not an individual preference over the State. I find that to be interesting because in many/most things there's a preference for the individual over the State.
And that's where the ideal is to have what is ultimately a good universal compromise position: limit abortions to a specific time frame (~24 weeks is my preference), with exceptions for health/rape/incest, and perhaps additionally rule out abortion after say 32-36 weeks if delivery is considered safe by the doctor as that would mainly just be an early delivery.
Another thing I'd like to point out (with a h/t to Dee Snider) is that one can't "choose life" if they don't have the choice to do otherwise: it's instead imposing someone else's choice upon the individual.
The worst part about this attempt to make a State constitutional amendment is that it's happening during the mid-term primary and not the mid-term general election: it was a blatant attempt to take advantage of the lower turnout. This is to say nothing of the typical lower turnout of a mid-term vs a presidential election year as well.
It’s possible that the effort backfired because of the wording or the question. It could be read that voting “yes” allows the legislature to fund abortions. However, that would indicate a shockingly bad voter education and engagement strategy by the very people who got it on the ballot.
GOP consultants may have also outsmarted themselves[1] if they sent these to GOP voters:
"The text messages arrived on Monday, the day before Kansans were set to vote on an amendment that would excise abortion protections from their state constitution."
"The text claimed that approving that measure, which could allow the Republican-controlled legislature to outlaw abortion, would safeguard 'choice.' If the amendment fails, constitutional protections would remain in place, buttressing current law that allows abortion in the first 22 weeks of pregnancy."
"'Women in KS are losing their choice on reproductive rights,' the text warned. 'Voting YES on the Amendment will give women a choice. Vote YES to protect women’s health.'"
"The unsigned messages were described as deceptive by numerous recipients, including former Democratic governor Kathleen Sebelius, who also served as health and human services secretary in the Obama administration. She told The Washington Post that she was 'stunned to receive the message, which made clear there was a very specific effort to use carefully crafted language to confuse folks before they would go vote.'"
(Insert sad trombone here.)
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/08/02/kansas-abortion-texts/
I full expect it to be taken up again at a later date: hopefully people do in fact understand it, and continue to pay attention to their elections.
Man the GOP punditry really think lowly of their voters. A vote in Michigan is completely due to democrat money and the voters of Kansas are too stupid to vote the correct way. I mean you are correct but still that's harsh to think your allies are so remarkably idiotic.