Why Abortion is costing the Dems their votes

[Jerome Scuggs]

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005277

Pretty creepy.

quoted for ease of viewing (not the whole article)

More than 40 million legal abortions have been performed and documented in the 30 years since the U.S. Supreme Court declared abortion legal. The debate remains focused on the legality and morality of abortion. What's largely ignored is a factual analysis of the political consequences of 40 million abortions. Consider:

There were 12,274,368 in the Voting Age Population of 205,815,000 missing from the 2000 presidential election, because of abortions from 1973-82.

In this year's election, there will be 18,336,576 in the Voting Age Population missing because of abortions between 1972 and 1986.

In the 2008 election, 24,408,960 in the Voting Age Population will be missing because of abortions between 1973-90.

[Torn Wing]

Stop Killing Babies

[triceratops]

Because every child that was aborted would have been a Democrat? These statistics are irrelevant. The same could be said about X amount of people who died in past wars not being able to vote.

[bloodzombie]

Because every child that was aborted would have been a Democrat? These statistics are irrelevant. The same could be said about X amount of people who died in past wars not being able to vote.

and if they were in the military, they would've been republican, so george bush is killing his supporters.


realistically though, a lot of those children would've been born to single-parent homes, made less money than average, and become single parents themselves. So the majority probably would've been democrats.

[Melufa]

Interesting tidbit - An increasing number of abortions has been linked with a decrease in crime. How? Well, children of broken homes and abusive parents are far more likely to commit crimes. Why would parents be abusive? Children they don't want.

[Jerome Scuggs]

Republicans are against abortions. It's saying that democrats have cost themselves votes (by pushing for abortion)

[Pan]

Lewis Black Joke

What's the difference between a Democrat and a Republican?
A Republican BLOWS!
A Democrat SUCKS!

[Awesome]

Republicans are against abortions. It's saying that democrats have cost themselves votes (by pushing for abortion)

i'm not an american but in my opinion, that's pretty decent of the democrats to stick to their beliefs and not sell out their remaining voters by just doing whatever it takes to become popular.

[triceratops]

You dumb asshole, as if Democrats are even thinking of lost votes or selling out when supporting abortion.

[Jerome Scuggs]

You guys are pulling assertions out my my ass. Nowhere have I said the dems have said this or care, nor have I said that the aborted children are democratic. I'm just posting the news, and my interpretation.

[triceratops]

You dumb asshole, look at the title of this thread that YOU started.

[Jerome Scuggs]

and my interpretation.

k, what?

[Jerome Scuggs]

Time to back it up with facts. From the article:

The question arises: Who would these Missing Voters have been if they had reached voting age? What would their values have been? How would they have voted? What impact would they have had on the great debates in America, including the abortion debate? Here's what we know from several generations of social science research about children:

They tend to absorb the values of their parents.

They tend to have the same political views as their family (parents, siblings, immediate relatives) and share common views on political causes.

They tend to develop the same lifestyle as their family.

Now, if republican families are against abortions, then they wont do em. But a more liberal person might. So, the liberal person loses their child- someone who would potentially grow up to absorb ideals from their parents.

Sorry to be talking about these aborted fetuses like theyre just statistics, but I debate much worse, I'm desensitized. But you don't gotta be up in my grill, tric. I'm just posting an article I found to be a bit weird- I'd never thought of this sorta thing before.

[triceratops]

k, what?

I just got served.

[triceratops]

Time to back it up with facts. From the article:



Now, if republican families are against abortions, then they wont do em. But a more liberal person might. So, the liberal person loses their child- someone who would potentially grow up to absorb ideals from their parents.

Sorry to be talking about these aborted fetuses like theyre just statistics, but I debate much worse, I'm desensitized. But you don't gotta be up in my grill, tric. I'm just posting an article I found to be a bit weird- I'd never thought of this sorta thing before.

Statistics are a bunch of bullshit, hundreds of thousands of eligible voters die every year from a myriad of causes. The same could be said that car crash deaths take votes away from people, or that cancer does the same. While still being statistics, they are still very broad and prove nothing.

Before I dropped out of my political science class my teacher gave us an example of where the murder rate is higher in the summer. Ice cream sales are higher in the summer, so would it not be statistically correct to say that higher ice cream sales = higher murder rate?