Why did Hillary Clinton swing towards an extreme pro-abortion position?

[bagelman]

Against Trump especially she could've at least moderated the bleeding of Democratic rural support by simply keeping the same position on this issue she used to have. But instead she went full baby killer, making it a prime issue at the debates instead of, say, winning bread and butter issues. Why?

[7,052,770]

Her opinion wasn't extreme but she should have done a better job in the debates answering that question. The only "ninth month" abortions are done for the mothers life or because of non-viable genetic disorders, but she allowed Trump to imply that they are often elective. She needed to spell this out very explicitly.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

^Regardless of what NARAL's pollster may say, most Americans do not agree with Clinton in her belief that abortion is justfiable up to the due date to preserve the women's health, in a world where that can mean literally anything, including age or familial health. Also taking the word rare out of Bill Clinton's "safe legal rare" slogan is not a popular position.

[Cashew]

Muh demographics.

But seriously, many assumed that the white vote had bottomed out under Obama, so no matter how extreme they went from now on would no longer scare off those who remained.

[White Trash]

Clinton really could've used social issues to her advantage. She totally could've contrasted herself with pvssy grabbin', foul-mouthed, "New York values" Donald Trump. Had she run as 2008 Hillary Clinton (sans gay marriage stance), she would've won.

[Santander]

Because the Democratic base is that extreme.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Because the Democratic base is that extreme.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It might be one of the few issues she sincerely cares about. I'm not saying it is, but that wouldn't surprise me.

Anyway, abortion is not the reason T***p won (the Electoral College).

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

^ No, it wasn't her chief mistake, but she probably lost some votes over it, especially considering she also supported repealing the very popular Hyde amendment.

[uti2]

^ No, it wasn't her chief mistake, but she probably lost some votes over it, especially considering she also supported repealing the very popular Hyde amendment.

She lost 0 votes over it, being opposed to abortion in all instances is far more extreme than the standard dem position that Hillary took. Dem voters who are personally anti-gay/anti-abortion, etc. have repeatedly told activists that they don't vote on those issues. The gay marriage debate before the Supreme court legalization is an example of what I'm talking about.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I get the whole "I don't vote on abortion" thing as I sometimes support pro-choice candidates who are good politicians otherwise. As an example, I've already "endorsed" Jon Tester for his 2018 reelection race. But when you get to something as extreme as repealing Hyde, you risk people saying "well, I normally don't vote on abortion, but in this specific instance I need to take a stand.", And I do think Hillary lost a few Obama votes there.

[uti2]

I get the whole "I don't vote on abortion" thing as I sometimes support pro-choice candidates who are great politicians otherwise. As an example, I've already "endorsed" Jon Tester for his 2018 reelection race. But when you get to something as extreme as repealing Hyde, you risk people saying "well, I normally don't vote on abortion, but in this specific instance I need to take a stand.", And I do think Hillary lost a few Obama votes there.

Obama was opposed to the partial-birth abortion ban, if you care about that issue, you never would've voted Dem at the presidential level in the first place anyway.

http://www.lifenews.com/2008/04/27/nat-3896/

Same exact thing with the gay marriage debate before the SC decision. Being against abortion in all instances is something more extreme and has more potential to hurt socially liberal republican support than Hillary's position did with democrats.

All the votes she lost came from the Left-wing progressives who thought she was too RIGHT-WING on economics and foreign policy.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Sometimes what's right isn't what's popular. Hence her hesitancy to embrace Bernie Sanders' dishonest "free everything" platform (though he certainly pulled her to the edge).

[uti2]

Sometimes what's right isn't what's popular. Hence her hesitancy to embrace Bernie Sanders' dishonest "free everything" platform (though he certainly pulled her to the edge).

By the way, the general public supports late-term abortion for zika fetuses:

https://www.statnews.com/2016/08/05/stat-harvard-poll-zika-abortion/

[100% pro-life no matter what]

I get the whole "I don't vote on abortion" thing as I sometimes support pro-choice candidates who are great politicians otherwise. As an example, I've already "endorsed" Jon Tester for his 2018 reelection race. But when you get to something as extreme as repealing Hyde, you risk people saying "well, I normally don't vote on abortion, but in this specific instance I need to take a stand.", And I do think Hillary lost a few Obama votes there.

Obama was opposed to the partial-birth abortion ban, if you care about that issue, you never would've voted Dem at the presidential level in the first place anyway.

http://www.lifenews.com/2008/04/27/nat-3896/

Same exact thing with the gay marriage debate before the SC decision. Being against abortion in all instances is something more extreme and has more potential to hurt socially liberal republican support than Hillary's position did with democrats.

All the votes she lost came from the Left-wing progressives who thought she was too RIGHT-WING on economics and foreign policy.

Remember, the people that Hillary was trying to win over were largely suburban/exurban semi-moderate Republicans, and especially Republican women.  These people, while they may be more open to gay marriage than other Republicans, still would generally be "pro-life with exceptions".  Hillary may well have lost the election the night of the third debate, when she took (and defended without apology) such an extreme position on abortion (something not even Obama ever really publicized).  There is no doubt that some voters, especially in suburbs of places like Atlanta, Milwaukee, Raleigh, Charlotte, and Columbus, voted for Trump or third-party because they couldn't vote for Hillary at that point.

[henster]

Most Americans are pro-choice. Exits from 2012

http://www.gallup.com/poll/183434/americans-choose-pro-choice-first-time-seven-years.aspx

These are from '12 exits but the numbers won't have changed that much.

[Intell]

It might be one of the few issues she sincerely cares about. I'm not saying it is, but that wouldn't surprise me.

Anyway, abortion is not the reason T***p won (the Electoral College).

She certainly lost some voters, for being so pro-abortion, with suburban moms, disillusioned with Trump and other white and hispanic voters.

She didn't lose the votes of the WWC because of this though, merely different demographics.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Most Americans are pro-choice. Exits from 2012

http://www.gallup.com/poll/183434/americans-choose-pro-choice-first-time-seven-years.aspx

These are from '12 exits but the numbers won't have changed that much.

Gallup polled it in May of last year, and found a 47/46 pro-choice result: http://www.gallup.com/poll/191834/americans-attitudes-toward-abortion-unchanged.aspx

However, the same poll showed that only 29% of americans support abortion being legal in all circumstances, with another 50% deciding to answer "legal in certain circumstances".

[Indy Texas]

Sometimes what's right isn't what's popular. Hence her hesitancy to embrace Bernie Sanders' dishonest "free everything" platform (though he certainly pulled her to the edge).

Healthcare and college are not "everything."

Quite rich coming from you, considering you get free healthcare and very cheap college tuition in your country.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Sometimes what's right isn't what's popular. Hence her hesitancy to embrace Bernie Sanders' dishonest "free everything" platform (though he certainly pulled her to the edge).

Yeah, letting people die because they can't afford healthcare is definitely the right thing to do. How principled.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Most Americans are pro-choice. Exits from 2012

http://www.gallup.com/poll/183434/americans-choose-pro-choice-first-time-seven-years.aspx

These are from '12 exits but the numbers won't have changed that much.

Fortunately Hispanics are the most opposed! Open up those borders! http://www.pewforum.org/2016/04/08/public-opinion-on-abortion-2/#views-on-abortion-by-level-of-education-2016

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Sometimes what's right isn't what's popular. Hence her hesitancy to embrace Bernie Sanders' dishonest "free everything" platform (though he certainly pulled her to the edge).

Yeah, letting people die because they can't afford healthcare is definitely the right thing to do. How principled.

Aw, that's a very pretty strawman you've built there, Antonio.

Sometimes what's right isn't what's popular. Hence her hesitancy to embrace Bernie Sanders' dishonest "free everything" platform (though he certainly pulled her to the edge).

Healthcare and college are not "everything."

Quite rich coming from you, considering you get free healthcare and very cheap college tuition in your country.

Dear, my health care isn't "free," nor would Bernie Sanders' be. That aside, I'm not complaining about single-payer in the abstract. In the abstract, the idea is grand. But no political issue exists in the abstract, and I do certainly believe it is dishonest and frankly unhelpful to suggest that single-payer would currently fly in the US.

This may sound ridiculous to those who have crafted the opposite narrative, but Hillary Clinton mostly ran on an honest platform outlining things that were at least within the realm of achievable. When she goes into the nuance of late-term abortions, it may not be popular to actually consider who would be getting these abortions (and why), but it's probably the right thing to do, and anyone who does would have to at least admit that there are legitimate reasons for why the option of getting a late-term abortion might be important to maintain. Few people do though, especially politicians, because the politics aren't good. Too bad. Hillary priced out her plans, considered what would be doable, and had the audacity to put forward an incremental but significant agenda. Sadly, while government runs on incrementalism, campaigns don't.

[Averroës Nix]

Sometimes what's right isn't what's popular. Hence her hesitancy to embrace Bernie Sanders' dishonest "free everything" platform (though he certainly pulled her to the edge).

Support for the kind of late-term abortions that actually happen is not especially shallow, though. Especially within the Democratic Party. It's the kind of support that a poorly- or opportunistically-worded polling question can miss, but it's there.

It was either Al or Bore who compared the politics of the abortion issue to the gun issue to explain that while a majority of Americans support some restrictions, a majority in either case support few enough restrictions that our politics tend to favor keeping all abortions and all guns unrestricted.

[emailking]

Her opinion wasn't extreme but she should have done a better job in the debates answering that question. The only "ninth month" abortions are done for the mothers life or because of non-viable genetic disorders, but she allowed Trump to imply that they are often elective. She needed to spell this out very explicitly.

This. I know someone who left her vote for President blank because she thought Hillary supported the right to an abortion at any point in the pregnancy, in general. I knew she was wary of voting either Clinton or Trump but didn't know she had this particular misconception until after the election, and then I had a hard time convincing her that Clinton supported this only in extreme circumstances.

[elcorazon]

The irony is that Hillary's position is the position she strongly believes in and frankly is supported by most people who understand the issue - her problem is that unlike Trump, she is too honest and the people elected the guy willing to lie to them so they can hear what they want rather than the honest person sincerely trying to improve our country.