# Dems Need to Accept Moderates on Abortion= capture the House **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 13, 2012, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819 "2012-05-13T23:52:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/221 "2012-05-21T05:23:15Z")
The Tea Party’s position (and Der’s) would make sense under a parliamentary system or under proportional representation. Your coalition supports you; your opponents critique. But our system assumes that Congress will keep the median voter in mind and tack towards the center. That worked for a while. But then we added primaries to the mix and after a couple of decades, Republican Congressfolk feared being primaried more than losing the general election. Oddly enough, the effect has been much less intense among Democrats. (Cite fwiw: [http://voteview.com/images/polar\_house\_means.jpg](http://voteview.com/images/polar_house_means.jpg) Cite2: [http://voteview.com/blog/?p=494](http://voteview.com/blog/?p=494) ). If we had parties choose their candidates with an eye towards the general election, the system might work. But we don’t. And Americans love their primaries: they are thought to be democratic. I say we should either move away from winner-take-all voting or go back to smoke filled rooms. But both options are currently unthinkable. Anyway with regards to the OP, I think professional pols are pretty saavy, so Democrats will be pro-life or pro-choice depending upon the makeup of their electoral district. Republicans face litmus tests, so they have less flexibility in general. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/222 "2012-05-21T06:35:29Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Spoken like a true Tea Partier. I’m not sure what you mean. If you refer to the fact that they want to see their particular beliefs implemented rather than just voting for politicians who ignore them, then your insult fails since that’s one of the few areas where they make sense. Their problem is that they are ignorant, evil and stupid, so the beliefs they are pushing are disastrous. Honestly though, if I was talking like a left wing version of a Tea Partier, I’d be talking about how the whites need to be sent back to Australia where they came from, how the military shouldn’t be in charge of the Superbowl, and how the Republicans are secretly working for the Pope as tools in his plan to take over the US. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/223 "2012-05-21T07:11:29Z")
Der: Dems should run conservatives in conservative districts. Liberals should clip the wings of conserva-dems in centrist or liberal ones. Specifically, it makes sense to eject Lieberman of Connecticut. Ben Nelson, OTOH, was an asset to the party since Nebraska was likely to go with the GOP anyway. Tea Partiers apply their loony purity tests to everyone. There are 2 problems with that, a) they are loony, b) they are electorally naive. The only reason it works is that the Republicans have iron party discipline and the Dems suck at conveying the nuttiness of, say, the Ryan budget proposals. Phasing out Medicare isn’t especially popular, partly because _it’s a really bad idea_. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/224 "2012-05-21T08:53:47Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Der: Dems should run conservatives in conservative districts. There’s no point, since you’ll just get “Democrats” who’ll side with the Republicans and do their best to sabotage the rest of the Democratic Party. The Democrats don’t have the kind of party discipline that the Republicans have, and they are already fairly right wing and a far more “big tent” party than the Republicans; you can’t get significantly more conservative than mainstream Democrats without essentially _being_ a Republican. Nor are such people desirable regardless of party; a conservative politician is going to be both an extremist and amoral, because American conservatism is extreme and amoral. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/225 "2012-05-21T22:24:41Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > No; it’s an accurate way of describing their position. > > But they are factually wrong. They are closest to the slavers, not the abolitionists; they wish to reduce half the human race to the status of domestic animals, of property. _Their_ property. Nuh-uh! I don’t think they’re right but if you could magically transfer an unwanted fetus into a test tube for the rest of their gestation, I don’t know that they would universally oppose the idea. I am well aware that SOME of them are trying to punish women for having sex but that is like calling ALL tea partiers racist. Only some of them are, the rest are just tolerant of those who are. > [@florez](#): > > Great, then we agree on everything except the use of the term anti-choice. And I am sorry that you are so consumed by the language that you cannot see past it to the reality of opposing viewpoints on the issue. I think that getting caught up in a term that is very fitting, and then making your disagreement with it into a major concern, is a bit hysterical and makes me take you less seriously. So trying to talk you down from a hysterical position makes ME sound hysterical? Like I said, I’m pro-choice in the first trimester and get steadily more anti-abortion as the pregnancy proceeds past the first trimester. > [@monavis](#): > > Perhaps your trying to insult me … > > I use the Bible,because it seems most of the people who are just Pro-Birth seem to be Christians, … I’m not trying to insult you but you don’t write that coherently. Like English is not your first language or something. Pro-birth? Pro-birth would imply that they would support prenatal care, do you think they support universal pre-natal care? > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > We are? Well, I suggest a message of “we’re trying to fix the economy, but the Republicans are too busy obstructing our efforts and trying to pass useless laws restricting American freedom.” THIS!!! When you look at what Republicans have been doing with their legislative control of state houses and the house of representatives and you look at the sort of amendments they have been introducing into legislation, its mostly abortion/gay marriage related. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > And, at this point in time, it’s the Republicans who really need to worry about retaining moderate candidates, as one after another gets flushed out in this purity test that they seem to be obsessed with. When the hell did this happen? When the hell did Bennett and Hatch become “not conservative enough”? I was listening to Coburn a few weeks ago and he sounded rational and I can remember a time only a few years ago when he sounded like a nutjob. I suppose everything is relative. > [@Measure for Measure](#): > > John Mace likes to search for middle grounds, to make conservatives seem reasonable: There used to be such a thing as a reasonable conservative in politics and John Mace has always struck me as reasonable. If more Republicans were like him, I don’t know who I would have voted for the last 3 elections. But thats not where the conservatives are today. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > You mean the ones that helped cripple the party, and then mainly lost the next round of elections? > [@John\_Mace](#): > > No, I mean the ones you have to take if you want a majority. If you don’t care about having a majority in the House, then I guess you don’t need them. Ideological purity\>workable compromise. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > I think where many of us here differ from the vast American public, is that we don’t consider abortion, especially early in the pregnancy, to be a moral issue. Safe, legal and rare. I don’t really care about the “rare” part, even if most Americans do. Other than it’s better to avoid a surgical procedure, that is. Sort of like it’s better to not have to have a root canal, but having one isn’t a moral issue. +1 ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2012, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/226 "2012-05-21T22:34:09Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I am well aware that SOME of them are trying to punish women for having sex but that is like calling ALL tea partiers racist. Only some of them are, the rest are just tolerant of those who are. And? So what? Saying that you can’t criticize people unless they are all identical is just a way of saying you can’t criticize them at all. And going along with and supporting bigots is just as bad as being a bigot; the distinction is invisible to the victims. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Pro-birth? Pro-birth would imply that they would support prenatal care, do you think they support universal pre-natal care? Nonsense; they don’t care if the fetus is dead, much less healthy. Even if it’s dead, they just want to force the woman to go full term and give birth because that maximizes her suffering and humiliation. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Ideological purity\>workable compromise. _You cannot compromise with the present Republican party_. The Democrats keep trying, and it keeps having predictably disastrous results. Compromise requires two sides, not for just one side to constantly cave in. The Republicans are not the loyal opposition, they are not reasonable; they will settle for nothing less than everything they want, and are willing to wreck the country in the process. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2012, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/227 "2012-05-22T11:59:04Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Nuh-uh! > > I don’t think they’re right but if you could magically transfer an unwanted fetus into a test tube for the rest of their gestation, I don’t know that they would universally oppose the idea. I am well aware that SOME of them are trying to punish women for having sex but that is like calling ALL tea partiers racist. Only some of them are, the rest are just tolerant of those who are. > > So trying to talk you down from a hysterical position makes ME sound hysterical? > > Like I said, I’m pro-choice in the first trimester and get steadily more anti-abortion as the pregnancy proceeds past the first trimester. > > I’m not trying to insult you but you don’t write that coherently. Like English is not your first language or something. > > Pro-birth? Pro-birth would imply that they would support prenatal care, do you think they support universal pre-natal care? > > THIS!!! > > When you look at what Republicans have been doing with their legislative control of state houses and the house of representatives and you look at the sort of amendments they have been introducing into legislation, its mostly abortion/gay marriage related. > > When the hell did this happen? When the hell did Bennett and Hatch become “not conservative enough”? > > I was listening to Coburn a few weeks ago and he sounded rational and I can remember a time only a few years ago when he sounded like a nutjob. I suppose everything is relative. > > There used to be such a thing as a reasonable conservative in politics and John Mace has always struck me as reasonable. If more Republicans were like him, I don’t know who I would have voted for the last 3 elections. But thats not where the conservatives are today. > > Ideological purity\>workable compromise. > > +1 Perhaps you don’t understand me because I don’t sound coherent to you,There are others who do. Pro-Birth can just mean, once a child is born then too many who call them selves “Pro-Life” care nothing, or little, about the child’s welfare once born. Just want to push their beliefs on other’s.They seem to be the ones who do not want to pay the taxes necessary to support the born child to adulthood,nor want to pay the medical cost etc. to make sure the born child is taken care of,and are against birth control; perhaps you are not one of them, but I personally know several who complain about people who can’t care for their born children, and what they call welfare moms. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2012, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/228 "2012-05-22T12:06:10Z")
The OP isn’t coming back so I guess we’ll never know what he meant by “moderate on abortion”, but since his opening premise contained the falsehood the Democrats were being kicked out of the party right and left for holding the wrong views on abortion, I can only assume that his definition of “moderate on abortion” was equally defective and nonsensical. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2012, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/229 "2012-05-22T12:06:35Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Nuh-uh! > > I don’t think they’re right but if you could magically transfer an unwanted fetus into a test tube for the rest of their gestation, I don’t know that they would universally oppose the idea. I am well aware that SOME of them are trying to punish women for having sex but that is like calling ALL tea partiers racist. Only some of them are, the rest are just tolerant of those who are. > > So trying to talk you down from a hysterical position makes ME sound hysterical? > > Like I said, I’m pro-choice in the first trimester and get steadily more anti-abortion as the pregnancy proceeds past the first trimester. > > I’m not trying to insult you but you don’t write that coherently. Like English is not your first language or something. > > Pro-birth? Pro-birth would imply that they would support prenatal care, do you think they support universal pre-natal care? > > THIS!!! > > When you look at what Republicans have been doing with their legislative control of state houses and the house of representatives and you look at the sort of amendments they have been introducing into legislation, its mostly abortion/gay marriage related. > > When the hell did this happen? When the hell did Bennett and Hatch become “not conservative enough”? > > I was listening to Coburn a few weeks ago and he sounded rational and I can remember a time only a few years ago when he sounded like a nutjob. I suppose everything is relative. > > There used to be such a thing as a reasonable conservative in politics and John Mace has always struck me as reasonable. If more Republicans were like him, I don’t know who I would have voted for the last 3 elections. But thats not where the conservatives are today. > > Ideological purity\>workable compromise. > > +1 Perhaps you don’t understand me because I don’t sound coherent to you,There are others who do. Pro-Birth can just mean, once a child is born then too many who call them selves “Pro-Life” care nothing, or little, about the child’s welfare once born. Just want to push their beliefs on other’s.They seem to be the ones who do not want to pay the taxes necessary to suppot the born child to adulthood,nor want to pay the medical cost etc. to make sure the born child is taken care of,and are against birth control; perhaps you are not one of them, but I personally know several who complain about people who don’t care for their born children, and what they call welfare moms. ---
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2012, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819/230 "2012-05-23T09:51:00Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > There’s no point, since you’ll just get “Democrats” who’ll side with the Republicans and do their best to sabotage the rest of the Democratic Party. This doesn’t have to be true, though. There are Blue Dogs, and then there are anti-choice democrats. My rep, Mike Doyle (PA-14) is the latter, at least nominally. He’s a pretty good dem, pro-labor, pro-progressive taxing, but he’ll vote yes on most abortion restriction bills that come around. (Though not on funding cuts. He sends mixed messages.) Kathy Dahlkemper, who represented the Erie area until 2010, when she was hit by the tea party with attack ads that had her in a Rockettes kick line with Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer and Secretary of State Clinton (tell me that’s not sexist) was very much the same. She was specifically attacked in her general for being “pro life but not pro life enough.” The brand of pro-labor Catholic (and yes, that’s functionally importnt because it’s why they’re nominally anti-choice) democrats that come out of the rust belt (Western PA, E. Ohio, Buffalo, etc.) are a far cry from the Heath Shulers (what a waste of skin he is) and Ben Nelsons who really have no functional support in them for the platform of the Democratic party at all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dems-need-to-accept-moderates-on-abortion-capture-the-house/621819.md?page=11)