There are a gazillion “explanations” for pro-life Donald Trump’s victory last week over pro-abortion (and then some) Hillary Clinton. A story written by James Hohmann for today’s Washington Post underlines two common denominators, which I believe are interrelated and are illustrations of the same willful blindness.
Hohmann’s primary emphasis is how the Clinton campaign’s tin-ear to the importance of jobs to working class America made them deaf to a private memo sent last May by David Betras, “the longtime chairman of the Mahoning County Democratic Party,” who argued Clinton was in “grave danger of losing not just Ohio but also Pennsylvania and Michigan.”
The most important long-term takeaway is buried near the end of the story: “Both before and since the election, scores of liberals have complained about how much attention… has been given to the Rust Belt; they argue privately that these blue-collar, non-college-educated, white-working-class Democrats are dinosaurs.”
Those “dinosaurs” are, of course working class Americans who are disproportionately pro-life (see below) and have been forever and a day. This contempt reflects both the elitist snobbishness of what Hohmann calls D.C. Democrats and their sublime assurance that there will be eventually be enough Hispanics who will vote Democratic to render “these blue-collar, non-college-educated, white-working-class Democrats” irrelevant. (And good riddance, they would add.)
“None are so blind as those who will not see,” anyone?
Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram to help us share pro-life pictures.
Hohmann also interviewed the African-American mayor of McDonald Village. A Democrat, Glenn Holmes “just got elected to an open state House seat with 60 percent of the vote, even as Trump carried the district.” Many Democrats in his district , he said, voted for Trump because of a Trifecta of issues, which included that she “supported late-term abortion.”
Holmes dismisses Trump’s talking about their concerns as “fear mongering.” But he concedes that “Democrats didn’t address the fears. They dismissed them and thought people would see right through it. But that just sent the message that they didn’t care.”
Without getting into the other two issues, which are not our issues, Clinton’s support for “late-term abortion” wasn’t imaginary, not something that voters misunderstand and therefore “feared” irrationally.
What Holmes is really saying, I believe, is that he regrets Clinton boldly and unhesitatingly stated her true position: abortion for any reason, or no reason, as late in pregnancy as any woman would want, paid for by you and me.
She didn’t bury her advocacy for unlimited abortion at home and abroad deeply enough in euphemisms and sophistries. Clinton happily adopted the position of the most militant wing of the pro-abortion movement (of which she is a charter member): abortion is a good thing, not something to be “rare,” so good that the rest of us ought to subsidize the annihilation of millions of unborn children.
Democrats have sold their souls to the Abortion Industry and want the rest of us to agree this Faustian bargain is a reason why someday they will return to power.
It is a measure of how far removed from reality they are, that they actually believe this.
LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. This post originally appeared in at National Right to Life News Today —- an online column on pro-life issues.
