Essay: Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton helped cause Roe vs. Wade to be overturned

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Liberals and leftists, as much as I hate to break it to you, Hillary Clinton helped cause Roe vs. Wade to be overturned.

Please examine the irrefutable proof and evidence of this matter below.

Recently, I was having a discussion/debate about Roe vs. Wade U.S. Supreme Court decision about abortion being overturned at a website with many people who have a left-of-center, secular worldview - namely the website RationalWiki. In case you are one of the many people in the world who are not aware of RationalWiki, that website has lost a huge amount of web traffic in recent years (see: RationalWiki and web traffic).

The discussion/debate can be found HERE.

Below is part of my discussion with RationalWikians about how Barack Obama helped cause Roe vs. Wade to be overturned. RationalWiki.org is a politically left-leaning website that skews towards atheism/agnosticism in terms of its worldview.

Excerpts from my discussion with RationalWikians on why Barack Obama helped cause Roe vs. Wade to be overturned

Barack Obama helped cause Roe vs. Wade to be overturned.

Given the political backlash to the liberal elitist Barack Obama at the state/local levels , historians may look back at the Obama years and argue that Obama hastened the death of liberalism. Democrats lost 1,042 seats—including U.S. House, Senate, state governorship, and state legislative seats—during his eight years in office.[1]

The Obama administration also further destabilized the Middle East which caused many refugees to go to Europe which caused political backlash in Europe in terms of right-wing nationalist parties.

In addition, Obama and the comedian Seth Meyers publicly mocked Donald Trump at the 2011 White House Correspondents' dinner which may have prompted Trump to run for president.[2]

Roe vs. Wade being overturned is partly due to Barack Obama not making a more clean break with the Clintons. Hillary Clinton was a far less skillful politician than Bill Clinton. She ran a terrible campaign against Donald Trump. And Donald Trump nominated three pro-life judges to the Supreme Court.

Hillary Clinton's Wikipedia page on Hillary's legacy as a Secretary of State: "Although Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State was popular at the time among the public and praised by President Obama, observers have noted that there was no signature diplomatic breakthrough during it nor any transformative domination of major issues in the nature of Dean Acheson, George Marshall, or Henry Kissinger. The intractable issues when she entered office, such as Iran, Pakistan, Arab-Israeli relations, and North Korea, were still that way when she left."[1] Wikipedia's article on the Clinton Foundation has a "cash for access" section.[2] Hillary Clinton was no JFK. JFK had political skills and he was electable. Hillary ran for the presidency twice and failed both times. And these two examples are merely the tip of the iceberg on why Obama should have never elevated Hillary Clinton.

Hillary's very preventable loss to Donald Trump being elected in 2016 was key to Donald Trump putting in three U.S. Supreme Court justices. Obama served in the executive branch of the federal government as POTUS and hiring quality staff is a key component to success in that position. Obama dropped the ball when hired Hillary and Joe Biden and there is no way to sugarcoat it. About half the Democrats don't want Biden to run again and I don't see Obama rallying to Biden's defense now and saying what a great president he is.

As far as Roe vs. Wade being overturned - it was weakly defended. The conservatives were focused like a laser on overturning Roe vs. Wade for five decades.

Who do you think bears more responsibility for Roe vs. Wade being overturned - Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton? Does Obama bear more responsibility because he elevated Hillary Clinton? Or does Hillary Clinton bear more responsibility because she is responsible for running a losing a U.S. presidential campaign in 2016 against an opponent who never held public office?

RationalWikians, instead of putting some of the blame on Roe vs. Wade being overturned on Obama and Hillary Clinton, would it make you feel more comfortable if we blamed Democrats for choosing such weak candidates and for having a weak system for electing candidates? For example, Bernie Sanders thinks that the Super Delegates have an outsize influence in candidate selection. Do you think more Democrat voters could be better educated about public policies, their candidates and their system of electing candidates? And do you think Democrat office holders could strengthen their public policies and/or keep more of their campaign promises?

2010 Midterm elections and wave of anti-abortion laws due to the red wave election. Obama called this political rout of the Democrats during his term a "shellacking"

Barack Obama called 2010 Midterm Elections rout of the Democrats during his term a "shellacking" that made him "feel bad".[3]

The New York Times in a news article about Roe vs. Wade entitled How Did Roe Fall: Before a Decisive Ruling, A Powerful Red Wave stated:

“ The beginning of the end of Roe v. Wade arrived on election night in November 2010.

That night, control of state houses across the country flipped from Democrat to Republican, almost to the number: Democrats had controlled 27 state legislatures going in and ended up with 16; Republicans started with 14 and ended up controlling 25. Republicans swept not only the South but Democratic strongholds in the Midwest, picking up more seats nationwide than either party had in four decades. By the time the votes had been counted, they held their biggest margin since the Great Depression.

There had been a time, in the 15 years after Roe, when Republicans were as likely as Democrats to support an absolute right to legal abortion, and sometimes even more so. But 2010 swept in a different breed of Republican, powered by Tea Party supporters, that locked in a new conservatism. While Tea Party-backed candidates had campaigned on fiscal discipline and promised indifference to social issues, once in office they found it difficult to cut state budgets. And a well-established network was waiting with model anti-abortion laws.

In legislative sessions starting the following January, Republican-led states passed a record number of restrictions: 92, or nearly three times as many as the previous high, set in 2005. The three years following the 2010 elections would result in 205 anti-abortion laws across the country, more than in the entire previous decade.

“A watershed year in the defense of life,” Charmaine Yoest, at the time president of the anti-abortion group Americans United for Life, proclaimed when the sessions were over, noting that 70 of the laws — restrictions on abortion pills and hurdles for women getting abortions and clinics providing them — had adopted the group’s model legislation. “And that is just the beginning.”[4]

”

Barack Obama called 2010 Midterm Elections rout of the Democrats during his term a "shellacking" that made him "feel bad".[5]

The forecasted red wave 2022 midterm election in the United States

A red wave of Republican/conservative voters has been predicted by pundits in order to give a majority of Republicans in the U.S. Congress and potentially in U.S. Senate as well in the 2022 midterm U.S. Congressional elections.

Political history shows that midterm election results are baked in by the second quarter of an election year. And the final outcome is almost always worse for the losing party than political analysts predicted six months out. Democrats will be happy if they lose merely 20 to 35 House seats this fall. They know they could lose as many as 40 or even 50 seats which would propel the GOP to their biggest House majority in nearly 100 years. The GOP, meanwhile, knows they can make history if they keep their heads down, nominate sane, electable candidates and keep the focus on President Joe Biden, inflation, crime and illegal immigration.

As far as the forecasted 2022 midterm red wave, while having the latest poll information is helpful, given the unreliability of pollsters as of late, it is very important to look at the aggregate of all the polling for the U.S. congressional generic polling. And the RealClearPolitics.com average is showing 44.7 percent of voters picking Republicans and 41.3 picking Democrats. And historically, it doesn't take much of a Republican lead for the GOP to achieve a red wave when it comes to the generic vote. I would also point out that many people vote with the pocketbooks and the economic forecasts are looking more and more gloomy as far the forecasters. Furthermore, historically after Memorial Day the results of the U.S. midterm elections are cemented in and do not change much. I would also point out that presidential approval has a big influence on the midterms and Biden is not doing well on the presidential approval front.

Axios just reported: "More than 1 million voters in 43 states switched to the Republican Party in the last year, while 630,000 became Democrats. Why it matters: It may be a new sign of a red wave brewing ahead of this fall's midterms. Driving the news: The party switches were most significant in the suburbs, where well-educated swing voters who didn't support former President Trump in 2020 appear to be returning to the Republican Party, per AP. But the party switches were evident across the board — in red states and blue states, cities and small towns and suburban areas, AP found. Of the nearly 1.7 million voters who changed parties in states with available data over the last year, some two-thirds went to the GOP." The Axios data does two things: 1) It makes the case for a 2022 red wave election stronger. 2) If you an advocate for representational government, it does make the case that the Democrats vote for poor leaders stronger. Therefore, it makes the case that Obama and Hillary Clinton were poor leaders stronger so one could argue that some of the blame for Roe vs. Wade being overturned could legitimately be blamed on them

RationalWikians, would it make you feel more comfortable if we blamed Democrats for choosing such weak candidates and for having a weak system for electing candidates? For example, Bernie Sanders thinks that the Super Delegates have an outsize influence in candidate selection. Do you think more Democrat voters could be better educated about public policies, their candidates and their system of electing candidates? And do you think Democrat office holders could strengthen their public policies and/or keep more of their campaign promises?

Another liberal/leftist bubble burst!

Before winning the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Donald Trump was a political novice who never ran for public office before.

It was unbearable for RationalWikians to acknowledge how weak the Democrat Party is right now! And that Saint Obama made a big mistake! I also pointed out that Obama was not rallying to the defense of Joe Biden and saying what a great president he is.

I do hope that as time progresses, the Democrat Party becomes saner. In general, it's not healthy if a two-party system has a very weak competitor. If the Democrats wind up in the political wilderness for a time, it might sober them up.

User: Conservative's other essays

See also

Humor

Other:

External links

References

  1. ↑ Democrats lost over 1,000 seats under Obama. Fox News. December 27, 2016. Retrieved December 27, 2016.
  2. ↑ Seth Meyers: 'I am the reason' Trump became president, Business Insider
  3. ↑ Obama on Midterm Shellacking: 'It Feels Bad'
  4. ↑ How Did Roe Fall: Before a Decisive Ruling, A Powerful Red Wave by Kate Zernike, New York Times, June 25, 2022
  5. ↑ Obama on Midterm Shellacking: 'It Feels Bad'
Retrieved from "https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:_Barack_Obama_and_Hillary_Clinton_helped_cause_Roe_vs._Wade_to_be_overturned&oldid=1873125"