Dem
51
GOP
49
After we published the mailbag last weekend, we got an e-mail from reader J.T. in San Bernardino, CA observing that a broad set of campaign messages for Joe Biden, like the one proposed by K.H. in Scotch Plains, is not the right approach, because so many voters don't pay attention. So, as an alternative, J.T. proposed this nine-point plan for what Biden should focus on:
It would seem that the White House has figured it out, because the Biden campaign is hard at work on hammering Donald Trump on the abortion issue.
Last week, in fact, we had an item about a commercial put out by the Biden campaign, in which clips of Donald Trump bragging about the end of Roe are paired with footage of Biden talking about how he will do everything he can to protect abortion access. Not bad, but Democratic strategists see two potential problems here. The first is that attacking Trump might alienate voters who supported him in the past, and don't want to feel judged. The second is that Biden is not wholly credible, since he's male, and a Catholic, and has some votes in his Senate career that are not 100% abortion-access-friendly.
And so, the Biden campaign is working on a somewhat different approach, one that worked pretty well for Gov. Andy Beshear (D-KY) in his reelection campaign. Beshear had ads featuring Kentucky women who were victimized, or who would have been victimized, by Kentucky's new, harsh abortion law. For example, Hadley Duvall was raped and impregnated by her stepfather as a child, and in her spot she talked about how she would have been required to carry the baby to term, had the rape happened in 2023.
Taking a cue from that, here is the new ad from the Biden campaign:
For those who do not care to watch, it features Amanda Zurawski and her husband Josh talking about how excited they were to welcome baby Willow, and then going through some of the things they had bought in anticipation of the event, like a baby book and a onesie. Then, of course, she had a miscarriage, but one that left the (deceased) fetus still in the womb. Nonetheless, no doctor in Texas would perform an abortion. As the commercial points out, this led to sepsis, nearly killed Zurawski twice, and left her potentially unable to carry another baby to term. It ends with what is clearly going to be a recurring tagline: "Donald Trump did this." The ad is... brutal. Very powerful, but very hard to watch. And there will be more.
Also, as long as we are on the general subject, reader S.S. in Toronto, ON, Canada, brings to our attention a piece by Robert Hubbell from his Today's Edition Newsletter. He points out that there's a way for a re-elected President Trump to ban abortion nationwide, and to do so without needing to worry about Congress/the filibuster, and without even needing to break his "promise" not to sign a national abortion ban. Here's the key passage:
Trump is playing word games with the fundamental rights of women. If elected, Trump doesn't need to "sign" a national abortion ban to enforce a national abortion ban. How can that be?
Project 2025 is a plan being prepared by Trump's reactionary advisors to implement an authoritarian regime under Trump if he is reelected. One prong of Project 2025 is to use the 1873 federal law known as the Comstock Act to effectuate a national ban. See Mark Joseph Stern in Slate, Arizona's abortion ban is back. It's every state's future if Trump wins. (slate.com)
Like the 1864 Arizona law, the Comstock Act is a moribund law that has been overtaken by newer statutes—but it has not been repealed. A Trump-appointed Attorney General could simply start enforcing a federal law that has been on the books since 1873 and claim that there is no "ban" signed by Trump. The national "ban" on abortion was signed by President Ulysses S. Grant in 1873—and would be enforced as an existing law by his Attorney General (Kash Patel?).
Indictments under the Comstock Act would be challenged in federal court, which would place the ongoing validity of the Comstock Act on the US Supreme Court's docket. It is reasonable to assume that the reactionary majority on the US Supreme Court will rule in the same way as the Republicans on the Arizona Supreme Court.
In short, don't fall for Trump's "I won't sign a national ban" lies. He will instruct his Attorney General to enforce the Comstock Act—and claim that he kept his promise.
So, Democrats will surely hammer on that point, too: "The exact same thing that happened in Arizona could happen nationwide; the only difference is that the federal law is from the 1870s instead of the 1860s." (Z)