Let’s be real. I don’t know how anyone could see last night as anything other than a complete disaster for Democrats, with President Joe Biden coming across as frail and meandering. A lot of the folks I spoke to are feeling despairing, and angry that Democrats ran Biden again when it appears he isn’t up to the task. I don’t know what happens next, honestly, but my plan is to keep looking forward and reminding people about what’s at stake should Donald Trump be president again.
Let’s talk about the dismal conversation on abortion (if you can even call it that).
When the moderators asked about Roe being overturned, Trump said exactly what I predicted he would, and in the exact order I listed (he’s nothing if not predictable): Trump claimed that he generously gave abortion back to the states, which now get to decide for themselves; he brought up Ohio’s Issue 1, taking credit for the state enshrining abortion protections in their state constitution and using it as an example of a state getting to decide for itself; and he talked about ‘exceptions’ in an attempt to appear moderate right before launching into nonsense about ‘after birth’ abortion.
We knew he would lie, and we knew he would claim that Democrats want to kill newborn babies—because that’s what he’s been saying on the campaign trail. So why, then, didn’t the moderators step in and fact-check him? This is not about getting a number wrong or exaggerating some political accomplishment; he told a lie that puts abortion providers’ lives in danger.
Apparently CNN decided that the role of moderators last night was to keep moving ahead and not live fact-check—they left that for the post-debate conversation and coverage. BBC U.S. Special Correspondent Katty Kay put it best:
“Fact checkers on line are working very hard…But without the lies being called out in real time, the public doesn't know what's true and what isn't.”
That means that we needed Biden to play the role of fact-checker, and point out the absurdity of his lies—especially on abortion, which should have been the president’s strongest issue of the night. That’s what was so disappointing about the abortion exchange: the question about Roe was a gift to Biden. It should have been the easiest question of the debate, and he should have had a powerful, emotional soundbite at the ready.
Instead, Biden said one or two garbled sentences about six week bans before pivoting to immigration and talking about a young woman who was murdered. When moderator Dana Bash brought the conversation back to abortion, Biden had yet another opportunity to offer up a compelling message. Here’s what he said instead:
Please understand, I’m not highlighting this to rub salt in the wound or further depress anyone. No one needs that. But abortion is arguably Democrats’ most important issue, and Biden squandered the opportunity to reach American voters. And for those people who have been working so hard since Roe was overturned, it was heart-breaking to watch. It was also infuriating. One reproductive rights attorney tweeted that his fumbled answer “was a slap in the face to every woman who has spoken out and fought in court and the press for two years now to make people aware of what’s happening.”
And here’s the thing: It’s not as if the White House doesn’t understand what the messaging on abortion should be. Contrast Biden’s statements to what Vice President Kamala Harris said on MSNBC after the debate:
Now, we all know that Harris is better on abortion than the president in general—and that she’s been out doing a speaking tour on reproductive rights. But this is the kind of passion, outrage and information we could have used last night.
American women are angry and afraid and we needed Biden to channel that. So it’s reasonable for us to be disappointed, upset, and fearful over last night’s performance. I sure am. But I also know what’s done is done; so I’m giving myself a few hours to freak out, and then I’m getting back to work. Because the alternative is unthinkable.
So here’s something we can do right now: make sure Trump’s lies about abortion are called out as just that. For example, I’ve seen a lot of post-debate fact-checking about the ‘after birth’ abortion bullshit (as there should be), but less about what the disgraced former president said about abortion medication. Trump claimed, “the Supreme Court just approved the abortion pill, and I agree with their decision to have done that, and I will not block it.”
If you followed the mifepristone case, you know that SCOTUS absolutely did not “approve” abortion medication—they dismissed the case on standing. Mifepristone is still in danger both from other cases that will be brought to the Court, and from the Comstock Act.
In fact, the Comstock Act is exactly how conservatives plan to ban abortion without passing a national ban. Trump doesn’t have to “block” abortion medication; he just has appoint a new head of the DOJ who will prohibit the shipping of the pills. That strategy is very clearly outlined in Project 2025, and is a tactic that allows Republicans to pretend as if they didn’t ban or block anything. After all, the medication would still be ostensibly legal—you just wouldn’t be able to access it.
Again, this is an explicitly laid out plan. Yet when you look at the headlines about Trump and abortion medication today, this is what you get:
This kind of coverage terrifies me. It’s giving Trump exactly what he wants: the illusion of being moderate. He needs voters to believe that he wouldn’t make abortion any harder to get than it already is. We know that’s not true, but many Americans don’t. Recent polls show that Trump’s messaging is working, with some voters believing that he doesn’t really oppose abortion rights at all.
Mainstream media outlets and political reporters have a responsibility to make sure that Americans understand Trump’s actual position, not what he says in a debate to assuage and win over angry voters.
So if you’re feeling distressed and powerless today, consider contacting some publications about their coverage. Whether they’re huge national outlets or your neighborhood bulletin, they all matters. You can do the same on social media, and with friends and family.
Part of the reason I publish Abortion, Every Day is to give you all the information and tools you need to go out and create change in your own communities. Today is a great day to do just that.
From Politico..Right wing conservatives around the world (including Trump) are using (completely made up) immigrant violence against women to rally women voters. Distracting in this country from the mess the Republicans have made of the abortion issue...
"Around the world, the far-right is using anti-immigrant rhetoric around protecting women to woo female voters. Men tend to vote more conservatively than women do, but this tactic is starting to gain some traction among women, potentially closing the political gender gap.
In France, where far-right politicians have sought to link women’s rights and safety to immigration, that’s proving to be an effective strategy. Earlier this month, Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella’s National Rally party won 33 percent of the women’s vote in this year’s Parliamentary election, outpacing 30 percent of men — a 12 percentage point increase from women voters over five years, according to an election day poll by OpinionWay.
On Sunday, French citizens will cast their ballots in the first round of voting in the snap election that will determine whether Le Pen’s party takes control of Parliament. (There will be another round of voting next month.) If the National Rally wins, Bardella, a protégé of Le Pen, could become prime minister of France, making him the leader of Parliament with Macron as president until 2027. Le Pen then could run for president against Macron in 2027.
There are parallels across the pond. Le Pen’s populist, anti-immigration rhetoric is often compared to that of former President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, the approval rating for incumbent President Emmanuel Macron is at 26 percent, mirroring that of President Joe Biden’s, at 36 percent.
Will France’s election serve as a preview for the U.S. in November?
“There could be women who have very right-wing views that will be watching [Le Pen], to see how successful and maybe they can mimic some of that same rhetoric elsewhere,” says Amanda Hunter, executive director of the Barbara Lee Foundation, a nonprofit which advocates for women’s equality and representation in politics.
During the European parliamentary elections on June 9, amidst the surge of far-right wins across the continent, Le Pen’s National Rally party sweeped the French election, crushing Macron’s Renaissance party by more than two to one. Macron responded by dissolving the National Assembly and calling for a high-risk snap vote in a last-ditch effort to prove Le Pen’s party cannot win on a national level. (Keep up with the French snap election results here.)
Throughout their campaign, Bardella and Le Pen have made a concerted effort to appeal to women, mainly through hard-hitting messages about safety and protection. Immigrants, they say, are the problem.
“There isn’t a single woman watching us tonight who, when she goes out in the streets of our country … isn’t afraid for her safety because she worries that … she will be harassed, insulted and sometimes assaulted,” by immigrants, Bardella said at a political debate in Paris Tuesday night.
Last week, Bardella posted a “message to all the women of France” on X, saying he’d be a “prime minister who guarantees the rights and freedoms of every woman and girl in France.”
He has also said he would deport “foreign delinquents and criminals” and introduce stricter sentences for violence against women.
In the U.S., the Republican Party has applied similar tactics in efforts to woo the women’s vote, mainly through the narrative that Latino immigrants commit violent crimes against women. (And typically, they showcase white women victims.)
At the State of the Union speech in March, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) wore a T-shirt emblazoned with “Say Her Name,” a reference to Laken Riley, a Georgia nursing student killed in February by a man who authorities say was an undocumented immigrant.
“Laken Riley would be alive today if Joe Biden had not willfully and maliciously eviscerated the borders of the United States and set loose thousands and thousands of dangerous criminals into our country,” Trump said.
At campaign events in April, Trump attempted to tie the death of Riley to the death of Ruby Garcia, a 25-year-old in Grand Rapids, Michigan, who was allegedly killed by Brandon Ortiz-Vite, a Mexican citizen.
Trump asserted that his administration had kicked Ortiz-Vite “out of the country and crooked Joe Biden took him back and let him back in and let him stay in and he viciously killed Ruby.”
Riley and Garcia are the latest in a string of womens’ deaths, linked to immigrant men, that have been used in Republicans’ anti-immigration policy push. Often, the victims are white and their killers are not: Kate Steinle in 2015, Sarah Root in 2016 and Mollie Tibbetts in 2018.
Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics, notes another example of this strategy in Republicans’ restrictions on transgender athletes, referencing how efforts to ban transgender girls from women’s sports teams are often angled as a precaution to protect young girl athletes.
Italy’s first female Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has employed the same strategy in her country to further her nationalist, anti-immigration policies.
After congratulating police officers for dismantling a Nigerian-run trafficking network in April 2019, Meloni said “the fight against illegal immigration involves saving trafficked women from the hands of their traffickers.”
Meloni’s party, Fratelli d'Italia, won 28.8 percent of the vote this year, up almost 3 percent from the 2022 legislative elections, and Fratelli d’Italia now intends to engage in dialogue with France's National Rally party to form majorities in the European Parliament."
Sigh.