Leaked/breaking:Roe v. Wade expected to be overturned

[jamil]

Here you go.

State Primary Election Types

The manner in which party primary elections are conducted varies widely from state to state. Primaries can be categorized as either closed, partially closed, partially open, open to unaffiliated voters, open or top-two.

www.ncsl.org

This site classifies Kansas as "open to unaffiliated voters". Just to muddy the waters up a bit...

n.b.: Indiana is "partially open" according to this site.

If anyone really wants to support a theory that Democrats are actually the reason why the measure passed, I think the math doesn't really add up. Polling puts the number of people who identify as "Republicans" at 46%. Democrats are 31%. Independents/unaffiliated are 23%.

Almost half of registered voters turned out, which is pretty heavy for a primary election. It doesn't look like Republicans stayed home. And if they did, they're obviously more casual about their views on abortion than one might expect. But I don't see much support for the idea that Democrats outperformed their distribution by enough to have made the difference.

I think anti-abortionists need to accept that the results of Kansas likely reflected the will of the voters, including Republican voters. And though I haven't seen statistics on it, I suspect that a majority of the people who identify as Republicans who voted nay on the referendum were women.

 

[chipbennett]

If anyone really wants to support a theory that Democrats are actually the reason why the measure passed, I think the math doesn't really add up. Polling puts the number of people who identify as "Republicans" at 46%. Democrats are 31%. Independents/unaffiliated are 23%.

Almost half of registered voters turned out, which is pretty heavy for a primary election. It doesn't look like Republicans stayed home. And if they did, they're obviously more casual about their views on abortion than one might expect. But I don't see much support for the idea that Democrats outperformed their distribution by enough to have made the difference.

I think anti-abortionists need to accept that the results of Kansas likely reflected the will of the voters, including Republican voters. And though I haven't seen statistics on it, I suspect that a majority of the people who identify as Republicans who voted nay on the referendum were women.

I looked at the actual numbers, and demonstrated why one simply cannot draw such a conclusion from that vote result.

 

[jamil]

I looked at the actual numbers, and demonstrated why one simply cannot draw such a conclusion from that vote result.

"likely" is the key word. We don't actually know. And yeah, the nay votes could have come 100% from Democrats. Serously though, Chip, how likely is that? I look at the results in Kansas, and Pew research on Kansas, and I'm not surprised by the outcome. It's not sure that if you're a Republican, you're pro-life. It's not sure that if you're a Democrat, you're pro-choice. It's not even sure if you have a Christian perspective.

I don't think much can be derived about party strength from this vote. Republican anti-abortionists are trying to say that it's activist democrats that produced the result. that pro-abortion Democrat activists swayed the outcome and that KS is actually strongly anti-abortion. It's not. It's close to 50/50 on the question of illegal in most cases vs legal in most cases.

The Democrat pro-abortionists are saying the same thing. I just read a LA Times article that claims it's the democrat activists that saved the day! That it's an indication, if they can win in KS, they can keep the House and the Senate, and that Republicans are secretly fearing the outcome in KS.

Back to the polls, it looks to me like party affiliation isn't an important enough factor to account for the numbers. The state is made up of almost 60% republican. You might think that should mean a clear "pro-choice" victory. But 36% of those Republicans say abortion should be legal or mostly legal. So Republicans "pro-lifers" are not a majority by themselves. Independents were split pretty much 50/50. So I think it's a mix of opinions that accumulate to an outcome. Point is, people are treating demographic groups as if they're a monolith. They're really not. The Pew research is interesting even on the question of religion.

86% of the Kansans who who support banning all or most abortions, say they are certain in their belief in God. Okay, so that sounds predictive, right? But on the other side, 51% of Kansans who say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, say they are certain in their belief in God. So even people who have a strong belief in God are split.


I do think a holistic view of polling data + actual vote, supports that this is probably the will of KS. However, I do not think that it's as lopsided as the vote was. I think that that Democrat pro-abortionists likely outperformed Republican anti-abortionists. But I don't see any evidence that it would be in numbers that would have changed the yea/nay outcome.

Another interesting one is how people's view on evolution distributed across the two sides. Predictably the natural evolution viewpoint favored legal/mostly legal. The evolution/don't know how, was evenly distributed. The view that humans always existed in present form, which would correlate with creationists' view, predictably favored the illegal/mostly illegal view.

 

[bwframe]

Remember when they threatened this with RFRA? Will Cummins and Apple be far behind with similar wokeness threats?

In wake of new abortion ban, Lilly says it will look outside Indiana for expansion projects - Indianapolis Business Journal

Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly and Co. said Indiana's new abortion law could hinder its ability to attract diverse scientific, engineering and business talent to the state.

www.ibj.com

 

[Twangbanger]

..."likely" is the key word. We don't actually know. And yeah, the nay votes could have come 100% from Democrats. Serously though, Chip, how likely is that?...

 

[KLB]

Remember when they threatened this with RFRA? Will Cummins and Apple be far behind with similar wokeness threats?

In wake of new abortion ban, Lilly says it will look outside Indiana for expansion projects - Indianapolis Business Journal

Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly and Co. said Indiana's new abortion law could hinder its ability to attract diverse scientific, engineering and business talent to the state.

www.ibj.com

More virtue signaling. If they want to pay higher taxes to build in a pro-abortion state they can knock themselves out.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I don't think they removed the criminal component entirely, I think they just got rid of the ability to prosecute at the State level, which will leave it up to county prosecutors to enforce the bill. Which is going to be a whole set of problems on its own, but best I can tell both the House and Senate version kept the same language with is that a mother cannot be charged with a crime for having an abortion, but the abortionist will be charged with a class A misdemeanor and lose his license, unless the abortion falls under one of the exceptions. I haven't had time to read the bill in its entirety yet, though, and keeping up with all the amendments was a bit hard, so I could've missed something.

The abortionist can be charged depending on which section violated anywhere from a class A misd to a level 3 felony and/or lose their license. They did get rid of the section to prosecute at the state level but added a section for a task force to make recommendations to the legislature on how to handle it. Including authorizing the state Attorney General to prosecute. Bottom of page 42 to page 43.

(b) The task force shall:
(1) study the circumstances in which a county prosecutor
makes a blanket refusal to enforce a specific statute or
constitutional provision; and
(2) consider appropriate methods of enforcing the statute or
constitutional provision, including:
(A) granting the attorney general concurrent jurisdiction
to enforce the statute or constitutional provision under
certain circumstances;
(B) granting another prosecuting attorney concurrent
jurisdiction to enforce the statute or constitutional
provision under certain circumstances;
(C) establishing a procedure to appoint a special
prosecuting attorney under certain circumstances; or
(D) any other method the task force determines should be
recommended; and

 

[chipbennett]

"likely" is the key word. We don't actually know. And yeah, the nay votes could have come 100% from Democrats. Serously though, Chip, how likely is that? I look at the results in Kansas, and Pew research on Kansas, and I'm not surprised by the outcome. It's not sure that if you're a Republican, you're pro-life. It's not sure that if you're a Democrat, you're pro-choice. It's not even sure if you have a Christian perspective.

I don't think much can be derived about party strength from this vote. Republican anti-abortionists are trying to say that it's activist democrats that produced the result. that pro-abortion Democrat activists swayed the outcome and that KS is actually strongly anti-abortion. It's not. It's close to 50/50 on the question of illegal in most cases vs legal in most cases.

This is all poll data, that may or may not have any correlation to ballot data.

The Democrat pro-abortionists are saying the same thing. I just read a LA Times article that claims it's the democrat activists that saved the day! That it's an indication, if they can win in KS, they can keep the House and the Senate, and that Republicans are secretly fearing the outcome in KS.

Back to the polls, it looks to me like party affiliation isn't an important enough factor to account for the numbers. The state is made up of almost 60% republican. You might think that should mean a clear "pro-choice" victory. But 36% of those Republicans say abortion should be legal or mostly legal. So Republicans "pro-lifers" are not a majority by themselves. Independents were split pretty much 50/50. So I think it's a mix of opinions that accumulate to an outcome. Point is, people are treating demographic groups as if they're a monolith. They're really not. The Pew research is interesting even on the question of religion.

Again, poll data are not ballot data. I posted the actual turnout numbers above. I also posted the minimum opposition to the referendum for both the participating Rs and Ds. As many as 80% of participating Rs voted Yes on the referendum (the actual percentage could have been less than that, depending on how many Democrat (unlikely) or Unaffiliated voters also voted Yes on the referendum).

But, yes: Kansas is its own State, and is certainly not monolithic, even if it is strongly R.

86% of the Kansans who who support banning all or most abortions, say they are certain in their belief in God. Okay, so that sounds predictive, right? But on the other side, 51% of Kansans who say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, say they are certain in their belief in God. So even people who have a strong belief in God are split.

(Back to poll data, which does not correlate with or translate to ballot data.)

I do think a holistic view of polling data + actual vote, supports that this is probably the will of KS. However, I do not think that it's as lopsided as the vote was. I think that that Democrat pro-abortionists likely outperformed Republican anti-abortionists. But I don't see any evidence that it would be in numbers that would have changed the yea/nay outcome.

Except that, polling data do not correlate with, or translate to, ballot data. There's just no way to link the two. Perhaps if there were some exit polling data, that might provide a modicum of clarity. But, I don't see any.

Another interesting one is how people's view on evolution distributed across the two sides. Predictably the natural evolution viewpoint favored legal/mostly legal. The evolution/don't know how, was evenly distributed. The view that humans always existed in present form, which would correlate with creationists' view, predictably favored the illegal/mostly illegal view.

View attachment 216109

Polling data are interesting, though I don't think Kansas looks all that different from most anywhere else with respect to ideological breakdown and abortion views.

It was likely a poor strategic decision to try run such a ballot referendum in a primary.

 

[chipbennett]

Remember when they threatened this with RFRA? Will Cummins and Apple be far behind with similar wokeness threats?

In wake of new abortion ban, Lilly says it will look outside Indiana for expansion projects - Indianapolis Business Journal

Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly and Co. said Indiana's new abortion law could hinder its ability to attract diverse scientific, engineering and business talent to the state.

www.ibj.com

I'll take "Toothless Virtue Signaling" for $200, Mayim.

 

[bwframe]

Remember when they threatened this with RFRA? Will Cummins and Apple be far behind with similar wokeness threats?

In wake of new abortion ban, Lilly says it will look outside Indiana for expansion projects - Indianapolis Business Journal

Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly and Co. said Indiana's new abortion law could hinder its ability to attract diverse scientific, engineering and business talent to the state.

www.ibj.com

Strange that I can see into the future so well?

Cummins is reliably woke...

Cummins outlines opposition to Indiana abortion law - Inside INdiana Business

Another one of Indiana's largest companies is expressing its opposition to the abortion bill signed into law Friday by Governor Eric Holcomb. In a statement shared to employees on Saturday, Columbus-based Cummins Inc. (NYSE: CMI) said it is "deeply concerned" how the law impacts its employees...

www.insideindianabusiness.com

 

[HoughMade]

Not going to find out. Thank Jesus for GOP Supermajorities!

...and we don't have referenda. Ever.

 

[bwframe]

 

[BigRed]

So where does the investigation into how this was leaked stand?

 

[bwframe]

 

[AndreusMaximus]

So where does the investigation into how this was leaked stand?

Try to keep up, we're not talking about that anymore because the FBI raided Trump and he's definitely going to jail this time!

 

[rhamersley]

I know they're all in for the cause and everything, but going out and getting knocked up just so they can come over to Indiana and get an abortion seems to be going above and beyond, to tell the truth...

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Pregnant Texas mom who claimed unborn child counted as a passenger gets ticket dismissed​

Pregnant Texas mom cited for driving alone in HOV lane gets ticket dismissed

Brandy Bottone, 32, said she has since received a second ticket for the same offense.

www.chron.com

 

[chipbennett]

Pregnant Texas mom who claimed unborn child counted as a passenger gets ticket dismissed​

Pregnant Texas mom cited for driving alone in HOV lane gets ticket dismissed

Brandy Bottone, 32, said she has since received a second ticket for the same offense.

www.chron.com

Excellent! Both on the basis that the unborn is a distinct individual, and on the stupidity of HOV lanes.

 

[Shadow01]

Pregnant Texas mom who claimed unborn child counted as a passenger gets ticket dismissed​

Pregnant Texas mom cited for driving alone in HOV lane gets ticket dismissed

Brandy Bottone, 32, said she has since received a second ticket for the same offense.

www.chron.com

Validates the unborn as a living human being

 

[jamil]

Regardless, terms of how the law was written, it doesn't look to me that there was any other choice. If the law would have spelled out asses in seats, it wouldn't have worked. The intent of HOV lanes is to encourage ride sharing. Stupidly written laws should get ruled against.