ADVERTISEMENT

Conservatives wonder: Why aren’t Planned Parenthood’s poll numbers falling?

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
78,475
60,597
113
Perhaps one reason why it looks like they will kick the can down the road to December for their ill advised government shutdown threat:

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) was perplexed. Two long months had passed since the Center for Medical Progress started releasing undercover videos in which current and former Planned Parenthood employees described the grim economics of fetal tissue harvesting. Since then, a long congressional recess had come and gone and Republican-run states had redoubled their efforts to defund the family planning titan. Yet in the most recent poll from Reuters/Ipsos, 54 percent of voters still favored federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

"Those numbers are news to me," said King. "I haven’t paid any attention to the polls. But am I surprised? Yes. That would explain some of the reasons why the leadership is not committing to defund."

Since King made that analysis, the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll has returned from the field, with even better news for Planned Parenthood. The full poll, to be released today, will find that the group's favorable rating is slightly up since the July release of the videos, from 45-30 percent favorable-unfavorable to 47-31 percent. Going into Tuesday's 10 a.m. congressional hearing on the group, a well-hyped showdown between the GOP and Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, the video campaign appears not to have shifted public opinion on federal defunding.

"This is something the pro-life movement has been trying to educate people about for many years," said Mallory Quigley, spokeswoman for the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List. "I’ve seen polling that finds even some people who consider themselves pro-life don’t know that Planned Parenthood performs abortions. When you’ve got President Obama and Miss America telling the lie for you, it goes a long way. I grew up with Judy Blume books, where the last couple pages would tell you that you should go to Planned Parenthood for health services."

The sturdiness of support for Planned Parenthood stands out in a field of anti-abortion victories. For seven years, until 2015, more Americans told Gallup pollsters they were "pro-life" than "pro-choice." Activists have credited even the omnipresence of social media, and the attendant photos of babies and sonograms, for building a culture of life. It's allowed the movement to talk over the mainstream press and the dominant, progressive cultural voices. It hasn't been able to talk over the Planned Parenthood defense squad.

"When mainstream news organizations do decide to cover the videos, they’ve parroted Planned Parenthood’s talking points and added qualifying statements about the credibility of the videos," argued The Federalist's Bre Payton, in one of that conservative site's many critiques of the funding debate. "They also love to use the phrase 'highly edited' when talking about the undercover footage, which suggests to the reader there’s a slight chance the abortion provider deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Steve King had worried about that. "When this emerged, I said, 'Cut all funding and do it now,'" said King. "If we didn't do that, we'd give Planned Parenthood a whole year to spend millions of dollars on PR and lobbying. I wanted to do it like ACORN -- that vote came so quickly that I think many Democrats came to a conviction that ACORN funding was a threat to their re-election."

No such phenomenon has subsumed Planned Parenthood. Republican messaging has been impeccable -- female members at the head of the line to argue for defunding, the party fully committed to funding any "woman's health" that is not Planned Parenthood. From Carly Fiorina to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), the party's presidential candidates have insisted that it would be the fault of Barack Obama, not the GOP, if the government temporarily shut down over the funding issue. Yet the numbers haven't moved.

"Certainly, the debate's come a long way," said Quigley. "I don’t think Romney would have touched this with a ten-foot pole. You’ve got all these celebrities coming out to defend Planned Parenthood; on the other, the pro-life movement, as you know, does not exactly have a lot of Hollywood on call."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ds-poll-numbers-falling/?tid=trending_strip_5
 
The media has done a fabulous job of making light of the PP atrocities.

They didn't even acknowledge the Pope's message on abortion. They were too busy ejaculating over the environmental message.

Protect a Spotted Owl = Good

Protect a child = Meh...
 
The media has done a fabulous job of making light of the PP atrocities.

They didn't even acknowledge the Pope's message on abortion. They were too busy ejaculating over the environmental message.

Protect a Spotted Owl = Good

Protect a child = Meh...

So what will conservatives learn from their latest escapades in making stuff up and flat out lying? My money is that they will redouble their efforts to lie and make stuff up.
 
so there are poll numbers for a business which cuts up babies and sells the parts? how is the third reich poling btw?
 
So what will conservatives learn from their latest escapades in making stuff up and flat out lying? My money is that they will redouble their efforts to lie and make stuff up.

I've always wondered how the Left wound up on the wrong side of abortion. Pretending that there is no wrong is the rendering of a human life seems so against their "save the world" mentality.

The Left could find a fetus on Mars and still call the planet devoid of life.

It is a debased mentality that doesn't fit with any of their other victim protection stances.

Truly confusing.
 
So what will conservatives learn from their latest escapades in making stuff up and flat out lying? My money is that they will redouble their efforts to lie and make stuff up.


It's proven. Watch the videos. Or are you too scared to be proved wrong?
 
They didn't even acknowledge the Pope's message on abortion.

Why would they? They aren't beholden to him.

With a quick turn in his speech he hit on the death penalty. I am sure there will be a vote to ban it soon, right?
 
The videos are heavily edited, have no legal merit, and don't fulfill the promise of proving that PP did anything illegal. Of course they are failing. The bigger question is why the Republicans are contemplating a shut down over propaganda videos?
 
I've always wondered how the Left wound up on the wrong side of abortion. Pretending that there is no wrong is the rendering of a human life seems so against their "save the world" mentality.

The Left could find a fetus on Mars and still call the planet devoid of life.

It is a debased mentality that doesn't fit with any of their other victim protection stances.

Truly confusing.
Don't let hyperbole get in the way of a rational discussion.
 
This issue is pretty settled for most people and there is no room for movement either way as you can tell from the discussion on here.

Democrats have done a better job making PP a women's health center than Republicans have at making PP an abortion center.
 
Made up? Really?

You can YouTube them.

I can confirm everything on youtube is real.

The better word than made up is probably "highly edited". They were a smear campaign against PP setup by people who have ran successful smear campaigns against other organizations. No more, no less.

I just read where Missouri didn't find any wrong doing in the only surgically based abortion clinic in St. Louis. It sounds like most states in the south of tried and failed to find any wrongdoing with their PP clinics. South Carolina did find some discrepancies in their findings and PP paid some fines, but were allowed to remain open and operating. Wisconsin is about the only state left still trying to cripple PP at this point.
 
The better word than made up is probably "highly edited". They were a smear campaign against PP setup by people who have ran successful smear campaigns against other organizations. No more, no less.

I just read where Missouri didn't find any wrong doing in the only surgically based abortion clinic in St. Louis. It sounds like most states in the south of tried and failed to find any wrongdoing with their PP clinics. South Carolina did find some discrepancies in their findings and PP paid some fines, but were allowed to remain open and operating. Wisconsin is about the only state left still trying to cripple PP at this point.
Edited or not what you see should be something you find troubling.
 
This issue is pretty settled for most people and there is no room for movement either way as you can tell from the discussion on here.

Democrats have done a better job making PP a women's health center than Republicans have at making PP an abortion center.
To be fair, PP is a women's healthcare center. Only what? 3% of what PP is abortion related?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Edited or not what you see should be something you find troubling.

The only thing I find troubling is that the editing was done dishonestly in order to push an agenda. Most of the states have done investigations into their PP and nothing has turned up. You'll have to excuse me if I'm not so inclined to jump on the Center for Medical Progress bandwagon because of the "highly edited" videos they've released.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Edited or not what you see should be something you find troubling.
With the cavalier manner in which these fetus parts were discussed, yes, we should be troubled. But the videos show nothing illegal. If people want to make a moral stink about these videos, that's their right. But what we shouldn't be doing is trying to legislate based on them. It is equally troubling threatening to shut down the government over videos that have no legal merit.
 
With the cavalier manner in which these fetus parts were discussed, yes, we should be troubled. But the videos show nothing illegal. If people want to make a moral stink about these videos, that's their right. But what we shouldn't be doing is trying to legislate based on them. It is equally troubling threatening to shut down the government over videos that have no legal merit.

The videos clearly show PP executives discussing altering the timing and manner of abortions to facilatate tissue and organ harvesting. This is prohibited by federal law. But, continue on with the dumbass PP, Democratic, NPR talking points.
 
The only thing I find troubling is that the editing was done dishonestly in order to push an agenda. Most of the states have done investigations into their PP and nothing has turned up. You'll have to excuse me if I'm not so inclined to jump on the Center for Medical Progress bandwagon because of the "highly edited" videos they've released.
Just wondering if you watched the videos and are not bothered by anything that you saw?
 
The videos clearly show PP executives discussing altering the timing and manner of abortions to facilatate tissue and organ harvesting. This is prohibited by federal law. But, continue on with the dumbass PP, Democratic, NPR talking points.
The videos absolutely do not show anything illegal. Several states have concluded their studies over PP and not one has found any wrong-doing. Are you suggesting that your independent analysis of these videos has found illegal activity that several Republican led states cannot?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Just wondering if you watched the videos and are not bothered by anything that you saw?
I personally have only watched snippets. I rely on the investigations that have already been concluded over the matter and not one has found any illegal activity. I will trust their findings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
The videos absolutely do not show anything illegal. Several states have concluded their studies over PP and not one has found any wrong-doing. Are you suggesting that your independent analysis of these videos has found illegal activity that several Republican led states cannot?

Stop with the mindless talking points - go read the federal statute banning the practice of altering the time and manner of abortions in order to preserve fetal tissue.
 
I personally have only watched snippets. I rely on the investigations that have already been concluded over the matter and not one has found any illegal activity. I will trust their findings.

This doesn't surprise me in the least.
 
Stop with the mindless talking points - go read the federal statute banning the practice of altering the time and manner of abortions in order to preserve fetal tissue.

I wasn't aware that state investigations led by Republican governors were mindless talking points by the left. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
I personally have only watched snippets. I rely on the investigations that have already been concluded over the matter and not one has found any illegal activity. I will trust their findings.
You are consistent in sticking to your legal argument and if that is what you want then fine.

Watching the video is for me more than a legal argument.
 
The videos clearly show PP executives discussing altering the timing and manner of abortions to facilatate tissue and organ harvesting. This is prohibited by federal law.

There is nothing wrong with that, provided you have the informed consent of the patient seeking the abortion. If they did this WITHOUT that informed consent, there would be an issue.

I've seen no evidence that is the case, and no investigation has turned anything up, either, probably because in EVERY case where there was tissue harvested, they have a signed consent form from the woman acknowledging the risks.

Of course, the anti-abortion crowd will not bring this up, because they don't have the evidence - they will simply tout that 'techniques were altered', which is a great talking point, but is not illegal.
 
Since none of the Republican states can find any wrongdoing, I did them a favor, and shot-off an email saying there's some guy named Pablow on HROT who can. I assume that you will be contacted soon to blow the lid off this whole thing.
 
You are consistent in sticking to your legal argument and if that is what you want then fine.

Watching the video is for me more than a legal argument.
It's perfectly fair for you to be personally upset over these videos. I can completely understand that. But there doesn't appear to be any illegal activity in them. So the GOP shouldn't be legislating based on them. That's my point on this whole thing.
 
the same people who talk about these videos being no big deal were the same people who thought Hillary doing gun running in Benghazi and blaming it on a vid, and getting americans killed- was no big deal
 
the same people who talk about these videos being no big deal were the same people who thought Hillary doing gun running in Benghazi and blaming it on a vid, and getting americans killed- was no big deal
Um. Benghazi wasn't a big deal. Several investigations have been concluded over that issue as well, and just like with PP, not one has found any wrongdoing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
To be fair, PP is a women's healthcare center. Only what? 3% of what PP is abortion related?

Additionally...

"Planned Parenthood’s 3 percent figure has been bought hook, line, and sinker by the mainstream media as proof positive that Planned Parenthood isn’t really about abortion. But if you take even a cursory look at Planned Parenthood’s own data, that claim begins to unravel and quickly.

Planned Parenthood’s latest report states that it performed “
11 million services during nearly five million clinical visits.” So, now their abortion number jumps to 6.6 percent of clinic visits were for abortions. That’s right 6.6 percent of all visits to Planned Parenthood result in an abortion.

Digging a little deeper, Planned Parenthood claims that all those “services” it provides only go to 3 million women. So by it’s own admission, 11 percent of the women that visit a Planned Parenthood clinic in any given year obtain an abortion there.

What about some of the other “services” Planned Parenthood claims it provides? Prenatal services (those services provided to women who choose to keep their baby) account for a measly 0.28 percent off all services provided. Moreover, the 841 adoption referrals made by Planned Parenthood in their last reported year amount to a whopping 0.0076 percent of services rendered."
 
There is nothing wrong with that, provided you have the informed consent of the patient seeking the abortion. If they did this WITHOUT that informed consent, there would be an issue.
The law states "(ii) no alteration of the timing, method, or procedures used to terminate the pregnancy was made solely for the purposes of obtaining the tissue; and"
I don't see anywhere where it states informed consent negates that.


http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/publiclaw103-43.htm.html
 
The law states "(ii) no alteration of the timing, method, or procedures used to terminate the pregnancy was made solely for the purposes of obtaining the tissue; and"
I don't see anywhere where it states informed consent negates that.


http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/publiclaw103-43.htm.html

The request of the donor (person seeking the abortion) is a reason beyond 'solely for the purposes of obtaining the tissue. You might want to look at the broader context of the laws, and which ones supersede this particular clause. ANYONE can donate tissues, provided there is proper informed consent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
The request of the donor (person seeking the abortion) is a reason beyond 'solely for the purposes of obtaining the tissue. You might want to look at the broader context of the laws, and which ones supersede this particular clause. ANYONE can donate tissues, provided there is proper informed consent.
I don't read it that way, but I'm not a lawyer. To me, this is the only thing I've seen on the tapes that could be considered breaking the law. I wish more analysis was on this that the other parts.
 
I don't read it that way, but I'm not a lawyer. To me, this is the only thing I've seen on the tapes that could be considered breaking the law. I wish more analysis was on this that the other parts.

Not sure why you are unable to understand this: what is 'on tapes' is not formal evidence of wrongdoing - what actually is happening in clinics, where tissue was harvested w/o consent AND procedures were altered to do so IS criminal evidence. No investigation to date has turned up anything; thus, the tapes are pure propaganda.

You (and others here) really need to understand how 'politics' works; there is ALREADY a series of 'informed consent' laws in place, protecting patients' rights regarding tissue harvesting, etc.

This 'law' was an irrelevant propaganda piece, too, put into the books so that all the conservative Republicans could put a 'gold star' by it and show their base how important this issue is to them: despite it already being completely covered by other, broader legislation. These 'laws' are worded very carefully so as to not contradict the actual, functional laws, but to just whip up the base, for exactly these kinds of political theater. And guess what? It WORKS!!! The simple-minded zealots flock to this stuff like flies to shit!

And it allows those same Congressmen to continue to ignore the REAL issues they need to be taking on, which really DO have a direct impact on YOU and your taxes. But by continually throwing out this type of fodder, they dupe you into falling in line behind them and their fake talking points - it means you and all the others whipped up into a frenzy by this stuff won't hold them accountable for doing their REAL jobs: energy policy, fixing 'entitlement' spend, Social Security, infrastructure funding, laying R&D foundations for future growth, education. No, we cannot have conversation on those more mundane, but far more relevant issues, because people are too busy trying to 'defund' Planned Parenthood.

I would MUCH rather be forcing my Congresspersons to be REQUIRED to have one of the ACA health plans, rather than their 'platinum' plans, and make them pay out of pocket for all the perks they get on my dollar. But that won't happen so long as they can dupe people like yourself into fake drama.
 
There is nothing wrong with that, provided you have the informed consent of the patient seeking the abortion. If they did this WITHOUT that informed consent, there would be an issue.

I've seen no evidence that is the case, and no investigation has turned anything up, either, probably because in EVERY case where there was tissue harvested, they have a signed consent form from the woman acknowledging the risks.

Of course, the anti-abortion crowd will not bring this up, because they don't have the evidence - they will simply tout that 'techniques were altered', which is a great talking point, but is not illegal.

Absolutely wrong.

The consent is required for the use of fetal tissue for medical reseach. The following prohibition "no alteration of the timing, method, or procedures used to terminate the pregnancy was made solely for the purposes of obtaining the tissue" applies regardless of consent. It is flatly prohibited.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT