Herschel Walker came out pretty aggressively in his debate with Raphael Warnock, and what got the most attention was him again denying any abortion payment and flashing an honorary sheriff’s badge.
The debate was probably a success. Nominated Republican Senate Candidate in Georgia, who had lowered expectations (“I’m not that smart”). At the same time, he acknowledged to NBC yesterday that the $700 check he sent to his accuser was his (she’s now the mother of one of his kids), and the ceremonial badge could remind people that he’d lied about being in law enforcement.
But that wasn’t the most important thing that happened on that stage.
Walker changed his mind on two issues that were vital to his win, Donald Trump’s backing.
CANDIDATES FOR GEORGIA SENATE CLASH ON DEBATE STAGE DURING THEIR ONE FACE-OFF AHEAD of MIDTERMS
Herschel Walker, a Georgia Republican Senate candidate, speaks during a campaign visit at Battle Lumber Co. in Wadley on Thursday Oct. 6, 2022.
(AP Photo/Meg Kinnard)
One was his Pro-life position 100%On abortion, without exceptions, no way or how. This fueled the criticism from opponents that he allowed himself an exception in sending that check to his girlfriend back in 2009, but wouldn’t give Georgia women the same choice.
Walker changed his mind during the debate. He said he now supported the Georgia legislature’s ban on abortion after six weeks, complete with exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother in medical emergencies or if their pregnancies cannot successfully be brought to term.
Walker stated that he is a Christian and is “also representing Christianity.” The people of GeorgiaWe would “stand by them.”
The stolen-election side was the other change. Back in late 2020, Walker said, “I can guarantee you, Joe Biden didn’t get 50 million voting for him. But yet people think that he’s won this election.” During the debate, he claimed that Biden had won. (It was with 81 millions votes, by the side.
Walker’s got some company in the GOP; he’s just the most recent example. Blake Masters was nominated for the Senate in Washington. He quickly deleted his website of anti-abortion rhetoric. He also supported a personhood amendment and talked about rigging elections.
It’s true that candidates in both parties inch toward the center during a general election. Democrats try to placate their liberal wing and then backpedal, saying, well, Medicare for All has its good points but I’m not saying you should lose your private insurance.
But when it comes to such fundamental issues as abortion and election fraud, did these Republicans believe what they were saying then–or what they are saying now?
Given the majority support for the now-defunct Roe v. Wade – and the pro-choice victory in a Kansas referendum – are these nominees just afraid of the real-world consequences?
Following Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court building has been barricaded.
(Joshua Comins/Fox News Digital)
Or you could describe it as wakeup to political reality – it was easy to take a maximalist pro-life position when it was theoretical, and now being against exceptions – such as forcing a woman to give birth to her rapist’s baby – can sound heartless.
In Minnesota, GOP nominee Scott Jensen said last spring he would “try to ban abortion” as governor, and didn’t support any exceptions unless the mother’s life was in danger. Jensen, who is a doctor, made a video stating that his comments from last spring were “clumsy”. He now supports rape, incest, and other exceptions.
WALKER V.WARNOCK – ATLANTA VOTERS VOTE IN ON A HOTLY CONTESTED US SENSATE RACE
In Iowa, Republican House candidate Zach Nunn wrote an op-ed saying he’s pro-life but supports the exceptions: “I share the frustrations of many I’ve spoken to on both sides of the issue who seek a compassionate and pragmatic discussion around life.”
In Michigan, Republican House candidate Tom Barrett called himself “100 pro-life–no exceptions,” but has now removed any reference to his abortion views on his website. Instead, he denigrates Democratic Rep. Elissa slotkin for having “some of the most extremist abortion policies of any member of Congress.”
This raises an important point. Many Democrats,They are afraid of angering their base and refuse to say that they oppose late-term abortions. This could allow for the nineth month. These late abortions are clearly contrary to the mainstream consensus which is more supportive for abortion in the first and second trimesters.
Arizona’s gubernatorial candidates Katie Hobbs and Kari Lake are standing in front of their showdown next year.
(Reuters)
Dana Bash repeatedly asked Katie Hobbs (Democrat nominee for Arizona governor) if she would support any limitations on abortion. Hobbs was uncomfortable and said that this was between the women and their doctors.
HOWIE’S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST – A RIFF ON THE DAY’S TOP STORIES
“When you’re talking about late-term abortion, that is incredibly, extremely rare… something has gone incredibly wrong in that pregnancy… Politicians do not belong in that decision,” Hobbs said.
She is running against Kari Lake,A Trump-backed Republican, who previously took a no exceptions stance, but is now more vague. Lake stated that she would support the law no matter what, although she wouldn’t say if she would exceed the 15-week ban that was passed earlier in the year by the legislature. In a radio interview, she also said that abortion should be “rarely legal”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD FOX NEWS APP
Given the importance of abortion rights – although it has fallen far beyond the economy and inflation in recent polls – the media should scrutinize these changes, explanations and evasions on both sides.
