New York Times Couldn't Possibly Guess How Voters Will React To Arizona Abortion Ruling, It's A Mystery!
No available data, except for all this data.
If there’s one uncertainty surrounding the Dobbs Supreme Court decision that stole abortion rights from millions of Americans, and all the subsequent bans and zombie laws and court rulings Republicans have rammed through in response, it’s that you just never can tell what Americans will do.
Will they rage? Will they get abortions anyway? Will they show up at the polls in greater pissed off numbers than ever, either to enshrine abortion rights in their state constitutions, or vote down ballot initiatives trying to ban abortion, or just vote people in who might fix it, or vote the motherfuckers out who caused it? Will they do all of these things and more before breakfast, even in red states?
See, that’s the thing, there isn’t any uncertainty. Ever since Dobbs, any election that could conceivably affect abortion rights in any way — i.e. pretty much all of them — people have shown up, especially when Democratic candidates have specifically run on abortion rights.
This week, Arizona’s extremist partisan hack state supreme court ruled that the state’s batshit 1864 total abortion ban, which was passed long before Arizona was even a state, can be enforced.
And the New York Times just doesn’t have a darn clue what voters are going to do about that, in this extremely swingy/trending blue state. It’s a shame we don’t have any data to look at to light our path of understanding. You know, except for all this data.
“Arizona Ruling Spurs Strong Reactions, but Election Impact Is Unclear,” declares the headline in the New York By God Times. They explain that they met some people who said they’re going to vote for Donald Trump anyway, even if they don’t like the reversal of abortion rights, so we are sure that negates whatever happened in Kansas and Ohio and all those other places where people have had an opportunity to make their voices heard on the issue.
Because like, they were at the mall and they met this lady named MAGA Marilyn and MAGA Marilyn said she’s still with Trump, and how is that not also data?
Oh wait, that’s not who they met.
Pam Raphael pulled up to the Arizona State Capitol on Tuesday afternoon bearing ice-cold treats and red-hot anger. She had come to deliver an order of her frozen prickly pear and lime pops but was preoccupied by a just-released decision by Arizona’s highest court that upheld an 1864 law banning nearly all abortions.
“I am disgusted,” Ms. Raphael, 50, said as she walked toward a rally by Democrats railing against the decision. She added that it’s “nobody’s business” whether any woman decides to get an abortion.
Don’t think it’s Pam who’s voting for Trump.
“Leave it up to the female,” said Maverick Williams, 25, a retail manager who was walking his dog in the conservative Anthem neighborhood on the northern edge of Phoenix. “It’s her body, then she needs to decide.” […]
But voters like Mr. Williams suggested that it might not be so simple in this closely divided desert battleground. Although he opposed the state court’s abortion decision, he said he was more worried about the rising cost of living, and he called President Biden too old and unfit to serve another term. He said he would vote for Mr. Trump.
Stop the presses, the New York Times found a 25-year-old bro named “Maverick” walking his dog in a conservative neighborhood who’s voting for Donald Trump, despite his misgivings about how the Arizona supreme court’s ruling might affect “the female.”
The New York Times also met Nikki Auchter, 42, and her husband, and they were filling up water jugs at the grocery store, and they’re pro-life, and they don’t like abortion, but they think there should be exceptions for rape and incest, and Nikki said “I’m pretty pro-life, but I think it should be the woman’s choice,” but she also barfed a bunch of Fox News talking points about asylum seekers at them, like a fucking idiot, and said her top priority this November was “to get Biden out of office.”
Was that a swing voter? Is that data?
They end the article citing two people who are absolutely fucking appalled by the Arizona supreme court’s decision, who are voting for Joe Biden, but we’re sure Maverick and Nikki cancel them out, from a purely numerical New York Times voting perspective.
No way to know what might happen in November! What are we, journalists?
PREVIOUSLY ON THIS TOPIC.
Evan Hurst on Twitter right here.
@evanjosephhurst on Threads!
I have profiles those other places but I think I forgot how to log on.
If you're shopping on Amazon anyway, this portal gives us a small commission.
Let’s not forget that in addition to being partisan hacks, the Arizona Supreme Court was expanded by two seats so as to give their wingnut governor two hand-picked justices—you know, that thing Republicans tell us would be the end of the country if Joe Biden did it on the federal level.
Also, to wash the taste of somewhat agreeing with the NYT out of my mouth:
"said Maverick Williams, 25,"
This is why you don't name the kid while still high on the epidural.