Of course, we saw a lot of votes where Democrats won non Presidential races both in the Senate and state government wise in states that went for Trump.
My theory with this is that Americans likely know that banning abortion at the state level and requires much less hoops and drastic measures and is thus much easier than the federal level.
The big flaw in this idea is that it assumes that most Americans have a reasonably strong understanding of federalism and how the current Supreme Court sees it, but I’m curious what this sub thinks.
Comments
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
Of course, we saw a lot of votes where Democrats won non Presidential races both in the Senate and state government wise in states that went for Trump.
My theory with this is that Americans likely know that banning abortion at the state level and requires much less hoops and drastic measures and is thus much easier than the federal level.
The big flaw in this idea is that it assumes that most Americans have a reasonably strong understanding of federalism and how the current Supreme Court sees it, but I’m curious what this sub thinks.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Yes I think you are correct. I was surprised. I thought overturning Roe would have more backlash but it seems Americans are okay with it being a state by state issue.
Absolutely.
If you were voting in Michigan, you could completely ignore the abortion issue because Gretchen Whitmer had huge coattails and a really good Democratic party and a really weak Republican Party to run against. So she had a legislature that would let her push through abortion protections.
If you were in Arizona, you could vote for Donald Trump while also voting for Reuben Gallego and to protect abortion in the state.
And honestly, if your middle class you can vote however you want because you know that if you ever need an abortion, you can take a “vacation“ to the nearest blue state and get one.
Yeah basically nobody cares because the vast majority of Americans live in a state where abortion is legal.
Americans vote according to what they think the government is capable of doing.
If they don’t think that the federal government is capable of affecting abortion policy, they ignore it as an issue for federal elections.
Before Dobbs that’s partially why the right voted on abortion for national elections and the left didn’t. The left treated Roe as settled.
After Dobbs people say think “they can’t/won’t ban abortion federally” so they do not factor that in the national election. But they know that it can/does get banned at the state level so they vote accordingly.
No. I don’t think the average American understands Federalism enough, even at a basic level, to put the ideas together in their head.
I think most voters don’t understand the difference.
Yes. And maybe, and this is just an unfounded hunch, this points to people not wanting the federal government to be as involved in certain things as it currently is.
Over Biden’s term, every progressive I know, was laughing at Republicans for screeching about “state’s rights!” and “seceding from the union!”.
Now, after Trump, I am seeing more and more progressives do that exact same thing they were laughing at them for.
Yes, in both cases this is just a fringe group of people; but it seriously raises the question of if we’re trying to do too much at the federal level, and if we should be letting states handle more responsibilities with funding certain stuff and legislating on certain things.
>The big flaw in this idea is that it assumes that most Americans have a reasonably strong understanding of federalism
Most people most certainly don’t, lol. As I alluded to, people want local control when the higher level of government is doing something they don’t like, and central control when the local government is doing something they don’t like.
It’s why I think we should make it explicitly clear what is the responsibility of the federal government, and what is the responsibility of state governments; where they can then delegate, explicitly, what is the responsibilities and powers of local governments; with very little overlap over what can be the domain of both. Who handles healthcare, state governments or the federal government? Who handles welfare, the state governments or the federal government? Who handles intra-state infrastructure funding, the federal government or state governments? That way, there isn’t this constant fight over who should be doing what: because it’ll already be settled. Things like environmental regulations should be primarily controlled by the federal government, but states should be able to impose further regulations to meet their own unique circumstances (I.e; the federal government controls regulations regarding food safety or greenhouse emissions, but states can impose stricter ones if needed/wanted; the federal government has general building codes across the country, but states can impose further ones to meet the needs of their geography, etc).
based on the exit polling from this last election i think it’s a fair idea to assume.