Democrats Revive the ‘War on Women’ Against Republican Senate Candidates

Michigan Republican Terri Lynn Land ridicules the attacks in her first TV ad.

A member of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), Pro-Choice America protest with their 'Etch A Sketch' in hand protest outside a hotel in Washington, DC.
National Journal
Alex Roarty
April 22, 2014, 10:29 a.m.

For­get job growth or the de­fi­cit. A pair of TV ads re­leased Tues­day sug­gests the 2014 elec­tions will dive head­first in­to a fierce de­bate over wo­men’s is­sues.

The new on-air missives came from a pair of mar­quee Sen­ate cam­paigns: Demo­crat­ic Sen. Mark Ud­all of Col­or­ado and Re­pub­lic­an Sen­ate can­did­ate Terri Lynn Land of Michigan, both of whom are in com­pet­it­ive races in battle­ground states. And be­cause each is the first TV ad from either cam­paign, they will set the tone for the races’ next six months.

In Ud­all’s case, the in­cum­bent took aim at Rep. Cory Gard­ner’s pri­or sup­port of so-called per­son­hood le­gis­la­tion. The hard-hit­ting ad ac­cuses the GOP con­gress­man of op­pos­ing abor­tion rights in cases of rape and in­cest and of “cham­pi­on­ing an eight-year cru­sade to out­law com­mon forms of birth con­trol.”

“It comes down to re­spect,” a fe­male nar­rat­or says in the ad. “For wo­men, and our lives.”

The ad buy, ac­cord­ing to the cam­paign, is worth $500,000 spread over two weeks.

It’s not sur­pris­ing that Ud­all is tak­ing aim at Gard­ner’s po­s­i­tion on abor­tion rights and con­tra­cep­tion ac­cess: His cam­paign tele­graphed those at­tacks from the minute the Re­pub­lic­an un­ex­pec­tedly entered the race in Feb­ru­ary. Demo­crats suc­cess­fully used a so­cial-is­sue play­book in the last com­pet­it­ive Sen­ate race in cos­mo­pol­it­an Col­or­ado, when Mi­chael Ben­net (now chair­man of the Demo­crat­ic Sen­at­ori­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee) won a nar­row vic­tory in 2010, and Gard­ner him­self re­nounced his sup­port of per­son­hood le­gis­la­tion shortly after en­ter­ing his race.

It might sur­prise, however, that the cam­paign is go­ing neg­at­ive in April, an in­dic­a­tion of the danger Demo­crats be­lieve the well-fun­ded Gard­ner poses.

Neg­at­ive ads like Ud­all’s are part of a Demo­crat­ic polit­ic­al at­tack against Re­pub­lic­ans known as the “War on Wo­men,” a charge the party leveled with suc­cess in the 2012 elec­tions. And they ex­plain why Land’s cam­paign ran its own ad in Michigan, a spot de­signed to re­but charges that she’s in­sens­it­ive to wo­men’s is­sues.

“Con­gress­man Gary Peters and his bud­dies want you to be­lieve I’m wa­ging a war on wo­men,” Land says, speak­ing in­to the cam­era. “Really? Think about that for a mo­ment.”

Land then stops talk­ing as el­ev­at­or mu­sic plays in the back­ground, as she drinks from a cof­fee mug and checks her watch.

“I’m Terri Lynn Land and I ap­prove this mes­sage be­cause, as a wo­man, I might know a little bit more about wo­men than Gary Peters,” she said.

The ad is one of the most vis­ible push­backs yet from Re­pub­lic­ans, who be­lieve they were hurt badly two years ago in part be­cause the party mustered only a muted coun­ter­ar­gu­ment to Demo­crat­ic at­tacks geared to­ward fe­male voters. (They also had to deal with fal­lout from nom­in­ee Todd Akin’s con­tro­ver­sial “le­git­im­ate rape” com­ments on abor­tion in the 2012 Mis­souri Sen­ate race, and In­di­ana Sen­ate nom­in­ee Richard Mour­dock’s op­pos­i­tion to abor­tion for rape vic­tims.) And it comes as Demo­crats prom­ise to re­vive the at­tacks this year, in par­tic­u­lar fo­cus­ing on Re­pub­lic­ans who have sup­por­ted Per­son­hood le­gis­la­tion in the past.

Demo­crats have said they need to dwell on such is­sues in part to drive up turnout among single wo­men, a key con­stitu­ency that votes in dis­pro­por­tion­ately few­er num­bers dur­ing midterm elec­tions.

Not all early TV ads from Sen­ate can­did­ates men­tion wo­men’s is­sues: In many of the red states in play this year, most of the dis­cus­sion has fo­cused on more fin­ic­ally themed is­sues like Obama­care, So­cial Se­cur­ity, and Medi­care. But at least in a pair of blue states, 2014 is pick­ing up right where 2012 left off. Wel­come to the War Over Wo­men.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
2 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
3 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×