GOP position on abortion in a timeline where Moral Majority never took off

[VioletRiver]

This is not a new concept by any means, but I have to say I've read all the threads I can on this topic and am still left wondering: in a timeline where the "Moral Majority" never really gained the foothold it did in GOP politics, would the party at the national level be as reflexively pro-life?

Specifically, what I'd like to know is how plausible it is that a GOP presidential candidate in the 2000s or so (i.e. modern era) could be pro-choice or nominate a pro-choice running mate without significant backlash. For example, a hypothetical McCain/Whitman, McCain/Ridge, or Giuliani/(whoever) ticket.

As for a POD, my favorite for this is Ford winning in '76. I imagine that he would probably act similarly to Carter vis-a-vis the Bob Jones University taxpayer funding debacle, though I haven't seen a consensus on that. Long story short, while Reagan gets some religious right love when he runs in '80, a subsequent Democratic administration could lead to pro-lifers being split between the two major parties (as Democrats still do well with Northern Catholics, for example). I'm curious how third-party politics could play into this scenario as well, even pre-Buchanan.

BUT...the ultimate question is, how long would this relatively even split last? As the Democrats tend to go more left on social issues (a trend that effectively predated Roe v. Wade), would the Republicans become more solidly pro-life and eventually wind up in a similar position to how they were by OTL's 2000s?

 

[PickledFish]

I would imagine that the issue of abortion becomes relatively divisive for a time (a split exists among members of both parties based on where they are in the country), then both parties generally move toward pro-choice positions over time.

For the record though, McCain was very much pro-life, as I recall.

 

[VioletRiver]

I would imagine that the issue of abortion becomes relatively divisive for a time (a split exists among members of both parties based on where they are in the country), then both parties generally move toward pro-choice positions over time.

For the record though, McCain was very much pro-life, as I recall.

I know McCain expressed his position as pro-life, I was basically suggesting, what would be the conditions that could lead him or any other Republican to pick a pro choice running mate without significant backlash.

It's interesting you suggest that both parties could become pro-choice, but I feel like that pro-life energy would have to go somewhere, and the GOP base embodying that philosophy makes sense for a lot of structural reasons. That said, I can't be certain about it. Wouldn't partisan polarization lead each party to take opposing sides? Or would they find it's an issue with relatively little gain electorally?

 

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

○ Other: eugenicist pro-abortion for minorities and the working poor.

 

[Colonel Zoidberg]

I would imagine that the issue of abortion becomes relatively divisive for a time (a split exists among members of both parties based on where they are in the country), then both parties generally move toward pro-choice positions over time.

For the record though, McCain was very much pro-life, as I recall.

Legally or personally? Like, did he believe in banning it or just personally disapproved?

And yeah, without someone making it a major issue, it probably becomes settled law like Loving v Virginia. (Which makes me wonder if there’s a TL possibility where people to this day could run for office on the concept of overturning Loving v Virginia.)

 

[Nivek]

Both would be divided because the big tent nature and because the divisive abort tend to be but I think USA all around would be more pro choice

 

[Comte de Geneve]

The real POD on abortion would be Roe vs Wade. Without SCOTUS interfering at that time the trend was for abortion, within limits, to become legal in more and more states and at least accepted by more and more. That trend would have continued and without RvW one of the key triggers in Moral Majority activism would be diminished. There had long been moralist activism against pornography or sexual evolution or evolution in schools or for prayer in schools, but none of these, while often agitated at the local level, really triggered a coherent 'Moral Majority' in national politics. Butterfly RvW and you probably butterfly an effective Moral Majority in the GOP. Abortion today would be legal in most states save for a few of the usual suspects and not be a national political litmus test in either party.

 

[Hcira1]

Specifically, what I'd like to know is how plausible it is that a GOP presidential candidate in the 2000s or so (i.e. modern era) could be pro-choice or nominate a pro-choice running mate without significant backlash. For example, a hypothetical McCain/Whitman, McCain/Ridge, or Giuliani/(whoever) ticket.

To answer this specific part of the question, yes, it is very plausible that the GOP could nominate a relatively pro-choice candidate. I don't think you'd even need to have a POD that stops the moral majority or anything either. GOP voters are not stupid, nor are they one issue voters. If they think a candidate is on their side on most issues, they won't have a big problem voting for them. I think we all know that Trump for example was pro-choice his whole life up until about 2015, but the GOP (especially the evangelicals tbh) had no problem backing him despite him being pro-gay marriage and (at the time at least) having a history of being pro-choice.

I think you could get Giuliani as the nominee in 2008 for example without needing a POD before 2006 or 2007. Another one could be a POD in 2000 where Gore wins, 9/11 still happens and Giuliani wins in 2004 (when 9/11 had happened more recently).

 

[Aisha Clan-Clan]

Without the moral majority imo you get both parties being pro-choice. Democrats as vocally pro-choice with GOP a split of pro-choice bc status quo and a pseudolibertarian set who are pro choice bc SMALL GUBMINT type thinking.

 

[Johnrankins]

○ Other: eugenicist pro-abortion for minorities and the working poor.

Not a chance, not at that late date.

 

[CalBear]

Ya, not a chance of this NOT going current political.

Closed per posted policy