2016 if Roe v. Wade overturned in between 2012 and 2016

[darklordoftech]

What effects would overturning Roe v. Wade have on the election result?

[dw93]

The only way I see this happening is if Gore wins in 2000, doesn't get any Court appointments, and loses in 2004 to a Republican well to Bush's right that appoints justices well to the right of Roberts.

[mianfei]

It would probably have helped the Democrats in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Upper Michigan and the “rust belt” of the Pacific Northwest (Grays Harbor, Pacific, Cowlitz, Mason, Columbia, Clatsop et. al.). These regions are generally pro-choice even though hostile to immigration and gun control. It might have made for less poor turnout amongst the poorest whites in the South, Plains and Interior Plateau, if they felt the Republicans were actually achieving something. On the whole it would have probably helped the Democrats, at least if there was anger in the Upper Midwest.

[MATTROSE94]

It probably helps the Democrats, as the issue of abortion is used by the Republicans as a wedge issue to gain votes in Appalachia, the Ozarks, and parts of the midwest. Without abortion as a major issue, the Democrats probably do a bit better in those areas of the country.

[mianfei]

It probably helps the Democrats, as the issue of abortion is used by the Republicans as a wedge issue to gain votes in Appalachia, the Ozarks, and parts of the midwest. Without abortion as a major issue, the Democrats probably do a bit better in those areas of the country.

Why would the Democratic Party do better in anti-abortion areas with Roe overturned? As I said, I could see them doing better in pro-abortion Frost Belt areas – add Alaska to those areas noted and indeed with Roe overturned Alaska might have voted more D than Ohio – but a reversal would I imagine simply add Republican turnout in Appalachia and the Ozarks.

[Alben Barkley]

It probably helps the Democrats, as the issue of abortion is used by the Republicans as a wedge issue to gain votes in Appalachia, the Ozarks, and parts of the midwest. Without abortion as a major issue, the Democrats probably do a bit better in those areas of the country.

Why would the Democratic Party do better in anti-abortion areas with Roe overturned? As I said, I could see them doing better in pro-abortion Frost Belt areas – add Alaska to those areas noted and indeed with Roe overturned Alaska might have voted more D than Ohio – but a reversal would I imagine simply add Republican turnout in Appalachia and the Ozarks.

I think the idea is that abortion would be less of a salient issue in these areas so people who are single-issue voters primarily motivated to vote because of abortion either wouldn’t vote or might even vote Democratic for other reasons.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The only way I see this happening is if Gore wins in 2000, doesn't get any Court appointments, and loses in 2004 to a Republican well to Bush's right that appoints justices well to the right of Roberts.

Not really if Miguel Estrada was confirmed in 2001, he undoubtedly was gonna be Bush’s pick to replace Rehnquist instead of Roberts

[Intell]

The idea that abortion is the reason that rural white Appalachia/south is so republican is dubious, as abortion generally out performs democrats in those counties. See WV abortion referendum in 2018 or the Alabama abortion referendum. Democrats that left the party in 2008/2012/2016 generally tended to be non-religious, secular and either pro-choice, or ambivalent on abortion.