Abortion activist Hillary Clinton, if she seeks the Democratic nomination for president in 2016, would almost certainly become the party’s nominee. However, 48 percent of Americans already say they would definitely not vote for Hillary for president.
A Wall Street Journal report indicates 48 percent of Americans are a definite no when it comes to putting Bill Clinton’s wife in the White House. Unfortunately, 50 percent of Americans say they would be open to the pro-abortion activist leading the country following 8 years of the pro-abortion Obama administration.
Here’s more on the poll:
A new poll shows 50 percent of American voters say they would support Hillary Clinton if she launches a 2016 presidential bid — while 48 percent say no thanks to another Clinton.
The new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, shows she fares better than any of the potential Republican candidates in a crowded GOP field.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is exploring a run, gets the support of 31 percent of the 836 registered voters polled, while 33 percent say they could support former GOP nominee Mitt Romney. Twenty-seven percent say they’d support Gov. Chris Christie.
The poll shows two things that could hurt Clinton, a former secretary of state under President Barack Obama:
- 71 percent say they want the next president to take a different approach in the White House than Obama.
- 40 percent say they’d rather see a Republican in the White House, compared to 38 percent who want a Democrat.
“This is an electorate — by a large margin — looking for change,” says Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted this survey with Democratic pollster Peter Hart and his colleagues at Hart Research Associates.
Earlier this year, Clinton said that to be pro-woman is to be pro-abortion. Clinton, at a pro-Braley rally, told voters in Iowa, “It’s not enough to be a woman, you have to be committed to expand rights and opportunities for all women.” Because Joni Ernst (who defeated Braley) thinks unborn babies should be protected, she isn’t committed to expanding rights and opportunities for women?
National Right to Life’s Carol Tobias said in response: “Pro-abortion advocates like to say abortion is a woman’s issue, but only pro-abortion women should voice their opinions. Indeed, they come very close to saying it is illegitimate for a woman who is pro-life to speak on abortion. The voices of pro-life women just don’t count. The hypocrisy, or should I say the gall, of people who think you have to want to kill unborn children in order to be pro-woman is stunning.”
As she ponders a potential 2016 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton launched a new partnership with the Gates Foundation, that supports abortion. The Gates Foundation operated by Bill and Melinda Gates supports abortion and the Planned Parenthood abortion business.
Clinton says she admires Margaret Sanger, the racist founder of the Planned Parenthood abortion business.
In her role as Secretary of State Clinton pressed for abortion on an international scale. As recently as June 2012, she was upset the document the United Nations adopted at its Rio+20 conference did not promote abortion by inserting terms like “reproductive rights” into he language of the text.
A diverse group of countries rallied together with the Holy See to successfully remove any mention of reproductive rights or population control from the final outcome document produced during the last round of UN negotiations at the Rio +20 conference. The UN Population Fund (UNFPA), along with Norway and Iceland, and Catholics for Choice and the International Planned Parenthood Federation, worked feverishly to take advantage of the Rio +20 conference on sustainable development in order to promote both an international right to abortion and population control.
However, nations like Nicaragua, Chile, Russia, Honduras, Syria, the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica and Egypt all rejected the introductionof “reproductive rights” into the Rio +20 outcome document.
Responding to the resounding defeat, Clinton said she was disappointed, according to a CNS News report.
“While I am very pleased that this year’s outcome document endorses sexual and reproductive health and universal access to family planning, to reach our goals in sustainable development we also have to ensure women’s reproductive rights,” she said. “Women must be empowered to make decisions about whether and when to have children. And the United States will continue – the United States will continue to work to ensure that those rights are respected in international agreements.”
Clinton personally urged Obama to veto a State Department funding bill over cuts to groups that perform and promote abortions.
In 2010, she testified before a Congressional committee where two pro-life members of Congress presented her with a long lecture on abortion and how it hurts women.
Congressmen Chris Smith, a New Jersey Republican, and Jeff Fortenberry, a Nebraska Republican, both addressed pro-life issues during the hearing.
Smith, who had frequently led the fight against abortion on an international scale, made his full remarks with Clinton sitting as the lone witness at the witness table.
Like this pro-life news article? Please support LifeNews during our Winter 2014 fundraising campaign with a donation!
“Secretary Clinton, the most persecuted and at risk minority in the world today are unborn children,” Smith said. “Pregnancy is not a disease. The child in the womb is neither a tumor nor a parasite to be destroyed.”
Smith said he is troubled by President Barack Obama’s decision to overturn the Mexico City Policy and open the door forcing taxpayers to fund abortions in other nations.
“I am deeply concerned that with the elimination of the Mexico City Policy by executive order last year, NGO implementing partners may actively seek to integrate abortion with the many necessary and noble undertakings funded by the Global Health Initiative,” he said.
“I respectfully ask that the administration consider that for many of us, all abortion—legal or illegal—is violence against children and poses significant, often underappreciated risks to women and even to children later born to post-abortive women,” Smith added.
