Marching on

The annual March for Life is perhaps the longest (and largest) sustained gathering in America, having taken place on the anniversary of Roe v Wade for several years now. Sure, the media would prefer to give wall-to-wall coverage to "progressive" rallies like the Women's March or Gun Grabbers United March for Our Lives. However, neither has or will have the staying power of the pro life movement.

And here's a surprise: With President Donald Trump speaking live at the Washington D.C. rally on Friday, he became the first President of the United States to deliver an in-person address.

Of course, Trump's appearance at the rally will be denigrated by his detractors as an attempt to distract from the Senate impeachment trial. But like it or not, as Philip Klein believes, this will only fortify the President's reelection prospects.

Given Trump's relatively low approval rating (in the mid-40s), he's going to be heavily dependent on his ability to fire up the base of the Republican Party, particularly in key swing states, and particularly on cultural issues.

As it is, there's a good case to be made that the Supreme Court vacancy, and the prospect that Trump would appoint a conservative to fill it, is what ultimately decided the election for Trump in 2016. There were many conservatives, particularly religious conservatives, who were initially reluctant to vote for Trump. They didn't know how sincerely to take his promises as a one time pro-choicer. But ultimately, the calculation many of them made was: Whatever the risk posed by a potential Trump betrayal, their chances of getting policies and judges they wanted was a lot higher than the 0% chance they had under Hillary Clinton.

Now, however, there is no doubt about Trump. He already has a strong case to make that as a result of both the judges he's appointed and policies he's pursued at the agency level, that he's the most pro-life president in history. His speech helped cement his legacy.

The importance of the signal that Trump was sending with his appearance at Friday's march cannot be overstated. Even George W. Bush, somebody deeply religious who was believed to have sincere conviction on the pro-life issue, chose to continue Ronald Reagan's tradition of phoning in to the march or delivering remarks by proxy. That reflected a certain desire to keep the anti-abortion movement at arm's length.

But Trump was willing to come out in the open and signal he is not at all embarrassed by the activists who flock to Washington every year to fight for lives of the unborn. He's with them. In 2020, there will be no leap of faith for pro-lifers who vote primarily on the abortion issue. They will not just support Trump passively, but they are much more likely to turnout and to volunteer for his campaign. From a political standpoint, this was a very effective bit of counter programming.

It should be noted that the majority of people (including Democrat voters) in any given survey today believe abortion should never occur past 20 weeks. I'm not sure Presidents Bush and Reagan had the benefit of such pro life sentiment during their administrations, so actually attending a pro life gathering isn't nearly as big a political risk for Trump.

Oh, and one other serendipity of President Trump's appearance at the rally? It might actually force the Trump-obsessed media to provide more coverage of the huge gathering than they would normally be inclined to do so. Chess master indeed.

--------------------------------------------