Obama's election seems the only big thing to have happened lately. Since the change only was significant in Republican or Republican-leaning members of the population, I think the 1-year shift may be the result of conservatives becoming concerned about liberalism as represented in our president.

I think technology may have something to do with it. Not all, but something.
We can see babies in utero in 3D now. More education -- the cry of the safe sex crowd -- has backfired a bit in that more people are seeing that unborn babies look like babies.

Hobo, there are a lot of pro-lifers who believe that abortion in the cases of rape/incest should be allowed.

I stand corrected; thanks for those comments. In all of the passion I hear from the pro-life side it's hard to remember there are shades of intensity.

Personally, I think the Obama campaign/election is what turned the tide. Specifically, as Obama was courting (religious?) conservatives, he began to speak out against abortion as a societal problem. Notice he never spoke out against its legality or as an option, in general, but readily admitted that we ought, as a society, aim to increase adoptions relative to abortions.

This really upset the pro-choicers, but why? He never apologized or backtracked on his extremely pro-choice stances that he's taken throughout his political career. They were upset, because their candidate inflicted a chink in their armor. When Obama openly argued that abortion is undesirable, he reflected negativity on the practice.

I think this one sentiment was enough to begin the swing - even though no practical changes were ever argued or implicated by his campaign comments or later election to office.

I think the shift in opinion occurred, ironically, because of the most pro-choice President in the history of our nation.

I agree that Clinton was very much the same, but isn't it true that the last time that the polls reflected this majority was during Clinton's first term? Maybe it's not coincidence.

I remember talking about (on this blog?) how the abortion debate was all but non-existent in the campaigns, falling far behind the economy and foreign policy. Obama's courting of the right brought it back to the forefront.

I posted my thoughts on one reason for this shift here.

Also, I should note that in my experience, even many of those who just say "abortion should be illegal" would allow exceptions for urgent medical necessity, to save the life of the mother. That's a vanishingly small percentage of abortions, though, as noted; the Guttmacher Institute stats I remember are old, but they showed that the hard cases (rape, incest, and threat to the life of the mother) accounted collectively for less than 6% of all abortions.

Can anyone help me here on this? ... doesn't that mean that the "real" pro-life people are ... mostly in that 23% (ie more of a minority than the poll might lead someone to think)?

I'll try again. For years now, those who think abostion should be 100% verbotten plus those who think there should be severe restrictions on it, have made up way more than 50% of the electorate. A clear majority. For years.

Calling the 23% the "real" pro-life people is a choice of words -- a choice. This is an unfortunate choice in my mind, and one that both the left and the right have bought into -- the left so they can say, "Only twenty some per cent of the population is pro life," the right so that they can preserve their ideological purity.

As I see it, the desire to make abortion illegal except in that 6% of the cases AM referenced makes one pro-life for all intents and purposes. According to the Gallup results, alot of other people must be starting to see it the same way.

Attitudes haven't changed that much. Most of America has always been skittish to one degree or another about abortion. That's just the fact of the matter. What has changed is that more people are now willing to adopt the pro-life label. I don't really know why that is. But I think that the difference between the "real" pro-lifers, who want to make 100% of all abortions illegal, and the "other" pro-lifers, who want to make 94% of them illegal is, well, only 6%.

Hobo,

OK, I think we are approaching something like understanding. Yes, if you say pro-life is only the "always illegal" option then 23% does not equal 51% and something is wrong. But if you say pro-life is "always illegal" plus "usually illegal", then that gets you sixty some per cent, which doesn't equal 51% either. So, yes there is something odd here. I agree.

I was trying to say that it seems to be that more of the "usually illegal" folks are, for reasons unknown to me, now willing to accept the "pro-life" label. There's no denying that most Americans have always wanted severe restrictions on abortion ("severe restrictions" or even complete elimination). That has been clear from the stats for years. But how this new particular result fits into that picture is, I admit, somewhat mysterious to me, and I think I understand why you have questions.