Hillary Clinton seemed to go out of her way during her Sunday interview on ‘Meet the Press’ to not only scare off the average independent pro-life voter, but pro-choice advocates within her own base.

During the interview, NBC News anchor Chuck Todd peppered her with questions ranging from the FBI’s ongoing investigation into her illegal email server, receiving funds from Wall Street, Democratic debates, to her stance on abortion.

Todd starts off the topic saying:

“Give me your straight forward position on the issue of abortion.”

It didn’t take long for Hillary to begin floundering with her response. She starts by saying her views are exactly in line with Roe V. Wade and that every woman has the right to make decisions when it relates to her body, but she begins to hedge when it comes to the possibility of reasonable restrictions.

Aware she is struggling, Chuck Todd cuts her off and asks a more pointed question:

“When, or if, does an unborn child have constitutional rights?”

“Under our laws, currently, that is not something that exists…The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” Clinton confirmed.

“You have said…there is room for some restrictions,” Todd responded.

“So is it fair to say that women don’t always have a full right to choose?”

Instead of answering the question asked, Hillary pivoted, pointing out that many conservatives don’t recognize abortion as an answer to any situation, including rape and incest.

She reiterated that her views fall in line with the current law, which is to say there could be limitations on late term abortions.

Just her slight admission that not every circumstance for abortion should be legal sparked an online backlash from pro-choice advocates. The Washington Times notes a tweet from a Planned Parenthood employee:

“Diana Arellano, manager of community engagement for Planned Parenthood Illinois Action, said Sunday that Mrs. Clinton’s  comments undermined the cause for abortion rights.”

“The comment “further stigmatizes #abortion,” Ms. Arellano said  in a tweet. “She calls a fetus an ‘unborn child’ & calls for later term restrictions.”

“Describing the fetus as a “person” or “child” has long been anathema to the pro-choice movement, which argues the terms misleadingly imply a sense of humanity.”

This kind of response is truly mind boggling. You would be hard pressed to find anyone on either side of the argument that would classify Hillary Clinton as a moderate on abortion. And yet, to those on the far left, she can’t seem to go far enough.

The reason for the backlash couldn’t be more clear; Hillary’s use of the term “unborn person” carries the implication that the subject in question isn’t a cluster of cells, or a fetus, but a person. And under Article 1 of the 14th Amendment, the State shall not:

…deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

While it will be interesting to see if the rabid pro-murder left goes after Clinton for this gaffe, more interesting still will be watching how she tries to recover from it.