Democrats think Wendy Davis is going to be a party star, even though they're pretty sure she's going to lose her campaign for Texas governor.

Liberal groups, according to Politico, hope Davis will become “a much-needed new face for abortion rights.”

What, Cecile Richards’ “Claire Underwood” look isn’t doing it for anyone?

But I wonder, how is Davis supposed to be the “face for abortion rights” if she's currently pretending that the filibuster that made her famous wasn't about abortion?

The obvious answer is that if, as expected, she loses in November, she will then become an abortion advocate. But that should worry Texas voters who actually don’t know about her filibuster.

The Politico article mentioned above brings up the post-election careers of Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee -- Palin, who failed to become vice president, and Huckabee, who failed to become the 2008 Republican presidential nominee.

But neither Palin nor Huckabee did a 180-degree turn on their campaign personas after their failed elections. In 2008, Palin gave speech after speech about limited government. Today, she gives speech after speech about limited government. The only difference now (besides the money she makes) is that she has made media criticism a big part of her speeches.

For Huckabee, he was always seen as the candidate of religion. Today, he's the radio and Fox News host ... of religion. He didn't pretend not to be religious during the 2008 presidential primaries and then quickly became religious again after his campaign ended. He is, after all, an ordained Southern Baptist minister.

But that’s what would happen with Davis if she became a “face for abortion rights.” She’s known for filibustering an abortion ban, yet her campaign goes to great lengths to avoid saying that word. If she goes right back to fighting for late-term abortion if her campaign fails, she will have proven that’s all she ever was really known for to begin with.