It's been broadly reported and discussed that 27% of Republicans (not just evangelicals, or FotF charter members) would vote third-party rather than voting for near-Hillary!-clone Rudy Giuliani for President. The resultant debate has generally featured hammering on Dobson and any evangelical who might not vote for Rudy. The usual line is that such voters are giving the election to Hillary!, who is (we're told) their worst nightmare.
I just wonder why the question is framed that way. Why are evangelicals hammered for this statistic. "Why are you handing the election to Hillary? Do you want Hillary as President?"
Here's my question:
Why are values-voters being asked to sacrifice their convictions — the very factor that drew them to the GOP in the first place — for one seriously-flawed man? Why all the effort to coerce the convictions of 27% of the party, rather than changing the mind of that one man? Why, instead, isn't the question being put to Rudy?
Why isn't Giuliani being asked, "Since you can't win without at least Republican support, and since over one-quarter of the party so seriously opposes you that they would rather vote for a candidate with no chance of winning — which does not even count those who simply will not vote if you are the candidate — why are you going to hand the election over to Hillary Clinton? Why don't you withdraw, for the good of the country?"
NOTE: that is my question. Not whether voting third-party is a good idea or not. Let's see if we can focus the comments on that question, shall we, hmm?
UPDATE: Justin Taylor has a good discussion of the nightmare choice we might soon be facing.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
Ok..you asked for it.
Two part answer: 1) There is no politician I have ever met who isn’t looking out for what he or she wants (that’s not bad if what they want is what Jesus wants). Rudy doesn’t care if he is supported by Republicans, Christians, Democrats or goats as long as he is supported and he is advanced…for his sake. So asking this question to Rudy is irrelevant…he doesn’t care. 2) We don’t care enough to ask. We Republicans just want to win, even if it means electing someone that doesn’t agree with us (see current occupant of California’s Governor’s seat). And, we Christians stopped caring (This is a great time to recommend the Christian Manifesto by Francis Schaeffer). We have reverted to our head in the sand (or is it head in the hymnal) approach. We have stopped engaging culture.
Rudy is playing for the political middle. The political middle is getting larger and many politicians are abandoning positions and platforms in favor of votes. Mathematically he can get elected with only 10% of Republicans and 10% Democrats if he gets all the middle. And, to do that you have to abandon your base…which in this case are Republicans and Christians.
(Man…my post was four times this long before I edited)
The last seven years have shown me that the republican party is inherently as corrupt as the democrats.
With Rudy in the office, we would be just as bad off as if Hilary were elected.
I say give Ron Paul a chance, he makes more sense with his policies than all the other candidates combined. I am not quite sure though if he is indeed a christian.
Thing is, though, Ron Paul doesn't have a chance. He isn't a serious candidate. It will be either the Republican, or the Democrat.
Can't agree with you about the GOP, as long as we're staying on the subject of the presidency. Would a Dem have given us Roberts and Alito, and started the Supreme Court back towards some sanity? To say nothing of stem cell research, and a host of other issues. No, it matters who's President.
The issue is: what to do if the GOP runs Rudy? I could probably vote (with varying degrees of happiness) for any of the rest of them. Rudy's far-gone on many issues.
That's the problem.
It comes down to that classic line from Master & Commander:
"One must choose the lesser of two weevils."
Ok, maybe as corrupt as the dems is a bit over the top.
However, I am quite disappointed with the GOP's track record. They had the white house, congress, senate, and the judiciary and still couldn't pass legislation to curb the moral evils in the land.
Now it looks like the only thing they'll have in 08' is a couple of SCOTUS appointee's.
That combined with laws such as the patriot act and increased executive powers cause me to worry that the next president will not be as forthright in upholding the legality of the constitution.
The system is broke, and until christians find a way to unite across racial lines on the basis of moral issues above fiscal and partisan ones we are in for the same old same old.
I agree with Jim, give Ron Paul a chance. I mean sheesh, they'd consider a 3rd party over someone who has a record of 'walking the talk' ?
And FYI - he is a Christian, he has a statement of belief somewhere on his campaign web site. (ronpaul2008.com) I'm one of the thousands of supporters on the meetup groups.
Again, Paul doesn't have a chance, and I don't think pretending the last 100+ years didn't happen is a realistic approach.
There's saying "We're here, and there's nothing we can do about it" is one position. It isn't mine.
Then there's saying, "We should be there! I want to be there! Let's just go there!" Paul's position. Not a political reality.
Then there's saying, "We're here, we should be there, now here's the first step (or five, or ten steps) in that direction." That's mine, and I think that's realism.
djp:
If you would just support Ron Paul you'd get a lot of new friends.
Come over to the dark side...
"Why are you handing the election to Hillary?"
There is one thing that values-voters dislike even more than electing Hillary: Waking up next year to the realization that the man they supported is working against their values.
Here's a truism: No Republican ever turns right after being elected.
If John MacArthur is right, this whole thing might well be part of God's judgment on America. Americans seem to have collectively lost the ability to think rationally and morally.
I am supporting Huckabee for the time being. I think he could be a bit tougher on illegals, but he's solid enough on the core issues.
I like Huckabee. Technically, nobody's unelectable if they get enough votes. (Duh!) I'd rather be right and lose than compromise and win.
Post a Comment