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.