Some leading religious conservatives are threatening to leave the Republican Party if it nominates pro-choice Rudy Giuliani for president. James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and others are considering supporting a third-party candidate. It is refreshing to see social conservatives show some independence and commitment to issues rather than to a political party. But if Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee, would they really vote for a third-party candidate, which likely would hand the presidency to Clinton? Do they think Clinton would be preferable to Giuliani, who says he favors strict-constructionist judges?
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Raptor on Open thread 11/21
- janeeyre on Open thread 11/21
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
- XXX on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- satatom on Open thread 11/21
- satatom on ACORN stole election?
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
79 Comments
A bargaining chip, methinks.
Methinks, too. Hardball beat it to death last night. Nothing there. The worst that could happen is they stay home and don’t vote for anyone.
VT,
Probably. They’ll extract some sort of “promise” from him, and they’ll all kiss and make up.
Still, the Fundos seem restive. This isn’t the last power play we’ll see from the Dobson/Perkins freakshow.
fleetwood,
If the Fundos actually do stay home, I think that would indeed be “the worst thing that could happen” for the GOP. That’s a lot of voters to lose.
That’s what I said.
Probably so here too, Vaughn. I would admire their independence if they did (it’s about friggin’ time), but I would also be relieved!
After a quarter-century, the Unholy Alliance appears to be in serious trouble. You’d think they’d realized before now that they were being played for suckers, just thrown an occasional bone every now and then (”Gays? They don’t vote Republican anyway! Here boy. . . take it nice!”).
Maybe something resembling sane governance will return. Call me an idealist, but I miss normal corruption.
Actually, I’ll amend that: they were thrown the courts.
Pretty damn serious bone.
fleettwood,
I read your meaning incorrectly: thought you were being ironic.
The fundies will grumble and whine but in the end, they’ll sit down, shut up, and take whatever scraps the GOP throws them.
They got no place else to go. A third party? Ha, ha, ho, ho, he, he, giggle, snort!
Hey fundies, how’s that anti-abortion thing going? How about that marriage amendment?The GOP owns you.
This would be a great opportunity for Democrats to switch parties just to vote in the primaries and get Rudy on the ticket.
Even if Religious Right do not pull out and form their third party, Hillary would still beat Rudy in the general election.
I think this election cycle belongs to the women and there are women out here that can’t stand Rudy for what he has done to his former family – even Rudy’s own kids will not support him. That is very telling.
“Do they think Clinton would be preferable to Giuliani, who says he favors strict-constructionist judges?”
I think that religious conservatives will hunt with the dog that comes with the hunt.
There will some “bailing out” by evangelicals, but for the most part, the “deep south” religious conservatives have enough common sense not to “throw the baby out with the bath water.”
The coming Great Crusade against the Iranians will rally the christian morons around the g.o.p banner, for sure!
Kansas, as close as elections run nowadays, a very small percentage of voters sitting home pouting could have a huge impact on the general election, especially in a state like, say, Florida.
I think this article makes a pretty good point. That Clinton has only one Republican that can beat her.
http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_114454.asp
If it’s Rudy vs Hillary, I will probably vote Rudy, even though that is far from settled. Far as I;m concerned, they are about the same thing. Power. If it’s Rudy vs Obama, I’d probably vote for Obama. Not because i like his politics. I don;t. But at least he is honest enough about them.Rudy may or may not be a good politician, but he is a horrible man.
“If it’s Rudy vs Hillary, I will probably vote Rudy, even though that is far from settled.”
Anyone who can write that needs to do some research into their own beliefs. That statement is startling in its vapidness.
And vacuous-ness.
If conservatives bail-out from Rudy, where do they bail-out to?
Hmmm, choose Far Left or Middle.
Tough choice.
“If it’s Rudy vs Hillary, I will probably vote Rudy, even though that is far from settled.”
Something for Hillary supporters to consider. She has hugs negatives not only among conservatives (much as Newsweek woud like to pretend that), but with liberals and independents as well.
And those who don’t identify with either party just might, ya know, decide the election.
“hugs negatives”–did I just invent a phrase?
Politics makes for strange bedfellows. Pro-gay, pro-choice, pro-gun control Guilani is embraced by “conservatives” and is somehow the Republic Party’s front-runner?!
Moderate-war, moderate-environment, moderate-tax policy Hillary Clinton is villified as being *ultra*-liberal?
The following quiz is far from perfect but it will be eye-opening, I think, for many.
I ended up with Kucinich, but Edwards came in second for me. And I have a lot of respect for John Edwards.
Take the quiz and report back who you *really* agree with on the 11 questions presented. Be honest.
http://www.wqad.com/Global/link.asp?L=259460
“I ended up with Kucinich,…”
That sez a lot. koo koo koo koo
And who did you end up with, “fleettwwood?”
Be honest, now.
Interesting. I expected to end up with Kucinich, but Chris Dodd came in second. May have to give the man a second look.
Looks like I’m a Fred guy.But, I knew that.
“Take the quiz and report back who you *really* agree with on the 11 questions presented. Be honest.”
I got Dodd.
If the religious right will quit the Repubs….Go, Rudy, Go!!!
Tie: Hunter and Thompson
Anyone who can write that needs to do some research into their own beliefs. That statement is startling in its vapidness.
Posted by: fleettwood | October 02, 2007 at 01:56 PM
And vacuous-ness.
Posted by: fleettwood | October 02, 2007 at 01:58 PM
I don’t need to examine anything. I will certainly be disinterested if it’s Rudy and Hillary. And yeah, the election will be without a point. All the real stuff will be done in the Congres.. Both Rudy and Hillary are losers, and in the same category as each other. Either one of them would steal a mothers milk if it meant getting elected
“fleettwwood” –
Fredrick of Hollywood?
How’d you put it? Oh, yeah.
“Koo koo koo koo.”
took the test, though the questions were not deep enough to get good answers. The reults, though i am not sure I agree:
Agree with mcCain and Ron Paul (score of 25), Huckabee and Gulliani (21)Hillary and Obama (20)THe rest go on down. Fred thompson (17)
Posted by: littlejohn | October 02, 2007 at 02:37 PM
I don;t even like McCain. Interesting results.
Oh please let them form a fundie party and split the republican vote! Let them have a Nader for a change!
A 3rd Party candidate is what it takes to get a Clinton elected.
That’s not entirely impossible Jed.
There’s a nut named Michael Savage. He’s a radio ranter and a real loon. He’s toying with the idea of running.
“He’s toying with the idea of running.”
Savage has worse negatives than hillary, and that’s saying something.
He’s also got more than 12 million people that say they would vote for him. That’s enough to sink any GOP contender.
Who would be an acceptable candidate for this third party?
Rudy? – a definite noRomney? – unlikely
Hey, I know who, and you guys said Brownback was tilting at windmills, giving speeches in empty tents and all that stuff.
Sam was awaiting this moment.
“Sam was awaiting this moment.”
Maybe we should encourage him. :)
“He’s also got more than 12 million people that say they would vote for him.”
I’m sure it was all scientific and all that.
Max – as I watched the numbers during 1992 it became clear that Perot took more votes from the challenger than he did from the incumbent. So I doubt what you say is correct.
However, in 2000 it is clearly obvious that Nader took votes from Gore and gave FL and NH to Bush.
“…as I watched the numbers during 1992…”
I remember that night like it was 15 years ago.I call Hogwash, ben. Perot hurt Bush. That’s what he wanted and that’s what he got. At least I don’t blame the voting machine.
As I recall, the Perot vote was fairly evenly split. Anyone want to hunt down the exact stats (sigh)?
I call hogwash right back fleettwood. As I watched crazy Ross enter, leave, and re-enter I noted that he effected the challenger’s numbers more than he did the incumbent. He was neither ‘right’ nor ‘left’; just ‘left-field’
“He was neither ‘right’ nor ‘left’; just ‘left-field’”
I must say you have nailed it.I still feel the pain of that night.
Ben, that was ‘96. If memory serves, he stayed in all during ‘92, and grabbed a fair number of votes from both groups self-identified voters–with Repubs getting a tiny edge (less than 1%).
If anyone really gives a damn THAT MUCH, please do check my figures.
I don’t.
92 he flip-flopped too. I remember worrying in 1992 that he might split the opposition and enable the incumbent to stay in. A split vote always favors the incumbent.
BUT – in 2000 the Nader vote CLEARLY tipped FL and NH. Those were the only two states where third-party mattered in 2000.
I would imagine if the RR bolt from the republicans it would be into something like these guys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Taxpayers_Party I dont see them going green, or libertarian
“A detailed analysis of the voting demographics revealed that Perot’s support drew heavily from across the political spectrum, with 20% of his votes coming from self-described liberals, 27% from self-described conservatives, and 53% coming from self-described moderates. Economically, however, the majority of Perot voters (57%) were middle class, earning between $15,000 and $49,000 annually, with the bulk of the remainder drawing from the upper middle class (29% earning over $50,000 annually). Politics: Who Cares by Peirce Lewis, Casey McCracken, and Roger Hunt (American Demographics, October 1994, vol. 16, no. 10) p. 23″
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot
I always assumed Perot hurt Bush more than Clinton and that clearly was his intent, too. In the Wiki piece above, it says Perot was “pleased” with the Clinton/Gore nomination.
Do you remember the Vice President debates in ‘92 when Perot’s VP candidate left his podium and wandered around the stage awhile – that was bizarre.
I always loved Perot’s automotive analogies – “We got to roll up our sleeves, pop the hood, and get under there and fix what’s wrong!” – don’t know that he ever said that, but he could have…
92 was when I really got involved in politics…working for the Perot campaign. As I recall, “Crazy Ross” pulled 19% of the vote. I had always voted republican before that, starting with Nixon. Reagan was the last republican who supported anything I believed in.
I would be leaving too. Religious values are very important! I agree with these people a lot. Thanks Phil for the story, shows that the government can do something right once in a while.
I don’t think they will do the third party but I do think lots of them will probably stay home on Election Day. I just don’t see them voting for a pro choice, pro gay, anti gun, cross dressing 3 times divorced affair having candidate.
“”"This would be a great opportunity for Democrats to switch parties just to vote in the primaries and get Rudy on the ticket.
Even if Religious Right do not pull out and form their third party, Hillary would still beat Rudy in the general election.”"”"
Rudy should be the easiest of the Repukes to beat. All of them are a pretty sorry lot although I would worry the most about Hukabee.
“”"Something for Hillary supporters to consider. She has hugs negatives not only among conservatives (much as Newsweek woud like to pretend that), but with liberals and independents as well. “”"”
She has high negatives with me. I hope that she is not the Democratic nominee. But if she is, I will support her because the name of the game is to beat the GOP by any means necessary. Most Democrats understand this which is why they are not bloodletting in the primaries.
I ended up with Edwards with a score of 36- only disagreement was line item veto. Close seconds were Clinton and Obama at 34.
“”"”That’s not entirely impossible Jed.
There’s a nut named Michael Savage. He’s a radio ranter and a real loon. He’s toying with the idea of running.”"”
He is a nut. The few times he takes phone calls, I love to call him up just to make his blood pressure skyrocket and hear him blow up.
What will the religious nutcase fanatics call their new party? The Snake Handler Party?
I do so hope that the fundies will either put up or shut up.
They’ve got to realize at some point, that people really want to live freely and normally, not their idea of how we should live.
Not even the fundies adhere to their own beliefs. They have a set of what society should do, but when it comes to their own lives…well that’s different.
Reminds me of reading a story once of a fundy lawmaker whose very young daughter ended up pregnant. He always voted against abortion but when he took her in for her abortion, he said “my daughter is a good girl, she has a bright future, she just made a mistake and shouldn’t have to pay the rest of her life for it…not like those other girls”.
“What will the religious nutcase fanatics call their new party? The Snake Handler Party?”
Hee hee hee hee. Good one, Kev!
I like “Left behind” better…
I like “Left behind” better…
Posted by: J R | October 02, 2007 at 06:32 PM
thats the one
you all are wrong. theyll just join the revolution. a man who transcends parties but runs on the republican ballot. ron paul 2008.
Yeah isn’t it funny how Ron Paul believes in freedom except when it comes to women’s rights.
Ron Pauls ideals are ridiculously dangerous. Talk about appeasing the RR and the rich at the same time.
Ron Paul is a Libertarian running as a Republican. Whats on his platform that threatens womens rights?
“”"”Ron Paul is a Libertarian running as a Republican. Whats on his platform that threatens womens rights?”"”"
Like we can really tell the difference between them. Neal Boortz says he is a Libertarian but he just parrots the Republicans.
“As I recall, ‘Crazy Ross’ pulled 19% of the vote.”
Yes, both in Kansas and nationally.
The Republican Party cannot assumesupport from the conservative evangelical base for a pro-abortion pro-sodomy nominee, thinking there is no one else to vote for but farther-left, pro-abortion, pro-sodomy Democrats. Some principles won’t be compromised. Drastic circumstances call for drastic measures.Never, never, never trust a RINO.
Never never never trust a Fundy.
Ron Paul believes in reversing Roe.
Parkay could beat Brownback. Go Parkay, go!
Parkay, the candidate for the snake handling party.
Somewhere in my basement, I have an ethnography on snake-handlers. It was fascinating, as I recall.
This may be a chance to bring the religious back where at least some of them belong.
The policies of Democrats and liberals are much more in touch with the teachings of Christ than are the practices of the GOP.
since we are talking religion if we are talking politics in america here’s a story that fits right in-
Ten Commandments sculptor killed in Missouri
By The Associated Press
AURORA, Mo. – A southwest Missouri man known for his giant stone sculpture of the Ten Commandments is dead after they fell over on him.
parkay,
CF2K is pro-sodomy and proud.
Larry Craig is pro-sodomy and not proud.
As for Ron Paul, well, the Nazis over at Stormfront seem to have found their guy.
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php/ron-paul-one-388512.html
P-Mom,”my daughter is a good girl, she has a bright future, she just made a mistake and shouldn’t have to pay the rest of her life for it…not like those other girls”.
When I volunteered as clinic support, you wouldn’t believe the security and secrecy demanded by women coming in for their abortion after they protested outside the clinics. Got to the point of being hilarious!
Jed – it’s that old saying again….do as I say and not as I do.
No wonder nobody listens to the religious whacko nutjobs anymore.
Rage asked us: “Take the quiz and report back who you *really* agree with on the 11 questions presented. Be honest.”
OK, I just took the quiz, and I ended up with a tie: Giuliani and Biden, each with 26 points!
Which is no surprise, since those were always the two candidates who appealed to me the most.
What may be a surprise to many is that, according to this quiz at least, Biden and Giuliani have such similar positions that I could support them equally.
Steven Davis says: “The policies of Democrats and liberals are much more in touch with the teachings of Christ than are the practices of the GOP.”
There is no way to be a devout Christian and support same-sex marriage for gays and lesbians.
And I can say that even though I am actually a supporter of same-sex marriage. I cannot see how one can interpret the Bible in any other way than that it regards homosexuality as sinful and not to be institutionalized via marriage.