"Christian Conservatives Consider Third Party Effort"(to block Giuliani) LINK

[Blackhatjack]

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/christan-conservatives-consider-third-party-effort/index.html?hp

When James Dobson of the Focus on the Family and Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council held their secret meeting with other Fundamentalist leaders and backers, it became clear that Giuliani would NEVER be acceptable to them as the Repub Nominee, and they are floating a plan to back a third party candidate rather than support Giuliani as the Repub Nominee.

IF in fact Giuliani takes the Repub nomination, and the RW Conservative Fundamentalists decide to back a third party candidate instead of Giuliani, the Republicans' chance of winning in Nov 2008 will be exactly ZERO.

The rigidity of the fundamentalists voting block will likely implode the Karl Rove induced coalition of dissimilar groups making up the Republican Party for the last two Presidential Elections.

IMHO the only hope the Repub Party has is for the country to experience an environment of great fear around the time of the election --hoping to scare people into believing that only a Repub President can protect them.

[Ganja Ninja]

1. Sounds like a great idea. n/t

[ThomWV]

14. I'm all for it myself.

[opihimoimoi]

2. The GOP hopes to sell that BS about REPIGs superiority in keeping America safe and sound

But the record shows otherwise......

Dobson and company are very selfish people...no empathy...only apathy
\
SelfCentered and self absorbed...they want to lead without really knowing how...

[Burma Jones]

3. Smart Move by the Fundies

They're pretty sure that the next 'Puke candidate is going to lose, so why not make it look like it was their lack of votes that did it. These guys NEED a Democratic President anyway.....

[riqster]

4. The Reep coalition was always unstable

...too many components who have opposing points of view. We are now (thank the dog) seeing it fracture.

[JNelson6563]

5. Yep, a brilliant move!

:rofl:

[Colorado Progressive]

6. Lets keep our fingers crossed!

But frankly, Giuliani doesnt creep me out as much as Mittens does. Would the fundies support Mittens?

[Blackhatjack]

8. They would have to rewrite ALL OF THEIR RELIGIOUS MATERIAL to support Romney....

... and that is not going to happen.

Romney's best hope would be for the RW Conservative Fundamentalist Leaders to remain quiet, offer no endorsements, and hope those followers would vote for him on other issues.

Not likely.

[TwilightGardener]

12. Dobson said nice things about Mittens. Wouldn's surprise me if they backed him.

[Blackhatjack]

16. Dobson would have to contradict thousands of pages of written material he pushed to do so....

Take a look at the material published by the Southern Baptist Convention which describes the Mormons as a cult.

How could Dobson ask his religious followers to support Mittens without setting himself up to be criticized as a hypocrite? )The anti-Mormon material is everywhere, easily obtainable).

Not going to happen. Dobson loves to be at the top of his organization too much.

[TwilightGardener]

18. Fundies don't like Mormons, but this group is not seeking a religious leader--

it's seeking a candidate who both smells like a possible winner (Romney's got money and organization) and would adhere to social-conservative policies. Romney would be eager for their approval and would thus jump through hoops for them--remember, the Bush administration has treated them pretty badly overall--Bushies cynically look down on the fundies while using them to get elected. In the end, power is more important than specific doctrine to the evangelicals. They're more pragmatic than you think.

[Blackhatjack]

20. I disagree... this group is looking for a religious leader in that position, because....

... they believe only a committed religious official can and will implement the 'changes' in the law they most fervently desire.

Remember, Dobson, Perkins, Falwell(now deceased), Robertson, and the rest of the Fundamentalists' leaders all are dependent on religious principles as the power to control their followers. They cannot and will not violate one of the bedrock tenets of their faith to accomplish a political goal that will cost them their position and power. For example, they will never endorse any political candidate who is pro-abortion, pro-gay rights, and in favor of allowing a member of 'a cult' to obtain a position of authority in this country.

It is a principled stand with their followers that they will never cross.

[TwilightGardener]

24. They won't endorse a candidate who is pro-abortion, gay rights, etc--

you are correct. But those are policies, not necessarily religious tenets--anyone who will guarantee the fundies that these policies will be pushed will get their support--especially if that candidate also has a nice, appropriate Christian-looking marriage and family. I'm telling you, they aren't looking for a religious leader in the WH, because they know one can't be elected--too much of a turnoff to a big part of the electorate. They are practical, and will rally to whomever will help their agenda the most. If that's Mittens, then so be it--they won't alienate their followers, because again, it's clear that Mittens won't be their spiritual leader, just their sugar-daddy in terms of SCOTUS, gay marriage, faith-based program bullshit, etc.

[Blackhatjack]

25. You are giving these religious leaders too much credit for be pragmatists....

Their personal desires are certainly pragmatic. However their power is supported by the web of religious principles they have constructed for their followers. IF they violate any of the basic tenets of their version of Christiantity, they will lose control over their followers.

IMHO they do not have the power (even if they wanted to do so) to get their followers to the polls to vote for Romney. Just is not going to happen.

[Blackhatjack]

7. It is clear that Giuliani, Thompson, McCain and Romney won't pass muster with this group...

... anyone remaining in the announced Repub Nomination race who backs their position does not have the numbers to be elected.

IMHO their first choice among the remaining Repub candidates would be Huckabee. If they intend to 'make a statement' to the Repub Party and prove they are principled voters on their very rigid standards, they will back a hopeless ideologue who has absolutely no chance.

Any way you cut it, the Repub Party is in for a huge setback in the 2008 General Election.

Just look at the number of Repub Congressmen who have announced they will not run for reelection.
This is going to be a wipeout year for Repubs across the board.

[Ganja Ninja]

19. I'm not sure even JC himself could pass muster with these folks.

The beard, the long hair and the sandals would frighten them. And the skin tone is all wrong too.

[Blackhatjack]

21. Jesus did not pass muster with the religious leaders of his day ....

.... no different today.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

9. brilliant! i hope we can encourage this effort

[Blackhatjack]

10. None of these RW Fundie Leaders have embraced Thompson....

... and in fact, Tony Perkins backed away from Thompson when asked about him.

[Tyler Durden]

11. Where do I send my donation?

[Blackhatjack]

13. There is One Repub Candidate(who will not run this time) who would get their vote hands down....

JEB BUSH.

I believe he is angling for 2012, and would not wade into this disaster this election cycle.

[supernova]

15. Wonderful idea we should encourage

The GOP imploding would be a sight to see. :thumbsup:

[Blackhatjack]

17. I believe the RW Conservative Fundamentalists have given up on 2008, and are aiming for 2012...

They can 'pull their support' from the Repub Candidate this election cycle, and then argue that the 2012 candidate will have to support their views to obtain their support for a Repub Party Candidate.

They want to establish their 'indispensibility' to the Repub Party success formula.

[kenny blankenship]

22. Just nominate Fred Phelps - you can't miss!

[Blackhatjack]

23. I did hear Alan Keyes thought he could fill this void .... n/t

[catmandu57]

26. All I can say is

Go right on ahead. Seriously though, these religious uprising come in cycles, the great awakenings, this cycle is over. The religious wrong is a demoralized group of has beens, even if jebbie could somehow reinvigorate them, America has had enough of the family bush for awhile. It will be a cold day in hell before we ever are troubled by another miscreant from this family of worthless eaters.

[codjh9]

27. Hey, as long as it splits the Republican vote, yee-hah! n/t

[SacredCow]

28. Heard about this on a RW radio station this morning....

Most of the callers were very supportive of the idea- indignant at the audacity of the GOP in considering someone who didn't fit their demands exactly.

Let's hope they continue to be this cocky and stupid.... Guess they've forgotten all about Mr. Perot and his contributions...

[Blackhatjack]

29. Tony Perkins on Hardball discussing this secret meeting in Utah....

Interesting discussion with Repub-Peter King lecturing Perkins on the need for them to support the Repub nominee. Perkins made it clear they would not support Giuliani.

Perkins even pointed out that they had their choice in the WH and until they spoke up they almost got Harriett Miers as a Supreme Court Justice.

Nice --fundamentalists abandoning the Repub Party, and the Repub Party telling the fundies to get over it.

[Posteritatis]

30. Definitely hope this happens

For two reasons, too. One's the simple "split the right? AWESOME" politicking factor. And if I can be a bit more abstract, I don't mind more choices with some kinda oomph behind them on the ballot; if people can more comfortably vote their consciences, even if their consciences aren't ones I'd want to have myself, then I'm for that.

But mainly, y'know, it'd mean the Republicans would be hooooooooooooosed in '08. The rest is the icing; that'd be the cake.

[BenDavid]

31. I believe the Christian Right is

finally seeing the light....Wrote several posts that asked the question, How can a person which is republican and is considered part of the christian right who would never support a democrat that is pro choice, pro gay rights, and from time to time call those Dems that believe in a woman's right to choose, "baby killers", support a candidate that supports a woman's right to choose and for gay rights?

Ben David

[Earth_First]

32. Go Giuliani, GO!

(I never thought I'd be uttering those words before...)

...I need a drink.

[David Zephyr]

33. They pull this "threat shit" every four years. It's to intimidate all GOP candidates.

The 19% of fundamentalists in the U.S. will never leave the GOP fold because their "leaders" have favor there.

[Blackhatjack]

34. Perkins pointed out that Giuliani had been in favor of state supported abortion rights in the past

... and that was a deal breaker as far as the RW Conservative Fundamentalists are concerned.