Iowa evangelicals thrilled with 2016 GOP field

The Washington Examiner ^ | April 26, 2015 | Sean Higgins

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

For Christian evangelical voters in Iowa this election cycle is an embarrassment of riches. They're having a hard time picking a candidate because, for the first time many can remember, they have several options to choose from.

Nine Republican presidential hopefuls spoke Saturday at an event hosted by the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition, a successor to the the now-defunct Christian Coalition. They hoped to win over supporters for the state's presidential caucus, the first major event in the presidential primary.

The Iowans could not agree on who did best.

"I'd like to elect all of them," said Doug Brown, who lives north of Des Moines. "Maybe one of them can get elected and appoint all of the rest as the cabinet secretaries. I mean, this so much better than we are used to."

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

It is nice to have a good bench of possibilities. Hopefully the ones who don't finish well in Iowa will drop out so that the conservative vote doesn't remain too divided. My remaining top tier, the ones that I would vote for, donate to, and campaign for, are Santorum, Cruz, and Jindal—probably in that order. Realistically Cruz will probably shake out as the last man standing among those three. My success rate (or lack of it) in recent years would perhaps indicate that Chris Christie or Lindsay Graham will be the nominee. But I remain hopeful.

[reasonisfaith]

I can’t imagine how Lindsay Graham will be able to accomplish what he wants to accomplish by running.

For example, I don’t see how he could pull conservative votes from Cruz in South Carolina.

[jjotto]

Ping for your amusement

[ansel12]

Paul impressed many with his remarks, during which he argued that conservatives could put put Democrats on the defensive on the abortion issue, citing a recent exchange he had with Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, D-Fla.

People need to learn to listen to Paul more closely.

Here is what he said about his position on abortion, and it isn't pro-life.

“The thing is about abortion—and about a lot of things—is that I think people get tied up in all these details of, sort of, you’re this or this or that, or you’re hard and fast (on) one thing or the other,” Paul told Elliott. “I’ve supported both bills with and without (exceptions), you know. In general, I am pro-life.

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

I have never been fond of conspiracy theories about “stalking horses”. I think that most (but not all) of those claims are rubbish. Huckabee and Gingrich did team up against Romney in West Virginia in 2012 if I remember correctly—not that there is anything wrong with that. But, in spite of my reluctance to endorse stalking horse theories, I firmly believe that the only reason that Graham is running is to draw votes away from conservative candidates in South Carolina. After that mission is accomplished, I would imagine that South Carolina will be the last state in which Graham competes.

[GeronL]

Santorum wants to raise the minimum wage. why?

[FreeReign]

Yes.

And here's the push....

"They're having a hard time picking a candidate because, for the first time many can remember, they have several options to choose from".

[Bob434]

several GOP potentials strutting around and tickling the ears of evangelicals- telling them what they want to hear in order to steal the votes away from the TRUE evangelical runners- Sadly many might fall for it, and should one of the faux evangelicals make it- they WILL flip flop after they are elected- per usual, and the new administration will hardly be distinguishable from the previous administration if this happens- We NEED an evangelical candidate WITH a backbone- someone who is NOT afraid of the left, NOT afraid of special interest groups, and someone who stands on moral grounds and is unwilling to waver- We do NOT need a jelly spined faux evangelical who changes positions every time the wind changes directions

[Newfy]

Ted Cruz fits the bill.

[Bob434]

[[or you’re hard and fast (on) one thing or the other,”]]

Yes paul, it’s called conviction - it’s called taking a stand on important issues and NOT changing your mind every 10 seconds- it’s called having a backbone- it’s called being a patriot and not a wishy washy pretender

Paul is worthless- when a man doesn’t believe in absolutes- he will fall for everything because there are no standards to judge by- everyone does what is right In their own eyes when there is no objective standard to judge by-

Objective standards are under attack I n this country like never before, and this paul fella wants to advance that attack by claiming there are no hard fast rules? This is the cancer eating away at this country, and he wants us to endorse more of it be electing him?

NO THANKS!

[Bob434]

[[I can’t imagine how Lindsay Graham will be able to accomplish what he wants to accomplish by running.]]

By taking votes away from those who actually deserve it- by dividing the conservative vote- by causing infighting- he is a divider, not a uniter- and he works for the left- make no mistake about that

[mrsmel]

You’re so correct, and it’s disheartening that self-identified evangelicals aren’t paying more attention. No wonder churches go worldly and “seeker-senstitive” so easily. No discernment being used.

[mrsmel]

The left has indoctrinated more than one generation that there is no such thing as absolute truth when it comes to morality, and as the Bible says will happen, every man does right in his own eyes. God gave us His revealed Word so we wouldn’t have to wonder, and make the rules up for ourselves on shifting sands.

[SunkenCiv]

"I'd like to elect all of them," said Doug Brown, who lives north of Des Moines. "Maybe one of them can get elected and appoint all of the rest as the cabinet secretaries. I mean, this so much better than we are used to."

[parksstp]

“Ted Cruz is popular amongst we tea partiers, however, he’s not allowed to run, because while he’s become a citizen, he wasn’t born here.”

Ted Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen and is eligible to run.
He was a US Citizen at birth born to an American mother (full NBC) and naturalized father while he was working in Canada.

[parksstp]

Ted Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen. He did not apply for legalization. He qualified for citizenship at birth because his mother was of age and met the requirements for residence to have her children considered Natural Born citizens.

The information in the link you provided is faulty.

The difference between Cruz and Obama is that Obama’s mother wasn’t old enough to meet the legal requirement so regardless of where Obama was born, he wasn’t considered a NBC.

The Cruz situation is different.

What you’re saying is expecting parents shouldn’t leave the country out of fear they may give birth outside the US which would make their children not NBC’s. Or the children of military members/foreign spouses living abroad overseas where the child is born off the military installation where the military member is serving wouldn’t be considered an NBC?

Maybe we should give Point Roberts, WA back to the Canadians. If an American living in Point Roberts marries a Canadian citizen with dual status and they live in Point Roberts, she goes into labor and can’t make it back to Bellingham or Blaine in time via the chopper/ferry and has to drive into Canada and stop at Vancouver to give birth, then return to Point Roberts after she’s released from the hospital, are you telling me that child is not a NBC? Because if she meets the age and residency requirements, then her children should be NBC’s regardless of where they are born.

Is would be stupid to punish her for not being able to make it back to the US in time (Point Roberts has no medical facilities) just to give birth. It’s also dumb to punish CEOs or other employees of multi-national corporations who must live abroad as part of their job.

Ted Cruz isn’t breaking any rules. Please provide support in the Constitution or Congressional regulation which supports your claim he isn’t an NBC.