Well, no, that a miscategorization. The GOP swings whatever way the winds blow. It's the Christian right specifically that is likely to fracture the coalition. Forcing unscientific ideas into biology class, interfering in matters where the federal courts do not traditionally get involved, pushing Christian icons into the public sphere - I think the great American public, broadly Christian though it may well be, have a limited tolerance for this sort of thing - particularly when it's been spin-doctored by the mainstream media. I've been surprised how effective the pro-filibuster campaign has been, for example; contrary to what I would have predicted a couple of months ago, I don;t think the GOP will be able to force through judicial confirmations.
Add this to the utter failure of the GOP to cut spending, and the expansion of federal powers by Bush in cahoots with the GOP (No Child Left Behind, prescription drugs), the betrayal by Bush of equal opportunity, the failure to enforce immigration laws; I can't find a single reason right now why a libertarian conservative would turn out right now to vote for the Pubbies.
One shouldn't underestimate the Dems' incompetence, of course. They could have taken the White House in 2004 had they nominated a centrist rather than John Kerry. They may well figure out some cockeyed way to alienate the electorate by 2006.
Don't worry; I'll put my money where my mouth is. I made a large chunk of cash in 2004, and I confidently expect to prosper in 2006.
(a) it doesn’t matter anyway, God is on our side and He trumps all goverments,
Of course, many of us find this an unpersuasive argument, and some of us take a look at the other people who claim God is on their side, and shudder.
(b) there are more believers in the U.S. than not – for every atheist who leaves in a huff, several Christians are apt to join in,
You have to wonder, though, if you haven't already gotten everyone you're likely to get, and may lose a few.
(c) it is more important to be right than powerful and
Now that we can agree on.
(d) the general election of 2004 was won by Republicans because of the party’s stand "for" values.
Well, I'll grant you that is the common wisdom. It wasn't nearly that simple though. It was better organization, a weak adversary, the Swifties, memogate, and George Bush's personality (while the left despises the man, hardly anyone finds him personally dislikable).
What you should really consider is that a hard-left Dem almost squeaked in. Had they nominated Joe Lieberman or even Dick Gephardt, we'd be singing a different song.
Regarding your threat of an opus prospering in cash, I ask, kindly, that you would take the lead and stay on topic, RWP. If you have something to say about epistemology, run with it.
Personally, I don't think the anti-evolution crowd makes much difference at all wrt politics since the educators are already mostly Democrat. The general voting public is pretty much divided on the ID controversy and unless it is made a political platform or something raised in political debates prior to an election, my sense is that it will be a non-issue despite all of the liberal MSM's attempts to make it so.
WRT to the Schiavo case - indeed, the pro-life crowd is overwrought and thinking with their collective heart instead of their head. As a result, they let the MSM frame the debate and didn't play it out beneficially. IMHO, a pro-life movement with judicial (rather than emotional) temperament would have pressed these three points:
(2) that once a judgment is made (with whatever standard of proof) that a life will be taken, then the same rules of compassion which are applied to companion animals, laboratory mice and convicted death row criminals needs to apply - a lethal injection (or gas) preceded by an anesthetic.
(3) that the rights of an estranged spouse to speak for the other spouse needs to be more clearly defined in state law.
These issues are all basically ideological and, as cornelis has pointed out, are far afield of the epistemological subject matter of this thread so I won’t go any further in my reply. But I do thank you for sharing your views on all of them.