Posted on 02/16/2007 4:56:04 AM PST by Spiff
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who said Wednesday night he is making a bid for the White House, will not be America’s 44th president because he supports abortion rights and gay rights and has been married three times.
At least so says Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.
Land is considered an influential evangelical leader, and he has a new book, due out next month, entitled The Divided States of America? What Liberals and Conservatives Are Missing in the God-and-Country Shouting Match — with a foreword written by Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn).
Land told The Hill in an interview this week that as it stands now, the top tier of Republican presidential hopefuls lacks a candidate social conservatives can be fully comfortable voting for.
Beginning with Giuliani, Land said “the vast majority” of social conservative voters will not vote for the former mayor even if he gets the nomination and faces off against Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).
“If he wins, he’ll do so without social conservatives,” Land said.
While Giuliani’s moderate to liberal stances on social issues are beginning to be discussed more and more in conservative circles, Land said the mayor’s annulment, divorce and subsequent third marriage will seal the deal against hizzoner for social conservatives.
“It’s got to surface at some point,” Land said. “There are too many social conservatives talking about it, and it applies to [Newt] Gingrich, too.”
Land talks often about the weight social conservatives carry within the Republican Party, citing exit polling and warning GOP candidates that they can “no more win without conservative voters than a Democrat can without overwhelming support from blacks.”
“That’s the reality of politics in the early 21st century,” he said.
Land looked at the current field of Republican candidates and offered his appraisal — not endorsement — of those he views to be in contention.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has to “convince” social conservatives his conversions on issues such as abortion and gay rights are authentic rather than politically motivated, Land said, adding that many conservatives will likely give Romney the benefit of the doubt on his changed abortion position.
“Conservatives would see that as ‘He’s seen the light,’” Land said. “They would see it as less of a flip-flop than as a journey.”
Of Romney’s Mormon religion, Land said it’s not a “deal-killer.”
Land said he has encouraged the former governor to reach out to social conservatives about his religion and appeal to “the American people’s sense of fair play,” much as President Kennedy addressed his Catholicism in front of the Greater Houston Ministerial Association in 1960.
As for oft-perceived Republican frontrunner Sen. John McCain, Land paused, then said the Arizona senator’s strengths with independent voters are what is hurting him with socially conservative voters.
McCain’s “maverick” streak may be a winning personality trait for reporters and independents, but social conservatives consider it to be a sign of unpredictability.
“They don’t like being surprised,” Land said.
Though Land doesn’t question McCain’s consistency on abortion issues, he said McCain’s involvement in the “Gang of 14” — the bipartisan Senate group that prevented the “nuclear” option on judicial nominees — and his refusal to support anti-gay marriage proposals severely hurts his chances with traditional-values voters.
In the end, Land said, social conservatives are concerned about the kind of judges a President McCain would nominate.
“Voting pro-life is not enough,” Land said. “He has got to express himself in other venues.”
Add that to the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance reform law, legislation that sparked an outcry in religious organizations, and McCain, despite a conservative record and his continued, loyal backing of President Bush, does not come in as a favorite of the religious right.
But Land said the second tier of candidates offers voters of his ilk two contenders so-called values voters could get behind — Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R).
Both men are considered long-shots at this early stage of the game, but Land said impressive fundraising or gains in the polls could open a door to either candidate through which social conservatives might run.
“They don’t have to convince other social conservatives they’re one of them,” Land said. “They just have to convince other social conservatives they can win.”
Land called Huckabee a “Republican Bill Clinton,” praising the longtime governor’s charisma and affability with voters.
“I think he could catch fire,” Land said.
As it stands today, probably a good 10 months away from the first votes, Land said Romney and McCain “get the first chance to close the deal,” but concedes with those two as the frontrunners, social conservatives are left without a candidate who makes them 100 percent comfortable.
“That’s why if I were a Brownback supporter or a Romney supporter, I wouldn’t be all that discouraged,” he said.
As for Democrats, Land challenges the assumption held by many that Clinton will be the Democratic nominee, giving her “50-50” chances.
He said as he talks to conservative voters, he hears the word “calculating” used most often to describe the former first lady and cites “Clinton-Bush” fatigue as one of the factors working against her.
“When people talk to me about her, their facial expressions change,” he said.
Anything that Pat Robertson says is not necessarily what Christians or Evangelicals believe. He is a known wacko. Just because he has money and a TV program and school doesn't make him an official spokesman for all of the Religious Right.
Thank you for that statement. Those who blamed the President for not being able to get votes on the nominations were unfair. The problem was in the Senate.
How will Rudy get anyone through except liberal judges, especially now that the Democrats will control the Senate?
If the problem is in the Senate, then what difference does it make WHO is President. If Bush can't get nominees through a 'rat Senate, and Rudy can't, and Reagan couldn't get Bork through, then how could Duncan Hunter or Tom Tancredo or Newt Gingrich get them through? Would they have some magic super powers beyond those of mortal men to get nominees past 'rats?
Thank you for making the argument that the Prwsident has limited ability to affect social issues.
That's a pretty spiffy chart you have there!
How about Bibi's endorsement?
Do you know Dr. Land? I do, and he is one happy guy. Talk about something that you might know a little about.
ditto, thanks.
I ~almost~ agree. But the fact is Robertson has enough of a following and enough folks sending him money that his influence amongst voting Evangelicals is arguably as strong if not stronger than Richard Land's.
He has no credence at all. He is no longer a serious player. Too much whackadoo nonsense.
Of course, the MSM goes running to him, in hopes that he will give them some outlandish and lurid statement.
He oblighes them fairly regularly.
ROfLMAO! I'm sorry! I'll go get my straightjacket! Hold on!
Pro-life, pro-liberty, pro-gun Americans--- straight-shooting loyalists who MADE the party what it is today In fact, this RINO maneuver was predicted years ago by savvy social conservatives.....that RINOS would be hell-bent on throwing social conservatives off the Republican flotilla.
However, one of the most ignorant RINO assumptions is that social conservatives are gonna lay down and play dead while RINOs stampede us out of the Repub party.
Ain't gonna happen.
It is Rudy who should GTH out of our party.....subito.
Here and now---let social conservative Repubs take an oath on the Second Amendment---we are united, and standing strong.
"So if Rudy looses will all the RINOs stay home?"
I've asked this questions too. I haven't seen any answers from the Rudybots on this. Would love to know.
Got it from a very reliable and honest source. ;-)
I with you fella!
Joe is more moral and conservative that Rudy ever was, or will be. Having said that, I would never vote for Lieberman, because he is way to liberal for me.
In other words anyone who doesn't agree with YOUR religious views is not a political conservative.
If you want to divide conservatism between political conservatives and religious conservatives that's OK with me. Just don't try to sell the notion that certain religious views are a necessary prerequisite to being a conservative. That just won't play in most of the country.
I have, I signed up to work as a volunteer for the Hunter Campaign last week. ;-)
i'll be interested when you launch that thread...
The Perpetually Pissed Off who say they will pout and stay home are a tiny portion of the voters. Nothing pleases them but suicidal positions no successful politician can espouse.
It always the same thing, threats and refusal to support the Party's candidates.
The minority party?
You guys have not been reading the Rudy posts lately have you? You guys are stuck on the flame bait anti-Rudy posts where the anti-Rudy people say they will stay home or vote third party and/or Democrat. THE RUDY PEOPLE WILL VOTE FOR WHOMEVER THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE IS. THEY HAVE SAID THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.