No they didn't. The so called "value voters" do not represent me or the bulk of the conservative base. What a bunch of pretentious holier than thous. Value voters? I suppose no one but them has any values nor is concerned about values when voting. Some of the members of this group are questionable at best. The tone of this group, and of this post, is threatening. What a way to get people to agree with you.
People with "values" will definitely have an effect on the elections, but it won't be because of this narrow group or the constituency challenged candidates who showed up at their show.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
So, what are these values that unite all conservatives?
I asked this question on an earlier thread and was told by a values voter that, "we don't make lists of our values." I never received a meaningful answer.
Okay...
Whether you choose to accept it or not, values voters make up a large part of the conservative base. They voted overwhelmingly for W in the last two elections. When H.W. lost to Clinton in ‘92, the eastern establishment RINOs blamed the values voters and tried to marginalize them, saying the Republican Party stands for fiscal conservatism only. When Republicans controlled the Presidency and both Houses, they spent tax dollars profligately. Fiscal conservatism went out the window. Without the values voters, the Republican Party stands for nothing.
Actually, yes, the front runners did/do ignore the core of the conservative base.
The so called "value voters" do not represent me or the bulk of the conservative base.
Values voters, as typified by the elements such as evangelicals, make up a much larger portion of the conservative base than you're admitting.
What a bunch of pretentious holier than thous. Value voters? I suppose no one but them has any values nor is concerned about values when voting.
You've just imposed your personal bias into this. They did not claim to be superior or holier than anyone. They are stating that they place a high weight on values...you may base your decisions upon whatever you choose to. If you place a large weight on values such as life then you're likely to agree with these value voters.
Some of the members of this group are questionable at best. The tone of this group, and of this post, is threatening. What a way to get people to agree with you.
Again, your personal opinion as to how questionable some are. Additionally, if every group were judged by a limited portion of their composition one can denounce pretty much every group in the same way you have done here. As for threatening? You're going to have to back that up with something...unless stating that they believe that they represent a very large block of voters and any candidate that ignores them isn't likely to win in their opinion. Do you think it reasonable to expect them to vote for candidates that do ignore them?
People with "values" will definitely have an effect on the elections, but it won't be because of this narrow group or the constituency challenged candidates who showed up at their show.
I think the reaction of average, decent, good people against the Clinton years was mistaken for a real influential group of holier-than-thou 'values voters'. The whole concept of 'values voteres' insinuates that all other voters are pagans or nihilists.
“What a bunch of pretentious holier than thous”
You know you really betray your own bigotry aand ignorance by labeling a whole group the way you have...you betray your own name”Prokopton” or truth seeker!
“more than 600 delegates to the Values Voter Debate Straw Poll were submitted by 40 national leaders to accurately represent America’s largest voting block.”