Evangelicals turn on Thompson

Politico ^ | September 26, 2007 | Jonathan Martin

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Thompson's refusal to back a nationwide ban on gay marriage has irritated potential supporters.

Fred Thompson is failing to meet expectations that he would rally widespread support from Christian conservatives, and he almost certainly will not receive a joint endorsement from the loose coalition of "pro-family" organizations, according to leaders of the movement.

Many religious conservatives, faced with a Republican primary top tier that lacked a true kindred spirit, initially looked to Thompson as a savior. But the former Tennessee senator has disappointed or just not sufficiently impressed the faith community since his formal campaign launch earlier this month.

While Christian conservatives once seemed willing to readily give Thompson the benefit of the doubt earlier this summer, when questions were raised about his lobbying for a pro-abortion-rights group, they are not willing to turn the other cheek anymore.

Even some on the religious right who remain sympathetic to Thompson are unhappy about his refusal to back a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and were unpleasantly surprised by his confession that he doesn’t belong to or attend any church and won’t talk about his faith.

It was Thompson’s refusal to discuss his faith that is likely to deny him any unified backing from the organizations that comprise the Arlington Group, the umbrella coalition of almost every major social conservative group in the GOP constellation.

[AnAmericanMother]

I couldn't care less if Romney is LDS. What worries me is the sudden change in a lot of what ought to be core principles, and just the fact that he could get elected in Massachusetts (and what he had to do and say in order to achieve that).

I am not happy that FDT doesn't go to church regularly, but it's not a deal-breaker (Reagan wasn't a regular churchgoer either, and Jimmuh the Peanut was, possibly even sincere . . . and Clinton was too, though his sincerity or lack thereof isn't in question . . . .)

'Course, I couldn't remotely be described as 'evangelical' . . . other than that I'll witness given an opportunity . . . .

[Brilliant]

Like I said, Reagan was a long time ago.

Bush barely scraped thru in 2000. In 2004, his victory had more to do with other issues.

We are dealing with 2008. We’ve got to deal with the issues that are important in 2008.

[Always Right]

No. Not without the Evangelical Right, he can't.

Actually, Fred has extremely strong support from the Evangelical Right. This article is BS. You can always find a few.

[Always Right]

What’s with this Jonathan Martin? He has written hit piece after hit piece on Fred Thompson, often using sweeping generalizations. He also believes that the entire Evangelical Church of America moves lock-step with Dr. Dobson or any of the other many Christian organizations. That is so untrue.

I agree. Thompson is doing extremely well with social conservatives. This guy is obviously pimping for some other candidate.

[L98Fiero]

“It is foolish for anyone to encourage any amendment that restricts our freedom. Why would anyone want that ??”

To “stick it to” people they don’t like. It’s a zero sum, win or lose game to some.

[roamer_1]

Actually, Fred has extremely strong support from the Evangelical Right. This article is BS. You can always find a few.

I beg to differ. Wide perhaps, but shallow.

[Always Right]

Fred is a lock in the south where the evangelical vote is the strongest. An absolute lock. No one of the GOP has a shot at any of the southern states, except Rudy will battle for Florida.

[JRochelle]

The Romney campaign is the dirtiest. They will do whatever it takes to try to win.

This past weekend in MI someone was handing out sheets with info about what James Dobson had said.

When confronted the guy said he wants to support right-leaning candidates. He brought up Mitt Romney and Sam Brownback. SInce Sam wasn’t even there, odds are it was more of MItts slimy operation.

I read that on the politico.

[ImpBill]

Most well said. It seems that "we can't support someone for who there are and what they believe" any longer. "We have to degenerate those whom we don't support"!

It has been a long held practice of the left. But to watch "so called" conservatives "Republicans" do it to one another, is a newer and very disturbing phenom.

[ImpBill]

Well let’s see ... I am religious and I am definitely on the “right”, but I get it. Either one is a Constitutional Federalist or one isn.t’t. You are correct. It seems that “many”, if we are to believe this article, of my brethren are sorta like the believers of Sharia Law, from a different Religion.

[jveritas]

There is no 100% turnout of any group and there is no 100% voting block for one candidate.

[jveritas]

I hope that is not an ad picture for Thompson. It is just silly.

[mad_as_he$$]

One of the constant complaints about Reps I hear from the right is that they want to legislate bedroom activities. The Federal Government has no business being in abortion or “marriage” in any form. Either way.

[seekthetruth]

You are right. Thanks! :)

[epow]

Fred's refusal to back a same sex marriage amendment is disappointing to me, but given the lack of any other acceptable AND VIABLE candidate, imho he's still the best hope we conservative evangelicals have at this time. Duncan Hunter is a Southern Baptist evangelical who says all the right things we conservative Christians want to hear, but sad to say he has been stuck somewhere between 1% and 2% in the polls since day one. If we evangelicals actually had the clout in the GOP that we are said to have Hunter should be among the top 2 or 3 candidates in the polls, but he isn't anywhere near that position.

I think it's safe to say that Hunter has no chance at the top spot on the ticket this time around, but he would make an outstanding choice for the VP spot. Then after 4 years of Fred in the White House, which is quite possibly all he would want given his health situation, or even after 8 years, Hunter would automatically become the leading candidate for the top spot in 2012 or 2016. I realize that isn't what most evangelicals want to hear, myself included, but it's probably the best we can hope for since I don't see any way short of a divine miracle sent down from above that he can win the primary this time around.

My position is that I won't vote for Rudy in either the primary or the general, but I would vote for Mitt in the general with great reluctance and only because he's not Hillary. But at this point I still haven't seen anything that completely turns me off on Fred, so lacking anyone better who has a real chance of winning I'm sticking with him. Or I am at least unless he fumbles the ball on some other issue that is critically important to me such as the sanctity of life or illegal immigration issues. If that happens I will just cast a symbolic vote for Hunter in the primary and then vote for whoever runs against Hillary in the general unless it's Rudy.

If worse comes to worse, which would be Rudy as the nominee, there will no doubt be a minor party candidate who isn't bad enough to be totally unacceptable. Therefore if it's Rudy vs Hillary in the general election I won't have to break my 50+ year record of voting in every presidential election since 1960's Nixon vs JFK. (I voted for Tricky Dicky)

[Mr. Lucky]

Yeah, these evangelicals have been so successful in outlawing abortion following their own strategy.

[Josh Painter]

MR. OCTOBER

From The Prowler, American Spectator

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is examining whether or not to enter a “testing the waters” campaign phase beginning the first week of October. According to Gingrich associates, he is mulling an announcement tour that would include appearances on one major Sunday morning show next weekend, along with several Fox News shows on Monday, as well as an appearance on Dr. James Dobson’s radio show.

“It’s not a coincidence that you saw Dr. Dobson attacking Fred Thompson when he did,” says a former associate of Dobson’s. “There’s a strategy here, and it’s about clearing the way for Gingrich to get in.”

Shortly after Gingrich appeared on Dobson’s radio show earlier this year and poured his heart our to Dobson, who forgave him for past personal indiscretions, Dobson attacked Thompson for not being — in Dobson’s view — a Christian. That attack was interpreted by many to be Dobson’s attempt to deflate what was then growing support for Thompson within the social conservative movement...

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12062

[jmc813]

Perhaps he’s against a pro life Constitutional amendment, too - I mean if he’s consistent.

Does your boy support such a thing?

[jmc813]

Unlike Rudy and Fred, Hunter and Romney agree on most of the GOP platform issues like FMA, tort reform, Reagan's Human Life Amendment etc....They also share their support of the WOT and their opposition to amnesty. They agree more than they disagree.

Also, they both have wonderful families

Yeah, Fred's wife and kids are a bunch of scumbags. You Mitt people are too much.

[jmc813]

Some libertarians in Tennessee may say that Fred was pro-choice when he first ran for the Senate. Not true. Pure bunkum.

I agree with you that Fred was never pro-choice, but what do libertarians have to do with this?