Posted on 10/10/2007 3:07:32 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Conservative evangelical leader Dr. James Dobson admits that a third-party plan supported by pro-family leaders might unintentionally help elect democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton.
The influential pro-family advocate still contends, however, that he would rather vote following his values than compromise and be forced to choose between two pro-choice candidates.
Were very, very concerned about the implications of a Hillary Clinton presidency, but you know, we have been working for 35 years, Ive been trying to defend the unborn child, Dobson said on Foxs Hannity & Colmes show Monday.
Thats been my life. Thats been my belief, along with marriage and the family and the other things. I cant now abandon that because weve got two bad choices here.
Currently leading the Democratic race and Republican race are New York senator Hillary Clinton and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, respectively. Both have been criticized by conservatives for their pro-choice and pro-gay rights stances among other issues.
During a meeting in Salt Lake City, about 50 pro-family leaders decided they would consider backing a third-party candidate if the Republican Party chose a pro-choice nominee, such as Giuliani
In an Op-Ed in the New York Times last week, Dobson explained the coalitions decision and the reasoning, stating that as vitally important as it is for the GOP to win the presidential election, it should not be won at the expense of what we hold most dear.
His announcement that a core Republican constituency could consider withdrawing their support from the party next year stirred controversy and created greater division in the already divided GOP.
Why would we not support someone who does line up with our values system, when we would have to literally hold our noses to support somebody that contradicts those values? Dobson posed to Hannity who supports Giuliani despite agreeing with Dobson 99 percent of the time.
When further pressed on the possibility that his third party plan could help Clinton, Dobson replied that the elections are still far away and elections are very dynamic and volatile.
Theres still a possibility that one of those other candidates, a dark horse, could come from nowhere, Dobson said.
As the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination, Giuliani has repeatedly stated he can beat Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton an appealing statement for those who see Clinton as a larger threat.
A recent Gallup Poll also found that the former New York City mayor had an overall favorable rating from churchgoing Protestants. Among the top tier Republican candidates, Giuliani was rated third by religious Protestants after former senator Fred Thompson and Arizona senator John McCain.
Thats been my life. Thats been my belief, along with marriage and the family and the other things. I cant now abandon that because weve got two bad choices here.
It's a noble cause Mr. Dobson. But sometimes you have to put it on hold. Besides, A Hillary Clinton as POTUS will be very bad for the cause, so in a sense keeping Hillary out furthers the cause, or at the very least prevents it from loosing ground.
While I understand the thought, he is actually going to ensure the death of millions more babies by being stubborn on this. It is better to elect a person who will not automatically appoint pro-abortion judges than one who definitely will.
Ruth Buzzy Ginsburg and probably others are waiting to leave with the next lib president. If a Dim gets in, we are guaranteed she will retire and new 15-20 year lib judge(s?) will be appointed and confirmed. There isn't anything like shooting yourself in the foot. If another Pub gets in, she will probably die in the office and a new appointment can be made that isn't as liberal as she is.
No I am not a Guliani supporter.
I’m with you. I would rather compromise than give in. A Democrat president, senate, and house is too much to comtemplate. The damage at this juncture would be irreversible.
What if he were? I don’t think that is either here nor there.
All that is true, and you are saying rather than vote for Fred, lets hand Hillary the white house and get it over with quickly, right? Rather than teeter on the edge, use the time to replace rino's and rebuild, lets just run as fast as we can into a brick wall.
A Third Party might be possible if Someone with a Name shows up.
The shame is on those who will support a liberal abortionist for president over a pro-life conservative when they know damned well that there are millions of pro-life Christians out there who will never vote for abortion.
Huh?
See it is very much here...and there. But instead of looking here and there, an answer to the question would be nice. Or is the answer too uncomfortable?
I've asked the same question for 4 days....maybe you could answer it.
.
Yup
FReeper “potlatch” did the excellent artwork & animations
We put a touch of “Flash” on FR threads
Dobson is finally exhibiting his long repressed Pat
Robertson gene.
***I don’t think so. He sees Fred as the frontrunner with the highest likelihood of getting the nomination, and there is really only one time for him to affect this race: Now. Fred isn’t 100% pro-life, has a lame record on CFR, gave the Clintons a pass on Chinagate, and went milquetoast in other ways when he chose to go to Hollywood rather than fight it out in the trenches of congress. My hope is that Dobson somehow endorses Duncan Hunter.
Think 19% of the vote. Think the little critter in Texas. Think another Klinton in the White House. I WILL happen. Basically, with the illegals voting and the illegal voting of the Dimocrats, she is going to rule anyway.
That was my thought too.
Over the last few weeks, that "fine Christian moral leader" seems to have started campaigning for Hillary Clinton.
Honestly, if there is a third party and they pull enough votes from the Republicans to let another Klinton or any dem into the White House.......I swear I am going to break some bones...today figuratively but on election day....who knows.
” If Dobson endorsed Hunter, his poll numbers would start going up past McCain, Paul, Tancredo, Huckabee, etc.”
It’s true, but he’s not going to do that.
Basically, we on the right must agree to disagree on the primary level and stand together on the national level. We are otherwise self-defeating. In-fighting will result in another Clinton in the White House.
Let’s debate without argument or attack and accept the result of the primaries.
I want to be rich and thin, but I’m not. I accept that. I want Duncan Hunter, but I’ll vote for the nominee.
Being true to your character is fine, even admirable. However, cutting off your nose to spite your face is just plain stupid. Even the most principled people have to make compromises. No one likes it, but better you get 70% or 80% of what you'd like than 0%. If Dobson and those who listen to him vote 3rd Party or not at all because the Republican nominee isn't perfect, then you'll end up with the most imperfect candidate imaginable. You'll end up with her appointing 2 Supreme Court Justices (at least) and dozens or hundreds of lower court judges - and that part of her legacy will last decades (in terms of who is wearing the robes) or hundreds of years (in terms of the longevity of the legal precedents established by these people.
She'll raise taxes, whereas any Republican will be hardpressed to do so (and most would cut them); most Republicans will be very hard-line on foreign policy and defense, while she'll slice our throats like her husband did; she's guaranteed to be the single most anti-gun President in our history, someone who'll likely appoint a Schumer-type to be AG (i.e. the person who is in charge of the BATF), whereas even anti-gun Rudy won't be able to much without his party's support.
Oh, yeah, and if Dobson thinks that Rudy and his crew are pro-abortion, maybe he should look at Hillary and hers. The result on that issue will be - at best - the same, while on a whole host of other important issues she'll be incredibly worse, even a disaster.
No, I don't like the idea of President Rudy. I detest it, in fact. But the worst Republican is better than the best Democrat - at least at this point in history (it certainly wasn't true 45+ years ago, but this isn't your father's Democrat Party). Dobson simply has to understand that he isn't going to ever get a candidate who agrees with him 100% of the time, and that his influence gives him a responsibility to intelligently choose between supporting an 80% candidate, or childishly taking his ball home and allowing a 0% candidate to lead our government. The man needs to think a bit more.
Example, Lieberman is Jewish, and I have praised many of his views. I wish he would switch parties, and wouldn’t vote for him for POTUS due to his others views I don’t believe in, but I respect him in many ways.
I cannot say how Dobson feels. I don’t think he said he wouldn’t vote “R” if Thompson were the nominee, I had heard he said he “wasn’t sure if he was a Christian” and that was about it.
B/S. Run, FRed, Run!!
Look at post #51.
If Spiff got some facts wrong, I’d like to know.
It appears to me that Fred is not 100% pro-life.
105th Congress 87%
106th Congress 78%
107th Congress 33%
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.