Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Publius804

For every vote that Ridge loses for being on the ticket, he can easily get 2 or 3 pro-choice voters.


3 posted on 08/03/2008 12:29:39 PM PDT by WilliamReading
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: WilliamReading

I doubt it would be that high. If people are pro-choice they’d probably vote for Obama in the overwhelming majority of cases, all a pro-abort on the ticket would do is fracture McCain’s already shakey base.


4 posted on 08/03/2008 12:31:54 PM PDT by Publius804
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: WilliamReading
For every vote that Ridge loses for being on the ticket, he can easily get 2 or 3 pro-choice voters...

... and move the party that much more to the Left, the new home of the Democrat-lite party.

5 posted on 08/03/2008 12:33:14 PM PDT by Ingtar (Haley Barbour 2012, Because he has experience in Disaster Recovery. - ejonesie22)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: WilliamReading; BlackElk
For every vote that Ridge loses for being on the ticket, he can easily get 2 or 3 pro-choice voters.

Your statement has no basis in fact. Actually it goes against all of the polling data I have seen on the subject. The pro-aborts who base a vote on whether the veep is pro-abort is voting Obama anyway.

Besides that, it would certainly cost seats in the House in some red states, as pro-lifers stay home, and pro-aborts vote for Dems for House and Senatewhile voting for McCain.
13 posted on 08/03/2008 12:44:27 PM PDT by Dr. Sivana (There is no salvation in politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: WilliamReading

Who exactly is Tom Ridge going to bring into the party?

*crickets*

That would be no one. People like to act as if a pro-life litmus test is a bad thing, it’s not, it’s a very good and sensible requirement. There’s issues we’re willing to compromise with, and then there’s issues we’re not. Abortion is in the latter category.


25 posted on 08/03/2008 12:59:27 PM PDT by eclecticEel (men who believe deeply in something, even wrong, usually triumph over men who believe in nothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: WilliamReading
For every vote that Ridge loses for being on the ticket, he can easily get 2 or 3 pro-choice voters.

LOL, riiiiggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhtttttttttttt. Pro-life is the biggest net voting issue the GOP has. A pro-life position generally nets about 7% over a candidate with a pro-choice position.

32 posted on 08/03/2008 1:23:25 PM PDT by Always Right (Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: WilliamReading; Dr. Sivana; ninenot; AnAmericanMother; Convert from ECUSA; ArrogantBustard; ...
Although Ridge obstinately enthuses for the slaughter of innocent unborn babies, he falsely claims to continue to be a Catholic. This would give the GOP the embarrassment suffered previously only by such phonies as John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and an army of other Demonrat ex-Catholics. Justin Cardinal Rigali is unlikely to allow Ridge to receive the Eucharist in the Philadelphia Archdiocese, Archbishop Chaput in Denver likewise and likewise Bishop Sheridan of Colorado Springs and an ever increasing number of bishops. Without the Catholic vote (and losing a large number of Evangelicals), the GOP loses.

The pro-aborts can go straight to hell in this life as well as in the next. If the GOP adopts the murderous views of the Demonrats by allowing a national pro-abort nominee (and a pseudo-Catholic no less) there will be a truly historic and fatal (short and long term) exodus from the GOP. The GOP was not meant to be merely the party of blind materialism. It is meant for better things.

Your claim that the GOP would receive 2 or 3 baby-killer votes for every pro-lifer lost is ridiculous and utterly unsupported and unsupportable. The GOP vote would instead be limited to windtunnel Muffy of the Junior League and windtunnel Skipper of the local polo club.

It is no accident that the party that defends the babies also defends marriage, guns, the War on Terror, drilling here and drilling now, a military second to none used whenever necessary and desirable, militant nationalism, and a host of other conservative values. Tax cuts are part but only part of the package and by no means the most important part.

"Who cares if they kill another 50 million babies so long as I get my tax cuts and trust fund protection?" is not a campaign slogan for the GOP to go to political war with.

Tom Ridge has no business whatsoever having any chance to appoint federal judges now or ever.

Should we try for the Ku Klux Klan voters? the neoNazis??? the militant queers??? the, ummm, animal lovers? the Code Pinkers??? the SDS Alumni Association? the cannibal "rights" groups? No. That is also true of NARAL, PP, ZPG and the other babykillers.

As the pro-life party, we win more often than not. The babykillers have done whatever little damage they can do (as pro-lifers have damaged the Demonrats badly) and the babykillers have usually failed. Accept them at the top of the GOP and there won't be a GOP.

50 posted on 08/04/2008 12:05:31 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson