Posted on 12/08/2008 9:09:25 PM PST by GonzoII
Whitman and the other GOP leaders who have made post-election stabs at social and religious conservatives had better start minding their manners. Whatever happened to the "Big Tent"? The Republican Party may find itself hemorrhaging its most zealous constituency....
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.org ...
Inside Catholic
McCain's reticence on social issues contributed to the fact that 4.1 million religiously active voters did not go to the polls on November 4th. WASHINGTON, D.C. (Inside Catholic) - In an op-ed published after the election, former Governor of New Jersey Christine Todd Whitman wrote, "Unless the Republican Party ends its self-imposed captivity to social fundamentalists, it will spend a long time in the political wilderness."
And who are these "social fundamentalists?" In Whitman's political lexicon, they are "the people who base their votes on such social issues as abortion, gay rights, and stem cell research."
When I read Whitman's column I had three thoughts:
Why is she putting the label "fundamentalist" on fellow Republican voters? Does she know she's also talking about Catholic voters who consider non-negotiable issues before casting their ballot? Is she asking Catholic and Evangelical voters who care deeply about these issues to leave the party and declare themselves independent?
It's remarkable that someone who considers herself a leader in the GOP would go out of her way to antagonize millions of voters who have been dependable Republicans for over three decades.Whitman and the other GOP leaders who have made post-election stabs at social and religious conservatives had better start minding their manners. Whatever happened to the "Big Tent"? The Republican Party may find itself hemorrhaging its most zealous constituency.
Did Gov. Whitman not hear the roar that went through St. Paul's Xcel Energy Center the night Sarah Palin walked out on stage? Here is Whitman's take on Palin: "Her selection cost the ticket support among those moderate voters who saw it as a cynical sop to social fundamentalists, reinforcing the impression that they control the party, with the party's consent."
Gov. Whitman knows very well that the pro-life, anti-gay marriage conservatives don't "control" the party -- such a claim will bring laughs from anyone familiar with the inner workings of the RNC.
Really, Whitman isn't worried about control; she wants an end to the pro-life plank of the party platform. She wants to take the pro-life pressure off GOP candidates, especially on the national ticket. If the GOP abandons its public stance against abortion and gay marriage, she thinks the "moderates" lost to Obama will return.
Whitman's numbers are telling, but they don't actually support her argument. She notes that Kerry won 9% more moderate voters than Bush while Obama stretched that number to 21% against McCain. But if moderates are turned off by "social fundamentalists," why would they have cast 6.4 million more votes for the evangelical George W. Bush? Kerry was just as liberal as Obama on social issues, and mainline Protestant McCain was more reticent than Bush in discussing them.
Whitman doesn't mention what is widely recognized as the major cause of the moderate swing to Obama: the economy. In exit polls, Obama led by nine points among the two-thirds of voters who said the economy was the most serious challenge facing the country. Add to that the increased voter registration and turn-out among Democrats, deep discontent with the GOP, Democrats' targeted appeals to sections of the Republican coalition, and you have the reasons for Obama's victory.
The moderates were not casting ballots against Sarah Palin or the social and religious conservatives she represents --this election was not a referendum on abortion or gay marriage. How could they be when John McCain almost never brought them up?
In reality, McCain's reticence on social issues contributed to the fact that 4.1 million religiously active voters did not go to the polls on Nov. 4. If there is a warning for the GOP from the presidential election results it is this. As Karl Rove noted, "Americans aren't suddenly going to church less; something was missing from the campaign to draw out the more religiously observant."
If Whitman has her way, something will soon be missing from the entire Republican Party that will keep religious conservatives -- or should I say "social fundamentalists"? -- from serious engagement in GOP politics. Whitman is calling out a potential voting group of 30,000,000 Catholic, Evangelical, Mormon, and Mainline Protestants.
In the final chapter of my recent book, Onward, Christian Soldiers, I posed this question for the future, "Will the Democrats Get Religion, Will the Republicans Keep It?" Obama won, in part, because he successfully courted religious voters -- the Democrats successfully found religion, at least for one election cycle.
Did the GOP lose religion? No. But when over four million religiously active voters stay home there was certainly what Evangelicals call "backsliding." If Gov. Whitman has her way, the GOP will offer voters nothing different from the Democrats on abortion and marriage. If that happens, the Republican Party can wave goodbye to religious conservatives.
Deal W. Hudson is the director of InsideCatholic.com and the author of Onward, Christian Soldiers: The Growing Political Power of Catholics and Evangelicals in the United States (Simon and Schuster).
“If Whitman has her way, something will soon be missing from the entire Republican Party that will keep religious conservatives — or should I say “social fundamentalists”? — from serious engagement in GOP politics. Whitman is calling out a potential voting group of 30,000,000 Catholic, Evangelical, Mormon, and Mainline Protestants.”
—
Good point, Deal.
I wouldn’t worry. Whitman, Mark Kirk, Gordon Smith, et al wield little if any influence within the party. Most of the Republican Main Street Partnership is out of office these days, and very few hold positions of leadership within the party. The GOP will remain committed to traditional values, probably now more than ever.
Whitman. Worst. New Jersey. RINO. Governor. Ever.
Deal, the overt leftists in the GOP are not what is destroying it. It is the sellouts who talk a good game - paying constant lip service to conservatism - but who have no intention of ever lifting one finger to actually back up their words with action.
The first group is relatively small. The second group makes up most of the current leadership of the thoroughly Whigified Republican Party.
The key to Obama’s success was that he was able to appeal to BOTH moderates and hard line lefties. I am wondering if somebody like that exists in the GOP, someone to unite social, economic, foreign policy, and moderate conservatives. There is no real reason why a candidate cant appeal to both the James Dobson and Ron Paul demographics as well as all the moderates in between.
“The GOP will remain committed to traditional values, probably now more than ever.”
—
I hope you are prophet.
I remember that Christine Whitman ran for the Senate in 2000, but dropped out. Had she stayed in the race and won, her views might have credibility. But she hasn’t won a race in over 10 years, and she never won by much.
I saw let her have her say, but don’t pay it heed.
No prophet, but I’m pretty sure about this. Granted there will always be moderates that stray off the reservation, but the GOP as a party will continue to be the party of traditional values.
“Obviously catholics don’t give a damn about pro life issues with 58% of the catholic vote going to Obama.”
—
Well, I like to think positive sometimes, 42% do.
There must be some reason why New Jersey is the only state where the majority of the people in a poll indicated that they would rather live somewhere else. Not exactly where the Republicans should be looking for leadership.
There must be some reason why New Jersey is the only state where the majority of the people in a poll indicated that they would rather live somewhere else. Not exactly where the Republicans should be looking for leadership.
Not only that, she’s never won a majority of the vote. She destroyed the NJ GOP, reducing it from majority status and putting liberal hacks on the court. It was her appointees that approved the Torricelli switcheroo, a blatant violation of the NJ Constitution.
Thr Republicans lost because they stood for nothing. The republican Party has been kissing the Democrat’s amd “moderate’s” asses for 8 years. A moderate is another word for cowar. They do not stand for anything nor do they oppose anything. Every time the voters have to choose between a real Democrat or a Democrat lite they choose the real Democrat. When given a choice between a real Democrat or a Conservative Republican, the Conservative Republican usually wins.
The only reason Mc Cain was not completely shut out was yjat he choose Palin as his running mate.
Actually 100% of Christians do. There are many lukewarm, double minded, pew warming, pretenders in all denominations.
Amazing how this can be said when Repubs stood stalwartly for the WOT again and again despite vicious opposition.
They better, because they will never out-liberal the liberals.
This one did. Don’t generalize, please.
Good point...The Republicans have been good on security but on most other issues have been wobbling and caving in for several yrs. Too many were willing to compromise.
Maybe we will see a rebirth of the party.
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.