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

To: j.argese
I’m not talking about Dole in ‘96, I’m speaking about Bush I in ‘92, the Evangelicals gave 19% to Ross Perot. In 1996 they gave 43% to B.J. Clinton. In 2000, they gave 42% to Al Gore. In a word, they are unreliable.

I am sorry but that was not just Evangelicals that left Bush I but a whole heck of a lot of them did when it was found out that his wife was pro-choice....his "read my lips, no new taxes" crap showed what his word meant and who he really was. It was mostly the strong lower taxes vote that moved to Perot. Since Perot's wife was a big Planned Parenthood player most of our moral vote stayed home or held their nose like I did and said well at least the VP was ok. The strong no holds barred moral vote stayed home that election.

The 42% of Evangelicals you are quoting and I have no clue if those numbers are right are not the Republican base that votes morals which we are talking about.

Not all Evangelicals vote their morals first and just because somebody on a survey say they are Evangelical does not mean that is what they first use as their bases for their vote. Those people who could vote Perot or Clinton are not the democrats that left that party because of morals or vote their morals they are the easily led wishy-washy middle who vote what they think is the winner of that cycle and not who we are talking about just because they say they are Evangelical on a stupid survey because they sit in a pew once a year on some holiday does not make them the moral voter that stays home instead of following the party blindly.

We are talking apples and oranges...I am talking the moral Republican voter that causes us to lose each and every time we give them a rino and the party heads are to stupid to figure it out. You are talking about a large sub group of people as a whole that checks a box on a survey that is no different then taking a every person that checks the white race box on a survey and looking at their vote as a whole. They do not vote as a group and just because they say they are white on a survey does mean it factors into their vote.

74 posted on 03/09/2012 10:10:05 AM PST by Lady Heron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: Lady Heron

I’ll just cut to the chase. If we have to disagree to disagree on this point, so be it. Here goes, people get annoyed here when Mormons vote for Mitt but have no problem when Christians vote for Santorum or Huckabee or Robertson. It’s selective identificationism.
People don’t know if someone is going to be a good leader based upon religion. I couldn’t tell you what religion Ronald Reagan was because I don’t remember more than a handful of times I saw a picture of him the vicinity of a church. He was divorced and made a woman pregnant out of wedlock. He turned out to be the best President of the 20th Century, far better than the man he replaced who wore his religion on his sleeve.
Based upon that, Santorum would be leading him in the polls and probably be considered unelectable. The Santoriums would be telling him to drop out.
If people are that intent on living for Heaven, perhaps it’s time for them to withdraw from the political process and let the rest of us live our lives in this Earthbound reality. There was a reason Jesus said to render to Caesar what is his.


76 posted on 03/09/2012 12:14:20 PM PST by j.argese (FR is a Newt-ist Colony, not a Romney Room, Paul Pavillion or Santorum Sanctum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | 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