Posted on 12/13/2001 7:50:35 AM PST by 11th Earl of Mar
STAYAWAY CHRISTIANS ALMOST COST ELECTION
Many Christians believe that prayer played a major role in sending George W. Bush to the White House, but stayaway believers came close to losing him the election, according to his chief political adviser, Karl Rove.
Rove said that one reason the 2000 election was so tight was that as many as 4 million Christian conservatives did not go to the polls, reported "The Chicago Tribune." Although the Bush campaign had expected 19 million evangelical voters to vote for their man, election returns revealed only 15 million turned out to cast ballots.
Speaking yesterday at an American Enterprise Institute seminar, Rove said the Bush campaign "probably failed to marshal support of the base as well as we should have," said the "Tribune." Rove added: "But we may also be returning to the point in America where fundamentalists and evangelicals remain true to their beliefs and think politics is corrupt and, therefore, they shouldn't participate."
Rove said that if the "process of withdrawal" went on it would be bad for the country as well as conservatives and Republicans. "It's something we have to spend a lot of time and energy on."
Never crossed my mind to not vote at all. That neuters you more quickly than anything.
Could you live with putting some Pat Schroeder wanna-be in place of Allard or Campbell? They vote pretty well on the issues. Not perfect, but far better than some Denver or Boulder liberal. Is making a point worth a far-left Senator?
I disagree. The prosecution of the war effort has been a positive, but proposing a budget larger than anything Clinton ever dreamed up and expanding the size and scope of the federal government is not the direction I want to see the country led.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I suspect this "son" of which you speak was conceived in the normal way. You are truly sick.
????
explain comment?
If you're promoting a 3rd party, It think you're blind. If so, you might as well be a Democrat plant who learned a really cool lesson after the Green Party cost Gore 600+ votes in Florida.
If you really believe Republicans were just as bad as Democrats, you'd spend an equal amout of time debating on The Democrat Underground. That's their Ideological Base, This is that of the RP. Both simply obscure their objectives and soften their platform in order to appeal to a population that supports neither. Don't divide us in our real battle.
Six in one (Bush), half a dozen in the other (Gore). Big diffrence lol!
We stay home because the candidate doesn't go all the way in our beliefs, often on just one single issue. Meanwhile, others who could not have a decent conversation about the issues are dragged to the polls to vote. So, while those on our side sit on the sidelines as a matter of "principle," the other side gets elected and shoves everything we hate down our throats in droves and droves.
Do I have this right?
Isn't that why we got 8 years of Clintonista hell thrust upon us?
The basic debate here is pragmatism versus idealism. I'm of the latter. I'm more than willing to accept some short-term losses if the probability of long-term gains exists. In my opinion, they do.
And in my book, voting against the Constitution on a regular basis makes for an unacceptable candidate. Can I live with some things? Yes. But I have drawn a certain line and am not willing to cross it. Others have as well, though it's considerably to the left of where I stand. Those are in the pragmatist camp.
The pragmatists call the idealists "stupid" for not being willing to settle for what they can get.
The idealists think the pragmatists are a bunch of "sellouts".
Each of us needs to be right in our own mind.
Why hold our noses? The majority of us were happy to vote for Bush. I think that most Christians know that we have to have realistic expectations. We don't expect to agree with Bush (or anyone) all the time. And we are electing a president, not a king. Bush does not have unlimited power to pass laws. He has to engage in politics, which involves compromise, and being polite and nice to those that don't deserve it.
When was the last time you looked at the GOP's platform and compared it to what they actually do?
At least the Democrats quit pretending to not be big-government socialists some time ago. The GOP is still holding on to the facade.
It's the difference between BIG government and big government.
That's right - I guess you prefer Hilary to become President the next time. Get real - or real politik. You represent about 5 - 10% of the voting public. ALL mainstream politicians are ALWAYS going to be of the left of you - there just isn't any room to your right. So, knowing that ALL serious contenders are to your left, HOW far to the left do you want to go - to Bush or to Clinton?
That is reality. Naderites found everyone, even Gore, to their right, but they weren't practical and now they are living with a President far to their right.
The White House is the house of ALL Americans, regardless of race, creed, or political ideology.
His hubris in speaking so plainly only underscores for me the absolutely duplicitous lip-service paid to faithful Christians by the "Christ is my favorite philosopher" crowd.
Believe it or not, not all Christian consciences are desensitized such that they rejoice in Big Brother's proffer of partnership or mistake Bush's decision on ECSR for some sort of "winning" compromise.
The "stay-away" Christians are likely those as yet have their primary loyalty to Christ rather than the GOP.
I realize the GOP would like to subvert the faithful the same way the DNC and Israel have claimed primary loyalty of all but traditional Jews but there will always be those of us who resist the urge to place our faith in some Cult of Personality or rabid nationalism.
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.