[Poohbah]

Without pro-lifers, the GOP would flat-line in short order.

And that would result in Democrats getting elected, which in turn would result in abortion policies far worse than Condi Rice's being put in place. Brilliant strategy.

[EternalVigilance]

Without pro-lifers, the GOP would flat-line in short order.

And that would result in Democrats getting elected, which in turn would result in abortion policies far worse than Condi Rice's being put in place. Brilliant strategy.

I wasn't threatening to leave. I was responding to a poster trying to drum us out of our own (pro-life) party.

I agree. Electing a pro-abortion presidential candidate would be very destructive to the republic, since it would absolutely elect Democrats.

[Golden Eagle]

And that would result in Democrats getting elected, which in turn would result in abortion policies far worse than Condi Rice's being put in place. Brilliant strategy.

Thanks for breaking it down completely, you're real good at that. I think the other train of thought, at least mine when first confronted with it, is that some would rather let that happen, so the Democrats bear "the sin" of it. Also, the desired side effect would be for the Republicans to learn "don't ever try that with us again."

Do you lose at least one term at the helm? Yes. But at least you don't possibly lose the position of your party being strongly "pro life", forever.

My recommendation is, if the Republican party wants to run a woman for president, find a pro lifer to do it. Yes, they are hard to find it seems, but they would be the best possible messenger for carrying the pro life torch. In fact I would say all things considered, that would be the primary reason for selecting a woman to lead the Republican ticket.