Karl Rove: Stayaway Christians Almost Cost Bush Election

Charisma News ^ | 12/13/01

[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."

[John R. (Bob) Locke]

If all the conservatives could suck it in and vote for their party, the Republicans will gain a large majority in this country. Then we can focus on making the candidates more pure once we obtain power.

You are so dead wrong it is amazing! Once you've demonstrated that you will vote for a less-than-acceptable Republican because you "fear" the Democrat may be elected instead, what sway do you pretend you can hold over that person? The correct answer, for anyone who knows the first thing about politics, is NONE. They know that you will vote for them so long as they have the magic "R" behind their name, and you have forfeited any measure of authority because you are unwilling to vote them out of office.

So much for "make them pure". Sounds good on paper, but it doesn't work in the real world. What happens is that more and more centrist Republicans get elected.

[lormand]

"If partial-birth abortion were the ONLY issue facing America in this Year of our Lord Two Thousand and One, then you might have a point.

However, it isn't--and it never was, either.

Most Americans would NOT appreciate the inevitable filibuster that would have hit, and they would have blamed Bush and the GOP for provoking it.

I respectfully disagree.

We are killing our own by the millions, while radical Islamist are populating like flies all over the world. Our civilization is dying from rampant celebrated homosexuality and abortion, but yet we are happy to take the time to rename the Justice Department building after RFK and declare "National Diary Week" or some other crap like that.

We are not only loosing our Republic, but we are loosing our civilization. What good is a strong economy without people to support it?

"The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in time of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality."

Dante, "The Inferno"

[Mad Dawgg]

Get real!

Liberals took over incrementally!

We can only recover incrementally!

Look what happened when Newt tried to go too fast!

Amen Brother Amen!

I am reminded of these words when I read your post: "The journey of a thousand miles begins but with a single step."

During the primaries you must vote for the canidates who support "Your" issues each and every time in order to swing the party towards the goals you wish! This process takes years and we are slowly gaining ground but, to "take-your-ball-and-go-home" when you don't get your way is a recipe for disaster! Witness when we Paid back President Bush 40 for "Read my Lips" we got 8 years of X42 and unending appearences of "the Little General" on Larry King! This alone is enough for me to never allow "principles" to lead me down the false path again!

[afuturegovernor]

A vote for a Republican is a vote for a socialist, that's plain and simple truth. Red Jones

Bush is a LIBERAL and you folks are suckers if you don't believe it. oldrightwing

Maybe you and oldrightwing should get together.

[Huck]

You can be cynical if you want, but I will look at the machinations of the Senate.

Exactly. I had the same conversation with my brother yesterday. Checks and balances cut both ways.

[Tory-Oxonian]

Hey! Lets all be upset that Bush is not conservative enough and let the liberal-socialists win elections! Good idea! Thats patriotism....NOT.

Conservatives are their (our) own worst enemies.

[Aristophanes]

You may be too young to remember it, but there was this radical conservative group of Congressmen in 1994 who won a landslide and almost changed the course of history by doing precisely that.

They only lost when Newt Gingrich caved to Clinton in the so-called "government shutdown." Until that point, every leftist law prof in the country was literally shaking and crying over the return of the Republic.

[Sci Fi Guy]

Please read my comments more carefully before responding. I am referring to the CURRENT crop of lawmakers...not the past ones in which Klinton was president

Thanks, I should try to express myself better. Let's try to reach common ground. (According to another post,) Republicans pass partial-birth Abortion bans 3 times. That means that they made it a top priority. They fought for it. Are you(not you personally) grateful for their efforts? As conservatives can we show gratitude for those that fight on our behalf.

Since the last election, Republicans have not been in a position to change the law. They didn't keep control of the senate long enough to do anything. And on top of that We lost pro-life votes in the last election. We don't have the ability to do anything about it.

I don't know you, so I'm not referring to you personally, but I am really frustrated by these gloom and doom Freepers. We are quick to forget the good they do, and quicker to condemn them for doing what they cann't. When the Republicans had the power to change the law, they tried. Now that they don't have power, we condemn them.

[4CJ]

"Those Christians, they think they can pray a president in, but then forget to vote for whom they prayed for!???

LOL - it was the absentee voters yesterday (voted too early).

It is my firm belief that God is in control of the destiny of this nation, from George W (#1) to George W (#43), and every one in between. Just think, if America had someone other than "pond-scum" as x42, conservatives might not have been so ardently opposed to Sore/Loserman. Just as x42 had his purpose, W has his as well.

[edsheppa]

Hmmm, I suppose it could have been that conservative Christians almost cost Bush the election ... or maybe Rove's forecasts just sucked.

[Poohbah]

If you are correct, we're doomed anyway, so why do you give an airborne improper relationship?

[Agamemnon]

A little majoring on the minors there, i think.

Your view of Bush's "language" or choice of words is the problem is it? You may take your place among the Christian Conservative Coalition Wrecking crews that almost gave us Gore, while you spin your manifestly ineffective wheels on stuff like this.

Bigger battles to fight than this for sure.

[Wyatt's Torch]

1994 was the result of one thing -- Democrats with extreme hubris (imagine that from a group led by Clinton!!) attempting to promote an extreme left agenda (tax increases followed hard by the "nail-in-the-coffin" overtly-socialized medicine). In the blush of their one victory (1992), the Rats were overwhelmed by their own sense of power-entitlement. And they governed to their convictions and away from the mushy middle.

I assume you are implying that the reverse would also be true. If so, I agree. As much as many of us were infuriated, and motivated, by the far left agenda, the same would be true if the agenda was "far right". Like it or not myopic voters...

[NittanyLion]

You may be too young to remember it, but there was this radical conservative group of Congressmen in 1994 who won a landslide and almost changed the course of history by doing precisely that. They only lost when Newt Gingrich caved to Clinton in the so-called "government shutdown." Until that point, every leftist law prof in the country was literally shaking and crying over the return of the Republic.

I would refer you to Post #173, where Scott from the Left Coast makes a pretty strong argument for why the GOP won in a landslide in 1994.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

You assumed my implication correctly.

[shortstop]

Have any of you people ever stopped to think that if we started to elect more Republicans (even RINOs), we would start building a bigger majority in the house and also take over the senate. With that plurality, I feel the Republicans would start pushing harder for more conservative legislation because now both houses would be in the majority. With a 60% plurality, Bush could do everything he said he would do during the election. I believe in incrementalism and we have to have the majorities before we get the 60%. I'm not sure the Stayaway Christians would ever understand this. They have "principles", you know.

[SamAdams76]

So I suppose your solution of electing liberal Democrats is better?

BTW, I wasn't talking about making the specific candidates "more pure" once they got in there. My point is, let's get the conservatives in there, RINO or not, and once the liberals are out of power and we have the incumbency, than we can worry about replacing the RINO's with more conservative candidates. But until we get a foothold, we ain't getting s**t.

[Antoninus]

Hey Karl. Tell you what. If you want the true-believing Christians to come out in big numbers, there's an easy way to do it. Kick the pro-abortion RINOs to the side and stop cuddling up to the gays.

I don't care which party you're from. If you support abortion and oppose the traditional family, you don't get my vote. It's that simple.

[TightSqueeze]

Do I have this right?

Sort of, I see it like this... There is a big fire, on one side of you there is a bucket of Gasoline (Gore), on the other is a bucket of Oil (Bush). Neither one will extinguish the fire, one will obviously do more damage than the other but in the end they will both contribute to the flame. Some contentious voters decided to do nothing, hoping the flame will go out on its own, it is a free country, and a free choice.

[lormand]

"Lormand, you ask how it costs the President political capital. How long do you think the media would have harped on Bush's inability to get a bill through a GOP-controlled Congress? Right off the bat, the American electorate would have an image of some bumbling, politically inept fool living in the White House. I believe the President understood this, and understands that there is a proper time to address sensitive issues (that time was not in the first six months of office under the current Congress)."

How do they know the results without even trying? It takes leadership to pursuade the electorate and opposing politicians. With your view of it, say goodbye to banning partial birth abortions forever.