More than Obama. And Harry had military experience, in WWI.
Not saying it means anything. Just pointing it out.
This is my major concern. The Pubbie leadership has looked at the demographics and concluded that they can’t win free and fair elections for some time to come. So, under Karl Rove’s guidance, they are systematically trying to sabotage the electoral process. That’s also why they’ve politicized the entire Justice Department … if they control the referees, they can cheat like hell. And they intend to.
The Republican Party as now constituted is the biggest enemy of American democracy … far more dangerous than Osama bin Laden or anyone like him could ever be. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, and that means we are going to have to watch the Pubbies very carefully indeed over the next few years.
As if on cue, head Focus on the Family nutbar James Dobson proved my previous point today by declaring that he will not support or vote for Giuliani under any circumstances.
If you think the GOP can win without FotF and other evangelical groups, you’re kidding yourself.
Would you care to explain this any further? Specifically: (1) Why isn’t the quest for better ratings an explanation for why news coverage might be slanted? (2) You said “if the media [slant the coverage], it won’t be because of…” OK, if they do slant the coverage, as I predict, but not for better ratings, as you state, then why are they slanting the coverage?
Bingo. I had a gut feeling that the religious right was going to turn on Giuliani eventually, and this seems to be the first hail of bullets. He has a lot of recognition from 9/11, but remember that he hasn’t run for a public office since BEFORE 9/11, and thus has not had to deal with the scrutiny of the campaign season. He won’t get a free pass as long as his adultery and (sometimes) support of more typically liberal causes are on the table. Of course, Dobson would probably prefer a hard-right candidate like Sam Brownback, but I don’t really see that happening.
I’m still waiting for the other shoe to drop with Romney. There may not be an out-and-out formal announcement of non-support as with Dobson’s, but the evangelicals are generally none too fond of the CJC-LDS. It’s a silly reason not to vote for someone, but then again, so was the whole Swiftboat fiasco, and we saw how that turned out…
You waaaay overestimate the actual influence of the religious right (as opposed to the amount of noise they make). After all, in 7 years of a Bush administration that everyone on the left likes to tag as willing crony of the religious right, what have they have accomplished on their agenda? Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zilch. Zip. They’ve gotten lip service from this administration and nothing else. Abortion is still legal. Gay marriage is a reality in several states, and will be in many more if it’s proponents are willing to let the process play out instead of trying to force it VIA the courts. There is no prayer in schools, and religious statuary is regularly being removed from public places. If it comes down to Rudy vs Hillary, the centerest swing voters that Rudy will pick up will far outweigh the few fanatics who stay away from the polls because some loudmouth idiot like Dobson refuses to support Giuliani.
Now if you mean that he can’t get the Republican nomination without at least some support from that segment of the Republican base…there you might well be right.
From your lips to God’s ears, but I think you’re underestimating their effect. Even if they’re not huge in pure numbers, they’re consistent voters and they’re by far the most organized segment of the GOP base. The church basement Republicans are responsible for the legendary GOP “ground game” that has put them over the top in a lot of close races.
Yes, and they’re starting to realize that. When Bush didn’t send the National Guard in after Terri Schiavo, a lot of them got disillusioned, realizing that they’ve been used to advance the other aspects of the GOP agenda. (That may be an oversimplification, but it’s the impression I get.)
That’s why they just didn’t push as hard in 2006 as they did in 2004. If RG gets the nomination in 2008, it’ll be even worse.
Possibly, though those same centrists are increasingly fed up with corruption, so when people start to remember the pre-9/11 RG, the bloom will come off the rose pretty quickly.
Plus, while I can see a lot of Democrats having trouble voting for a pro-life Democrat, I don’t see a lot of them clamoring for a pro-choice Republican who’s pretty solidly conservative everywhere else. (Same goes for gay rights.)
I think it’s the other way around. Those anti-RG Republicans are split a lot of ways, so they probably won’t make much difference in the primary. It’s the general election where that organization and the loss of those sure votes will make a difference.
What has the religious right gotten from this adminstration? Only the naming of two way right of center justices to SCOTUS - which, maybe you noticed, had a dramatic effect on the last abortion case to come up. There is now a majority of justices on the court that are probably willing to at least consider the abolition of Roe v Wade, at at least one (Ginzburg) who’s health is bad, and one (Stevens) who is way old. If the next election goes Republican, it is very likely that the Court will be stacked to ensure that the whole question of abortion legality can be reopened, regardless of what Roberts says about Roe being “settled law.”
Roe v Wade is bad law. I support a woman’s right to chose (although, as I’ve said over and over, I think that baring health issues for the mother or child or cases of rape and incest, it’s a BAD choice.), and wish that that right was ensured VIA a solid legislative base and not by one of the worst examples of legislating from the bench in history. Roe is an abhorrent example of judicial activism at it’s absolute worst, and at some point it needs to be overturned, on that basis alone. I agree with the result of Roe v Wade, but the method by which that outcome was achieved is repugnant. Gonzales v. Carhart, while being a stupid decision upholding a stupid law (methods of abortion should be a decision between a woman and her doctor), is hardly the chink in Roe that you seem to think it is. The court specifically upheld the principles of Roe and also PP v Casey WRT this decision. Gonzales v. Carhart didn’t even effect the ability of a woman to get a late term abortion, it only dealt with once specific medical procedure used for late term abortions (which, as I said before, should be between a woman and her doctor. If abortion is legal then they are the ones who should decide the method. Which is why I called this a stupid law in the first place)
So I stand by my statement that the Fundie idiots haven’t gotten anything from this administration.
Of course they have. They’ve gotten money. Remember the “faith-based initiatives”?
In elections as finely balanced as the American Presidential elections, every single national voter group counts.
And in other news, I’m running for President, too: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=8613975#post8613975