Lash wrote:Bringing some articles.
This is the final paragraph in the linked article:
If Giuliani winds up harnessing enough moderate Republican support to win the nomination, the GOP will have another problem on its hands: how to get evangelicals to the polls in the general election. "Evangelicals just won't vote" if Giuliani is the nominee, says the Southern Baptist Convention's Richard Land. "He'll lose Ohio, perhaps Tennessee-maybe even Texas." To Christian conservatives, it's a losing formula. But they still have to find a winning formula that includes them.
Evangelicals may stay home and wash their hair.
Let 'em.
I tend to agree with both you and Bill at least in principle on this. I think the really radical RR group is too small to make a significant difference except in a very close election where a few swing votes will tip the balance.
While most (not all) of the rest of the RR are going to be pro life, pro death penalty, pro immigration enforcement, pro defense, pro conservative economy, etc., no single one or two of these (or any other issue) is going to be a deal breaker if a candidate offers most of what they want.
So I think it comes down to which candidate offers the most that the RR and all other of the Conservative base want that will get the vote even if noses are held. I think many Conservatives would have preferred a candidate other than George Bush in the last election, but John Kerry was way too liberal and wishy washy to be an acceptable alternative.
Even if the GOP puts up an unpalatable candidate--they did with Bob Dole who would have made a terrific president but way too few were able to see that--it does open the door wider for a mainstream, attractive, charismatic Democrat. That Democrat will have to appear as close to the Center as Bill Clinton was though, or the RR and other Conservatives who vote will sigh and go into depression, but they'll vote Republican.