Daniel Davies’s Blog

The NYT political blog ran an article today about a meeting of evangelical leaders that supposedly took place yesterday. If this meeting/plan keeps Rudy from being the nominee, great. However, if Rudy gets the nomination and they do break with the GOP, that will be terribly shortsighted, selfish, and irresponsible, and will lead to another 8 years under a Clinton. The nation is too evenly divided for this type of third-party scheme to work. Clinton won two terms thanks to Ross Perot and others siphoning votes from the right, then Gore lost in ’04 thanks to Ralph Nader and others doing the same from the left. President Bush sqeaked by with 50.73% of the votes in ’04, the first time a candidate actually topped 50% since ’88.

Is flexing the evangelical activists’ political muscle really worth going through another eight years under a Clinton? Hillary’s stands on issues, ethical violations, etc. are bad enough, but I’m ready for some fresh names in the White House as well. This article, posted on Friday, points out that 40% of Americans have never lived with someone besides a Clinton or Bush as their President or Vice President. 1976 (Carter-Mondale) was the last time the winning ticket didn’t include a member of those two families. That’s 31 years ago now- do we want to wait another eight and make it an even 40?

Comments(1)

This upcoming election is really fascinating and a little scary. Here we are in the middle of September, when the nomination will, most likely, be decided by Feb. 5, yet no GOP candidate is registering more than 27% of the Republican votes in polls.

If I just had to pick someone to be President from among the current candidates, I would probably choose Mike Huckabee or Duncan Hunter. Huckabee has been rising significantly in recent months, but is still only registering about 5 percent in the national polls, and Hunter even less. Neither of them seems to have the national support and fundraising base needed.

I don’t like McCain or Rudy Giuliani, and to a lesser extent Romney, on the issues, which leaves me with Fred Thompson. I’ve been watching over the past several months as the conservative bloggers have been drumming up support for him to run. I think he has the most conservative record among the leading GOP contenders, the star power needed to raise money, and will soon have the name recognition needed. He’s made some smart campaign moves, shunned “the system,” and talks straight about the tough issues facing our nation. His personal life (Divorce, many girlfriends while divorced, etc.) is less than perfect, but at least his former wife still supports him, unlike Giuliani’s. Right now he seems to be the only one who can be a viable, reliable conservative to run against Hillary.

Here at Patrick Henry College, there is a lot of support for Huckabee. As mentioned above, I like him, but I don’t think he’s really viable and has what it takes to beat Hillary Clinton. I think this is the dilemma for many conservative Christians. This article has some interesting perspective from some of the Evangelical Christian leaders. At this point I think I agree with Tim Wildmon that Thompson is the best option. He’s not perfect, but Jesus Christ isn’t on the ballot, so we’re going to have to vote for some who’s imperfect, as all of us are. It will be very interesting to see how this all goes over the next month or so. The best site I’ve found to follow the polls is Here. Will anyone drop out of the GOP race and where will their supporters go? There’s much to think and pray about in the days to come.

Comments(3)