Columns

THOUGHTS ON THE GOP RACE FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION

Posted on: July 20, 2007

by Bryan Fischer, Executive Director Idaho Values Alliance

In response to a query yesterday from a member of the IVA network, I shared some of my thoughts about where the race for the GOP presidential nomination stands.

I’ve added some additional thoughts here to what I wrote him, and offer them to you for your consideration. I would welcome any feedback you have.

The fundamental problem, as I see it, is that Republicans allow candidates who do not subscribe to the party platform, particularly on social issues, to fly under the GOP banner. The GOP party platform, at both the national and state level, is firm on the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage and family. But many of its candidates and public figures are weak on these issues or take positions that are directly contrary to what the party claims to stand for.

This is the only reason why pro-choice, pro-gay-rights candidate Rudy Giuliani is even a player in Republican politics. A pro-life Democrat, for instance, would not even be able to get out of the gate and would have no chance whatsoever of gaining the party’s nomination. The fact that Giuliani is still leading in polling data is a perfect illustration of this fundamental weakness of the Republican Party.

I do not believe a pro-choice Republican candidate can win the presidency (Giuliani can win the GOP nomination, but not the general election). This is because, if the Republicans run a pro-choicer, far too many pro-lifers (myself among them) will refuse to vote for him, and either stay home or vote for a third party candidate, thus making it impossible for Giuliani to win the presidency.

Personally, there are no circumstances under which I could vote for a candidate who believes it’s okay to slice up unborn babies, or puncture the back of their heads with a fork when they are halfway out of the womb.

Enough Americans still treasure the sacred value of every human life and see things the same way, which means they will either sit out the 2008 election or cast their vote for a candidate who shares their values but cannot possibly win. I don’t see them being persuaded to vote for a pro-abortion Republican just to keep a Democrat out of the White House. (Whether or not they should is irrelevant; the point is, they won’t.)

A GOP candidate cannot afford to alienate this bloc and have any chance of winning against likely Democrat candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton.

However, if the GOP runs even a problematic pro-life, pro-family candidate such as Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson, enough pro-lifers perhaps can be persuaded not to jump ship to give that candidate a chance. A choice between the Democratic candidate and either of these two will be considered a no-brainer for many conservatives, even though they’ll wish they could be more enthused about their guy. But most pro-lifers will not see a meaningful difference between Sen. Clinton and Mayor Giuliani, and that makes his candidacy nonviable.

In fact, if the GOP nominates Giuliani, I believe Republicans will have no chance at regaining a majority in Congress or the White House for many years. Too many genuine, true-blue conservatives will depart the GOP in droves, and their complaint will be the same and it will be right: I didn’t leave the party, the party left me. For Republicans who believe in the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage and family, the disillusionment with their party will be complete and the break irrevocable.

A Giuliani candidacy will leave the nation in Democratic hands for years and years to come. I don’t know that the GOP could ever, in our lifetime, recover from a Giuliani candidacy.

This would be a tragedy of immense proportions for our country, as every prominent Democrat is an ardent proponent of protecting the right of mothers to kill their babies in the womb, an ardent advocate for special rights for homosexuals and the full normalization of homosexual behavior, and severely underestimates the threat the nation faces from radical Islam and uncontrolled immigration.

I have not commented on Sen. John McCain’s candidacy, because in my judgment, he is finished. And I have not said much about second tier candidates because none seems electable at this point. Rep. Duncan Hunter probably has the best overall credentials of anyone in that pack, while Sen. Sam Brownback is solid on social issues but weak on immigration. Mike Huckabee is strong on social issues, but weak on taxes.

Tom Tancredo will be perceived as a one-issue candidate (immigration), which makes it unlikely that he will gain much traction, and Ron Paul, whose presidency would be by far the most fascinating, is likewise a long shot. Paul’s presidency would focus the attention of the nation and Congress on what exactly the Constitution does and does not permit the federal government to do, and for that reason would be an utterly gripping and instructive thing to watch.

As I said, comments and reactions would be welcome!

Share This

Your Comments

Commenting is closed for this article.

Click here to go to Columns Archives