If you're new here and enjoyed what you read, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed so you don't miss a thing. Thanks for visiting!
In the Republican race, we currently have 4 men running, yet people keep saying that we’re in a two-man race. Why? Well, I have been trying to get Ron Paul supporters to give me a plausible path to the nomination, including states, delegate count, etc. So far, I’ve been told that the run for presidency is not “the American Idol contest” and then again that it is not “a soccer match.” I’m assuming that means that there is no plausible path to the presidency for Ron Paul, because if there was, his supporters would be giving it to me, instead of telling me that it doesn’t matter if Ron Paul can win or not. Umm, as a matter of fact, it does matter. If didn’t matter, than all this would be is a vanity run and a complete waste of time and money for Ron Paul and his supporters. What on earth is the point of running, if it isn’t to win? Did I miss something?
Then you’ve got Mike Huckabee who won the Iowa caucus but hasn’t won anything since. The media has been downplaying the Maine caucus that Mitt Romney did so AMAZINGLY well in this weekend, because after all, “it’s just a caucus.” I guess someone forgot to tell the MSM that Iowa was “just a caucus” too. Putting that aside, even his most ardent supporters have got to be realizing that Mike just isn’t going anywhere. There are not enough states where there are enough evangelical Christians to vote for Mike to give him the nomination. And outside of the evangelical vote, there isn’t much else to point to. Mike’s support has been almost all evangelical. Don’t agree with me? I’ll give Mike Huckabee supporters the same challenge that I gave Ron Paul supporters: Show me how Mike will win the nomination. I want states, delegates, and supporting poll data. If you can show me sufficient proof of such, I will stop saying that this is “only a two-man race” and will encourage everyone I know to do the same, and that includes pretty much all the pro-Mitt bloggers out there. Just a hint: Telling me that the presidential race isn’t the same as a soccer game, or football/baseball/cricket/bowling game is not convincing. 
But (and I hate to be the bearer of bad news) even evangelical Christian leaders are starting to say that Huckabee cannot win. Reverend Schenk said in a press release put out today, “After careful and prayerful consideration, I have concluded that an evangelical vote for Mike Huckabee is a vote for John McCain, and a vote for John McCain will be a disaster for this country.” Who is Reverend Schenk? He is president of Faith and Action in the Nation’s Capital, chairman of the Committee on Church and Society for the Evangelical Church Alliance, and co-founder of the annual National Memorial for the Pre-born and their Mothers and Fathers, the only pro-life worship service held inside the U.S. Capitol complex in Washington, DC.
Here is his press release, in full:
McCain, Huckabee Worst Picks for Evangelicals
Contact: Rev. Schenck, 703-447-7686
MEDIA ADVISORY, Feb. 4 / Christian Newswire / — The Reverend Rob Schenck (pronounced SHANK), in his capacity as a private citizen, today released this statement regarding tomorrow’s primary votes:
“I have spent the last 33 years as an active evangelical Christian. I am an ordained evangelical minister. I graduated from an evangelical Bible college and an evangelical seminary. I serve on the board of America’s oldest association of evangelical church leaders, and I head one of the most active evangelical ministries in Washington, DC.
“I have thought long and hard about the upcoming elections. I have prayed earnestly about them, and I have met many of the candidates and their top campaign people and I have studied their platforms and policy proposals.
“After careful and prayerful consideration, I have concluded that an evangelical vote for Mike Huckabee is a vote for John McCain, and a vote for John McCain will be a disaster for this country.
“Let me explain. It’s clear to me and many others that Mike Huckabee is not broadening his appeal enough to win the primary. Therefore, his only contribution is to siphon off votes, giving McCain a clear path to victory. It’s very possible Huckabee is being positioned to be John McCain’s pick for vice president. In order to win, McCain needs Mike Huckabee and the evangelical votes he brings with him. The specter of a McCain-Huckabee ticket is bad for evangelicals.
“McCain is proud of his signature accomplishment, the McCain-Feingold law co-authored with liberal Democrat senator Russ Feingold. McCain-Feingold severely limits the First Amendment rights of evangelicals. McCain will use this law as the litmus test for his Supreme Court nominees. If a judge is likely to be against McCain’s unconstitutional law, McCain will not nominate him. Make no mistake about it, constitutional originalist judges will be against McCain-Feingold. These same judges will also be pro-life, for traditional marriage and for the public acknowledgment of God.
“Only liberal judges will support McCain-Feingold. They will also be pro-abortion, anti-traditional marriage and against the public acknowledgement of God. So, with a McCain-Huckabee administration, or with a McCain-anyone administration, we get the wrong judges. Most distressing, we get the wrong justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.
“Evangelicals must consider both the stakes and the realities in this election. Mike Huckabee’s continuation only helps John McCain. The consequences are just too great to take this risk. A McCain victory will hurt this country because of the long-term damage of the wrong judges and justices. Worse, McCain’s court legacy will continue to hurt our children and our grandchildren, perhaps even our great grandchildren.
“Evangelicals must choose wisely from among candidates other than Mike Huckabee and John McCain as they vote tomorrow, February 5.”
Can I be perfectly honest with you? I don’t think Reverend Schenk wanted to write this. And judging by the lack of actual endorsement of Mitt Romney (”choose wisely among the other candidates” - if you take out Mike and John, this only leaves Mitt and Paul!) I don’t believe the reverend could bring himself to actually endorse a Mormon. Hey, I understand. I would probably have a hard time endorsing or voting in someone who worshiped the moon and drank blood at dinner every night. I know that evangelicals have a hard time with the LDS Church. But we need to focus on something much more important (in the political world) than whether the Trinity exists or not. A gentleman who blogs over at Evangelicals for Mitt said it best when he said in an interview:
As David—who is so much smarter than I am, despite the fact that he went to Harvard—puts it so well: Theology is only important in a political race to the extent it affects public policy. With a Mormon, the places where we diverge—the Trinity, for instance—are not relevant to public policy. And the places where we are together—family values come to mind—are.
Don’t get me wrong; correct doctrine is extremely important. The Bible doesn’t mince words on that, and if Governor Romney believes all Mormon doctrines, I believe he’s mistaken and that it is a matter of eternal significance. But the mere fact that something is important to one’s relationship with God doesn’t mean it’s something we should give it prime consideration in a political race.
What’s prime consideration? Well, put it this way. If there were another candidate in the race who had all Governor Romney’s good qualities but happened to be a Presbyterian, I’d probably support him. Plain and simple, he’d be more likely to win, because there’d be no need for a website like EFM. But there isn’t. The only other candidate whose doctrine is—near as I can tell—close to mine has nothing of any intelligence to say on the central issue of our times (the war) and believes in massive governmental intervention in the economy. Sorry, but when we’re picking a president—not a pastor—having good theology doesn’t cancel all that stuff out.
Tomorrow is Super Tuesday, and the evangelical Christians have a choice to either vote for the man whose doctrine is the closest to theirs, but would ultimately bring about the presidency of a man who openly admitted just two days ago that “It’s not social issues I care about,” or vote for a man whose doctrine is oppositional to theirs, but whose presidency would help strengthen such important movements as pro-life and traditional marriage.
It’s your choice, America. Please choose wisely.
Havs
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Hi, and welcome to "Vote Mitt for President!" Be sure to
6:05 pm on February 4th, 2008 1
I will vote for Mike Huckabee.
As an evangelical I cannot vote for Romney. Not because of his faith but because of his lack of character. He has used millions to attempt to mislead Americans. His ads are negative and deceptive. His change of heart on abortion has been convenient and untested.
A vote for Mike is a vote for Mike. A vote for Mitt is a vote for ???
8:55 pm on February 4th, 2008 2
Larry what about then issues? He used negative campaign ads - boo hoo, this is politics. Did you not vote for Bush because he used negative ads? Your main reason for voting for a candidate should be the issues. I feel many people are jealous of Romney’s wealth, and the media has been downplaying his victories from the get go.
Great blog Hava
10:24 pm on February 4th, 2008 3
It may sound negative but Mitt Romney’s early ads were about contrasts and comparisons of their public records which by the way is public records. Mike and John said never to go negative. Well, it’s hard to understand how a Baptist Minister later lied and resorted to not only negativity but attacking someone’s personal integrity. Mike and John have been ganging on Mitt and its obvious with their resentment and jealousy. They are the hypocrites and we don’t want that kind of person to lead us. Mike will go as far as the evangelical can go and sadly not far. McCain ended up using dirty tactics and lied just to get votes. I will not vote for an arrogant old man with short temper and a foul mouth. Mitt is not perfect, but he’s the only one to carry us forward. Please, don’t hesitate or procrastinate. VOTE FOR MITT ROMNEY.
12:43 am on February 5th, 2008 4
I think they are all in the same boat - Huckabee, Romney, and McCain have Presidential Platforms that are different than things they have done in the past.
McCain is scary because he doesn’t really believe in appointing conservative judges like Huckabee and Romney.
Huckabee doesn’t have enough money. He only raised 4 million with a goal of 10 million by Feb 5th. He’s a good guy, but that he only attacks one other candidate is kind of weird.
Romney - they guy ain’t perfect, but he is a man of integrity. I think he will do more than McCain for America.
Rally to Romney to block McCain
12:40 am on February 6th, 2008 5
it is said to beleive that McCain wont be good for the office, but what about military affairs?? he will know better than anyone what the military people go through who better to support them then one of their own???
8:48 pm on February 16th, 2008 6
I agree with most of the above article. My initial reason for voting for Mitt Romney was because I thought he had a better chance at winning than Mike Huckabee. Later, I studied him a little further and realized that I really do like him for more reasons than just the moral issues.
Mike Huckabee has indeed “siphoned off votes” from Mitt Romney, caused a split in the Conservative Vote and may have been the main factor that has cost Mitt the election.
To be honest, Christian Voters have been really disappointing me lately. So many of the ones I know are no longer voting in accordance with Conservative values. Some of them are even Democrats. What’s really sad, though, are the Republican Christians I know who are beginning to compromise. Though my parents are highly Conservative in their thinking, they voted for McCain thinking that he might have a better chance at winning against the Democrats than the other Candidates. I don’t see how, though, someone who has been called a “Hawk” can win votes from war hating Liberals any better than one with values can win votes from value hating Liberals. If McCain can’t even hold on to a lot of the votes from his own party, than how does this make him a person whose more likely to win against the Democrats. I don’t think so.
The main difference between Democrats, Liberal Republicans and True Conservatives is what we believe to be THE SOURCE OF OUR STRENGTH. Democrats seem to believe that it is the government itself and want lots of it. Liberal Republicans think that the source of our strength is the military. This idea is also incorrect.
I like what Romney said in one of his speeches. He said that it is our “CULTURE”, which includes our Values, that makes us strong. To support this idea he quoted a College Professor that had done a lot of research of history. Christians believe that THE TRUE SOURCE OF OUR STRENGTH comes neither from the government, nor from our military, but from our Creator. Keeping this in mind, the real truth is that if we lose the conservative values from our country’s youth, no governmental program, NOR EVEN A VERY STRONG MILITARY will be able to save us. This is why I fear greatly for our country.