I Will Stand.

That is really far off base. Obama was elected for one reason and one reason only, the anger and outrage at the inept leadership of George Bush. They are so angry they did not give a thought who they voted for.

When conservatives act like liberals, they lose.

 

The answer to a bad conservative leader, is not a baby killer who spits on the Bible.

Obama was elected for one reason and one reason only: He is charismatic. He has a "movie star" persona, and a bunch of people who did not even know the issues went out and voted for him so we could have a "historic" election.

 

I never considered voting for Obama, in fact, came really close to voting 3rd party because McCain is so liberal. That is not the point. The point is had the Republicans done their job the last eight years, we would have never elected a far left candidate like Obama. Being for abortion is just the first of many things this guy has wrong with him.

That does not excuse the leadership of George Bush for the last eight years, and I voted for him twice. Please keep your politicians in Texas.

 

Really? Have you forgotten the Democrat controlled congress? The MULTIPLE pieces of legislation that was thrown out by congress that would have helped avoid the current situation??

Funny how people always point to the President, even when the President DOES NOT get what He asks for: just the blame.

Despite the medias attempts to paint it otherwise, Bush has done a reasonably admirable job as president.

 

Clinton would have also beaten McCain. saturnneptune is right--GW Bush is to blame here.

 

Clinton was Charismatic himself.

When is the republican party going to learn that you do not win elections by putting crusty old guys 6 months short of a heart attack up for their rep? (No offense to older folks, here)

The fact is, all of the "Conventional wisdom" about McCain drawing moderates, etc. was just wrong. We did not need a "moderate" candidate, we needed a true social conservative. McCain failed to motivate one of the prime forces of the party, i.e. Evangelicals.

Had Huckabee been nominated, instead, He could have garnered more support. All of the "Economic" conservatives, who are much more prone to compromise than their social counterparts, would have voted for him anyway, just to keep Obama out. And since Huckabee is younger, Charismatic, etc., He could have matched Obama in these areas, rather than coming off like a used car salesman the way McCain did.

Of course, I work at Mike Huckabees old Church in Arkansas, so I might be biased. But I don't think I am.

 

If you equate stem cell research with abortion, you are very much mistaken!

 

This is very true!

 

Baloney, there was a six year Republican Congress, and a two year Democratic Congress. Bush would have gotten a lot less blame if he had followed conservative principles, such as social security reform, medicare reform, balanced budgets, immigration control, border control, getting out of deficits, not allowing border agents doing their job go to jail, allowing a free market to work without government interference. I will not even get into the way the war in Iraq was handled and the token effort to rid the country of abortion. Need we go on?

There has not been the similance of a conservative President since Reagan.

Bush has not done a good job, leaving out the conservative liberal angle. He has no leadership ability, or ability to inspire the American people to action. If there is one thing I blame Reagan for it is picking Bush the First as VP. Had that not happened, this President would have never been elected.

 

I was referring to Hillary Clinton.

I'll grant you that it was a bad situation for the GOP to run a senior citizen against Obama. If Hillary were the nominee, it would not have mattered as much, though.

At the end of the day, though, not all evangelicals are Republican. And the ones that are do not constitute a majority. You cannot win an election solely on the evangelical vote. Abortion is an important issue, but both parties know that independents by and large do not vote based on abortion. Ditto for gay marriage or any other social issue of the day.

 

Self professed Christians make up more than 70 percent of the population of the U.S. of that percentage, almost seventy percent is pro life, 69 percent says abortion is the "most important issue" in political elections, etc.

On a personal note, I know several evangelicals who voted for Obama, due to the fact that McCain was not really "pro-life" (He stated publicly he was against the overturn of Roe Vs. Wade), I know others (including myself) who could not in good conscience vote for him, so voted third party, and I know several registered voters, that did not even bother to vote.

Had we had a true, Pro life, pro family candidate on the Republican ticket, that was "charismatic", the results would have been completely different.

 

I wonder how serious they are about saying that when Obama won. Obama goes over and above just abortion to infanticide, yet chirstians voted to allow it.

 

Because McCain's and Obama's view are not that different, in the area of Abortion. Many Christians, myself included could not bring ourselves to vote for the "Lesser of two evils".

 

Where have we seen proof that McCain approves of murdering a born alive infant? Because Obama has said so.
Murdering a born alive infant isn't even an abortion issue, it is infanticide, murder of a living human being outside the womb.

 

He was not a "free wheeling" supporter. He was a partial supporter, and stated publicly that He opposed the overturn of Roe vs. Wade. He also voted to support Embryonic Stem cell research.

That is why I called Him the "lesser" of two evils. He approved murdering children under certain circumstances.