romney_concedes_blog_main_horizontalWith the 2012 Elections now (mostly) in the books it’s time to look at Mitt Romney’s defeat and the Republican brand.  What went wrong and where do we go from here.  I wanted to write this the day after, but time didn’t allow which was good because it allowed me to process more.

We can see three primary things present in President Barack Obama’s victory over Mitt Romney.

The gender gap – If you look at the exit polling objectively you can see we have a problem.  It’s nothing new, but when women made up 53% of voters it’s going to be a huge problem and it expanded in 2008.  Women broke for Obama 55% to 45%.  Now what I find interesting is that married women went with Romney 53% to 46%, those are the security moms.  Romney’s economic message resonated.  They made up 31% of the electorate, but Romney was killed among non-married women which made up 23% of voters.  They overwhelmingly went with the President 67% to 31%.

The race gap.  Mitt Romney beat President Obama among Caucasian by 20 points.  They made up 72% of the electorate which is a 3% drop from 2008 (with fewer voters).  He still lost.  Romney lost Hispanics (which made up 10% of the electorate which is a 2% increase from 2008) 71% to 27%.  That is a four percent drop from what McCain had in 2008, and President Bush garnered, I believe, around 40% (I don’t remember the exact number.  There was a slight shift among Black voters (13% of the electorate).  Romney picked up 2% percent than what McCain had in 2008, but it was still 93% to 6%, so nothing to write home about.  Romney lost 73% to 26% among Asians (3% of the electorate), and among the “others” (2% of the electorate) President Obama had a 20 point advantage.  Also among Catholics a group that over all saw movement toward Republicans this year, President Obama won this group by two points which is a 4% drop from 2008.  Romney won among white Catholics by 19 points.  President Obama won among Hispanic Catholics 75% to 21% gaining three points from 2008.

The base didn’t turn out. That alone didn’t sway the election, but when you consider Mitt Romney garnered about 1.7 million less votes than John McCain did in 2008 that’s saying something.  Romney needed to improve upon those numbers not receive less.  President Obama had slightly more that 8 million less votes than he had in 2008 and he still won. It made for a closer race, but President Obama did a better job turning out his base than Mitt Romney did. The Washington Post exit poll shows that 38% of voters were Democrat while only 32% were Republicans. 29% were independent or third party. Why didn’t they turn out? More on that later.  Evangelicals represented 27% of the electorate nationally – a record high and the same percentage of evangelicals went for Romney as did for President Bush in 2004 – 79%, but with fewer voters this time around (about 10-11 million) that 27% isn’t nearly as impressive.  So I can’t say with certainty that the evangelical vote showed up like it could have.  Then it also begs the question in what states did they turn out where it made a difference?

The youth vote.  Mitt Romney made a five point gain among 18-29 year-olds who made up 19% of the electorate.  He still lost 60% to 37%.  Three percent voted some other way – Ron Paul or Gary Johnson anyone?

Now looking ahead where do we go from here?

1. Select a better candidate.  Many of us warned that Mitt Romney was the weakest voice on repealing Obamacare.  Rick Santorum said as much, Tim Pawlenty went after him on it kind of anyway.  We saw in the debates that he just didn’t seem credible and his answers were nuanced and that doesn’t fly well with the electorate.  It also sows distrust among the base.

You can’t win without the base.  Period.  President Obama knew that which is why he openly shifted leftward.  I don’t know how many times I’ve said this since 2008.  You lose the base, you lose.  That isn’t a problem with the base, that is a problem with the candidate.  Many in the Tea Party and those who supported Ron Paul didn’t trust his stands on fiscal matters.  There was RomneyCare, there was his support of TARF, and laying out concrete ways in which he’d slash the deficit.

Among Evangelicals and other social conservatives there was his flip flopping on abortion, his saying there wasn’t any pro-life legislation on his agenda, and his record as a liberal then at best moderate as Governor of Massachusetts.  He may have scored points with his dismissal of Todd Akin with some moderates, but he hurt himself with the base and let me say it again…

You can’t win without the base.  He had a missed opportunity with Chick-fil-A to address the religious liberty issues.  He ignored or played defense on abortion when he should have been playing offense.  President Obama has a record there that is radical compared to mainstream America.  Other groups like Susan B. Anthony List and others pointed this out, but the candidate himself?  Crickets.  Many understood why social issues were on the back burner this election cycle.  The economy is the focus, but when opportunities present themselves you seize the day.  Too many missed opportunities.

With foreign policy Mitt Romney could have shined, but instead he punted.  The foreign policy debate was a disaster in that he didn’t gain any ground.  Sure President Obama was on watch when Osama bin Laden was killed, but is that the entirety of our foreign policy?  He ignored Benghazi and she should have been pressing the President on that in the final days of the campaign, especially when the emails came out that showed President Obama was being less than truthful about his knowledge of events on the ground (putting it nicely).  More missed opportunities.

Republicans need to select in our next nominee (provided their isn’t some huge exodus to create a third party – and I think there’s enough discontent to do it) somebody who is a proven conservative – actions, not talk.  Somebody who is charismatic who can connect with voters, and we need somebody who has a bold vision for the future who can lead.

Not the next in line.  Not the person that the establishment thinks is “electable.”  We went with the people they though was “electable” in 1996, 2008 and 2012.  How’d that work out for us?  They talk about having a “big tent” – which I understand and I want to address that, they have to realize tea party people and social conservatives are under that tent and they are the majority.  Again you can’t win without the base.  Whining about your base won’t win elections.

2.  Nosotros palpable supera en la comunidad Latina.  We need tangible outreach into the Latino community.  First off many Latinos being Catholic are very traditional – another reason not to shy away from moral issues like abortion.  That isn’t a losing message within the Latino community.  Our issue is with immigration.  We may not like to hear that, but when there is a large segment of our base who continually talk about deporting everybody who are illegal we need to.  Frank Cannon, President of American Principles Project, said in his post-election wrap-up that strategy isn’t working:

It is not enough to speak a few words of Spanglish at election time;  Romney’s strategy of appealing to Latinos solely through conventional economic issues failed. Conservatives need to take the lead on delivering immigration relief for Latinos.

We need comprehensive immigration reform that extracts a penalty for lawbreaking (to affirm the rule of law) but creates a clear pathway to citizenship.  We need to follow the lead of Marco Rubio and the new rising star of the conservative movement Texas Senator-elect Ted Cruz to support the educational aspirations of children of illegal aliens, who came with their parents, were raised as Americans, and now find themselves with no country to call home. (Maggie Gallagher argues  in National Review that religious conservatives in particular need to take the lead on this effort.)

Neutralizing the immigration question gives Republicans the opportunity to make conservative arguments to Hispanics based on life, marriage, religious liberty, entrepreneurship and the ideals of freedom which, like every immigrant community that the Republicans have absorbed, Latinos believe in overwhelming numbers.

So we need to talk beyond just securing our border (that must be done too), but it is time to discuss specific, comprehensive immigration reform and to take the lead on it.

3.  Continue reaching out to the Black community – we did see a gain, two percent.  Those gains are largely to do with a social conservative message and happened in spite of Romney not because of him.  That work needs to continue.  We also have to frame our economic message beyond just job creators.  I know that Mitt Romney talked about the middle class, but he said very little about the working poor and those in poverty.  I’m not trying to paint the Black community with a broad brush here, but it is obvious that the Republican’s economic message isn’t resonating.  This isn’t going to happen overnight, but we must find away to frame our message of less spending and fiscal responsibility in a way that will connect with Black voters.

4.  Talk about abortion, but do it wisely.  Here is how we lost among unmarried women, from Becky Garrison writing at the Washington Post:

Furthermore, even though evangelical entities such as Christianity Today, the magazine founded by Billy Graham, agreed with Rep. Todd Akin (R-Ind.)(sic) and Republican candidate Richard Mourdock (R-Mo.) (sic) that ultimately, rape is a gift from God, voters chose to vote for candidates that will continue to protect women’s rights to control their own health care decisions. Also, initiatives failed in Florida that would have set new limits on abortion rights and repealed the state’s ban on public funding for churches and other religious organizations. (emphasis mine)

That is a mischaracterization that unfortunately uninformed younger voters heard loud and clear.  Nobody said rape itself was a gift from God.  Children are.  Some Republican candidates may not make pro-life issues the forefront of their campaign, but the other side will and the media will be looking out for it.  Be prepared for gotcha questions.  Saying also you’re ok with exceptions except for the life of the mother – will alienate your base, again you can’t lose your base and win.  Be smart whether you refuse to answer the question “why are you bringing up something that rarely occurs in the midst of this campaign? We have other topics that need to be discussed” or give some other answer, be ready.  Jesus said we are to be as wise as serpents and harmless as doves, (Matthew 10:16).  We’re not so good at that.

5. A bold economic vision that gives specifics on how to cut the debt.  That is one reason why many loved Ron Paul.  While I didn’t care for some of his other positions, enough so not to vote for him, his economic polices were spot on.  Many people are concerned about the debt.  We’re concerned about the value of the dollar.  Our current course is untenable.  Frank Cannon offered up some other suggestions that I liked:

In short, we’ve tried to convince people that we can cut taxes for job creators, i.e. small businesses and high-net worth individuals, and can get a handle on the budget through legislative action.  The election proves this is not a winning argument.

We need to shift to the unmentioned portion of the Reagan economic agenda, and look to a re-linking of paper money to gold.

In reality, and politically, only a program of monetary reform can cut through these various dimensions and provide a plausible case that government spending can be brought under control; that the political class will not accept the passive taxation of inflation brought on by out-of-control deficits; that wage-earners will not continue to fall behind and American families see their real income erode; and that steady and consistent growth will not be undermined by the fiscal policies of government.

We at APP have been making this argument for the last three years. I believe the election results confirm that a return to a gold-linked dollar is not only the most constitutionally sound economically prudent course of action, but it is politically necessary for the survival of the conservative movement.

No other mechanism provides the discipline to deliver to middle class voters the relief they are seeking from economic policies that encourage a chronic inflation that picks their pockets and reduces economic growth.

6.  Educate, educate, educate.  The youth vote will not turn around overnight.  Much of this has to do with kids receiving little or no civics education.  Also a lot has to do with maturity as well, again note the difference between married and unmarried women.  I’m sure the same is true with men.  While I was never a liberal I am far more conservative at 40 than I was at 19.  Some will come around.  We need education reform – not to indoctrinate kids – that’s already happening.  Liberals won that battle.  We need to either find ways to bring reforms to public education and bolster civics so we can have a better informed electorate with a basic understanding of economics or we find alternatives.

There is a spiritual aspect to this as well.  Never before have we had leadership coming to age who have abandoned the notion of absolute truth.  Never before have we had a large segment of our population embrace an entitlement mentality.  A friend of mine said it best on Tuesday night when he wrote, “There is no explanation of the last few election cycles without a very accurate understanding of basic human nature and depravity.”

People are inherently selfish and will gravitate to people who give them what they want.  We need to regain the culture and that doesn’t happen at the polls or in our seats of government.  That happens among our friends, neighbors and our communities.  Ultimately I believe we need a revival and that isn’t something we can orchestrate.  Followers of Christ need to get on their knees and pray and share the Gospel wherever we can and whenever we can.  It’s up to God to provide the fruit.  I said on Monday that we live in a broken world.  I believe that.  So much of what we’re doing is being a preservative.  But rest assured He’s in control.

So let’s get to work where we can.  Pray for God to bless our efforts and that they will please him – there’s a lot of messaging that I hear among conservatives that I simply can not agree with.  We need to speak truth, but as I have said before we need to do so in love, (Ephesians 4:15).  We also need to pray about the things that are not in our control and pray for revival because we certainly need it.

Subscribe For Latest Updates

Sign up to receive stimulating conservative Christian commentary in your inbox.

Invalid email address
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Thanks for subscribing!
  1. I disagree with you sir….the people that voted for Obama could care less about these issues you bring up which are very important to me, but his voters could careless. The people that voted for him wanted their free Loot…..At no time in history have we paid this many people to vote…This is it simple…We paid for this to happen…

      1. No Michael Jones brought it up because he’s the GOP base that you are speaking to. He represents why the GOP won’t win in the future and didn’t win in 2012. I suggest you read the comment of Gov. Jindal for starter on what the GOP could and should do for the future.

    1. Obama supporters just wanted ‘free loot’? Seriously? That sort of disrespect and mischaracterization reflects a kind of lying to one’s self insularity and self-delusion that got many in the GOP into trouble in the first place. I live in a neighborhood with a mixture of Obama and Romney supporters. I really like living here because I find my neighbors *all* good and intelligent people. We help each other when someone needs it. There are several houses of elderly couples or widows and we look after them. There are a couple homes where the parents are coaches for the local kid’s sport leagues. These aren’t looters or takers. These aren’t people who want handouts and don’t work hard. We all want what is best for the children. We have different opinions about politics but respect each other and show each other respect.

      This reminds me of the parable: In heaven and hell people all have arms that don’t bend at the elbow and sit before a table laden with wonderful food. In hell everyone is angry and hungry because they can’t bring the food to their mouths. In heaven everyone s happy because they cooperate and feed each other.

      Now, if you really think that those who voted ‘for that other guy’ in the election are stupid, selfish, lazy people… then where do you ‘live’? I’m thankful every day I don’t live near that type of neighbor and I sure hope after I die that I don’t find myself seated next to that person.

    2. Who has more free loot in this country? And who feels more entitled to it? The wealthy or the working middle class?

    3. It would appear that Shane, like many in the conservative wing of the GOP, don’t understand the issues. He believes going more conservative is the way for the GOP and that’s not going to bring in more voters. Its sad to think he believes that religious liberty issues and Benghazi were somehow going to turn out the base for the GOP. He’s as lost as the rest of the white males in the GOP.

  2. The people at my poll voted 95% for Obama….They were all black poor people…85% of the were black women…How do you overcome this…You don’t. We have now allowed anyone the ability to vote themselves into benefits….and that is the end of this country….We have tipped the progressive balance.

    1. You overcome this by changing the way electoral votes are given. Let each candidate receive the number according to the votes that he/she gets. Letting big cities decide for the entire state is not working. Here in Pa. our votes never count! Only Philly and Pittsburgh’s votes do count. This is unfair to all of us. Also, we need photos Id’s–we need them everywhere that identity is important and why not when we vote–this disenfrachises no one. I loved Gov. Romney as the candidate, he is the only one of the primary candidates who could have fixed our economy!

  3. There was also racial, gender, class and religious bigotry against Romney. Exit polls showed voters saying they did not want to vote for a rich, white, man. Then there was abortion. Polls of women voters said their number one issue was abortion. We cannot give up the pro-life position, but in the next four years we must educate people about the horror or abortion. Why is it that all kinds of gory murders, slashings, brutal rapes, awful war atrocities, and bloody medical procedures are allowed to be shown on television, but we cannot put up a commercial showing an aborted baby? We have been able to touch people’s consciences with pictures of lynchings, bodies piled up at Auschwitz, and war dead. Pictures of aborted children will be equally effective in turning people against abortion. Also, we can go at this issue incrementally, bit by bit. We can talk about requiring non-invasive sonograms as a first step. Women should have these so they have all the information they need to make a decision. Require waiting periods for the second step. During this wait, many women would decide to keep the baby. These two measures alone would save thousands of lives. Combine these steps with an education campaign against abortion and many women will choose life themselves. We wouldn’t have to campaign for a complete overturn of Roe vs. Wade at this point because the country isn’t ready for it. But we can chip away at it while still keeping women in control. One day maybe the country will be ready to reject abortion the way we rejected slavery.

    1. I’m all for reducing abortions. How about educating instead of legislating? What’s with the abstinence-only education directives? Why are we OK with blocking contraceptive services or allowing bosses to remove these from the medical plans of those who want it as part of health services? Why force additional, needless procedures on women seeking abortion? There’s nothing un-invasive about coming between a doctor and their patient, and it just creates more backlash and another issue with which to be beaten. And why aren’t we acknowledging that family planning is an economic issue whose responsibilities and impact falls disproportionately on women? The US has practically the worst parental-leave support of all the western nations. Fix that.

      Trying reducing abortions in a multitude of ways that others may prefer rather than the ‘my way or the highway’, heavy-handed, sanctimonious approach that has been the hallmark of the religious right’s politics. You can have purity or you can be effective; your choice.

  4. Excellent points, Shane. Personally, however, I have difficulty believing that, next time around, the “process” will really deliver us anything better.

    First off, the whole primary schedule is a joke. Why should a handful of states get to decide all the momentum? Is that the way things worked 200 years ago? I don’t know what the solution is, but the primary schedule is goofy at best and a horrific mess at worst.

    Far more serious, though, is the behind-the-scenes manipulations by the GOP elite. The whole motto this year seemed to be, “Let’s pretend to give the voters a choice!”, while the elite had already decided way back that they were going to pull every trick in the book to give Romney the nomination. Remember the “improvised” rules in Michigan whereby Romney swiped a delegate from Santorum? And then we had Romney and Ryan allegedly cheating in Wisconsin by handing out food for votes, but none of the GOP officials seemed to care. Even worse, many state conventions almost completely disregarded the primary voting and railroaded the selection of delegates to favor the GOP Chosen One. And then we had the crooked national convention, which was the crowning disgrace.

    Furthermore, is there anybody in the GOP who really puts principle above party? Along with many other folks, I have serious doubts. And anyone who endorsed Romney this go-around will automatically be scratched off the list of many (including me) when they’re considering which candidates (if any) to support next time. But honestly–what are the odds that the next GOP nominee will end up being someone who didn’t endorse Romney this time???

    Maybe there truly is hope for the GOP, but at this very moment, I’m not really feeling it. 😉

    1. Oh, one more thing. There have been allegations of electronic vote-flipping by Romney in the primaries this year tied to precinct size. You can do a Web search on “rigged election for Romney” to get more info. Does the study have merit? I don’t know, but it certainly needs to be investigated so that the truth is known.

      1. Oops, make that “rigged elections for Romney.” If you don’t add the “s”, the proper search results won’t turn up.

    2. “Why should a handful of states get to decide all the momentum? Is that the way things worked 200 years ago? I don’t know what the solution is, but the primary schedule is goofy at best and a horrific mess at worst.”

      This allows lesser known candidates gain some traction. Santorum would not have even gotten to the point to where he was at if it were not for the process. I’m for having a shorter calendar though. I don’t see why we need to be having primaries/caucuses past April.

      “But honestly–what are the odds that the next GOP nominee will end up being someone who didn’t endorse Romney this time???”

      Probably not. If that’s your standard though you are going to end up with a poor candidate. A person is more than their endorsement.

      As far as a third party we are not even close to having that become a reality. I think it’s much more realistic to reform the Republican party. We are going to have to work with people we may agree with on some issues. That doesn’t mean we abandon our principles, but work with people where we can. Here’s the thing with third parties or multiple parties. What they find in Europe is that they have to build coalitions among parties in order to govern. Not much different than what we’re needing to do within the party.

      I’d say if you want to build a third party, a serious, reputable party that can compete you have to first start at the local and state level and build from there.

      1. Probably not. If that’s your standard [someone who didn’t endorse Romney] though you are going to end up with a poor candidate. A person is more than their endorsement.

        I agree with a lot of your other points, but I have to differ on this one. I think the phrase “You are who you endorse” is much closer to the truth. This kind of compromising is exactly what got us Romney in the first place. But then again, I’m not really convinced we’ll ever get a godly candidate from the GOP anyway–at least unless there are some serious changes.

        I think it’s much more realistic to reform the Republican
        party. We are going to have to work with people we may agree with on some issues. That doesn’t mean we abandon our principles, but work with people where we can.

        But as corrupt as the GOP is, can it be reformed? I don’t know.

        Here’s the thing with third parties or multiple
        parties. What they find in Europe is that they have to build coalitions
        among parties in order to govern. Not much different than what we’re
        needing to do within the party.

        That’s a good point.

        I’d say if you want to build a third party, a serious, reputable
        party that can compete you have to first start at the local and state
        level and build from there.

        That makes a lot of sense too. We obviously need to do a lot of praying. As Psalm 127:1 says, “Unless the LORD builds the house, its builders labor in vain.” So the initiative is all in His hands–we just need to determine exactly the steps He wants us to take in assisting His plan.

  5. “Rick Santorum said as much, Tim Pawlenty went after him on it kind of anyway”.. Romney may have no backbone and weak, Ricky the rent-A-Christian and T-Paw’s smoking hot wife are weaker than last week’s retention vote turnout… “You can’t win without the base.” – you can’t win without cannabis on the ballot….the numbers don’t lie,Massachusetts passed a medical marijuana law, Mitt got smoked by his own state..

    tea-bagging blowhards need to come out of the green closet and educate themselves, support reform if you ever want to win a POTUS election again….Supporting marijuana law reform will be the difference maker for anyone running for future public office… coming out against those of us who follow the path of the righteous, will leave you scratching your nuts thinking” damn that RevRayGreen was right”

    And I will raise up for them a plant of renown, and they shall be no more consumed with hunger in the land, neither bear the shame of the heathen any more. — Ezekiel 34:29

    Blessed are the peacemakers. (Matthew 5:9)BVP is no peacemaker…unless you are talking about piece of dungaroo…

  6. I think part of the problem is that too many of us focus on one big victory instead of fighting for a thousand little one. God has put in in a position where we have to fight all the little battles. It would have been nice to repeal Obamacare. We cannot now, and a lot of people will DIE because of it. What we can do right now is make sure that the state does not set up an exchange. Let’s force the Fed to do it. It will be more limited in scope, and help force reform since it keeps the spending on the fed side. We also need to end all the exemptions on Obamacare. Let’s make the unions live with it too. After that then we start rewriting the healthcare laws one at a time.

  7. Anyone relying upon social issues will never win the presidency. Shane and others like him will never understand that. Most voters have rejected his kind of ilk because they are smarter and want a better nation. But most of all they don’t want religion in their politics.

    1. Exactly, mobyditch! I responded in the same way. The Republicans, once they realized that President Obama had presided over three years of uninterrupted job growth, that his economic policies were actually working, had no choice but to return to the politics of persecution of homosexuals and women. They failed on both counts. African-Americans, Latinos, women, and the youths of our country do not buy into the bigotry of the right wing, and these constituencies are ascendent. This became especially clear when Troy Akins forwarded his sick, medieval theory of the woman’s body’s rejection of the rapist’s sperm! Then the repulsive Richard Mourdock’s depiction of the rape baby as a gift from God only added fuel to the fire! And the smug, holier-than-thou vice-presidential candidate coldly described rape as merely a “method of conception”. There are lots of reasons why Republicans received such a sound drubbing, but I am convinced that the gender gap was due to the revulsion of millions of women by Republican demands that they be forced to give birth to the babies of rapists. Shane: get a grip! This position is a non-starter! You cannot win ever again by advocating that we force the victims of rape to give birth to the babies.

  8. Speaking as a middle-class, college educated, single woman and sole proprietor of her own (very small) business, I, too, am interested in economic security. But I concluded that even when the economy improves, it’s not going to do me any good if I am seen as less than a full human being with power over my own life and the ability to make my own choices about my life. The way some of the Republicans talked about women just appalled me.

    1. What are you talking about about? That we don’t believe you should be able to have an abortion on demand – killing an innocent human life or is it because we believe you should pay for your own contraceptives? Because I’m racking my brain to think of what choice Republicans talked about taking away.

      Now Democrats want to tell you you must have health insurance or you’ll have a fine. They want to increase regulations that could impact your business. They even want to tell you what light bulbs you can purchase… That is just off the top of my head.

  9. I find your stance on the babies of rapists to be completely repulsive. It is also amazing that you folks who claim to be conservatives fail to understand why your parsing of the difference between rape as a gift from God and rape babies as gifts from God is viewed to dimly by so many in this country. We who vote against you so-called conservatives who support forcing women to have the babies of rapists ARE conservative. There is nothing conservative about supporting the rights of rapists to force their victims to have their babies. In 31 conservative states, rapists even have parental visitation rights! You so-called conservatives cannot understand why some women are horrified by your repugnant program to force them to have the babies that result from a violent, disgusting crime. You refuse to let go of this position, instead insisting that there is somehow a lovely, flowery, delicate, tactful way in the future to espouse laws that force women to have the babies of their rapists! You holier-than-thou evangelicals like to emphasize that when it comes to Christianity, you can’t pick and choose, but you DO pick and choose! In this election you chose to back the party that hands out billions in tax cuts to the wealthiest, laying the burden on the poor. Even in this editorial of yours you characterize the unfortunate among us as takers. You have chosen to emphasize your persecution of homosexuals and to force rape victims to have the babies of rapists, at the expense of emphasizing generosity, charity, helping the less fortunate of us. You claim to be such devout Christians? Read the words of Jesus Christ! He didn’t say anything about abortion or homosexuals. He railed against the rich, he advocated for the poor! You do pick and choose, and this election shows you are on the wrong side!

    1. First off I don’t buy that you are a conservative – certainly not pro-life. Secondly, what did that baby do? All life, including yours, is a gift from God. Rape is not, it is an evil act which should be punished severely. You advocate creating two victims out a heinous act. The baby is innocent. I can understand if a rape victim wouldn’t want to keep her baby, but let’s talk about adoption then.

      1. You missed the point. However morally superior you may consider yourself to be, what you advocate is forcing rape victims to give birth to rape babies. That is a twisted application of Christian principles. You fail to understand that you are advocating for the right of the rapist to insist that his victim give birth to the child he engendered by violation. Many women accept this point of view, but they appear to be a minority now, and your position, supported by the Republican establishment, alienated enough women to lose you this election. You cannot turn the clock back on this one. As long as you and your ilk cling to this position, YOU WILL LOSE. You will not convince the majority of women that the baby engendered by rape is a gift of God. Your position is perverted. You represent that sector of the male population who believes that when they violate a woman, she must be forced to accept the consequence of their vile crime. By the way, my life is a gift from God, but my father did not rape my mother to engender me. For you to suggest that my conception is the same as that of a child born of rape is gravely offensive.

      2. That is twisting Christian principles? Please show me in the Bible where it is ok to kill innocent life. This isn’t about being “morally superior” it is about making a second victim of a vile act. You don’t get it. Abortion is murder. What you’re saying is that babies conceived by rape are worthless trash and evil. That’s repulsive. That baby didn’t have anything to do with the rape. The Supreme Court outlawed capital punishment for rapists, but let’s go ahead and kill the innocent life. Victims of rape are in a tough circumstance in a situation like this. I understand that. I’d want to provide counseling support, adoption services – I can understand if they don’t want to raise that child. Abortion would only add to this tragedy. I know personally two people conceived by rape and I think they would be horrified by your comment as if they have less worth and value. If this is the attitude our society has taken then God help us.

      3. Why do you hate babies so much, Shaw? Why are you so angry? So how do YOU determine which life is sacred? You are looking at this backwards. Many men want to destroy the evidence of the their crime by seeing the baby destroyed. They also love abortion in order to hide their other sins, just as King David tried to cover up his adultery in several ways, finally committing murder.

  10. Shane, you forgot the biggest moral issue of our generation – COVETING. It is the one moral idea that drives the entire democratic party. It drove their campaign and appeals to voters. The church and christian conservatives need to address this. We do need to run an issues campaign. Explain to voters why borrowing is bad. How much money each taxpayer pays each year just to pay the interest on existing debt? Why don’t we have campaign commericals about that?
    I don’t know if we could have gotten a better candidate than Romney. The GOP has a serious problem with corruption and corrupt consultants.

Comments are closed.

You May Also Like

Buttigieg Misuses Scripture to Argue for Minimum Wage Increase

Shane Vander Hart: Pete Buttigieg’s use of scripture as a cudgel against those who do not support a minimum wage increase was inappropriate and mistaken.

Donald Trump Hires Three Iowa Political Operatives

Donald Trump announced three hires in Iowa to join Chuck Laudner. Ryan Keller, Brad Nagel and Chris Hupke will advise his grassroots campaign exploration.

The Politics of Throwing Your Spouse Under the Bus

Gail Ernst makes some inappropriate remarks on Facebook, and his wife Joni Ernst, GOP candidate for U.S. Senate, is expected to throw him under the bus?

Blum and Young Top Latest Loras College Poll

The Loras College poll shows Rod Blum leading by seven in Iowa’s 1st Congressional District and David Young by 10 in Iowa’s 3rd Congressional District.