How Haggard is the evangelical vote?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the implications of Ted Haggard's resignation from the National Association of Evangelicals following allegations of sexual misconduct and drug use. Participants explore the potential impact on the evangelical vote in the context of the upcoming elections, touching on themes of hypocrisy, loyalty to political parties, and the historical relationship between evangelical Christians and the Republican Party.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the evangelical vote will not be significantly affected by Haggard's actions, questioning where these voters would turn instead.
  • Others suggest that some evangelicals might reconsider their support for the Republican Party due to perceived hypocrisy and the actions of leaders like Haggard.
  • Concerns are raised about the historical entrenchment of the Republican-evangelical alliance, with some participants noting that this relationship is unusual.
  • Participants discuss Haggard's admissions regarding drug use and sexual misconduct, with varying interpretations of the implications for his credibility and the evangelical community.
  • Some express skepticism about whether the incidents will lead to a broader realization among evangelicals that they have been misled by their leaders.
  • There is a mention of the contrasting behavior of political figures, with some participants drawing parallels between Haggard's situation and past political scandals involving other leaders.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the impact of Haggard's resignation on the evangelical vote. Multiple competing views remain regarding the loyalty of evangelical voters and the potential for change in their political affiliations.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions reference the historical context of the evangelical movement's relationship with the Republican Party, as well as the broader implications of leadership scandals on voter behavior.

  • #31
loseyourname said:
I'd rather have a hypocrite passing the legislation I want passed than honest Abe passing the opposite.
Point taken. I'm not sure I'd always vote in the person who's most likely to pass my agenda if I think he's a complete slimeball...but if he were running against anyone but a relatively honest Abe, I think I'd often do the same.

The way character figures in my decision is through the variabity that sliminess brings with it. If the guy can't be trusted, I'd be nervous about what he'd do 2 months down the road. I believe it (character) plays a more direct and telling role in the decisions of the most others, though.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
loseyourname said:
The thing is, if you're a social conservative, shouldn't you vote in the person that will back and get passed socially conservative legislation?

If you are really a conservative, this is not even an issue at the federal level. I think you mean pseudoconservatives.

Even if the guy is a gay vampire, at least he really will try to get an amendment passed banning gay marriage. I'm not personally a social conservative, but whichever way one may lean, on the grand scale of things, I'd rather have a hypocrite passing the legislation I want passed than honest Abe passing the opposite.

If the person is a hypocrite, then you really have no idea who you are electing, or what he or she will do.
 
  • #33
LURCH said:
BTW; I would very much like to read the script for the speach. Does anyone have a link? I'm guessing that his publicist would have immediately posted that document on the 'net somewhere, as soon as he started to make the claim that it was a mis-spoken joke about the president. I've heard more than one version of what he meant to say, and I'd like to read it myself.

I couldn't find the full transcript, but here is what Kerry said right before the infamous remark. Src:

I (Kerry) has been in Texas the day before. President Bush used to live in that state, but now he lives in the state of denial. The trip has reminded me (Kerry) the value of education. If you make the most of it ...

Did you have the same grudge against Bush for his literal mistakes?

I wonder if there would be any way for us, the common citizens, to make it clear to politicians that we dislike the recitation of prepared speeches. It would take a drastic change, and so I don't think it would happen quickly. However, perhaps in a process resembling natural selection, in which the candidate who speaks most frequently from his own mind gets the most votes, perhaps a new campaigning methodology might "evolve".
You really don't like Bush, don't you?:smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #34
I don't normally spend so much tiem ni the politics forum, but I think I will start a thread on prepared speeches.
You really don't like Bush, don't you?
*?*
 
  • #35
Well, would you agree that if we take away prepared speech, Bush would be in big trouble? He is already having difficulty formulating complete sentence. It would be a national embarrassment everytime he communicate verbally.
 
  • #36
Like

Bush videos - Actual excerpts



 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K