Obama told the audience that people ask him, "`What role does faith play?' I say, `It plays every role.'"Both Hillary and John Edwards have also dropped the faith card in the recent past. But will it work? Can they out-God the GOP? Maybe.
Of the leading Republican candidates only Mitt Romney seems religious and that's probably because of all the questions about his Mormonism. Thompson has admitted to not being a regular Sunday church-goer and Rudy's stance on abortion places him outside even the most casual evangelical. McCain, however, is a Baptist pro-life war hero who has all the tools to be a hero of the traditionalists, yet he is floundering. Shows what a pro-illegal alien stance can do a person, I guess.
I've asked a few friends recently about the notion of voting for a third party if Giuliani becomes the nominee. Purely anecdotal, but when faced with a Hillary presidency they all agree they'd probably hold their noses and pull it for Rudy. Of course, this is without knowing who the third party candidate might be, so it's not entirely convincing.
Here in Memphis we've just experienced a miniature version of what could happen on the national stage. Incumbent mayor Willie Herenton, who gives all the indications of being off his rocker, won reelection to a fifth term with less than a plurality by effectively splitting the vote of two challengers. Think Ross Perot.
If the right cannot come up with a consensus candidate to get behind out of the primaries it's hardly worth even holding the national election. Just go ahead and crown HillBilly to a third term and save us all the irritating commercials.
Hot Air is asking the Rudy vs Thompson question in the context of how either would impact the pseudo-mythological evangelical voter. Allahpundit is clearly a Rudy man, that's fine, but we've yet to see Fred! in action. Tomorrow's debate might be rather telling on that account, so perhaps we should all wait to see the newcomer in action before deciding this thing.
It's on. Fred's backdoor hook to Dr. Dobson last week on Hannity and Colmes was just shown to the Doc on H&C tonight, and his response was, shall we say, less than brotherly. I actually thought Fred went a little too far in that piece by insinuating the leader of a large block of potential voters should apologize for something that could have been taken out of context. What was the point? Was he trying to woo moderates at Dobson's expense, knowing they (evangelicals) can't stand Rudy?