Im just totally baffled by this endorsement
2007-11-07 08:56:29 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
The confusion comes from the last election cycle in which Robertson and the Religious Right got everyone all fired up about Values. In particular, they seemed really concerned about abortion and gay marriage. The Religious Right bolstered support for Bush by portraying him as the candidate who would protect traditional values.
This time, Robertson's endorsement of Guliani contradicts the message of the last election. While Guliani is clearly viewed as the best hope of winning the White House for the Republican Party, he is very out of line with the issues that Robertson and Co. harped on last time (Guliani is pro abortion rights, pro gay rights).
What this suggests is that Robertson is much more concerned about having a Republican in office than he is about traditional values.
2007-11-07 09:06:35 · answer #1 · answered by wrightabilly 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Who knows, maybe Guliani has slipped him something under the table! Quite frankly I do NOT endorse anything Pat Robertson endorses, he is not on the same page as the rest of the conservative world. I cannot ever support a candidate who does NOT advocate the END of MURDERING BABIES!!!!!!!
2007-11-07 19:37:48 · answer #2 · answered by MBlessed (SOC) 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe Pat has jumped the Evangelical ship because we all know Guiliani's reputation. It certainly was a surprise. A well known Evangelical supporting a candidate who believes and votes pro-choice and pro for issues concening Gay people. Your guess is as good as mine. This endorsement has totally confused me.
2007-11-07 17:11:14 · answer #3 · answered by Lettie D 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't know, he should've endorsed Huckabee, because he's the most likely candidate to repeal the first amendment and declare a Christian Theocracy.
2007-11-07 17:10:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Two has-beens holding hands while the ship goes down?
They deserve each other?
2007-11-07 19:55:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why?
You mis understand the conservative postion. Abortion should be a local/State issue and not a federal one.
read the constitution
2007-11-07 17:00:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yeah, the more I think about it the more it confuses me too. But whatever floats his boat.
2007-11-07 17:00:17 · answer #7 · answered by ItsJustMe 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Me too! He's (RG) pro- gay rights, he's pro-choice and an adulterer.
I'm baffled too......
2007-11-07 17:07:33 · answer #8 · answered by Run Lola Run 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋