Values Voters: Bopp Warns Of Rudy Win Unless Social Conservatives Rally Around Romney

James Bopp Jr., the legendary pro-life activist and attorney, has turned into one of the more effective surrogates for Mitt Romney and his pro-life conversion.

In a letter Bopp sent to hundreds of social conservatives this week, he agrees with fellow Romney adviser Mark DeMoss that unless social conservatives coalesce around Mr. Romney, the nomination is Rudy Giuliani's to lose. With 100 days to go, Bopp writes with a sense of urgency. His e-mail was obtained from a Romney supporter.

Writes Bopp, "While several of the other candidates are certainly fine social conservatives, none has established his viability as a serious presidential contender. Only Mitt Romney has the resources to compete with Rudy Giuliani for the nomination."

"Other evangelical leaders have weighed in on the acceptability of the leading Republican candidates. Dr. James Dobson, America's most influential evangelical leader, has expressed his opinion that Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Fred Thompson are not acceptable, based on their positions on various important conservative issues. I have explained Fred Thompson's adamant support of McCain-Feingold, while in the Senate and when it was before the U.S. Supreme Court in the McConnell case."

Two other prominent evangelical leaders, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, and Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention have recently expressed their view that Mitt Romney is an acceptable choice for social conservatives.

So it does come down to two things: (1) the viability of the candidate, which only Mitt Romney has demonstrated among the socially conservative candidates, and (2) whether social conservatives will have the courage to rally around the only viable social conservative alternative to Rudy Giuliani. A divided field means that Giuliani is likely to win the nomination. This is our choice to make, and we don't have long to make it.

Comments

Why are these fundamentalists propping up Romney who has flipflopped on every single conservative issue? Romney is a pro-choice, pro-gay-rights Massachussetes liberal.

Posted by Mitt | October 18, 2007 12:06 PM

Taking the cynical view:

The fundamentalist leaders care, above all, about access to power. All things being equal, they would support Saint Rudy.

However, fundamentalist voters have become aware of Saint Rudy's lack of saintliness, as well as his unsaintlike stands on social issues.

Therefore, the fundamentalist leaders have had to go down the sorted-according-to-poll-standing list of GOP candidates, to find one that their followers don't know enough about to reject out of hand. His name is Mitt.

Posted by Joe Schembrie | October 18, 2007 12:47 PM

This is great news for conservative Christians. We have to remember personal bias beside, that Mitt Romney is the only one who shares Christians values and who has the experience to lead the largest "corporation" in the world; i.e. the US Government.

Posted by Gabe Larsen | October 18, 2007 3:01 PM

This is great news for conservative Christians. We have to remember personal bias beside, that Mitt Romney is the only one who shares Christians values and who has the experience to lead the largest "corporation" in the world; i.e. the US Government.

Posted by Gabe Larsen | October 18, 2007 3:02 PM

It's actually good to see evangelicals coming together and being bold enough to understand that Mitt does stand for what they believe in and if they choose to stand together can nominate someone that has their values, and as well as the resources to compete with Hillary. In so doing, they can also take away the "electibility" claim of Rudy's. I actually like Rudy in a general sense, but he doesn't have the conservative values. It's that important and should Rudy win...the conservative side of the Republican party will change.

Posted by MJ | October 18, 2007 7:51 PM

"Evangelicals" have forgotten that Mitt is a heretic and worships a false god. A sick tree will produce rotten fruit, no matter how good it looks. As long as "evangelicals" continue to compromise their principles at the voting booth, they will never see godly men in office. Instead we will continue to have conservatives who merely say churchy things and value good morals.

Posted by JD | October 19, 2007 1:32 AM

JD-

Comments like yours are what turn people off from religion. Have you ever realized that it is possible to have religious convictions that you boldly live by WITHOUT spewing hateful words against those who are different from you?

Well, let's look at Mitt's "fruits" since you brought up the topic. He is a family man who has spent plenty of time and money serving others. He boldly stands for morality and values at a time when it is becoming increasingly unpopular to do so. Sounds like a pretty healthy tree to me. Aren't those the Christian things to do?

Or maybe you have forgotten that. Perhaps you think that practicing bigotry and acting self-righteous is a more Christian approach? Or do you just reserve that side of you for Mormons? Would you use the same hateful language when talking about an atheist? How about a Hindu? A Bhuddist? I doubt it. And guess what, you would NEVER hear Mitt Romney say something like that about you. If you want people to take your religious convictions seriously, you should start practicing what you preach. Show charity, be kind, and stop being self-righteous. I know someone else who taught that about 2000 years ago. And guess what, Mitt Romney believes in him too.

Posted by Mac Reynolds | October 19, 2007 2:45 AM

Mac Reynolds: You are dead on! I couldn't have said it better myself.

Posted by Rick | October 19, 2007 10:05 AM