RANKING THE GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES ACCORDING TO NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA

I thought it would be interesting to give the candidates a pro-abortion score card. NARAL Pro-Choice America gives a grade to each state based on their legislature’s makeup and several other factors like current abortion laws and number of abortion facilities etc. It is a pretty good ranking of liberal vs. conservative populations since abortion is the linchpin of most liberals – not just liberal democrats but also liberal republicans. I believe that the score that each candidate gets is directly correlated to how they will treat the pro-life movement, since their mandate will come from those people who elected them. The higher the pro-abort score the less attention they will pay to pro-lifers. For example, McCain’s constituency consists of mostly liberal pro-abortion states, it is no surprise therefore that he garnered the endorsement of the Republicans for Choice and received NARAL’s highest grade. Romney’s lower grade may be a little bit deceiving since he won two pro-life states based on his religion and his family history (Michigan and Utah.) In general however, his lower grade shows that his constituency is less pro-abortion than McCain’s. The undisputed pro-abortion flunky is Mike Huckabee, his grade might still have been lower had he won Missouri (which he lost by less than one percent) and not won West Virginia, which he won thanks to McCain’s help.

McCain, the front-runner gets the following grades from NARAL:

Arizona(C+), California (A+), Illinois (B-), New York (A-), New Jersey (A-), Oklahoma (F), Connecticut (A), Missouri (by less than 1%) (F), Delaware (C+), Florida(D), South Carolina (F), New Hampshire (A-)

McCain’s total comes out to a 2.31 or the equivalent of a C+

Romney, “the conservative’s conservative” (according to Laura Ingraham et. al.) gets a NARAL gets the following grades:

Massachusetts(B-), Utah(F), Michigan (F), Minnesota (C+), Alaska(A-), Colorado(C-), Montana(A-), North Dakota(F), Main(A), Nevada(A-), Wyoming(D)

Romney’s total comes out to a 1.98, or a solid C.

Huckabee, the church-goer’s candidate received the following grades from NARAL:

Arkansas(F), Georgia(D), Alabama(F), Tennessee(D+), West Virginia (B), Iowa (C+)

Huckabee’s totals come out to a 1.33 or a solid D+
What does this tell us about the makeup of the voting blocks? What does it tell us about the candidate?

Here are my conclusions:

1. McCain will continue to compromise on life when it suits him, for example suing Wisconsin Right to Life to uphold his Campaign Finance Bill or pushing for funding of human embryo destructive research. Who he will appoint to the supreme court only God and John McCain can tell, but I am not confident appointing a pro-lifer will be very high on his list.

2. Romney, even with the incessant and overbearing advocacy of talk radio and the conservative mainstream media was not able to convince pro-lifers that he was their man. Christian conservatives have been taken for granted too many times by candidates who paint themselves in a favorable light to us only to later care little if at all about our issues.

3. Huckabee will have a hard time winning over Romney’s base, since as the grading describes Romney’s base is closer to McCain’s than to Huckabee’s. McCain 2.3, Romney 2.0, Huckabee 1.3. I believe most Romney supporters wanted a winner who spoke like a generalized conservative. Huckabee supporters want a proven Christian conservative. I believe the Romney base will take a while to warm up to McCain, but they will end up following the currently perceived winner – after all Americans, especially conservative Americans, love a winner. The Huckabee followers will follow Huckabee through the primary and only in the general election will they vote for the lesser of two weevils.

4. Out of all conservative talk radio, only Rush understood the Huckabee crowd. We didn’t support Huck because we don’t like Mormons (See. Hugh Hewitt), and we didn’t support Huck because we love illegal immigration and higher taxes. (See all the rest of the talk show hosts), we supported Huck because we are willing to believe he will change his ways on taxes and immigration and remain a pro-life advocate. For too long Christian conservatives have been taken for granted. Our main concern is abortion. We also like lower taxes and the rule of law, but we want the abortion genocide stopped or at least we want to see someone put up a good fight. During the GOP primary we went for the candidate with a proven consistent pro-life record, and that was Mike Huckabee. After all, isn’t it time the mainstream GOP hold their nose for one of ours like we have done for them for 35 years? Rush had it right, the Christian conservatives voted for one of their own, and it all revolves around abortion.

One response to “RANKING THE GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES ACCORDING TO NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA

  1. Don’t Hold Your Nose at the Polls! The wholly conservative, PROVEN totally pro-life candiate (as in no extreme conservative wannabe makeover) is ALAN KEYES. He has been ACTIVE in pro-life activities for decades, speaking at pro-life functions, participating in marches, coming out publicly in support of Terry Schiavo, etc. He was there publicly defending Judge Moore over the Ten Commandments. He was instrumental in helping to change the military “don’t pray in Jesus name” when a chaplain was punished for his beliefs.

    Why vote with doubt, or end up with another Jimmy-Carter-like president, when we can have a courageous and strong conservative – Alan Keyes.

    http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/30686.html

    http://www.alankeyes.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s