With less than a week to go before Election Day, campaigns and other organizations are emptying their coffers to fund a barrage of last-minute political ads. One such blitz, which featured a full-page spread in last Sunday’s New York Times, is led by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and urges Americans to “vote for biblical values.” Graham’s face appears in the ad with the following text:And, as of yesterday, also in the St. Paul Pioneer Press and the Star Tribune. It's worth remembering that a lot of evangelicals sat things out in 2008. There is reason to believe that they will be back tomorrow.
“On Nov. 6, the day before my 94th birthday, our nation will hold one of the most critical elections in my lifetime. We are at a crossroads and there are profound moral issues at stake. I strongly urge you to vote for candidates who support the biblical definition of marriage between a man and a woman, protect the sanctity of life and defend our religious freedoms. The Bible speaks clearly on these crucial issues. Please join me in praying for America, that we will turn our hearts back toward God.”
The ad, which first appeared about a week after Graham and his son Franklin met with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in North Carolina, has also run in the Wisconsin State Journal, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today and more than a dozen newspapers altogether, according to the Huffington Post.
Monday, November 05, 2012
When the post-mortems come in (Part III). . .
. . . on this election cycle, here's something else that we'll want to consider:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
(In response to all three post-mortem posts)
So...if Mr. Obama wins, may we then assume that Catholics, gun enthusiasts, and evangelicals don't matter nearly as much as one might have thought?
I realize that sounds a bit glib, but it's a serious question. To the extent this kind of thinking is valid (and I have my doubts, personally) it cuts both ways.
Brian, it all depends on how much of the 47% shows up.
Cuts both ways indeed. I'd wager that Billy Graham excites the left more than he enervates the right. Both camps, if they are alive above the brain stem, remember Mr. Graham agreeing with President Nixon, and adding his own obnoxious comments, with regard to Jews in this country and their conspiracy against the president. Those people whom view Mr. Graham as a benevolent interlocutor with the Supreme Being and either dismiss or do not know of his repugnant history of anti-Semitism are far outnumbered by people with clear memories and disgust for his scraping contemptuously at the heals of power. So, yes, indeed it cuts both ways, but one edge of this political sabre is made of very cheap, dull, and pitiful tin.
Brian, you could at least argue that "those on the left, and those who listen to most of the media, are the bigger voting block."
And anon; not quite sure how many people remember that, even on the left. If you expand the critique of Graham to include lending his name to all kinds of rogues on both sides--Graham notoriously shared a stage with Bill Clinton even after the Lewinsky debacle--I'm pretty close to with you.
I realize that sounds a bit glib, but it's a serious question. To the extent this kind of thinking is valid (and I have my doubts, personally) it cuts both ways.
Well, I think these factors matter. That doesn't make your question unserious, though. We'll find out. What I'm suggesting is this -- these are factors that pollsters might not catch.
We'll know soon!
Anon said,
Those people whom view Mr. Graham as a benevolent interlocutor with the Supreme Being and either dismiss or do not know of his repugnant history of anti-Semitism are far outnumbered by people with clear memories and disgust for his scraping contemptuously at the heals of power.
Actually, I'd be very surprised if that many people knew the history of which you speak. In fact, inasmuch as every president since Nixon has curried favor with Graham in one form or another, I find it somewhat implausible. We're 40 years past those days now.
By the way, I'm curious what you mean when you say that Graham "enervates the right."
one thing about Graham is how he's managed to 'walk the line' politically, and done it fairly well.
not a graham guy myself, but when ya see a player who plays the game well, cant help but notice.
it IS a game.
Graham IS a PLAYER.
Post a Comment