or trying to stop him from getting the nomination and assert themselves over the rest of the repug electorate...
I think more infighting is brewing and will come to a head very soon.
Well, I certainly agree that they want someone other than Rudy to get the nomination. But they're smart enough to realize that it might happen and that they lose all their leverage if they exit the tent altogether.
Better to reaffirm their power by forcing the nominee to swear a loyalty oath to the evangelical movement.
Evangelicals have been very disenchanted with the GOP, and this is just a continuation of that. They care about political power (and the party) less than about principals. Remember that before 1980 they were largely apolitical, and a return to that if they see the GOP not in line with their wishes (which Giuliani would certainly represent in their minds) may make that a reality again. Of course, the leaders want to stay involved in the political process, so this 3rd party option if Giuliani is nominated seems like a logical step for that group.
I'm talking about the leaders as opposed to the voters.
Ever since the rise of the Moral Majority, the Christian Coalition, and the like, it's been clear that the leaders are fixated on political power to the exclusion of actual religious principles.
This is why I don't think they will be abandoning the Republican Party if they can possibly help it. Like Markos and Jerome in Crashing the Gate, they realize that there are only two games in town, and it certainly won't be the Democrats who enact their policy goals. They really have no choice but to work within the framework of the Republican Party. That's why I think this is 99% saber-rattling.
It is, indeed, possible at some point that if the Republicans truly abandon the causes of the evangelicals, the voters may stop showing up no matter how much the likes of Dobson and Perkins try to persuade them that the Democrats are the party of Satan. But we're not there yet. With a few utterances of the right phrases, Giuliani still has a chance of passing muster.
As a matter of game theory, I disagree. If Dobson and his ilk decide that it is highly likely that the GOP presidential candidate will lose even if they try to rev up the base, their most effective play is to encourage their supporters to support a third party candidate (or note vote) for president, while voting down ballot.
If they can show a huge gap in the number of Republican votes for president vs. congress, they can argue that the party must toe the line in the future, or else lose the support of these voters.
Didn't work for Nader. I think they'd have to be pretty confident in their ability to move millions of votes to a candidate with no chance of winning in order to try something like that.
But this saber-rattling runs counterproductive of that theme. Dobson has been on this "anyone but Giuliani" kick for months, and he provides compelling arguments that seem very hard to simply just say "never mind" to in the end. In a way it is like Nader's talk.
I think this is more real than you think. They would probably be holding their tongues and then work with Giuliani's people to press concessions out of him. But think about it, the big "principle" thing for them is abortion, and I don't see a way for them to come together on that. According to Dobson abortion is murder in any way, shape or form. If Giuliani continues his pro-choice stance (which he is unlikely to convert out of at this stage) there is no basis for them to "split the difference" IMO.
I don't know if "anyone but Giuliani" is a fair statement. Did you see his rant against Fred Thompson? Unless they're prepared to embrace a Mormon, they're pretty much out of candidates!
Oh... darn.
