... somehow just doesn't get it:
Mike Huckabee warns that if the GOP caves on same-sex marriage, Evangelicals will walk. I don’t believe it. This is an empty threat. Huckabee and I are on the same side of the SSM question, so for “Evangelicals” you might as well substitute “social conservatives.” I think very few of us will abandon the Republican Party over this issue. Why would we, given the alternative would be a Democratic Party that’s more hostile to our values and concerns?You know, pundits , you would think, would have at least a little understanding about what it is they talk about.
Social conservatives, no matter how misplaced their politics may be, son't have to go to the Democrat party ... they'll just stay home. The question should be 'What will the GOP do without evangelicals?'
And this situation is where libertarians have failed to advance their message, mostly because all of the 'establishment' libertarians you hear think So-cons are 'icky', what with all of their God-bothering ways. That's irrelevant. What they should be advocating is that the government (federal, at least) has no business legislating on a lot of things it's currently legislating on.
Look, Jesus never petitioned the government to change the law to suit His teachings; He relied on the power of His message (and sacrifice) to change human behavior.
Likewise. So-cons shouldn't look to the government to enforce their way of thinking. Remember that what the government likes today can be what it hates tomorrow. It's much better if the government just butts out.
And Rod Dreher needs to understand that the GOP can't make up for a wholesale defection of those icky So-cons.