Why Romney is Likely to Win and With Evangelicals At His Side

//Why Romney is Likely to Win and With Evangelicals At His Side

Why Romney is Likely to Win and With Evangelicals At His Side

I was preparing to write a post on this topic but in my daily reading on Friday I came across two articles by Jay Cost and David and Nancy French that say it all. The bottom line is that I believe not only will Mitt Romney win the presidency, but he will do it with the overwhelming support of evangelical voters.

This first article is from Jay Cost of The Weekly Standard. Jay is an excellent writer and even mentions another favorite of mine, Sean Trende from Real Clear Politics.

Cost believes that a Romney victory will come because of two reasons:

1) Romney leads among voters who trust him to get our economy back on track

2) Romney leads among independents

The first reason is important because regardless of your personal political or religious convictions, the economy is still front and center for everyone.

The second article is from my friends Nancy and David French who manage the Evangelicals for Mitt website. They paint a clear picture of why Romney could outperform President George W. Bush in support of evangelicals because of the damage President Obama has done to America’s social fabric. Read it here.

By | 2012-11-02T21:13:13+00:00 November 2nd, 2012|My Blog Post|3 Comments

About the Author:

Paul Stanley is a commercial insurance executive, writer and former journalist living in Memphis, Tennessee.


  1. David C. Penn November 23, 2012 at 10:05 pm

    Well, Mr. Stanley, congratulations! Happy, ecstatic, and exuberant am I to say that you along with your cohorts (Jay Cost, Sean Trende, David French and his wife Nancy) were absolutely WRONG about Romney assuming residence in the White House. The fundamental reason why all of you were wrong is because the 2012 presidential election was not about politics and issues, it was simply about race and prejudice. In case you haven’t heard, God does not like “ugly” and He is not too fond of “pretty.”

    Secondly, how can anyone in their right mind (or even left mind) consider a hypocrite like Romney who says one thing one day and something else the next? Here is a man who refused to divulge his tax returns, hides money in the Cayman Islands, put thousands of employees out of work by closing down factories, desired to see the United States auto industry go bankrupt, wanted to repeal ObamaCare, and sought to destroy Medicare. You call that “getting the economy back on track?”

    You profess to be an evangelical Christian but your conscious is not in line with your conversation. The United States at this point needs Democratic leadership and a man such as Barack Obama who is willing to stand up for “all” of its constituents and not just the imperialistic rich.

    So again, I commend you and others like you for revealing your intolerant side of cultural diversity. It is people like you who keep us closer to God because we are always on our knees in prayer!!

    • Paul Stanley December 3, 2012 at 3:06 pm


      Thanks for your note and sorry I haven’t replied sooner. Yes, I was wrong about this election; very wrong. The momentum felt similar to 1994 but it turned out to be more like 1996.

      You and I obviously have differences (fundamental ones at that) on a number of issues but I’ll be happy to address the most relevant.

      First, and thankfully so, being a Christian is completely about accepting Jesus Christ as your one and only Lord and Savior and not about which side of the political fence we argue from. Knowing that Jesus died for all of our sins is comforting and I say with certainty that people of all political opinions will find themselves in an eternal kingdom if we recognize Jesus as the savior He is.

      Now on to politics. Gov. Romney did release two years of his tax returns and I would bet most all of the other years would look the same. Personally, I don’t see why either side needs to release their returns. I wouldn’t. As for his investment strategy, you insinuate only Republicans take advantage of investment strategies outside of the U.S. Are you serious? Where do you think Stephen Spielberg and George Soros invest a portion of their money? If President Obama and the Democrats thought off-shore tax havens or investments in foreign companies was such a bad idea then they could have made them illegal in 2009-10. After all, they controlled the White House and both chambers in Congress. Trust me on this one; wealthy people of both parties follow the same tax laws. You won’t see Harry Reid or Barack Obama (both are “rich”) in a hurry to introduce this legislation.

      Personally, I am concerned that President Obama is leading us into socialism as fast as he can. It will tear this country apart. Why do you think we’re the strongest nation in the world? Because we were built on socialist ideas? Don’t think so. We have a system in place that allows those who wake up each day and desire to work hard to have a chance at success. As I write this I’m in Memphis, TN and I can take you through plenty of neighborhoods where able bodied young men are hanging out and drawing government assistance. There’s nothing wrong with that if they are out of work and looking for a job but I know I could have most of them employed by the end of the day if they wanted to work.

      As for the company you’ve put me in (Jay Cost, Sean Trende, Nancy and David French) I’m honored. They are all fantastic writers and journalist and I aspire to write up to their level each day.

      Seriously, thanks for stopping in. I would be delighted to continue our discussion on the issues of the day anytime.

      Merry Christmas,


  2. David C. Penn December 21, 2012 at 10:27 pm

    Mr. Stanley:

    In response to your statement about “being a Christian is completely about accepting Jesus Christ as your one and only Lord and Savior and not about which side of the political fence we argue from…” is admirable but incomplete. There are other components of Christianity which include virtues such as compassion, sensitivity, and concern for the less fortunate; all of which Mr. Romney does not possess.

    Secondly, you said that “Gov. Romney did release two years of his tax returns and I would bet most all of the other years would look the same.” Why only two years when he was requested to release the last twelve years? I would caution you not to “bet” that the other years look the same because if they did he would have gladly released them. Furthermore, you bet on Romney winning the 2012 election, so your track record on “betting” is not something I would boast about!

    Third, you stated that Stephen Spielberg and George Soros invest a portion of their money in off-shore investments. But neither of these two including other wealthy people of both parties happened to be running for president of the United States. The Commander in Chief should be a person who leads by example and not one who follows the questionable practices of others. Does Barack Obama have hidden money in off-shore bank accounts that he refuses to disclose such as Mutt.. I mean Mitt Romney? Not on your life and that is something you can safely “bet” on.

    Fourth, you say that you are concerned that “President Obama is leading us into socialism as fast as he can.” You also raised the rhetorical question: “Why do you [I] think we’re the strongest nation in the world?” Let me reply first to the socialism concern that you supposedly have and then ask you a rhetorical question: “If socialism is so bad, then why don’t conservatives (such as yourself) complain about the many socialized institutions that seem to work just fine and that we all take for granted?”

    For example, our nation’s various police and fire departments are all socialized institutions, but we don’t hear conservatives (such as yourself) screaming about making those into private industries (notwithstanding wealthy conservatives who live in gated communities with private security guards). Likewise, our nation’s judiciaries (both criminal and civil) are socialized, but we don’t hear conservatives calling for private funding of judges.

    Conservatives (such as yourself) don’t mind having everyone share the cost of things such as police, fire, judges, etc., because conservatives tend to be people with wealth and power…and people with wealth and power tend to own more assets than people without wealth and power. And what better way is there to protect those assets against loss (fire, theft, fraud, etc.) than by making everyone share the cost of things like police, fire, courts, etc.?

    Of course, not all conservatives are wealthy and powerful, and not all wealthy or powerful people are conservatives. But I am talking here about conservatives (such as you) who unquestioningly accept socialism in some contexts, while blindly rejecting it in others. I suspect these people (such as you) realize either consciously or subconsciously that for them personally, socialized cops are good but socialized doctors are not. They are content to let their neighbors help pay for the police that protect their mansion, but why should they help pay for their neighbor’s broken leg? There is nothing inherently wrong with socialism, it’s just that society’s movers and shakers have disparaged the term in situations whenever it benefits them to do so.

    Let’s compare nominally “capitalist” America to some nominally “socialist” countries in Europe. Countries such as Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, etc., have much higher income taxes, much higher gasoline prices, nationalized healthcare, nationalized universities, shorter work weeks, longer vacations…and they still have a stronger currency, a healthier population, fewer people in prison (per capita), fewer violent crimes (per capita) and a far smaller military (per capita). All of which causes me to ask you another rhetorical question: “If socialism is so bad, what’s so good about American-style capitalism?” By the way, Jesus was a “socialist Savior” and not a “capitalistic Christ.”

    As it pertains to why I think we are the strongest nation in the world, I will answer that by saying America is the strongest nation in the world primarily because this country was built on the backs of forced free slave labor. In addition, America was built on imperialistic practices which are still used.

    I also found it rather interesting that you did not respond to my assessment of the 2012 presidential election being simply a matter of race and prejudice as opposed to politics and issues. Case in point, Congress raised the debt ceiling a grand total of 78 times since 1960 – 49 times under Republican presidents and 29 times under Democratic presidents. Ronald Reagan was responsible for the largest number of debt ceiling increases and George W. Bush approved a near doubling of the borrowing cap during his two terms in office without it ever becoming an issue. Conversely, the debt ceiling under the Obama administration has been raised only three times and each instance it became a national conversation. President Obama has yet to lead this country into a war where trillions of dollars was spent unnecessarily and thousands of lives were lost.

    Ronald Reagan closed countless numbers of steel mills throughout the United States because he said it was cheaper to import steel from foreign countries rather than produce steel in America. This resulted in severe job losses in cities such as Youngstown, Ohio, and Gary, Indiana, with them becoming modern day ghost towns. You can “bet” on this as well! President Obama on the other hand has saved the American auto industry and is seeking to reverse many of the nefarious Bush policies that have crippled the economy and caused government assistance. I ask you does this demonstrate Christianity and the principles of Christendom? I think not!

    Finally, the company I have placed you in (Jay Cost, Sean Trende, Nancy and David French) are “fantastic writers and journalists” in your estimation, not mine. I would much rather read the opinions of journalists and writers such as Dr. Cornel West, Soledad O’Brien, Tavis Smiley, Marc Lamont Hill, Michael Dyson, and Roland Martin.

Comments are closed.