Apparently not. If they're willing to support a Mormon, a member of a religion that directly contradicts several key Christian beliefs, then it is clear that they believe in their faith less than they hate Hillary Clinton (of course, the average Evangelical's capacity for hatred is itself evidence enough of their religious hypocrisy).

I get the feeling that nuts like the fellow quoted in this story would support an Islamic Jihadist before they would support a Democrat, and watching them justify such a decision could be no more appalling than watching them justify this one. Blech!

The "christian" right chose Bush over McCain in 2000 because of the campaign of rumor and slander run by Karl Rove. Which principles were they showing us then? They chose Bush over Kerry in 2004 because of the label "liberal" that Rove hung around Kerry's neck or because of the Swift Boat veterans who said that they had served with Kerry and he didn't deserve his medals.....even though none of them actually had served with Kerry and a couple of them were responsible for Kerry getting his medals.

In my opinion the fundamentalists are more likely to vote for a bumper sticker or clever tag line than they are to do research into any of the issues. I wish I had a clue as to how to fix this. The casual voter is the greatest threat to our nation, because the damage their votes do will one day destroy the constitution in the name of protecting it and all because of a catchy slogan.

streak in them! They might actually vote for someone of a different religion who shares common moral ground, even though the basis of that is different.

Or do you just want the Christian vote to sit on the sidelines and allow people to be elected who have a very different agenda for public morality?

To vote republican, regardless of the "agenda" for public morality is pretty interesting. Look at the number of these moral individuals who have had to resign or are serving time....so much for that agenda you mention.