It’s probably not going to happen, but I could see a populist-evangelical fusion party that could emerge if the Republicans became overly libertarian and told off the social conservative wing of the party. If the Huckabee voting block hooked up with black evangelicals and culture-of-life center-left Catholics and worked together a coalition that was economically centrist and culturally conservative, they would be within hailing distance of a 40% plurality in a three way race between garden-variety Democrats and a libertarian-oriented Republican party.

Such a critter is unlikely to happen, since the planets would have to align just right for a cultural liberal to win the GOP nomination; it was only plausible for Giuliani when the field was divided and 35% primary pluralities were available for a hawkish libertarian. The nominee has to throw a bone or two to the theocons to be palatable to the party as a whole.

They would not back away from politics (especially guys like Mohler and Land), but would seek a revisionist political stance and try to bring as many SB’s along with them as possible.

Again, it is linked to the Bible, not to one particualr party.

I meant leadership. Key people, head of state conventions, the executive, SBC celebrities, Land, Mohler, Patterson, Page etc.

If the Republican Party changed (as you say Guliani) then what, go third party or go back to being isolationist?

What is true is that the Republican party’s traditional stance on issues of family, abortion, economics, and application of the Constitution are more in line with what the bulk of Southern Baptists believe than the Democrat’s.

Yes, SB’s are often very vocal in their support of the Republican party, but were the party to change it’s values (see the case of Guliani) the bulk of SB’s would not continue to follow them.

The money.
Follow the money.
The US conservative paradigm is pouring all it can into the Canadian religious environment.

One of the things that just struck me is that ministries will often use a marketing paradigm borrowed from business. Businesses that have maxed out their opportunities in their home country will look to expand internationally. Canada would be the first logical place to “export” a big ministry.

One problem is that Canada’s broadcasters generally need to be broadcasters serving a broad community; the powers that be frown upon purely religious channels, IIRC. The buy-airtime-from-a-Christian-station model that broadcast ministries use stateside doesn’t work in Canada.

The Washington Post coverage was factually incorrect on so many levels it would have been funny if it wasn’t sad.

Nelson was writing for a religious site, a wider audience that who he is probably used to and he used the sub-language.
I don’t see complaining, I see healthy pondering.

Being against a certain breed of conservatism isn’t enough.
Agreed, and well said Mark.

The money.
Follow the money.
The US conservative paradigm is pouring all it can into the Canadian religious environment.

Do I hope and pray they fall flat?
Hell yes, I’ve never been shy about saying so - we can learn from each other - the seduction is stunning.

I’m glad ‘the other Baptists’ held a celebration.
I’m glad interested Canadians ( and other countries) were welcome on their terms.

However, you haven’t seen that list to the right up north yet, as there are plenty of faithful in the Liberal and NDP camp. Canadian Baptists haven’t been major parts of either the left or right as Baptists, as far as I can tell, so a lot of the conversation that we’ve had south of the border falls on tin ears.

Being against a certain breed of conservatism isn’t enough, especially when it’s not all that prevalent in Canada. You report on folks like FotF trying to make footholds in Canada, but it seem that the conservative US paradigm will fall flat in a more apolitical Canadian environment.

Not everything translates across the border.