This wasn't a referendum on social conservatism

To contact us Click HERE
I’mgoing to reiterate a point I already made. This election was not a repudiationof social conservatism. If Mike Huckabee or Rick Santorum had been ourstandard-bearer and lost to Obama, that would be somewhat different.
Eventhen, it would be simplistic to say their loss represented a repudiation ofsocial conservatism. Some voters are voting for something, some voters arevoting against something, and some voters do both.
Forinstance, if a voter cast his vote for Obama rather than Santorum, that wouldn’tnecessarily–or even presumably–mean he was voting against Santorum’s socialpolicies. He might simply be voting for something he likes about Obama. And itmight not even be a policy issue. He might find Santorum’s demeanoroff-putting. He might find Obama more personable.
Now,that doesn’t mean conservatives should be complacent. The election was asetback for social conservatism.
Butthere’s a danger of mirror-reading. Because social conservatives voteideologically, it’s tempting for them to project that outlook onto othervoters. Yet that runs the risk of viewing another voter’s motivations throughour own spectacles rather than their spectacles.  

Reelecting Obama does reflect moral indifference on the part of many voters, which is not the same thing as moral endorsement.