Crunchy Con

The more Evangelicals change...

Thursday August 21, 2008

...the more they stay the same, according to a new Pew survey showing that for all the yakkity-yak about the Evangelical-Republican crack-up and Obama's religious outreach, white Evangelicals are backing McCain as strongly today as they backed Bush in the...
Advertisement
Comments
Frog Leg
August 21, 2008 4:19 PM

Even if they back McCain at the same levels, the lack of enthusiasm might translate to more staying home than in 2004 or 2000.

octopus
August 21, 2008 4:28 PM

Abortion trumps all. And this one is about the judges...

Derek Copold
August 21, 2008 4:31 PM

As Malcolm X might have said, they do it because they're chumps.

Spoodles
August 21, 2008 4:43 PM

I'm probably not typical, but I'm an evangelical, and I wouldn't touch either of these guys with a ten-foot pole. I'm writing in Ron Paul, and I know a few other evangelicals who are doing the same. I'm extremely frustrated with the lack of thought in religious circles as to what kind of message they send Republicans when they vote for them no matter what. I hope they'll come around, but the truth is, most evangelicals just don't apply that much thought to politics. They have stuff to do...unlike me, apparently.

Matt K
August 21, 2008 4:46 PM

I'm pretty steeped in the world of evangelical Christians (I prefer the word as an adjective rather than a noun), and I'll second what Octopus says-- Abortion does trump all. So I while I hear more and more Christians becoming "crunchy" and a little less hawkish and homophobic-- I think this whole "Born Alive Infants" debacle is putting the brakes on most of them ever actually pulling the lever for BHO.

I'll also posit a second theory. We're seeing some shifting in Evangelicals that don't result in a net/gain or loss from 2004. Younger ECs might be more open to voting Obama, but older ECs who might be considered "moderates" have been put off Obama by the "extremist" and "other" labels the Right-wing is trying to pin to BHO (not to mention the persisting "Obama is Muslim" lies).

That's just a guess, but I think the Pew survey echoes what I'm hearing on the ground-- church going people are tired of the excessive mixing of religion and republicanism, but they certainly aren't going to embrace a "Religious left" either. The disdain is for political involvement in general.

Houghton
August 21, 2008 5:00 PM

I'm an evangelical, and I can tell you that many people in my congregation have flirted with the idea of voting for Obama. Ultimately, however, most of them say they can't do it. I know a few who are definitely going to cast their ballot for him. Like anyone else, they're simply deciding between two choices. It's not about being "chumps." That's the nature of the two-party system. And as much we'd like to complain about it, the two-party system is about avoiding the fractionalism and the "coalition" traffic jams they call governments in other countries. I haven't decided who I'll vote for, incidentally.

Derek Copold
August 21, 2008 5:27 PM

If you pull the lever for a guy whose record has consistently shown (at best) indifference to your concerns, if not outright contempt, then you're a chump. It's that simple. If you really think McCain is going to appoint another Roberts, I've got some beachfront property in AZ to sell you. I even think it used to be McCain's house.

Not voting for McCain doesn't mean you have to vote for BHO, BTW. There are other protest candidates available. But if you pull the lever for him, don't be surprised if he doesn't do anything else for you. This is particularly so as he's been indicating he's only interested in a four-year stint.

Charles Cosimano
August 21, 2008 5:35 PM

My guess is that it is simple, common sense. They certainly don't want Obama. A protest vote is a vote for Obama given how close the race is in most states right now. I'm not surprised at all.

Derek Copold
August 21, 2008 5:50 PM

In McCain, they're going to get Obama, just at a slower pace with a few more exciting moments overseas. Only this way, the Democrats can blame McCain if their programs fail.

Bill
August 21, 2008 5:51 PM

Another Evangelical here...

I agree with Mark Twain. There are three types of untruths: lies, damned lies, and statistics. Sorry Rod, but I don't put much stock in polls of any kind. Especially those that touch on faith issues. For one thing, the term "evangelical" is often misused by pollsters. Often, they conflate it with "fundamentalist." These kinds of mistakes can really throw off the data.

It is cerainly true that fundies are staying with the Rs (with a few promising to vote Constitution Party). But within evangelicalism (which has always been a far more complex category), there has been an undeniable shift since the last election.

I trust what I hear and see in the pews. And there is significant disenchantment with Bush, and with the Republicans generally. On other threads I've recounted several close friends and family members who've always been guaranteed pro-life votes for the Reps, but who now are going for Obama. I also know many other fellow Evangelicals who, although they were once enthusiastic for the Republican candidate (Reagan and Bush in past elections) are now holding their noses and complaining loudly about having to vote for McCain. When election day comes, I wouldn't be surprised if some of them decide not to vote at all or even end up going Obama. The war really troubles a lot of evangelicals, and if McCain continues to beat the drums he may push more of us toward Obama.

Plus, there is generally more of a recognition that politics won't save us, and that those who promised it would were selling snake oil. The stock of Dobson, Robertson, et al has dropped noticeably within evangelicalism. Rick Warren (a far more nonpartisan guy, with an agenda that extends into some issues of the Left) has stolen center stage from them.

I think the Pew study underestimates what's really happening.

The Man From K Street
August 21, 2008 5:59 PM

This won't be the only time this election cycle where you'll see an example of the Forced Narrative: where the media predetermines a storyline, then desperately grasps at straws in looking for anecdotes to fit the thesis.

Others will be the Great Pumpkin-like, always imminent "conservative coalition is fracturing!" (never mind that it is the other side that has been generating PUMAs and Greens/Naderites), or the shopword "this time the youth vote really will turn out!" (for some Boomer-age media types, it is always 1968 and the blindfolded guy is picking draft numbers), or the ever popular "libertarians will shift to the proven statist."

Derek Copold
August 21, 2008 6:03 PM

One thing to keep in mind here, conservatives are in a tizzy now because John McCain might pick someone like Ridge or even Lieberman. I'm sure if he does go with Lieberman, they'll find a way to justify their newfound appreciation of Al Gore's old running mate.

Anyhow, given their demonstrated suppliance, all the GOP has to do is keep itself just slightly to the left of the Democratic candidate, and evangelicals will support their candid, albeit tepidly.

Erin Manning
August 21, 2008 6:25 PM

If I had to guess, I'd say the BAIPA quotes and comments from Obama that are starting to surface more and more are not just hurting him among Evangelicals, but among some Catholics who might otherwise vote for him, too.

For example, yesterday at The Corner Kathryn Lopez linked to a youtube audio of Obama talking about BAIPA in these words:

"...and that essentially adding an additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion."

Quotes like these, closer attention paid to Obama's BAIPA vote and explanations of it, will definitely hurt those who have thought of Obama as the sort of moderate, "personally opposed" candidate they could live with on this issue. But there's no evidence Obama has ever been "personally opposed" to abortion, given not only his Illinois BAIPA vote but his vote against the ban on partial-birth abortion as well. So pro-life Evangelicals, and some Catholics who have considered supporting him, are starting to be unsettled by some of the details about how radically pro-abortion Obama really is.

Secular Republican
August 21, 2008 8:23 PM

Since McCain is known as a moderate conservative Republican who often reaches across the aisle, he needs to urge the party leaders to not get too closely attached to these evangelicals. The Southern Strategy backfired when the GOP started losing the support of moderates, independents, and former GOP states.

Ann
August 22, 2008 12:51 AM

What these candidates say is far less important thatn what they have already done. And are yet to do.

If McCain picks Lieberman or Ridge for his running mate, it will be the final nail for me. It was hard enough to get behind him anyway. If he chooses Romney, I'll stick, more or less unwillingly, but Obama is totally unacceptable, based on his extreme leftist mind-set, very unsavory associates, typical Chicago-machine activities, radical pro-abortion votes and propensity to say one thing to one group and the opposite to another during the campaign.

But many like me will watch the polls carefully and if their state looks like it is going for BO by enough of a margin that one vote won't make a difference, I'll bet there will be many write-ins or third party votes - to send a message that we will not be taken for granted any longer.

who knew
August 22, 2008 9:47 AM

Not to seem ignorant, but how does one go about writing in a vote? I to intend to write in Ron Paul but would have no idea how to go about it and I don't think the pleasant grandma sort of ladies running the polling place do either.

I also wonder if any provisions have been made for "write-in" votes with these "new-fangled" compooterized voting machines. Ours,for this year at least, are still the standard lever madels.

And the reason evangelicals, such as myself, almost always end up voting for the Republican candidate, no matter how greatly we disagree with them, is the simply "a third party vote is a vote for the Dem candidate" argument. Here's my argument, with McCain, no matter what he says, he will not be appointing truly conservative Supreme Court judges anyway, I'm not even sure they make those any more. The best we can hope for is more neo-cons, pro-choice and pro-eminent domain. I don't need it.

fbc
August 22, 2008 10:50 AM

Can't speak for your jurisdiction, who knew, but in mine (Oklahoma) it has been illegal as well as physically impossible to "write in" a candidate's name for many years.

The physically impossible part is due to the use of a computerized ballot which is read by a machine as you insert it in the ballot box. ANY marks outside of the boxes beside the pre-printed choices, automatically invalidate the vote.

Good luck with your state.

Secular Republican
August 22, 2008 2:35 PM

McCain and the GOP in general need to steer the party away from the Religious Right and ultra-right and back near the center as Clinton and the DLC tried to do with the Democrats. Only then can the Republicans win back the public, former GOP states, and previous huge electoral victories. McCain and the moderate, moderate conservative, and "RINO" Republicans shouldn't pay too much attention to the Limbaughs, Hannitys, Coulters, and Dobsons of the party. After all, the religious and social conservatives won't have anywhere else to go, so they'll have to learn to compromise as the liberals did when the moderate and conservative Dems flooded into Congress in '06.

Marian Neudel
August 22, 2008 4:50 PM

Re: write-in votes--check with your local chapter of League of Women Voters. They always have the straight dope.

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

About Crunchy Con

Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Crunchy Con

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.