Skip to comments.Election 2012 Marks the End of Evangelical Dominance in Politics
Posted on 11/16/2012 4:57:28 AM PST by darrellmaurina
Ever since Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980, evangelicals have been a powerful political force. Jerry Falwell and his Moral Majority organization were credited in part with Reagan's election, having registered millions of evangelicals to vote. Their influence would only grow over the next 25 years: Evangelicals were instrumental in Reagan's reelection, the Republican Revolution of 1994, and both of George W. Bush's victories. But on November 6, 2012, their reign came to an end.
"I think this [election] was an evangelical disaster," Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, told NPR. He's right, but it wasn't for lack of trying.
The late Falwell's Liberty University gave former governor Mitt Romney its keynote spot at its 2012 commencement and backed off previous language calling Mormonism a "cult." Billy Graham uncharacteristically threw his support behind the Republican candidate, and his evangelistic association bought full-page newspaper ads all but endorsing Romney. Ralph Reed's Faith and Freedom Coalition spent tens of millions in battleground states to get out the religious vote.
As a result, 79 percent of white evangelicals voted for Romney on Tuesday. That's the same percentage that Bush received in 2004, and more than Senator John McCain received in 2008. The evangelical vote was 27 percent of the overall electorate -- the highest it's ever been for an election.
Their support wasn't enough. Not only did Obama win soundly, but four states voted to allow same-sex marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
Maybe we need better candidates. I don’t know any “evangelicals” who wanted Romney to be the nominee.
So much for the rumor grist that millions of evangelicals stayed home.
Exactly, some people really don’t think obama is that bad and they hate mormons.
However, the author has some valid points, key among them being the way in which too many Christian conservatives decided to downplay the seriousness of Mitt Romney's theological aberrations, and the fact that he hasn't even been faithful to his own Mormon conservative values on issues like abortion and gay marriage.
If Christian conservatives keep doing things like that, we deserve what we get.
The fact is that Mitt Romney was not a Christian conservative, wasn't a socially conservative ally of Christian conservatives, and was a terrible choice for the Republican Party. I understand the need for compromise and coalitions in politics, but the result this year was Republicans nominated a man whose main reason for supporting a “pro-choice” position on abortion, and then backing off from it, seems to have been poll data.
I believe the Mormon Church dodged a major bullet this month, and if Mitt Romney had been elected, he would have become the Mormon version of the Kennedy family, injecting liberalism into a prominent position in his church while giving the church a respectability it, like the Catholics before Kennedy, had sought for decades before the election.
I am no Mormon, but if I were a Mormon, I would be a strong opponent of the Mitt Romney-Harry Reid wing of the LDS, and be doing whatever I could to fight it.
Maybe we need better citizens to elect men and women of honor and integrity.
“decided to downplay the seriousness of Mitt Romney’s theological aberrations, and the fact that he hasn’t even been faithful to his own Mormon conservative values on issues like abortion and gay marriage.”
Look at black Christians who overlooked Obama’s views on abortion and homosexual “marriage” and voted for him because of his perceived skin color. We all know if Obama were white, he never would have been elected. Never!
Mr. Mohler, what did God tell Gideon? Judges 7:2 And the LORD said unto Gideon, "The People that are with thee are too many for Me to give the Midianites into their hands, lest Israel vaunt themselves against Me, saying, Mine own hand hath 'saved' me.'
I take this election as God sifting out more chaff from His wheat. I think Americans are going to have to have their noses rubbed into 'social justice' religious/politics, to figure out God is against the redistribution of wealth. Yes things are going to get harder and more worldly, but, God said I will never leave you nor forsake you, IF!
If we're ever going to reach Hispanic Roman Catholics, it's going to be over social issues like abortion.
Social issues are a major part of what led white evangelicals out of the Democratic Party and into the Republican Party. Social issues are a major part of what led ethnic Catholic blue collar workers in Northern industrial cities to become “Reagan Democrats.”
Frankly, if we really have become a country of “takers” rather than “makers,” we need to appeal to the votes of people who are willing to consider something else to be more important than their pocketbooks.
Religious values have proven their ability to do that in the past.
Next time, let's try to get a candidate who actually believes the religious values he claims to affirm.
Unfortunately we are stuck with the “citizens” we have. If you can think of how we can get better ones, I’m listening.
“Not only did Obama win soundly, but four states voted to allow same-sex marriage”
ZERO won because hispanics are totally ignorant of their Catholic faith and most would rather have free government handouts than work for a living. That, combined with mass voter fraud, elected the worst president in American history to a second term. Romney said he would find jobs for American, ZERO said more handouts. Free stuff wins every time.
I think we agree.
Very similar things could have been said about Southern rural whites from the Great Depression until at least the 1970s and probably well into the 1980s. The old Democratic Party coalition depended on the ability of people like LBJ to give poor rural whites lots of “free stuff” to buy their votes.
The Democratic coalition broke down for many reasons, but social conservatives were a major part of that breakdown.
I believe the same thing can be done with Hispanics. The modern Republican Party is not anti-Catholic, and there are lots of conservative Catholics who are well-positioned to reach out to their socially conservative Hispanic Catholic fellow believers.
While it will be much harder, as more blacks become businessmen, it may be possible to split off enough black voters to deny Democrats a majority in close races. Conservative black pastors fighting homosexuality need to be encouraged as much as possible in that regard. The way in which Democrats fight tooth-and-nail against people like Congressman West show how concerned Democrats are that some prominent conservative black leaders will gain traction. If they're worried as Democrats, we should view that as a sign of their weakness and our opportunity. But short term, we've got a lot better opportunity with Catholic Hispanics and with the growing population of evangelical and charismatic Hispanics.
Those numbers are based on exit polling. Has everyone forgotten the exit polls of 2004? Everybody voted for president Kerry according to those polls.
Not much of a faith, then.
The odd comments of many bishops to the contrary notwithstanding, socialism, homosexuality, and abortion are anathema to the Catholic faith. Conservatives in general, and particularly Protestant conservatives, must learn to make the case that voting for conservative candidates and conservative issues is the authentically Catholic thing to do.
Freeloaders, breast implants and condoms are the top dog now.
The loss of white Southerners from the Democrat coalition was due to three factors: the increasing urbanization and prosperity of the South after World War II; the support the Democrats outside the South gave to affirmative action and school busing; and the appeasement of Communists and (after 1979) Muslim extremists by Johnson and Carter. With middle class incomes and greater creature comforts, white Southerners had less need for government cheese. Unless Hispanic-Americans prosper economically as white Southerners did, or can be set against black Americans politically, a similar turning is unlikely. With the Democrats running the White House and Senate for another four years, the chances for a rising economic tide lifting all boats are not promising.
Even prosperity is no assurance that members of particular ethnic groups will vote in their own economic self-interest. A case in point is the Jewish voters, of whom it is said that they earn like Episcopalians but vote like Puerto Ricans. Even with Romney being a strong friend of Israel and Obama questionable at best on this matter, almost 70% of Jewish voters supported the Democrat. Another example is the Asian vote. The increase in Asian-Americans post-1965 parallels that of Hispanics, although the former group's percentage is smaller relative to the overall population. Asians are far more likely to enter the professions and own businesses than Hispanics and the income levels of many Asian ethnic groups exceed the average for whites. Yet, like the Hispanics and the Jews, about 70% voted for Obama.
Some 85% of Muslim voters supported Obama, only a slight drop from the 89% he garnered four years ago.
It appears that white Protestant, Catholic, and Mormon voters represent the only base conservatives and Republicans have, and a shrinking one due to low white birth rates, higher minority birth rates, legal and illegal immigration, and the conversion of people from white Christian backgrounds to secular humanism, agnosticism, and atheism. At best, this country is on its way to becoming a European style social democracy; at worst, a cauldron like South Africa or Zimbabwe, where the formerly dominant whites are persecuted and killed.
When the GOPe figures out they can get more votes when voters choose “who you are” instead of “who you are not”, they may win another election. I am not anticipating that ever happening.
Muslim or Mormon
Democrat or Former Democrat
Federal Mandated Healthcare or State Mandated Healthcare
See anything wrong with the choices we had?
Got me excited/s
I attended a Christian college back in the early 70s and as part of our community service, we went to the local elementary school every week and did a Bible lesson. The teachers loved it because they got a break and the kids loved it. It was a public school and no one complained. Can you imagine that being allowed these days?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.