The religious swing vote: “white bread” Protestants in the spotlight?
Photo courtesy of the Daily Yonder
When I was growing up I thought that all Irish Americans were Catholic and that all Irish Catholics were, as my father liked to call us, “good solid Democrats.” Then, around the time I was in middle school, something strange happened. My grandparents, who absolutely idolized JFK, RFK, and all things Kennedy, voted for Ronald Reagan.
It turns out that they were part of a trend, and that (as everyone knows) in the years since the Reagan Revolution the Catholic vote has turned steadily Republican, as churchgoing Catholics have become allied with Evangelicals and other more conservative Protestants to become a bloc known as “Values Voters.” There has been much talk this election cycle about whether Values Voters are going to remain a cohesive group, or split into factions, or even swing Democrat. The polling has been, at best, equivocal and unconvincing. We hear about “emerging” Evangelicals and young Hispanics swinging one direction, while older Catholics and those who attend church weekly (rather than monthly) swing another.
Now, the Wall Street Journal tells us that it is “white bread Protestants” (which, by their definition, is about 18 percent of the population), who may well decide the election. If I were being cheeky, I might say that if feels good to at last be in a demographic that counts. But the larger point is that it seems there are more ways to slice the electoral pie this year than ever before. If you have still have a stomach for analyzing polling data, read on.
The Pew Research Center did a poll earlier this month that has garnered attention from several media outlets. The results suggest, as CNN puts it, that “religious voters appear to be gradually gravitating toward Barack Obama as their pick for president.” Some argue that this trend is nothing more than voters focusing on their financial well-being rather than their religious beliefs; in other words, the thinking goes that these “religious voters” are leaning toward Obama in spite of the influence of their faith, because of pocketbook and other issues that some might see as unrelated to “values” as they’re traditionally defined (think Culture Wars versus It’s-the-Economy-Stupid thinking). This UPI article that ran on Beliefnet is a pretty typical articulation of this way of looking at things.
A different analysis of the same information leads to a completely different conclusion. Some reports, such as this one by Ed Stoddard from Reuters, give credit to
“Obama’s strong emphasis on his personal Christian faith in the earlier stages of the campaign and his team’s outreach programs aimed at evangelicals and other religious groups [which] seem to be paying off.”
It seems that it could be precisely because these the so-called Values Voters see Obama’s policies as more in line with their religious views that they are considering voting for him. In this argument, issues such as global warming, healthcare for the uninsured, and poverty reduction simply rate higher on the values scale than abortion or gay marriage. An article about people who are torn between the two agendas, and who show an understanding that “neither candidate will ever line up 100 percent with the Gospel,” is well worth the read.
Another survey, this one telling titled “The Young and the Faithful” was released by Faith in Public Life and conducted by Public Religion Research(PRR), according to an article in the Christian Science Monitor. It involved interviews with people ages 18 to 34 and also seemed to hold good news for Democrats. The takeaway message from that seems to be that
“Younger Americans, including young Americans of faith, are not the culture-war generation,” says Robert Jones, president of PRR. [...] For instance, young adults are more open to religious diversity and cooperation, they are less likely to say that one has to believe in God to be moral, and they believe good diplomacy rather than military strength is the best way to promote peace, says Dr. Jones.
Obviously, we won’t know about any of this for sure until after Election Day. Just as obviously, thinsg have gotten a lot more complicated than they were when I was in seventh grade–or maybe it’s just that polls are springing up like mushrooms and every third person in the country seems to be part of a “focus group.” All I know for sure is that I wish my Irish Catholic grandfather were still around to see this one play out.
Pamela Dolan is on staff at Emmanuel Episcopal Church in Webster Groves and is a Candidate for Holy Orders. After high school in Hawaii and college in California, she earned a master's degree in theology from Harvard before spending several years in New York studying medieval religion and literature. Pamela is married with two children. 
My vote for Obama has absolutely nothing to do with financial reasons but is because of my Christian faith and my witnessing more genuineness in Obama than I have not witnessed in any politician ever before. Then secondly, Obama has my vote because he has a very high IQ and I support and agree with the new direction he wants to lead this country into. He is a TRUE LEADER who WILL LEAD HIS IDEALS INTO BEING.
I see in Obama the representation of “Values” more than those screaming “Values” the loudest. I am truly disappointed and disillusioned by the Evangelical Right and many other religious leaders and churches.
It is extremely sick of the Church and religious leaders to tell anyone that they are in danger of damnation for voting for Obama/ Biden over McCain/Palin?
I am learning more and more each passing day to have no trust in man and especially religious leaders because they have developed a habit of using religion like witchcraft, TO MANUPILATE PEOPLE WITH and leading many astray.
I don’t think the evangelical vote will be anything but exceedingly right any time in our near future. I seriously doubt that most evangelicals see Obama’s values as lining up with theirs - if he had a strong stance with his personal faith platform, he lost it at Saddleback.
d-
You can’t even come close to standing behind the claime that ANY evangelical leader is telling anybody that they must vote republican to avoid damnation. I am extremely sick of that kind of talk.
Mike,
Actually, I stated the TRUTH, when I stated; “…the Church and religious leaders to tell anyone that they are in danger of damnation for voting for Obama/ Biden over McCain/Palin?”
Do you see the name Evangelical anywhere there in my comment? My, my, my.
Also Mike,
Who are you stating that Obama lost his personal faith platform with? Man or God? Do you not see how ridiculous you are being concerning spiritual things and the ways of God that He has disclosed to us?
And, by the way, Obama has not lost standing with Christians, or, are you so foolish to think that only “pro-lifers” are the true Christians of the world?
Mike,
Yes, I do wonder about Evangelicals, although that can be a tricky group to define and therefore to poll. But most likely they will still vote Republican in droves, even with the tide turning toward an interest in the environment and poverty issues. I’m still surprised that so many people of faith saw Saddleback as such a drubbing for Obama, since I thought he acquitted himself well and seemed both less simplistic and ultimately more comfortable in his expressions of personal Christian faith than McCain. But maybe I was already prejudiced in his favor.
The Wall Street Journal article wasn’t talking about Evangelicals, though (although some of the other articles linked above do), but about mainline Protestants (thus the term “white bread” to denote the bland, boring middle–like me!). That demographic is also rather amorphous, but they read it as having gone Republican in the last two elections and trending Democrat now. We’ll know for sure in a week or so…or longer, I suppose, if there’s another hanging chad debacle!
It is sad to think that a vote for Obama is being discounted as a vote for self financial gain on part of these voters. Perhaps it is actually a voter who cares about their fellow man’s well being–financially, physically, and emotionally–and will not tolerate 4 more years of the lower and middle classes being stepped upon for the gain of multi-national corporations and their overpaid executives.
Most voters can look beyond the one or two push button issues (e.g. abortion or gay marriage) and think about what is best for the country as a whole. Who cares if two gay people are married if the neighbors have lost their job, home, and/or health insurance.
It’s unfortunate, but true, that the face of the Christian Church in America over the last 25-30 years has been the face of the politically and socially conservative “evangelical”. Their public voices have been people like Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, Jim Bakker, and Jimmy Swaggert. The fact that they do not represent either the politics or the theology of many American Christians has been lost or ignored.
To many Christians in America, Obama represents many of the things they like, celebrate, and appreciate about what faith actually accomplishes in their lives and in their communities. For many, Obama is the real descendant of Martin Luther King…something that seems to frost Jesse Jackson to no end.
It certainly appears that the political might of the Religious right has passed it’s peak. Come on, Sarah Palin is the best they can do?
suzyjax, what part of the vote for Obama is more caring for their fellow man? The part where their tax burden is increased, the part where abortionists are given free reign, or the part where anti-business laws and regulations causes thousands of small businesses to shut their doors forever? Please, enlighten us…
BTW…Aren’t you the one always complaining about this blog being too political?
Please, don’t group James Dobson with those other guys. It shows a real misunderstanding for a good man.
I disagree that the evangelical community is not conservative. They are. Very much so. They are not the uneducated stupid and bamboozled sheep being led around by their sense of loyalty to lying church leaders who want political power. The political views are not that of the progressive left by any means, and discounting their vote is generally a mistake.
Tim, I can’t speak for suzyjax, but obviously I wouldn’t be supporting Obama if I thought that your characterization of his policies was accurate. I think his take on the environment, education, health care, and poverty are all “more caring for their fellow man.” I also think that his tax and business policies will be very similar to Clinton’s, and we all know that this country experienced unprecedented wealth and growth in those years. I doubt that we’ll be able to duplicate that level of prosperity again no matter who is president (too many global realities have changed), but I don’t think that either the average American or most small businesses will be worse off under Obama–I’ll think they’ll do better.
Tim, I totally agree with what you wrote about what will truely happen if Obama gets in. Ms. Dolan I respectfully disagree with you. I work for a small company in Saint Louis and have a great relationship with the owners. Off the record I asked them about who they’re voting for and they said McCain. The reason they gave was that if Obama gets in he has promised to raise their taxes. And being business men they said that the money they will lose in taxes will have to be made up somewhere. Either by having a pay freeze next year for the employees, raising our prices to our customers or by reducing the 401K match. They hoped they won’t have to do any of that stuff but admitted that in business you have to make up losses somehow and that the biggest overhead they have is the employee.
On a side note as bad as Jerry Falwell, Jim Bakker, and Jimmy Swaggert were I don’t think any of them said anything as vile as Obama’s reverend Wright did for the 20 years Obama was sitting there. To sit there that long and listen to all the hatred poured out from Reverend Wright really makes me question Obama’s judge of character.
Pamela, I am very surprised (and disappointed) that someone of your education would give any President credit for what the economy did during his 4 years in office. You know damn well that a President has very little control over what happens to the business cycle. The growth under Clinton was fueled by productivity gains through technology. Deflationary pressure AND economic growth are not supposed to coincide, but they did for three or four years while he was President. There is ample literature on this written by economists much smarter and learned than me.
What Clinton DID do right is leave the whole thing alone (which Obama will do anything BUT leave business alone). He also resisted pressure from his party to increase spending and instead payed down the deficit with the sudden surplus of money the Treasury had from taxes on that production increase (let’s see Obama do that). Kudos to Clinton for acting like a Republican when it came to business.
If it was so simple there would never be a President that would have a bad economic cycle during their term.
I’d stop worrying about the global reality since your own is so out of whack. If you bothered to know anything about Obama’s proposals you would immediately recognize that they are decidedly unfriendly to business, especially in the tax arena (again, plenty of literature on this). I should ask you if, given the error or your ways, you are going to rethink your support of Obama in this election. But an unabashed Democrat such as yourself isn’t going to see the light if it is shown to them, so I won’t bother. Do us a favor and stick to theology…
“White Bread” protestants are no more monolithic than the Catholics described here and in Sherry Tyree’s earlier post:
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/civil-religion/video/2008/05/faith-cultural-identity/
However, there does seem to be a desire for people to identify with a group, especially if it looks like they are going to win.
Hopefully, all people will follow the example of Christ and chase after God rather than organization. Relationships with God are among the living and are personal. Seems like that is what Robert Jones is saying about the younger generation. More power to them.
I don’t buy the concept of Values Voters slipping away from their Faith for their financial well being. If you take any reasonable view at Obamas economic concept the middle class is going to be in dire trouble. unemployment is going to go up and any incentive to try and earn more will be taken away. Prices and taxes will depress the middle class, furthering the distance between the average citizen and the wealthy.
But Values Voters that turn to Obama certainly are turning away from their faith based voting record considering his radical view on a bread and butter issue like abortion.
What is the reason? Emotion. Obama is a passionate and eloquent candidate that can move anyone with his tone, despite his reasoning. We’ve been conditioned by circumstances that we’re in a very bad way and that the ship is sinking. We’ve gone through 8 years of devisive religious tactics to move the middle to vote and no matter what any political mantra gets tiresome. So despite his plans and motivations and goals, Obama has moved some of the faithful toward him because the faithful like to feel good and when he speaks he makes you feel good. So reason and logic play no role, just emotion.
take Walkers post for example. Now, I’d start by saying I doubt his Christian faith has anything to do with his support for Obama. I can read very well into his tone that he’s probably always been committed to one side and its that committment alone that decided his vote. But forgetting that opinion, look at what he says. “Witnesses more genuineness”. “True Leader who will lead his ideals into being”. Those are two character assessments made from what he feels about Obama. There is no definition of what Obamas ideals are, but he has some and Walker feels he will lead them to be. Walker goes on to chastize the Right for motivating people to vote on a select few religious issues. If he is a moderate voter this characterizes my opinion of being tired of that rhetoric after 8 years.
I think emotion and change for its sake will drive the Obama moderate vote, and certainly not reason or faith. We’re about to get the Democrat version of George W thanks to peoples emotions.
Tim spouts Limbaugh’s talking points/lies as if they are true. If Tim really read Obama’s plans he would know that what he has written is completely false.
Yes, Tim, this religious blog is too political. I still believe that. I will still defend the viewpoints of those of us on the religious left. I will still point out your lies when you post them, religous blog or not.
Suze, I have read Obama’s plan, and I have read comments about it on websites like msnbc.com and cnn.com, and the consensus is his “plan” will be bad for small business. He will increase governmental spending because there is no way NOT to increase it given all the things he says he will do.
I always call out inaccuracies in people’s posts whenever I find them. Do you really think I would do that and then go around making the same stupid mistakes? Check the articles written by economists and see for yourself. If Obama wins we can have this debate in six months too, you won’t be able to defend him then…
Just to respond to the last two comments, although there have been some other interesting points raised: I don’t think Tim is lying, or only spouting someone else’s opinion. I am fully willing to believe that he is sincere and well-informed, even thought we disagree. I was surprised, though, that Tim decided that I am either willfully uninformed or blindly partisan, or both. Isn’t it possible that we’ve both done our homework, and we’ve chosen to trust different analyses, and so we simply land on different sides of the issues? I think so.
If only ignorance or partisanship could lead one to support Obama, we wouldn’t have the newsworthy endorsements of him by people like Colin Powell, William Weld, Warren Buffett, Susan Eisenhower, Christopher Buckley, to name a few.
All of this can, I hope, lead us back to the main point of the post, which is to look at whether people of faith can support Obama because of their religious values or only in spite of them. We’ve had a few comments that suggest that people’s faith has influenced their decision to support Obama and we’ve had some people say why they don’t support him (those answers have been mostly financial in their reasoning). I don’t see anyone saying that he goes against their religious values but they’re going to vote for him anyway. I hope I haven’t left anyone out!
Not that this is a poll, it’s just interesting. Because even if Obama loses on Tuesday, which I still believe is possible, the sheer number of votes he’s likely to receive and the fact that this is still a majority “religious” nation (even if increasingly diverse in the types and expressions of religion) means that a lot of people of faith are going to be voting for him. Same is true, obviously, for McCain. And I still don’t think the media has any clear idea of how much people’s faith influences them on Election Day.