... despite the professed wariness toward Trump among many high-profile evangelical Christian leaders, evangelicals as a whole are, if anything, even more strongly supportive of Trump than they were of Mitt Romney at a similar point in the 2012 campaign...Trump is so different from Romney. Isn't it odd that they get the same numbers when people are grouped by religion? Trump has been married 3 times and the media portrays him as immoral. (He is like Romney in that he doesn't drink.)
Meanwhile, religiously unaffiliated voters – those who describe their religion as “atheist,” “agnostic” or “nothing in particular” – are lining up behind Hillary Clinton over Trump, much as they supported Barack Obama over Romney in 2012... Religious “nones” are, however, somewhat less enthusiastic about Clinton’s candidacy (26% now strongly support her) than they were about Obama in June 2012 (37%).
Trump support among white evangelical voters on par with Romney in 2012....
And those who've been pushing the idea that Trump is winning by attracting racists should wonder why his numbers with white evangelicals is no higher than Romney's. And why didn't Trump win some more of the nonreligious people? Aren't a good proportion of the country's racists nonreligious.
One answer could be that Trump would get fewer evangelicals than Romney if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws them back in.
पोस्ट्स
८० टिप्पण्या:
Correlation is not causation.
Romney is Mormon, which (to most evangelicals) might be worse than Trump's diluted Protestantism.
Funny how it is considered prejudice to say, "most women" "most white men" "most African Americans" "most religious people" etc...
But voting patterns and blocks seem to illustrate that we are truly divided exactly those prejudice assumptions.
But of course not ALL people stay inside their block. So it is wrong to utilize any of this...
Unless your a politician.
So many are tired of PC and the unwillingness of elites to speak about real problems. Trump is certainly flawed but people think he says the truth. That is so rare in a politician that the rest is ignored or tolerated.
Not odd at all.
Why would religious people vote for a person who is a known liar of epic proportions; all in service of her multi-million dollar bribery scheme?
Maybe Trump has been unlucky in love. We don't know why his two marriages broke up now do we? On the other hand we know with absolute certainty that Hillary remains in a marriage as business deal with a guy who is an alleged rapist and a regular on the Lolita Express.
For me, religion and politics are separate. I also don't understand why minorities are so loyal to the Dems especially after the miserable seven years we have been through.
AA: "And those who've been pushing the idea that Trump is winning by attracting racists should wonder why his numbers with white evangelicals is no higher than Romney's."
Gee, I wonder who "those" are? You mean leftists who seek political power by smearing their opponents as racists?
Yes, it is terrible to be a racist. But it is equally bad to falsely accuse someone of racism. The country has made great, heroic strides reducing the numbers of the first group. But the second group seems to be sowing their oats much too frequently these days
...because racist = white evangelical, is that your expectation, Professor?
"One answer could be that Trump would get fewer evangelicals than Romney if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws them back in"
What the hell?
It's very simple. Christianity is under world wide assault with Obama and his minions on the left leading the charge in this country, while sitting on their hands as persecution goes unchallenged over seas. Christians know where the danger lies.
"David Begley said...
...I also don't understand why minorities are so loyal to the Dems especially after the miserable seven years we have been through."
Try 50+ years.
"Support for Clinton among black Protestants and Hispanic Catholics mirror the preference for the Democratic candidate among blacks and Hispanics overall."
Tribalism trump's religion.
But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
"What the hell?"
It was a tragedy for Gabler when the Soviet Union collapsed.
I just hate that he is at USC, my alma mater and when I have been faculty for 40 years.
At least the football team has been pretty good.
I haven't seen any sign at all that Trump is insensitive or racist or any of those things, but then I don't watch TV.
It's been a couple of months now since evangelicals turned up at the front door.
Time-saving exchange: "Not interested. I'm saving you time."
Imus in the Morning has degenerated into sidekick mindlessness and Imus moral preening if he's even there, if anybody asks.
Way past the sell-by date.
Irreligious people are mostly Dems. Though they worship and adore another idol called the fed govt- you should know that Althouse. Hell, most far left libs hate religion and love the Dem party which quietly abhors religion too.
It's possible that evangelicals don't watch TV either, so have not caught on to how bad a person Trump is.
Dems are mostly irreligious, not the irreligious are mostly Dems.
The Judeo/Christian culture is hugely wider than belief in the religion.
The religion is a figure of speech for the culture. If you see it that way, you're irreligious but still into the culture.
The number of people who literalize the figure of speech is much smaller.
Trump is life long a Christian pledged to protect them and protect Israel. His only drawback among evangelicals is that he is friends with sinners and eats with them.
But if Tim Tebow likes him, they will too.
Aaaand Ann reveals she's an anti-Christian bigot. Of course that puts her among the majority in academia and certainly among law profs so it's all good.
Meanwhile, religiously unaffiliated voters – those who describe their religion as “atheist,” “agnostic” or “nothing in particular” – are lining up behind Hillary Clinton...
The Heathens for Hillary campaign appears to be working...
Timely little article from Christianity Today
Abortion is still an issue with many Christians. Trump had the kerfluffle over punishing the women getting late term abortions, which while forehead smacker signaled he was at least somewhat on the pro life side of the fence.
Watching Ann try to write about what evangelicals think = lulz.
"I see Trump as pro-gay, and being cagey about it."
~Ann Althouse
"...because racist = white evangelical, is that your expectation, Professor?"
Agree totally, Hoodlum. Probably the most surprising and offensive thing I have ever read on this blog. The casual way that ignorant (imo) people assign racism to evangelicals is a mystery to me. It's almost like they have never bothered to talk with one. I find the most racist people are the traditional lukewarm Christians/agnostics who don't bother to read the bible or go to church.
Although a clean and moral lifestyle is deemed admirable by evangelical Christians, justification is believed to be through faith alone and the Mormon religion is simply not in accord with Christianity. I wonder how many Republicans stayed home on the 2012 election day as evangelicals who couldn’t vote to put a Mormon in the White House.
Evangelicals voting Trump would make logical sense if they're considering the likely effect of Clinton on the U.S. Supreme Court, as from an evangelical PoV, the Court has been deprecating Christianity in the USA for several generations now.
Although I'd surely need more data to conclude that's what's driving evangelical support for Trump.
The reason is simple.
Evangelicals feel threatened by such things as the legalization of same-sex marriage.
And when you feel threatened, you want someone to protect you, even if that person doesn't share your faith. Trump is offering protection to the GOP base, and right now, that resonates more than religious appeals do.
Example: If a Jewish synagogue is vandalized, the rabbi wants cops to safeguard the place from now on even if those cops aren't Jewish. He doesn't care if they're not Jewish, just as long as they keep him and his synagogue safe.
Why do you assume evangelicals are racist?
Trump has said or done nothing racist. Just because the media shouts it, doesn't make it true.
But by all means, let us continue to chase tails about how a non-existent character trait may or may not be driving people who may or may not have the same non-applicable trait to the candidate.
Can't speak for evangelicals, but a parsimonious hypothesis would make sense of their support in the same way it does for all other #NeverNeverTrumpers: Hill will screw them on 99% of the issues that matter to them, with Trump they have a 50/50 chance of getting something.
Why do you assume evangelicals are racist? It's her jersey princess upbringing.
What a lot of people seem to think is racism, I think is a combination of inconsequential misapprehension and bad manners.
I'm kind of a knee-jerk contrarian.
One of my many faults.
It's not easy, being contrarian but not disputative.
think of him, like a Constantine, or more precisely a Justinian, in the big scheme of things,
This racism thing inevitably gets me incensed. The Dem party has been the racist party since its inception two centuries. Nothing has changed except how they show their racism. For the first half a century, it was through enslaving blacks. Then a century of Jim Crow, the KKK, and lychings. And, most recently, a half century war on the black family and black living standards. A color blind country, like that preached by MLK, is not racist. Supporting BLM is racist. And voting for Dem candidates is racist, because, for 200 years, the party has been the racist party. Instead of looking at one kook or another about of tens of millions of supporters, you need to look at the programs that the two parties have pushed and enacted, and not the spin of Dem cheerleaders like the MSM. Good intentions aren't what matter. Results are. Trying to tar the Republican Party as racist is wishful thinking and projection at its worst. And, yes, I think that Obama has been probably the most openly racist President since another great Democrat, Woodrow Wilson. Surely the most divisive racially.
""I see Trump as pro-gay, and being cagey about it."
~Ann Althouse"
Or simply indifferent, and so no need or impulse to comment on it one way or another. Tribes always assume tribalism.
AA: And those who've been pushing the idea that Trump is winning by attracting racists should wonder why his numbers with white evangelicals is no higher than Romney's[...]
One answer could be that Trump would get fewer evangelicals than Romney if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws them back in.
To echo previous commenters, wtf? This certainly provides an interesting insight into the distortions in your mental map of the body politic.
Whence this bizarre assumption that "white evangelical" correlates with "racist"? "White evangelicals" tend to be anti-racist to a fault. In fact, they are pilloried non-stop for what is perceived to be their rather groveling and self-abnegating form of "anti-racism" by the anti-"cuckservative" branch of the right.
I don't get it. Why are evangelical voters seen as racist? I don't know them but in my experience sincere belief in helping others generally doesn't go with wanting others to fail+suffer. Take Mormons, for example, who are happiest when converting the (higher success rate) low-education low-IQ nations. Yes, they had a semi-racist doctrine (dark skinned people in the Americas were cursed by God for their fathers' sins, and blacks couldn't be priests) as late as the 70s. But you can't find any socially-conservative group more opposed in numbers (though not universally so) to Trump today.
One answer could be that Trump would get fewer evangelicals than Romney if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws them back in.
Now do the same for Clinton's support among the non-religious.
As Angelyne said: exactly my impression.
Don't blame Althouse for that "one explanation". She's just role-playing the cynical, failing media, who are being confronted at last with the limits of their power to manipulate public opinion.
I guess evangelicals are mostly white? What else are people going on to come up with this "racist" badge?
What does "racist" really mean?
"And those who've been pushing the idea that Trump is winning by attracting racists should wonder why his numbers with white evangelicals is no higher than Romney's. "
Please explain this apparent non sequitur, Professor.
Romney’s percentage of evangelical voters was historically low for a Republican because they perceived him as a member of a cult. If Romney were the same candidate but mainline Protestant, he would have won the election. If Trump's evangelical numbers are similar to Romney's, it's bad news for Trump.
What Prole just said.
"As good as Romney, that heretic Mormon weirdo, among evangelicals" isn't exactly an endorsement by them.
(Racism? Jesus Wept.)
I've said it before: We are electing a PRESIDENT, not a PASTOR.
The Evangelicals are facing a choice between the immoral Donald Trump and the amoral Hillary Clinton. A simple choice albeit not an easy choice but a choice nevertheless. Indeed its the same choice all decent law abiding, tax paying and non-parasitic voters face.
One answer could be that Trump would get fewer evangelicals than Romney if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws them back in.
Voters gained or saved, huh?
Folks, the comment Ann is making is purely a role playing hypothetical. The both funny and depressing thing about it is I could see journalists actually agreeing with that line of thinking.
As why white evangelicals would like up behind Trump, he's a cipher. No one is really sure what he would do but at least he seems sympathetic. Hillary wants to be Obama's third term and evangelicals have not enjoyed the first two. Not really a tough choice. Now if Trump was running against Obama when he was still a first term senator, then you could see some support going to the Dem, albeit later deeply regretted support.
The DNC "hack" made it clear that they intended to use the very same charges of racism, sexism, and homophobia against Cruz and Kasich, too, if they wound up taking the nomination. Not surprising since they have been doing that since at least Reagan.
Trump normalizes or promotes orientations and behaviors that are compatible with evolutionary fitness, but he tolerates all people, including transgender/homosexuals and couplets, bachelors and bachelorettes, etc. The problem is the "=" activists, judges, president, and other Pro-Choicers who support selective exclusion.
As for class diversity mongering, he rejects racism, sexism, etc., and reconciles moral and natural imperatives to conclude that all Americans are eligible for equal treatment.
if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws [evangelicals] back in.
Facts not in evidence much, Althouse?
Let me suggest to you the possibility that evangelicals (and other pro-life types) are attracted to Trump because he is less likely to nominate hard core pro abortion judges. Particularly with a Supreme Court vacancy pending (and one that was occupied by a conservative jurist), this should be one of the main concerns of the election.
It seems like playing the race card is the only response the left has anymore to anything.
Pence is on board as a Mid-westerner with Ohio appeal. Gingrich will always be available and can be hired later to be a Congressional Liaison or Chief of Staff. Christy is the Attorney General. Palin can be the UN Ambassador.
Trump doesn't have the evangelical support because some believed the Media lies of racism, et.al.
And some evangelicals make their shit sandwiches with "open boarders" and "amnesty." They think that's the way to future growth.
Well, I was at the national conventional of a conservative Christian organization 2 weeks ago, and we were told by someone who had been present at a Trump meeting with evangelicals, that Trump said some encouraging things regarding who he would nominate to the Supreme court.
We were also cautioned that there's no way we can be certain what he will actually do, but there is no doubt in anyone's mind what a Hillary president will do.
That pretty much leaves two choices, stay home or vote for Trump.
One answer could be that Trump would get fewer evangelicals than Romney if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws them back in.
Yeah, that's it Hillary. Anybody who says that we don't need to import large numbers of unskilled laborers, keeping huge downward pressure on their wages and well being, is a racist! Because racism! That's using racism! And we all know how racist evangelicals are, we know that because they are white, and (wink wink) black evangelicals aren't really evangelicals, are they? (wink wink)
I'm not sure Trump is "pro gay" I think he is just not anti gay, same as most people.
Romney’s percentage of evangelical voters was historically low for a Republican
That is simply not true:
There was considerable speculation during the 2012 primaries about the strength of support for Mitt Romney among white evangelical Protestants. A Pew Research Center analysis of exit poll data finds that white evangelical Protestants voted for Romney with as much enthusiasm as his other supporters did. In addition, white evangelical Protestants voted as heavily for Romney as they did for the GOP candidates in 2008 and 2004, and they made up about the same share of the electorate as they did in the two previous elections.
One answer could be that Trump would get fewer evangelicals than Romney if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws them back in.
Nasty and bigoted, in one shot.
the racism likely brings some of the christianiast back in.
"And those who've been pushing the idea that Trump is winning by attracting racists should wonder why his numbers with white evangelicals is no higher than Romney's. "
And:
"One answer could be that Trump would get fewer evangelicals than Romney if Trump were not using racism, but the racism draws them back in."
Are you kidding, Althouse? Please elaborate on how evangelicalism comports with racism. Is it demonstrated by Samaritan's Purse and other Evangelical charities that provide millions of dollars in relief for African children? Maybe it shows up in the hospitals and schools we have built in Africa staffed by missionaries who risk death by disease and at the hands of Islamic militants and other hostiles to offer service to our black brethren.
I know. Some academic has discovered a new gospel in which Jesus preached racism. Right?
Or maybe we're confused, and Africans aren't black at all.
Racism my ass.
It somehow never occurs to non-Christians that a good proportion of blacks are Evangelicals, too. And I believe that we will only become 'one nation' when we are 'UNDER GOD'. Not a theocracy--I believe in separation--but a nation that overwhelmingly believes in and respects a higher moral authority.
"His only drawback among evangelicals is that he is friends with sinners and eats with them."
If evangelicals really believe what they claim to believe, they are all friends with and eat with sinners. They and all their family are sinners!
Of course we are all sinners, Robert. All Evangelicals believe that. " for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.… Romans 3:23
I don't know why the results among Evangelicals are surprising. Sure, Trump has been divorced, but given how theologically weak Evangelicals and Protestants have been on marriage, particularly in the last century but in some ways back to Henry VIII, and given the current cultural context, most are probably willing to put up with divorce. The fact that he's a success financially may also be attractive, depending on interpretations of the Gospel of Wealth idea.
Alternately, perhaps they have become more like the Catholics-in-name-only demographic -they'll claim the name Evangelical but are mostly indistinguishable from an agnostic except for the name and the weekly trek to some sort of church.
Render unto Caesar, and all that....
Titus, you're a bigger racist then coupe and rcocean. You think nobody remembers the drivel you write? Tell us more about the brown hogs of muzzies.
<--Arch Stanton
Trump "using racism" is a barrel full of manure.
It's really simple: Trump isn't Clinton. That's it.
Evangelicals are feeling threatened like never before, see story with bakers being coerced to make wedding cake for gay marriage and you see why religious Americans, such as evangelicals, are behind Trump more than they were behind Romney. A Hillary victory would influence government policy, both the administrative state and also through further installing liberals on the courts, up and down to severely curtail religious freedom.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा