Search
Close this search box.

Tag: Trump

2020 Voters Fire Trump but Democrats Have Reasons to Worry

Joe Biden: Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America (source: Joe Biden); User:TDKR Chicago 101 (clipping)Donald Trump: Shealah Craighead (source: White House)Сombination: krassotkin, CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

As a data geek, I could not resist pouring over the early statistics coming out of this election. In previous blogs, I expressed my thoughts on the issues at stake. In this blog, I offer a brief summary of the main insights coming out of the data published on the election so far. Certainly, more data will come but there is enough already for some interesting points.

  1. Turnout was the highest in 120 years hovering around 67% of eligible voters.
  2. African Americans (87%), first-time voters (64%), and people under 30 (60%) voted overwhelmingly for Biden. 9 out of 10 African-American women voted for Biden, by far the largest alignment in the electorate.
  3. White evangelicals or born again (76%) and white with no college degree (67%) and white men (61%) voted overwhelmingly for Trump.
  4. From a regional perspective, Trump bested Biden in the South and Midwest while Biden won by larger margins in the East and West.
  5. Trump voters thought that the economy and public safety were the top issues in this election. Biden voters saw the pandemic and racial inequality as the most pressing issues.
  6. Nearly a 1/3 of Biden voters did so to oppose Trump rather than support Biden. This is an important statistic for the Democrats to keep in mind if they have any hope of keeping the presidency in 4 years.
  7. Biden won in every income level except those with $100K or more where Trump won by 12 points.
  8. For every moderate that voted for Trump, there were two who voted for Biden.
  9. Biden narrowly edged Trump in the suburbs: 50/48
  10. Compared to 2016, Biden was able to convince 3% more voters to switch from Trump than from Clinton. More importantly, Biden was the choice of 58% of those who did not vote in 2016 but decided to vote this time.

Note that it is still early to draw any definite conclusions but these numbers already paint an interesting picture of voter’s preference in 2020. As I reflect on these findings, I would like to highlight some main observations.

By J4p4pn

Voters want a balanced government

The blue wave did not materialize. In fact, Democrats lost seats in Congress though still retained a majority. The Senate is up for grabs as the country waits for Georgia to vote in a January runoff. What that means is enough voters rejected Trump at the top of the ballot but were not willing to commit to the Democrats elsewhere ballot choices. The majority of the electorate wants the party to work together even if the most radical factions continue to control the narrative and the campaign money.

Considering the lagging popularity of the president with the majority of the electorate and a Republican party that stood steadfastly behind him, it is surprising how the Democrats struggled in the house and senate races. These initial numbers suggest that the electorate is still hesitant to give a solid mandate. I think a lot of that is suburban voters who are wary of “defund the Police” rhetoric among Democrats. Others are concerned with a rise in Socialism, which however realistic a claim, was an effective GOP attack. This was especially true for voters making $100K or more, the only income group where Trump won by a decisive margin.

Biden won narrowly in those areas that continue to be the bellwether for American politics. While the cities and rural areas get the most attention for their opposing views, it is the suburbs that decide elections. It was demographic changes in two large Atlanta suburban counties (I live in one of them and would like to believe was part of that change) that turned the state blue for the first time since 92. Yet, this cannot be interpreted as a turn to progressive politics but more of a reaction against the worse incarnation of conservative politics reflected in Trumpism.

In short, Democrats have a long way to go if they want to keep these voters in the blue column. As point 8 above demonstrates, Biden won in large part by courting the moderate vote. The president-elect and his party have a monumental challenge ahead as they seek to balance appealing to moderates while keeping the progressive wing of the party happy.

Voters Lack Choices

While we celebrate the record turn out, it is important to highlight that close to 1/3 of eligible voters refused to participate. Furthermore, the high rate and is still below other industrialized nations. This is a remarkable finding considering the amount of media attention on this year’s contest. Some could attribute it to the Trump effect that brought new voters to the polls either to support or reject him. Hence, it is possible this turnout rate is not sustainable.

There was a lot of outcry about polarization in politics but the elephant (and donkey) in the room remains unaddressed. Voters still are under the tyranny of a duopoly that cannot represent the diversity of the American population. Unfortunately, there are no prospects of change as the two dominant parties have erected large barriers for new entrants. The only way to expand turn out is to open the political system to viable third and fourth parties. I was hoping moderate Republicans disgusted by Trump would take the lead. Instead, they opted to either support Biden or remain on the sidelines.

Until the system is reformed, turnout will continue to hit a ceiling of 66-70%. It is tragic that so many Americans who are eligible to vote do not have adequate representation. We are made poorer as a nation for it.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/exit-polls-president.html

Plea to evangelicals II: Culture War, Social Unrest and COVID

In a previous blog, I went over the two most often cited reasons that evangelicals use to justify their vote for Donald Trump. Here I want to continue examining other rationalizations to see if they hold water. My contention continues to be that voting for the current president is the worse choice for a Christian in this junction of history. I record this here in an attempt to persuade those who have voted for him in the last election to reconsider their support on November 3rd.

Trump the Culture Warrior

The president has proven to be a consistent culture warrior, advancing conservative causes in his speeches and nominating a record number of conservative judges. He has also addressed excesses from zealous culture warriors on the left. I can understand how conservative Christians may feel like they have an ally in the White House on this matter.

His record on religious freedom is more ambiguous. At times, he has spoken for persecuted Christian minorities in the world. The State Department under Secretary Pompeo, an evangelical Christian himself, has put (Christian) religious freedom at the forefront of US diplomacy. Yet, Trump’s betrayal of the Kurds, many who are Christians, was jarring. His action demonstrated what we feared all along: that his support for conservative causes was not borne out of conviction but political expediency. Some evangelical supporters can see that but are satisfied with the bargain given the consistency he has shown in the domestic front of the culture war.

Even so, I would contend that evangelicals should re-visit their participation in the culture war. Their blind support for conservative causes comes with strings attached. While upholding traditional moral values that often align with Biblical principles, conservative judges also betray the heart of Christianity when they side with libertarian economics. There is nothing biblical about siding with the rich or removing regulations that seek to preserve the environment. Surely every involvement in politics requires some compromises but it is important to at least spell them out. To equate Christianity with American Conservatism is to diminish the gospel to traditional morality and trickle-down economics.

Furthermore, I question whether winning the battle in the courts will achieve the wholesale culture change evangelicals desire. That often happens through grassroots movements from below rather than from legislation from the top. Moreover, our faith revolves around invitation, not coercion. Passing laws that uphold moral values may change behaviors but rarely change hearts.

Trump’s Response to Social Unrest

I add this section as this topic has come to the forefront lately with multiple instances of black men (and women) being brutally murdered by the police. These tragic events have sparked multiple demonstrations in many cities of the country. Some protests go on till this day. The murder of George Floyd, especially, was a watershed moment that exposed the long-lasting legacy of racism in our nation.

The president’s response to these multiple events has been inadequate at best and cruel at its worse. While conceding the injustice of George Floyd’s event, his unwillingness to admit the problem of systemic racism in the police was a complete failure of leadership. Instead, he has resorted to golf metaphors to explain that cops sometimes make mistakes. The carelessness of this response is appalling. It was a slap in the face of grieving families and an insult to people of color. His response only further inflames the anger that is boiling in the streets.

Protests in some cities have turned violent. Some included instances of looting and rioting. Yes, keeping the streets safe is important and de-funding police departments may lead to an increase in crime. Yet, the worse reaction a politician could have is to ignore or minimize the causes of the riots while repressing them violently. Callous calls for “law and order” in periods of social unrest will likely fuel further grievances. It has nothing to do with Biblical Christianity but instead belongs to the playbook of authoritarian regimes.

Corona Confirmed our Worse Fears

The global pandemic that started earlier this year has tested societies in every continent. The death toll continues to rise daily to a point we have become numb to it. It has hit our nation particularly hard, exposing the cost of our disunity, and the underside of our individualistic culture. It has also exposed the gross incompetence of a ruling party that scoffs at science believing more in conspiracy theories rather than facing reality for what it is.

The basic function of the federal government is to aptly coordinate a response to national crises. No private entity can do that and local governments are limited in their ability to cope with a global pandemic. If we compare our handling of the pandemic with other countries, the US undoubtedly comes in the bottom. It does not matter how you frame the analysis, 200K deaths (as of the publishing of this blog) will never be acceptable. While not all deaths were caused by the federal response, many could have been prevented by it.

The pandemic was a perfect storm that exposed the dangers of Trump’s character failings. His gross narcissism prevented him from foreseeing the worse and acting quickly to coordinate a response. Also, his inability to lead by example encouraged widespread neglect of CDC guidelines. Furthermore, Trump’s resignation before the growing death counts was insensitive and served only to hide the incompetence of his administration. The least we expect of our leaders is that they do not stand in the way of experts who are best prepared to respond in these situations. In his insatiable thirst for attention, Trump undermined experts and politicized a matter instead of uniting the country behind a response.

For that mistake, we are all paying a heavy price.

While this affects all citizens, his failure of leadership strikes at the heart of evangelical engagement in politics. If evangelicals are pro-life, they cannot stand by a president that shows so much disregard for the life of the governed. His response was not just a matter of incompetence but a moral failure.

Conclusion

In short, voting for Trump is the worse choice an evangelical Christian could make in this election. In these two blogs, I showed how in multiple issues Trump has proven to be more of a curse than a blessing. While evangelicals gained an apt culture warrior, that benefit has come at a high price of in multiple areas.

I also know that many reading this will protest saying that the alternative is worse. They will contend that the Democratic party stands against everything evangelical Christianity is for. Others will claim that even the most egregious mistakes of this administration are justified in the fight to contain Socialism. Is that really true? That is what I will turn to in my next blog.

My Plea to Evangelical Voters: Rethink

I rarely write about political matters. This time, things are different.

As I reflect on this election and our historical moment, maybe for the first time I feel that simply expressing my support through voting is not enough. I’ll resist the temptation to call this election the most important of our lifetimes. However, to me, it clearly calls for greater engagement than previous ones. Also, in this case, there is no doubt in my mind that one outcome is much worse than the other. This is not just about policy or even a candidate character but a battle for the soul of our nation. It is about who we are as a people and our role as Christian citizens in service of the common good.

My contention is simple: voting for Trump is the worse option a Christian (evangelical or otherwise) could make. I would go even further: to reject Trump’s Christian nationalism even as it seems against the self-interest of the evangelical church, is the most powerful act of gospel witness in the public square. The way of Jesus compels us to go against the natural order of political power. If evangelical Christians care most about changing hearts then the best way is through cultural influence not political power. Some times, we must give up power to gain influence. Lose a battle to win the war.

Intended Audience

With few exceptions, most of my evangelical brothers and sisters that voted for Trump, did not like him as a person. Many abhorred his tweets, disapproved of his lifestyle choices and acknowledged his sick narcissism. Unlike George W. Bush in the early 00’s, he is not a guy you casually “want to have a beer with.” Many were scandalized by his immoral behavior. Yet, they were convinced that putting up with all that was worth it to deny Hillary Clinton the presidency. They often cited some specific reasons and rationales for this decision.

In the following sections, I will address each of these most-cited reasons and demonstrate that, upon closer scrutiny, they do not hold water. In short, they are mirages, fabricated arguments to appease the conscience as opposed to legitimate reasons to tolerate the president’s misdeeds. Because they have been repeated so often without challenge, they became a truth of their own.

By now, most voters had made up their minds but I want to speak to those who are still undecided. Some of them, who voted for the president 4 years ago, are now rethinking their decision. For this group, I offer this blog as one data point in their honest discernment process on who to vote for in this election.

Voting for Trump will NOT Save Babies

Let me put it bluntly: you have been duped. A few decades ago some fundamentalist preachers and market savvy political operatives came up with a brilliant strategy. They saw the Roe vs Wade decision as a pivotal point and decided that the top (and only) priority for Christian voters was to overturn it. At a national level, it meant electing presidents that would pick conservative judges for the supreme court that would eventually overturn that ill-fated decision.

This strategy was a “win-win” for both sides. Republican candidates got unquestioning support from a significant voting block and in return all they had to do was pick conservative judges when the existing one died. They could invade countries abroad, torture prisoners, wreck the economy, reinforce inequality at home and be downright corrupt as long as they came through with their side of the bargain.

For evangelicals, the strategy provided clarity and absolution from guilt. They did not have to think critically about which party to support, or which candidate to vote for. All they had to understand was the following: 1) abortion is murder; 2) one party is trying to end it through judicial nominations and restrictive politics; 3) the other party supports abortion; 4) therefore, the Christian choice is clearly to vote with the first party. They would show up to vote every four years to save the nation and then go back to saving souls in the remaining years with a clear conscience that they did not vote for baby killers!

If this was not clear before let me say it here: voting Republican will not end abortion! The very premise that we could do so is misguided and simplistic. It is more about a pernicious political strategy than biblical truth. If you care about unborn babies do work for a society in which abortion is the last resort. Help the mothers who are making these choices, call for restrictions where appropriate, build pregnancy crisis centers and make an argument for fetus rights in the public square.

In other words, get engaged in the process instead of selling your vote for so little. Don’t settle for this false choice that one party is for saving babies while they other is for killing them. And above all, do not let any religious leader make you feel guilty for voting for the alternative. There are biblical reasons to vote for one party as much as there are for another. There is room in the household of God for progressives and conservatives.

The Cyrus argument is NOT a valid “Biblical” reason to vote for Trump

Another commonly held justification is what I call the “Cyrus argument.” It alludes to the Persian ruler praised in the Bible for allowing the Jewish people to return and re-populate their lost national territory. In Biblical terms, God used him to fulfill his promises of restoring Israel. He was not Jewish and not necessarily a benign leader. Using this metaphor, evangelicals see Trump as a “non-Christian” political leader that will advocate a conservative Christian agenda, returning the US to its supposedly Christian past.

In certain aspects, the 45th president has proven to be really supportive to the conservative agenda spelled out in the previous section. He appointed a record number of conservative judges and multiple circuits, supported moving Israel’s capital back to Jerusalem and sided with conservatives in civil liberty issues. In the surface, the Cyrus metaphor has worked.

Yet, at further examination, the metaphor breaks down quickly showing a lack of knowledge of historical context and bad application to our present situation. It is important to distinguish Ancient world politics with our modern situation. First, the Jewish people had no choice in Cyrus rise to power. In other words, they did not elect him. This is an important point because democracy spreads agency across the population as opposed to ancient monarchies. That means, those that elect a president also become responsible for his or her behavior.

Second, I get disgusted as how this Cyrus argument became cover for Trump’s most egregious words and actions. It went right along with the saying “I am not electing a pastor but a president.” This pernicious statement allowed leaders to justify scandals and minimize misdeeds at an appalling fashion. This is the same voting block that years ago blasted President Clinton for his character failures now happily supported and justified a much more immoral president. This inconsistency did not portray biblical faithfulness but instead it revealed a dark secret of evangelical political involvement, namely that the means justify the ends. In Roosevelt’s words: “Trump may be a SOB but he is our SOB.”

When I saw Franklin Graham refuse to criticize the president’s policy on immigrant detention that literally put kids in cages, it made me sick. While not all evangelicals agree with him, he is representative of the evangelical voter. Like him, many evangelicals actually took on a harder (and more cruel) stance on immigration as a way not to challenge their Cyrus.

That is simply scandalous and exposes the dark side of political alliances. When you start aligning so closely with a political party, your religious convictions start changing. Suddenly, compassionate evangelicals take on heartless political positions that neglect the least of these. Separation of church and state was not conceived to defend government from religion but the other way around. Our founding fathers understood that religious convictions could easily be co-opted by malignant political motives.

Conclusion

In this blog, I covered two of the most often cited reasons for supporting Trump by evangelicals. In the next one, I want to cover more pragmatic reasons and how those also do not hold water. For now suffice it to say: support for Trump does not equal biblical faithfulness. Quite the opposite, at its core it represents a betrayal of fundamental biblical principles of compassion, hospitality, love for the neighbor and a commitment to truth.

If there is any silver lining for this contentious political period is the unmasking of the unholy alliance between evangelicalism and Conservative politics. For at least 4 decades, these two were often seen as synonymous with each other. This can no longer be the case. It is high time for evangelical Christians to recover their authentic voice in the public square rather than settling for the poor counterfeit of conservative politics.