For some time we've been told that Democrats have a God-gap and that evangelicals are politically conservative. As to the former, there has been a certain hesitancy among Democrats to talk religion -- either because it was considered a private matter or because it was seen as being too narrow. Much of this has come about because of a hard edged religious right message that swirled around certain conservative religious circles. That group hasn't disappeared, it's just lost prominence.
That has changed this election cycle. In part that's due to Democrats waking up to the fact that huge numbers of Americans -- including many Democrats -- are religious. It also came about because this year's presidential candidates have been more open about their beliefs and more willing to speak to religious groups than have the GOP candidates. Indeed, the Religious Right had a hard time finding a candidate. Mike Huckabee was the most overtly religious, but most RR leaders didn't think he could win -- so we have John McCain, who is reticent to speak about his faith (though he's sought the backing of John Hagee and Rod Parsley).
With the Democratic nomination almost in hand, Barack Obama has begun focusing on the fall. As my friend Steve Kindle reminded me in a comment to an earlier post, I must not put my faith in Barack Obama. My faith must be in the God who is working to bring about the kingdom or the basilea of God.
Steve Waldman, founder of Beliefnet.com and author of Founding Faith (which is on my "to be reviewed" shelf), has written an interesting piece for the Wall Street Journal. He suggests that Obama could be the first non-evangelical evangelical president. Although there are still some who think he's a Muslim, they're more likely now to link him with Jeremiah Wright, and while that may hurt with some, his own faith profession and commitment to issues of interest to many evangelicals -- especially younger ones -- could lead to significant voter gains.
Second, Sen. Obama has been working harder for their support than any other Democrat in recent memory. In his book “The Audacity of Hope”, instead of describing the religious right as a grotesque, right-wing power grab (as many on the left do), Sen. Obama said that its rise stemmed from Christians “feeling mocked and under attack.” Far from casting them as bigots, he declared that “most evangelicals are more tolerant than the media would have us believe.”
That is key. Although Hillary beat Obama among evangelicals in recent elections, he actually won among younger ones. It's really more a generational thing, than a religious one. Besides his faith is deeply rooted -- its the reason why he stayed in his church. And as Waldman points out, many whites see the black church as in his words "the real thing." What is allowing Democrats, like Obama, to draw in evangelical votes is that the definition of "moral values" is being broadened.
Waldman notes that this is no Obama slam dunk:
I’m certainly not saying this will be easy. The majority of evangelicals are conservative and will likely still vote Republican. But given that evangelicals make up a quarter of the electorate and a third of President Bush’s winning coalition, if Sen. Obama can at least get what Bill Clinton got in 1996 (32% of white evangelicals) instead of what Sen. John Kerry did in 2004 (22%) that could make the difference between victory and defeat.
But, he's in a better position than John Kerry or Howard Dean!
Comments