The Candidates
I enjoyed reading Doug’s commentary on McCain’s weakness among religious voters relative to Bush’s performance in 2004. This is to be expected. As one generation yields to another, the issues that motivate religious voters change. Additionally, McCain, as a less overtly religious candidate than Bush, is naturally going to lose some of the religious to Obama, who is in turn more overtly religious than Kerry. There’s no mystery here.
As someone who is highly sympathetic to Doug’s solution to this problem, I am alarmed by the thinking that many are putting forth in the comments section, most of which is so 2004. I agree with Doug that McCain should basically let voters know that his America is one in which it will be easier to care for a family. I think that this is a message that will resonate with voters regardless of level of religiosity, and which is timely given the period of malaise that America is going through.
What I disagree with is the kneejerk reaction of some folks in the comments section, including reactions from folks who are generally not sympathetic to traditional social conservatism, that the data presented by Doug indicates that McCain should either begin to run a traditional social issues campaign, or that he should starting wearing his faith on his sleeve, or both. I think both of these strategies would be horrid ones.
We’ve talked at length this season about the declining importance of issues such as gay marriage in America’s political psyche. These numbers do not change that. In a recent Pew Poll of national priorities, gay marriage ranked dead last among voters’ priorities. Abortion was penultimate. The economy, the war, education, and the environment dwarfed these concerns.
But what about the notion that McCain should start talking about his religion? Frankly, I can’t think of a more cynical ploy. It’s a gimmick that would not only be transparent to voters, but one that should be offensive to the very people of faith that seem to be proposing it. Up until now, McCain hasn’t mentioned anything about a relationship with any specific deity. He may view himself as part of such a relationship, or he may not. Maybe McCain prays to Jesus of Nazareth every night. Or maybe McCain is like many of the Founders, believing that there’s a God somewhere out there but that the deity can only be discovered through empirical study of the natural world. Whatever the case, McCain has elected to keep his faith private, and to make it public now, particularly if such publication involved embellishment or fabrication of a non-existent faith, is something that would speak very poorly of our straight-talking nominee. Why any religious voter would want a false statement of faith just to win an election is beyond me; this is something that should be anathema to the religious and non-religious alike.
McCain’s lack of strength among the religious does not require turning to religion, and his seeming empiricism may actually assist him among non-religious voters who will be turned off by Barack Obama’s goopy religious leftism. Both religious and non-religious voters want basically the same things — lower gas prices, safe and secure communities, economic security — and neither should want candidates to lie to them about religion just to make them feel all warm and fuzzy for a few minutes. I think Arnie Vinick, the fictional Republican presidential nominee on the final season of The West Wing who became a hero to young Republicans everywhere, said it best when asked to attend church despite being a closet agnostic:
June 9th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
“I agree with Doug that McCain should basically let voters know that his America is one in which it will be easier to care for a family. I think that this is a message that will resonate with voters regardless of level of religiosity, and which is timely given the period of malaise that America is going through.”
The legislative proposals introduced by Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX) is pretty good in this regard and is worth considering.
June 9th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Still, if McCain could line up Rick Warren, Paul Crouch and Dr. Joyce Meyers to do a joint appearance and endorse him I think that it would carry a lot of weight among self-described Values Voters.
June 9th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
Just pick Huckabee and you get Rick Warren, Paul Crouch and Dr. Joyce Meyers for free.
June 10th, 2008 at 12:06 am
Religion hasnt been too helpful for the major candidates this cycle
1) Obama had to fight off baseless Islam rumors only to get bitten by his racist pastor and allies
2) McCain allied himself other pastors with pretty fringe worldviews, hurting his campaign more than it helped
3) Romney could never shake the Mormonism question and win among southern Christian conservatives
4) Huckabee was too overtly religious to win broader support necessary to win a major party nomination.
5) Hillary believed too much in herself that she failed to nip Obamanism in the bud.
Okay, Hil didnt have a religion problem but the others did…
June 10th, 2008 at 12:19 am
McCain helps himself when he talks about his values.
In the debates he was particularly effective when he spoke about what he believed and why he believed it. He shouldn’t invoke religion unless it is a fundamental part of his values.
Martin Luther King showed how faith can be a unifying force instead of a divisive one. He invoked his religion to argue for the principles of the Declaration of Independence.
We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights among these life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:23 am
#3 If McCain picks Huck he’ll lose….#4 POINTS OUT WHY…”Huck loses broader support necessary to win because he” IS too overtly religious and a divider…(Besides he’s not the smartest apple on the tree)…. KEEP RELIGION OUT!!!! MAYBE THE CHRISTIANS NEED TO STAY HOME THIS TIME IF THEY CAN’T KEEP POLITICS AND RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY SEPERATE. If McCain picks Huck I will stay home!! ANYBODY but HUCK!!!
June 10th, 2008 at 3:19 am
Leave it to you Dave to call people “religionists”. That is, was, and has been a term used by the secular left to describe those who hold religious beliefs. It is not a term any religious person anywhere would use to describe him or herself. Then again, it fits well with your overall eagerness to jettison the socon part of the party.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:40 am
People threatening to stay home gets pretty tiring. If people decide to stay home, go ahead–just don’t threaten us with the staying home card all the time.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:13 am
Or maybe McCain is like many of the Founders, believing that there’s a God somewhere out there but that the deity can only be discovered through empirical study of the natural world.
I can’t imagine McCain thinking that deep. No offense, he’s or candidate, but he doesn’t strike me as deep thinker or philosophical.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:13 am
Look at the following op-ed in today’s NYT by David Brooks re the debt culture and its effects. This could be a values issue for McCain that would also fit nicely with his other major issue themes.
June 10, 2008
OP-ED COLUMNIST
The Great Seduction
By DAVID BROOKS
The people who created this country built a moral structure around money. The Puritan legacy inhibited luxury and self-indulgence. Benjamin Franklin spread a practical gospel that emphasized hard work, temperance and frugality. Millions of parents, preachers, newspaper editors and teachers expounded the message. The result was quite remarkable.
The United States has been an affluent nation since its founding. But the country was, by and large, not corrupted by wealth. For centuries, it remained industrious, ambitious and frugal.
Over the past 30 years, much of that has been shredded. The social norms and institutions that encouraged frugality and spending what you earn have been undermined. The institutions that encourage debt and living for the moment have been strengthened. The country’s moral guardians are forever looking for decadence out of Hollywood and reality TV. But the most rampant decadence today is financial decadence, the trampling of decent norms about how to use and harness money.
Sixty-two scholars have signed on to a report by the Institute for American Values and other think tanks called, “For a New Thrift: Confronting the Debt Culture,” examining the results of all this. This may be damning with faint praise, but it’s one of the most important think-tank reports you’ll read this year.
The deterioration of financial mores has meant two things. First, it’s meant an explosion of debt that inhibits social mobility and ruins lives. Between 1989 and 2001, credit-card debt nearly tripled, soaring from $238 billion to $692 billion. By last year, it was up to $937 billion, the report said.
Second, the transformation has led to a stark financial polarization. On the one hand, there is what the report calls the investor class. It has tax-deferred savings plans, as well as an army of financial advisers. On the other hand, there is the lottery class, people with little access to 401(k)’s or financial planning but plenty of access to payday lenders, credit cards and lottery agents.
The loosening of financial inhibition has meant more options for the well-educated but more temptation and chaos for the most vulnerable. Social norms, the invisible threads that guide behavior, have deteriorated. Over the past years, Americans have been more socially conscious about protecting the environment and inhaling tobacco. They have become less socially conscious about money and debt.
The agents of destruction are many. State governments have played a role. They aggressively hawk their lottery products, which some people call a tax on stupidity. Twenty percent of Americans are frequent players, spending about $60 billion a year. The spending is starkly regressive. A household with income under $13,000 spends, on average, $645 a year on lottery tickets, about 9 percent of all income. Aside from the financial toll, the moral toll is comprehensive. Here is the government, the guardian of order, telling people that they don’t have to work to build for the future. They can strike it rich for nothing.
Payday lenders have also played a role. They seductively offer fast cash — at absurd interest rates — to 15 million people every month.
Credit card companies have played a role. Instead of targeting the financially astute, who pay off their debts, they’ve found that they can make money off the young and vulnerable. Fifty-six percent of students in their final year of college carry four or more credit cards.
Congress and the White House have played a role. The nation’s leaders have always had an incentive to shove costs for current promises onto the backs of future generations. It’s only now become respectable to do so.
Wall Street has played a role. Bill Gates built a socially useful product to make his fortune. But what message do the compensation packages that hedge fund managers get send across the country?
The list could go on. But the report, which is nicely summarized by Barbara Dafoe Whitehead in The American Interest (available free online), also has some recommendations. First, raise public consciousness about debt the way the anti-smoking activists did with their campaign. Second, create institutions that encourage thrift.
Foundations and churches could issue short-term loans to cut into the payday lenders’ business. Public and private programs could give the poor and middle class access to financial planners. Usury laws could be enforced and strengthened. Colleges could reduce credit card advertising on campus. KidSave accounts would encourage savings from a young age. The tax code should tax consumption, not income, and in the meantime, it should do more to encourage savings up and down the income ladder.
There are dozens of things that could be done. But the most important is to shift values. Franklin made it prestigious to embrace certain bourgeois virtues. Now it’s socially acceptable to undermine those virtues. It’s considered normal to play the debt game and imagine that decisions made today will have no consequences for the future.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map
June 10th, 2008 at 7:39 am
Chris L, thanks for posting that article. I found myself nodding my head through the entire thing.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:59 am
The problems with the CC cards is that Colleges make money off the companies.
Debt is a serious problem, the mortgage meltdown is only the tip. We are a nation built on fake money. It will catch up sooner or later. Hopefully later. I think Ron Paul made some sense, especially with the gold standard. Impossible to return to probably, but a total mistake to leave.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised that if the dollar gets weak enough in the future (maybe 20 years) we could be talking about combining currencies with Canada and others. Maybe the Amero?
June 10th, 2008 at 9:18 am
“On the one hand, there is what the report calls the investor class. It has tax-deferred savings plans, as well as an army of financial advisers. On the other hand, there is the lottery class, people with little access to 401(k)’s or financial planning but plenty of access to payday lenders, credit cards and lottery agents.”
I think this will have enormous political implications over the next 20 years, especially as the “lotto class” tries to retire with no savings. I agree that there are enormous moral implications to how households, and the GOVERNMENT- handle debt. This issue would seem to fit McCain well, because he needs to stop just nibbling around the edges- harping on earmarks- and get down to brass tacks, which is soon-to-bankrupt-us entitlement spending.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Jason,
I’ve posted elsewhere suggesting that 20 years from now, Ron Paul will be considered a prophet crying out in the wilderness.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:50 am
CT says:
Yes, we must purge all these religious people from our ranks and history:
June 10th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Dave,
I also see the term “religionists” as a loaded, even contemptuous, term.
Similar to when militant sodomites call married people “breeders.”
June 10th, 2008 at 10:15 am
I think Ron Paul made some sense, especially with the gold standard. Impossible to return to probably, but a total mistake to leave.
The gold standard is a horrible idea, mostly because gold is not really standard anymore. It’s a commodity. In previous generations, gold was a precious metal with very few practical applications that could not be duplicated by cheaper and more abundant materials, but nowadays, it is a common component of high-tech devices and appears to be posed to play an even larger role in the future. To link the value of our money to such a commodity would be silly; the total value of our economy is a much more stable “standard” in the long term.
June 10th, 2008 at 10:22 am
“KEEP RELIGION OUT!!!! MAYBE THE CHRISTIANS NEED TO STAY HOME THIS TIME IF THEY CAN’T KEEP POLITICS AND RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY SEPERATE.”
Could anyone else hear the Soviet national anthem playing wistfully in the background?
“LONG LIVE THE INDISSOLUTE UNION OF THE WORKING CLASS, THE PEASANTRY, AND THE INTELLIGENTSIA!!!”
June 10th, 2008 at 10:23 am
In response to the David Brooks column above, here are a few solutions I would suggest…
1. Make classes in personal responsibility and personal finance mandatory in the public school system.
2. Make these classes prerequisites in order to graduate from a four year public university.
3. Require FDIC-insured lenders to deny mortgages to every applicant incapable of putting a 20% down payment on a home or property.
4. Offer financial/tax incentives to in-over-their-head homeowners facing imminent foreclosure to get out of their homes and into rental properties they can afford.
David Brooks asks: “But what message do the compensation packages that hedge fund managers get send across the country?”
It sends the correct message that you are duly rewarded for working smart, and serves as a subtle reminder that hard work alone is working stupid. An essential component of the education process is learning how to acquire and preserve wealth so you will have the resources in life to meet you and your family’s needs and desires in your pursuit of happiness.
David’s piece also informs me of his latent disdain for capitalism and his eagerness to engage in class warfare.
June 10th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Gay Marriage isn’t necessairily less important, its just less common of an issue. Gay Marriage has never ranked in the top two issues, and now, when only a couple states are voting on it, its not going to be the huge issue.
That said, if McCain is a man of faith, and I believe he is, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to start talking about it.
June 10th, 2008 at 10:26 am
I don’t see religionist as a derisive term. It seems to be constructed in the same manner as secularist, which I also don’t see as derisive. But to each his own I guess.
June 10th, 2008 at 10:55 am
I don’t see religionist as a derisive term. It seems to be constructed in the same manner as secularist, which I also don’t see as derisive. But to each his own I guess.
I think when the term “secularist” is used on blogs like this one, it is more often than not used in a derisive manner.
June 10th, 2008 at 11:06 am
sec·u·lar·ism
: Indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations
Religionist see
re·li gion·ism n.
: Excessive or affected religious zeal
I’m noticing a difference. Secularists describes themselves as being such.
June 10th, 2008 at 11:33 am
and, for the record, I don’t think its a good idea for the GOP to cast off its connections to religious faith - which is the basis of sound social policy, which, in turn, is the basis for a strong economy and military.
June 10th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Act,
How can you possibly support Romney when we agree on so much?
June 10th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
I’m curious, is there enough gold in the world to back up the currency\economies of the developed countries?
#20- Aron, totally agree. I would also stress that deductive logic be a required course in school as early as late grade or early middle.
Many in this country chose not to wear their religious beliefs on their sleeves. I think that they are actually refreshed to see someone like them. McCain should remain true to himself and not be forced into pandering to those who want a more demonstrative show of his beliefs. If someone wants to know were McCain stands on important social issues, look up his voting record. His record is enough of a reflection to show where he stands.