Well, I’m going to break out the political crystal ball and make a fool of myself–as most people do when they attempt to forecast the future. But, since there is nobody here to stop me at the moment, here goes… .
I’m going to take a run at two questions in this post: 1) Who might be the nominees for Vice President of both parties and what difference would that make to the evangelical sector? and 2) How the next four years might go, if either party wins the presidency? (By the way, at this point, I don’t think there is the proverbial “snowball’s chance” in you know where for the Democrats to lose the Senate and House. If they do, it would be the most colossal election year political collapse in memory.)
On the Democratic side, the so-called “dream ticket” would be Obama and Hillary Clinton. But, the only way she gains from that is if Obama got assassinated. After all, it’s unlikely they would nominate her in eight years–in her late 60s, given that he is 46 now. There would be too much new blood at the top to be willing to go back to the “old hand,” who would constantly be calling to mind the Clinton years at a time when “change” (i.e., to the emerging Obama era) is the Democrat’s watchword.
Now, it is absolutely true that the Democratic Party needs Hillary Clinton on their ticket. Or, at the very least, they need a candidate who can deliver most of the same demographic group with which she is much stronger than Obama. If there is such an animal, it may be Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico. He is part Hispanic and a former Clinton administration Cabinet member.
What about Hillary? I expect her to either: 1) sit tight in the Senate, hoping Obama loses, so that she can be the clear front-runner in 2012; or 2) accept a job in the Obama caninet which would enhance her resume, such as Secretary of State (honing her foreign policy expertise) or Health/Human Services (presiding over the almost inevitable passage of universal health care, her baby back in the early Clinton era).
On the Republican side, there is no clear front-runner. At 36, Governor Bobby Jindal of Lousiana would be a shock, but not impossible, given McCain’s general weakness in the South in the primaries. The choice of Mitt Romney, a Mormon, would be utterly stupid, gaining little nation-wide and further alienate the large former evangelical base of the party. Yet, I continue to hear drumbeats of support for Romney. (Maybe the Republican Party has even more of a deathwish than I previously thought!)
The best choice by far, if he would accept, would be former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. After all, did he not surprise everyone in the country with the effectiveness of his campaign against McCain, especially doing it on a financial shoestring? (And, if it happens, what a grand irony it would be to those top dogs in the Southern Baptist Convention who would not even meet with Muckabee during the primary season, still holding a 20-year plus grudge against him for not kissing their feet during the early going of the Conservative Resurgence!)
Now, on to what may well take place over the next election cycle if either party wins. First, in the increasingly unlikely (i.e., based on his recent speeches and current strategy) event that Senator McCain were to win, it seems to me that two trends are likely to harden in between now and 2012: 1) Some evangelicals, following the lead of McCain, will continue to go “green”-er on environmental issues and slide to the left on other assorted issues. But, since that is already happening fairly substantially in certain parts of the evangelical sector, I’m not going out on much of a limb to say that; and 2) Some evangelicals will, in their anger of being betrayed by party leadership, pull even farther to the right and make all manner of threats in regard to bolting the Republican fold in 2012, if they and their issues are not catered to. The problem is that is only going to make them look even more like a bunch of narrow kooky fundamentalists.
Make no mistake, I am very much a conservative. But, I am a Christian first and foremost. And, without question, the viewpoints that resonated with Scripture in the primary campaign all came from Mike Huckabee. Since he was the runner-up this year, if he is not the V-P candidate, then he should be encouraged by conservative evangelicals to start doing what is necessary to raise the war-chest and gather the troops as 2012 approaches. And, that would be true either way. If Obama wins, it’s a no-brainer. But, even if McCain wins, he would be 75 when he would be seeking a second term, making that quite unlikely.
If the Democrats win, with Congress and the presidency firmly in their grasp, it is going to be a very tough time for evangelicals. It is not hard at all to imagine bill after bill passing into law angles that will hamstring conservative churches, not to mention likely harrassment by the IRS. It may be too strong to use the wording that evangelicals could be “a persecuted religious minority” between now and 2012, but it is certainly not out of the realm of possibility.
If the worst-case scenario happens, though, it could turn out to be the best thing for conservative American churches. After all, as one Church Father noted: “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.” Some would fall away, yes. But, many others among us would be awakened from our comfortable slumbers to serve the Lord with all our passion and strength.
Bottom line: Whatever happens in the election only a few months from now, it is virtually impossible that the status quo will be maintained. Without question, there will be many major changes. And, it can be a great opportunity for evangelical renewal, if we just pull our heads out of the sand and re-commit ourselves to serving the Lord and biblical values instead of believing our only option is playing pragmatic (i.e., “Who is electable?) politics.
Coming Saturday: “Saturdays are for Newspaper Articles”
This is a subject that I could on in regard to for some time. However, I am going to attempt to finish up in this post and the one on Thursday (assuming I don’t get too revved up, a common weakness of mine, as you’ve likely noticed).
In my last post, I noted that the evangelical sector of the American population has had to eat a big piece of humble pie in the political realm in the last several years. It’s almost like we were on some sort of ego “steroids” that make us think that we were much bigger (i.e., in actual numbers) and stronger (i.e., in influence and political clout) than was actually the case. Because of the false numbers and sense of influence, in 2000 and 2004 many evangelical leaders walked with quite a swagger in the run-up to, and in the aftermath of, the elections.
My, how things have changed since that point less than four years ago! Not only has the evangelical sector been whittled down to size by various demands for integrity in membership numbers. But, the seemingly solid single-issue (or, at least, short agenda) voting patterns have largely dissapated.
What has happened? Well, at the very least, many evangelical voters–including significant numbers in the Southern Baptist Convention have re-thought the essence of what it means to be an evangelical… even a very conservative evangelical, in regard to politics.
The most startling aspect of that widespread re-thinking is that many evangelicals have decided that being a Bible-believing Christian and a Republican are not one and the same thing. As a result, for the first time in well over 20 years, it is a very real possibility that a large number of evangelical voters who were dyed in the wool Republicans as recently as 2004 will vote Democratic this time around.
Why are they doing this? There are numerous reasons, which I don’t have the space to discuss here. However, here are a few of the most common for you to consider:
- President Bush’s leadership of the war in Iraq has simply run out of popular support with the masses (as every war does) and his popularity rating, even among Republicans, is at near record lows.
- The President’s handling of the economy has things teetering on the brink of recession and budget deficits are astronomical.
- The Republican Congressional majority from 1994 through 2006 took power and, in many respects, simply did not do what they had promised, but became vitually just as bad at “pork barrel” spending as the Democrats, making the Democrats look much better.
- Whether it is his fault or not, Bush is being blamed for oil and gasoline prices, which continue to skyrocket.
- What Bush had called “compassionate conservatism” when he was elected did not have legs to much of a degree. What people saw in Mike Huckabee’s positions was recognized as being much more consistently compassionate while still broadly conservative.
- The “eco-bandwagon” has gathered steam in Republican circles. Even among those who think that global warming is a hoax are many who have become much more environmentally sensitive (i.e., mildly “green”-oriented).
In regard to several of these areas, John McCain’s candidacy must be recognized as a reflection of what had already happened with a lot of evangelical voters, not a leading indicator. Indeed, the disillusionment in regard to “more of the same” (i.e., as Bush) has set in with many evangelical Republican voters and is not likely to change much between now and November.
A tantalizing question here has to do with where this trend might take things between now and 2012. And, I am just crazy enough to pull out the crystal ball in the next post and take a stab at extrapolating out for the next election cycle.
Coming Thursday: “Some Thoughts on Evangelicals and the Political Landscape in 2008 (Conclusion)”
