Religion and Politics
Last week I drove about 1000 miles in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee, and saw many things. Most of them were churches. In the rural areas, in particular, I was struck by how many churches there were. In the urban areas too, but those had other types of buildings also. It seemed like there was a church for every person down there. I had lunch in a truck stop one day, and the people next to me were talking about how Jesus guides their lives. Religion, insofar as it relates to Jesus, was everywhere.
If religion is such a big part of people’s lives, then it will influence how they think, how they act, and how they vote. If religious people believe that a political candidate is God-fearing and culls his faith from the Bible, then he is their kind of guy. Do you see John Kerry as a faithful devotee of the Bible? I do not. Bush got 60% of the vote in Mississippi, 57% in Tennessee, and 54% in Arkansas. I don’t think there is any question that faith played a role in these numbers. Bush never stops talking about his faith, and it has justifiably registered with religious folks. The implication, though, is that his opponent is not religious and is unworthy of being their leader.
Can this be turned around by the Democrats? Yes. A Southern Democrat, if you can find one these days, might be a start. A Democrat whose life and religion are intertwined could also be a good candidate. It would have been interesting if Gore had not had the election stolen in 2000 and this country had ended up with a religious Democratic Jewish Vice President in Joe Lieberman. Having such a visible religious figure (even a Jewish one) would counter arguments that Democrats are a non-religious, possibly God-less people.
Bill Clinton won just 12 years ago, and won Arkansas and Tennessee, and other states that Kerry almost immediately gave up on. Clinton pointed out that the religious right holds the Bible with one hand and picks your pocket with the other, and he legitimately won two terms. People say this is a religious country. Parts of it certainly are. The trick is appealing to broad swaths of those who clutch their Bibles and also those who do not. The two need not be mutually exclusive, despite what the GOP has been telling everyone. Bush says he is a uniter, then goes about dividing, pitting people against each other. That may have been a way to stay in power, but it’s not the mark of a successful leader. Unfortunately, it is where we stand today, and makes it harder for a Democrat to break through.
If religion is such a big part of people’s lives, then it will influence how they think, how they act, and how they vote. If religious people believe that a political candidate is God-fearing and culls his faith from the Bible, then he is their kind of guy. Do you see John Kerry as a faithful devotee of the Bible? I do not. Bush got 60% of the vote in Mississippi, 57% in Tennessee, and 54% in Arkansas. I don’t think there is any question that faith played a role in these numbers. Bush never stops talking about his faith, and it has justifiably registered with religious folks. The implication, though, is that his opponent is not religious and is unworthy of being their leader.
Can this be turned around by the Democrats? Yes. A Southern Democrat, if you can find one these days, might be a start. A Democrat whose life and religion are intertwined could also be a good candidate. It would have been interesting if Gore had not had the election stolen in 2000 and this country had ended up with a religious Democratic Jewish Vice President in Joe Lieberman. Having such a visible religious figure (even a Jewish one) would counter arguments that Democrats are a non-religious, possibly God-less people.
Bill Clinton won just 12 years ago, and won Arkansas and Tennessee, and other states that Kerry almost immediately gave up on. Clinton pointed out that the religious right holds the Bible with one hand and picks your pocket with the other, and he legitimately won two terms. People say this is a religious country. Parts of it certainly are. The trick is appealing to broad swaths of those who clutch their Bibles and also those who do not. The two need not be mutually exclusive, despite what the GOP has been telling everyone. Bush says he is a uniter, then goes about dividing, pitting people against each other. That may have been a way to stay in power, but it’s not the mark of a successful leader. Unfortunately, it is where we stand today, and makes it harder for a Democrat to break through.
posted by Wounded Liberal at 3:18 PM
|
