Monday, December 01, 2008

The GOP's "God Problem," Part Two

Conservative columnist Rod Dreher, has an interesting column in today's USA Today, where he defends the role of religious conservatives in the Republican Party. What's interesting about the piece is how yet again, a religious conservative paints themselves as the victim and bashes anyone that complains about them as being a stooge of liberals.

But maybe what is more fascinating still is how much these religious conservatives live in a cocoon, thinking that what is popular in GOP circles is what is popular among the whole nation.

Take Dreher's notion on how important the Religious Right is to the GOP:

Republicans interested in rebuilding the party would be fools to shun us. White evangelicals (and, to a lesser extent, Mass-going Catholics) are the GOP's backbone. Just more than a third of President Bush's 2004 vote came from white evangelicals — and they turned out for McCain in comparable numbers. Cut social conservatives loose and you get a GOP that, as blogger Daniel Larison archly puts it, is "the party of all the remaining Episcopalians, Californians and New Yorkers who prefer lower taxes."

In the opinion of Dreher and others, religious conservatives aren't just a part of the GOP, but they are the GOP. Take them out, and all you have is a little coalition that couldn't win dogcatcher.

But Dreher is only focusing on the percentage of white evangelicals that make up the Republican vote. He forgets that there is a wider public out there and the Republicans are losing that vote. Remember those white evangelicals that Dreher says are the "backbone" of the GOP? Well, they are shrinking:

In 2000, according to CNN’s exit polls, 42% of voters claimed to attend church on a weekly basis. That number remained steady in 2004, but dropped to 39% in 2008. 55% of those voters supported McCain in 2008. About 60% of them supported Bush in 2004 and 2000. With most young voters thinking that the church is too involved in politics and incorrect on the issue of homosexuality (most young voters support gay marriage, too), what is the Christian Right to do?

Additionally, religious candidates are increasingly marginalized as regional candidates. With the weird exception of Iowa, Mike Huckabee was only able to win Southern states in the Republican primary season. Sarah Palin’s favorability ratings were only in the positives in the South by the end of the election season. The two of them are religious populists, very appealing to a niche section of the base, but with absolutely no ability to attract independents, Northeasterners, or people on the coasts. Whether one wants to assail them as “elitists” or not, they did just decimate our candidates and we need to appeal to them if we’re going to be a majority party.

And by the way, those elitist jerks were voting for our candidates just a few cycles ago.

Let's take a look at the youth vote, which Obama won:

voters ages 18 to 29, almost one-fifth of the electorate, went better than 2-to-1 for Obama.

Here, too, the trends in the past couple of elections have been all Democratic. Some of that is because there are more minorities among younger voters; some of it is the lousy economy, and some the opposition to the Iraq War.

But interviews and survey data suggest that another reason is tolerance, and the feeling that on matters like gay rights and race relations, Republicans are out of step. Most young people have no trouble with gay relationships.

Cultural conservatives celebrated that three states, California, Arizona and Florida, voted last month to ban gay marriage. They will learn these were pyrrhic victories much like the anti-immigration measure California Republicans rode to electoral success in 1994, where they won an election and lost a generation.

Research suggests that once young people cast a few votes for one political party, it’s often a lifetime habit.

Did John McCain lose soley because of the Religious Right? No. Dreher is correct that there are a lot of reasons that McCain lost. But the fact is, the Religious Right did play a role in loss nevertheless. Americans still have the whole Terry Schiavo fiasco in their minds, and young people don't understand why people who claim to be religious are so interested in banning same sex marriage or not allowing women to get an abortion if they are raped, or banning embryonic stem cell research, when a loved one is dealing with Alzheimers or diabetes. Conservatives are correct when they say culture matters; it's just that the GOP is on the losing side.

Conservatives have long believed that faith has a role in our civic life. I have no problem with that, being a person of faith myself. What is wrong is that American conservatism has held too long to a narrow understanding of faith and has given it too high a place of honor. Religious conservatives seem to only notice their own faith and not realize that we are a multi-religious society. They really believe that the GOP stands for "God's Own Party" instead of realizing that a sucessful political party has to be willing to reach out to all Americans, even those that may have a different faith or none at all.

The problem with Dreher and others like him is that their conservativism is too myopic. It doesn't see a need to expand the tent and appeal to the center.

Until that happens, the Republicans will be destined to be a regional party.


Progressive Conservative said...

Great post. I agree with your conclusions. The problem isn't that evangelicals should be expelled from the party, it's that they shouldn't have so loud of a voice.

Futhermore, while older evangelicals may have been dependly 'conservative' younger evangelicals ( are much different. They see things like the environment as moral issues. And they aren't becoming liberals. They're moving to the Center.

As you know Dennis, the Center is the most important part of winning elections. While the Religious Right may have been important to mobilizing voters in the past, their influence is diminishing. It's becoming increasingly clear that we are entering an era where economics is going to play a more important role than social issues. We can't win without the middle and right now older evangelicals are driving away more voters than they are attracting.

Personally I'd like to see us adopt ideas that would appeal to younger evangelicals, but as i have said in the past, we need multi-issue voters. They will be more dependable in the long run that voters who only share one or two common goals.

daddymak said...

I stubled onto your blog because I was looking for a list of moderate Republicans. I am a Democrat, my beliefs can be described by many as liberal. I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment to the Constitution, but that's about the only policy that I line up with the GOP. Anyway, I enjoyed reading your post-election analysis post. Some of my frieds and family think that I am to the Democrats what Ann Coulter is to the GOP. I disagree. I do get fired up and go into attack mode on certain Republicans that I consider to be extremists, ie Rick Santorum, Tom Tancredo, Rush Limbaugh, but although I am a hardline Democrat, there are Republicans who I do respect, because like me, they are opposed to labels. People like Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, Lindsey Graham,John Warner and Susan Collins are neither liberal nor conservative, they are, as we like to say, moderates. But to me, they are pragmatists. And even hardline conservatives like Tom Coburn and Orrin Hatch, I find them to be decent people, if not their politics. The problem that today's GOP face is that they've been hijacked by extremist ideologues like Karl Rove, whose idea is simple: Win at all costs. Anyway, just thought I'd drop in. I'll be checking out your blog from time to time. Peace.

democraticpitbull said...

I posted earlier as daddymak. That was my screen name when I first found this website and started reading the blogs. Well, now I have one of my own, under my new name. Don't let the title fool you, like I said when I posted as daddymak, there are many Republicans I respect and I named them in my previous post. I use that moniker because I have appointed myself the defender of members of my party against certain attacks by the extremists in the Republican party. Where I come from, local talk radio still exists and one of the on air personalities fits the description of " rightwing extremist " and has his head buried up his ass 95% of the time. Anyway, I am a new follower of yur blog because I believe that if you are sincer in your posts, there is hope that bipartisanship can once again be a part of government, like it was under Congresses led by Samuel Rayburn and Joe Martin, A Democrat and Republican, respectively. Check out my blogs and leave a message if you can. I welcome both praise and criticism. I even welcome anonymous, cowardly attacks chock full of venom. Thanks.