Religion Powerful Force in 2012 Race
Email
Win McNamee/Getty Images
Religion and politics may not always mix well together, but that’s not the case for Republican candidates.
Virtually all of the candidates for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination have spoken candidly about their faith. In fact, many like Rep. Michele Bachmann and Texas Gov. Rick Perry have made it a central feature of their campaigns. Even Mitt Romney, who has mostly attempted to steer clear of questions about his Mormon faith, has said that if an affirmation of his faith sinks his candidacy, “so be it.”
Though the United States is a secular state and there’s no informal religious test for office, religion plays an important role in the minds of the American electorate. And voters, in many ways, view their leaders through a religious lens, experts say.
“Religion always remains a significant factor in elections,” said Melissa Deckman, a political science professor at the Washington College. “I think there is a litmus test” for office.
In a recent Public Religion Research Institute survey, two-thirds of voters said it is very important or somewhat important for a presidential candidate to have strong religious beliefs. As a further evidence of the importance of a candidate’s faith, two-thirds of voters in the poll said they would feel somewhat uncomfortable with an atheist president.
For Republicans particularly, the link between the two is important. The majority of Americans who attend church on a regular basis have historically leaned Republican, and that trend has stayed consistent in recent years, experts say.
“Self-described evangelicals are overwhelmingly supportive in presidential elections of the Republican party because, by and large, conservative Christians see the Republican party as the vehicle for the way that they view public policy,” said Tim Goeglein, a former special assistant to President George W. Bush on faith issues, and currently the vice president for external relations at Focus on the Family.”That has been true in the contemporary presidency since the Jimmy Carter-Ronald Reagan election of 1980.”
Over the years, evangelical Christians and Catholic groups have cemented deep ties within the GOP and are considered a key voting bloc, especially in early primary and caucus states. So it’s no surprise that candidates are courting them ahead of the primaries and caucuses.
Candidates “perceive that they can attract votes by making religious appeals,” said John Green, a political science professor at University of Akron and a senior fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. But “if the past is any guide, once we get beyond the nominations into the fall election, we’ll have a different set of messages.”
The current set of candidates, however, pose somewhat of a challenge for the Republican religious right. Romney has frequently been the frontrunner in the GOP pack but evangelical groups view his Mormon faith with skepticism, as illustrated in a recent Pew report that found Romney garnering only 17 percent of the evangelical Protestant vote.
But evangelical groups’ favorites have fallen flat when it comes to questions of moral values. Herman Cain — once the top choice of evangelicals — tumbled in the polls and eventually dropped out of the race because of multiple allegations of sexual harassment and a claim of an extramarital affair, all of which combined to virtually drain up his support among religious voters despite his conservative credentials.
Newt Gingrich’s three marriages and an extramarital affair have also cast some doubt in religious voters’ minds. Whether the former House speaker can overcome those questions of moral value remains to be seen.
Gingrich’s public discussion of his faith, his conversion to Catholicism and his acceptance of past actions could help improve his image in the eyes of voters. Still, issues of moral and family values are top agenda items for conservatives, and it may be difficult for many to overlook those questions of moral bounds and personal behavior.
“In the past, those voters have been very skeptical of candidates whose personal behavior hasn’t lived up to this standard,” Green said. “For a lot of traditionally religious voters, with Newt Gingrich they may be a bit conflicted. On the one hand, his past behavior doesn’t line up with what they believe in. On the other hand, he has made this claim about a change of heart with regard to his faith.”
Conservative groups say it could be difficult for Christian groups to overlook Gingrich’s issues of infidelity and multiple marriages. At the same time, he is more open to talking about his faith than the last Republican presidential candidate, John McCain.
McCain “was less likely to bring it up as an issue because he didn’t necessarily feel comfortable with it,” Deckman said. “You had to force him. You heard more talk about religion when [Sarah] Palin was added.”
In contrast, Obama was more than comfortable talking about his faith. In the 2008 general election, he won the majority of the Catholic vote.
The intersection of religion and politics in the presidential election isn’t new. In fact, religion has always had a deep influence in politics, but the strength of its influence varies from year to year.
The economy is the top issue of concern to American voters today, but that still hasn’t diminished the role religion plays. There are religious dimensions to economic problems, Green says, and they come into play heavily in elections. Candidates have already tied issues like health care and jobs to moral values.
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
I am uncomfortable with a politician who wears their faith on their sleeve; it makes me think it’s an act to get votes. For that reason, I would not trust Rick Perry. Of course, he has other problems (e.g., ignorant of world affairs, not very smart). By the way, I am an evangelical.
Posted by: morris2196 | December 6, 2011, 9:12 am 9:12 am
Religion leads you to……….the same kind of place as IRAN!
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | December 6, 2011, 9:44 am 9:44 am
I mistrust those who make their particular religious faith central to their bids to be their party’s presidential, or for that matter, candidacy for any public office. Freedom to worship — or not — is a core tenet to the Constitution of the United States and why the Founding Fathers and their antecedents came here in the first place.
Faith is a very personal matter; organized religion is, no matter which beliefs are trumpeted, is, in my opinion, exclusionary. When a cadidate uses every opportunity to remind the electorate that his alleged religious beliefs have, do and will guide his/her governance should that person be elected, the alarm bells are deafening.
This is a secular nation and the very diversity of its population is what has made us great. We are a democracy. We see what theocracy means. All we have to do is look at Iran, etc. to see the tragedy insularity brings to a nation, especially so when the various sects within any given religion are at war with one another.
Posted by: amn | December 6, 2011, 10:25 am 10:25 am
Why is it that people want to link religion and politics? Politics and religion are antagonistic, they are oxymora. The daily tactics of politicians are lying, cheating and stealing. Why does religion want to be associated with those characteristics?
The USA is a secular republic. The vast majority of the USA’s people are religious and/or have a religious background, and the country’s spirit is unquestionably christian. But the govt is secular as the founding fathers and some influential church leaders of the time had insisted. One of the great fears of the time was to prevent the corruption of govt from influencing the church. And the opposite holds true as well – the govt wanted to prevent religious influence from it’s affairs.
What we are seeing with these ‘religious’ candidates is a coordinated attack against the people of the USA, claiming to be deeply steeped in faith while at the same time living a politician’s life of lying, cheating and stealing.
Bachmann recently stated that every American has the same civil rights – and then in the next breath says marriage is 1 man and 1 woman. What happened to those who believe otherwise? There is no religious requirement to marriage in the USA unless you choose so for your marriage. (And then over 50% of marriages end in divorce. There is no sanctity to marriage.)
Newt and his adulterous affairs. No need to elaborate further.
Cain and his alleged indiscretions.
Santorum and his tirade against a segment of the population.
And so on …
These candidates are pledging to the religious groups. They should be pledging to the USA. The closer religion wants to be to politics and govt then they must realize the more corrupt they will become. If religion wants to be more involved in politics then tax them!
There is no greater human presumption than to claim you can read the mind of the Almighty. There is no more dangerous individual than the one who claims he is executing the Almighty’s will.
Organized religin is organized crime.
Posted by: raggmopp | December 6, 2011, 10:43 am 10:43 am
Romney’s religion is no problem. I don’t like his politics and stand on gun control. \
Gingrich understands the Constitution almost as well as Palin understands history: “The First Amendment guarantees the right of every Christian to practice his religion in public.”
That’s right Mr Gingrich. Every Chrsitian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, Hindu and everyone else. Christians aren’t the only one’s with Constitutional rights. I don’t trust fanatics of any religion.
Posted by: oonogil7 | December 6, 2011, 11:09 am 11:09 am
Big religion is the problem. Little churches act as social mediums. Big religion = inquisition and Jihad. Catholic = big bureaucracy, so, Catholic Republicans advocate bureaucracy in their religion.
Posted by: Greg | December 6, 2011, 11:33 am 11:33 am
Politicians use their “faith” to get the sheep to follow them. The only faith they have is that they can get people behind them by mentioning Jesus and God once in awhile. But, that doesn’t mean they actually believe in anything but the all-mighty dollar….
Posted by: WorkingClass | December 6, 2011, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
Politicians need to understand that there are MANY religions in this country, and some of us feel very strongly about our faith and beliefs, or lack of faith, even if it’s different from their’s. No one should force their beliefs or rules on others. That’s the problem with religion in government. Our founders were against establishment of a national religion, and supported religious tolerance. Otherwise, the tendency is to move into a theocracy, with religious laws, the way the Taliban and Islamists have gone. And then we slide again into the Dark Ages.
Posted by: Dr. Bubba | December 6, 2011, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
ragmopp: Maybe you should do some reading about our founding fathers because you could not be farther from the truth. They spent hours in prayer and if you read the text from their meetings and decision made they always refer to the almighty creator and give God the credit. Too many people do not even realize that the separation of church and state was mentioned in one letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists ensuring them of freedom for religion, not freedom from religion.
Posted by: Seriously | December 6, 2011, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm
Religion leads you to……….the same kind of place as IRAN!
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | December 6, 2011, 9:44 am.
I agree.
Posted by: Searambler | December 6, 2011, 12:49 pm 12:49 pm
Seriously | December 6, 2011, 12:44 pm post ———– So what. Our laws are derived from our Constitution, not from some religion. Neither God, nor Jesus, nor Lord, nor Creator, are mentioned in the Constitution.
Posted by: Searambler | December 6, 2011, 12:56 pm 12:56 pm
One cannot have freedom of religion without freedom from religion. The right to not believe in any mythology is just as fundamental as the right to choose between them. The separation of church and state is a concept to prevent ANY faith from dominating the function of our government at the expense of all those not part of that faith. This protection extends just as much to those of us without any faith.
Posted by: cicclinton | December 6, 2011, 1:03 pm 1:03 pm
I have real problems with the candidates who claim that God told them to run for President. So, if He told Bachmann, Perry, and a couple of others, was he just fooling around with them all, and pulling their legs?? Why tell them all to run against each other? Maybe he has money down on one of them and wanted a challenge, LOL?! Sometimes, people are just delusional. GWB also said he was guided by God telling him things, and look how that turned out! God has a mean sense of humor.
Posted by: Bobby Jo | December 6, 2011, 1:11 pm 1:11 pm
The odd thing is that Jesus was a fiscal liberal. A guy who said that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Heaven and advised selling everything, giving the proceedes to the poor would not side with any of these people.
Posted by: Greggw | December 6, 2011, 1:16 pm 1:16 pm
How the Reagan campaign in 1980 manufactured the still present link between Christian voters and the Republican party is one of the most important and least known stories in our recent political history.
The Reagan campaign targeted Christians, mainly evangelical/fundamentalists, with the largest mass mailing ever conducted. They infiltrated churches. They presented Reagan as the “Christian candidate”.
I was in a Baptist school at the time, and personally witnessed the political speech from the pulpit, in the classrooms, the DONATIONS being taken up in church (illegally). They even took us on a FIELD TRIP to see Reagan as he campaigned in our area.
Prior to this massive propaganda campaign, Christian voters were just as likely or more likely to be Democrats. How Reagan’s operatives managed to transform, in the minds of Christian voters, the Republican platform of military aggressiveness, favoritism of the rich and business, vilification and abandonment of the poor, and disregard for the environment into the CHRISTIAN platform is almost beyond belief.
But they did it, using abortion (which, you will note, is still legal, despite many years of Republican control since then…they have no intention or ability to carry through on their rhetoric), the “war on drugs”, homophobia, and the shameless display of religious faith (which, for the record, Reagan was NOT terribly happy about, NOT being the deeply religious man he was being portrayed as by his handlers).
To this day, such “social/values” issues are regularly trotted out to whip up and bring out the Christian vote, esp. in close races (Bush’s team did it both times, placing anti-abortion and anti-gay rights measures on the ballot in key states).
Somehow, that makes many Christians forget that the Republican platform is, in many cases, diametrically opposed to the teachings of the Bible:
Ezek. 16:49ff. “Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had arrogance, abundant food, and careless ease, but she did not help the poor and needy. Thus they were haughty and committed abominations before Me. Therefore I removed them when I saw it.”
Is. 10:1-3. “Woe to those who enact evil statutes, and to those who continually record unjust decisions, so as to deprive the needy of justice, and rob the poor of My people of their rights…”
Prov. 31:8ff. [Commandment to kings.] Open your mouth for the dumb, for the rights of all the unfortunate. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy.
Posted by: Raven | December 6, 2011, 1:17 pm 1:17 pm
P.S. not to mention this one, which these candidates blatently and routinely ignore:
“And whenever you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites who love to stand in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they will be seen by people. I tell you with certainty, they have their full reward!
Matt. 6:5
Posted by: Raven | December 6, 2011, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
A lot of Christians refuse to recognize that belief in God does not necessiarily mean Christian. A lot of non-Christians believe in God. Don’t confuse ‘God’ or ‘Creator’ with Christ. They may be the same to you but not to all people.
If one religion is forbidden it opens the door to allow another to be banned. If everyone has to be Christian sooner or later someone will want to require everyone to be protestant. Catholicism would be banned. Maybe Methodists next. Never trusted those Pentecost anyway. Baptists are just plain wrong… Where does it end?
All religions should be respected and treated equal. Otherwise, your’s might be on the ban list.
Posted by: cloud | December 6, 2011, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
I’m making religion the primary issue for the 2012 election. I will vote for the least religious of the crowd. There is no god and it’s about time that the human race grew up and started to accept responsibility for it’s actions.
Posted by: Simon | December 6, 2011, 4:07 pm 4:07 pm