It is no secret anymore the Democrats realize they need to win back Christian voters if they want to win a general election. So it should come as no surprise that many Democratic campaign strategists are making sure their candidates don’t pull a Paris Hilton and get caught in a daze when asked what their favorite bible passage is. It did come as a surprise however that this very subject found its way to the final question in last night’s debate at Dartmouth. Unfortunately however, even though Christian voters are not immune to the sophistication of consultant-style campaigning, where pollsters and strategists move the mouth of the candidates, they are for the most part very keen and sensitive on the lessons and passages of the bible. This year’s democratic candidates have not all shown the same savvy however, and nor did their consultants, who would have much better served their bosses by taking a little bit more time to craft their answers.
Let’s briefly run through each one. I won’t quote all the candidates in length. or in short, so if you want to read their actual answers, go here.
Congratulations Barrack – you’re first up. Barrack is one of the few democratic candidates who genuinely appreciates and wants to win over Christian voters, rather than just manipulate them with mind-reading psychoanalysis delivered to him by his minions. He has a track record of this approach going back at least to the 2004 Democratic convention. His answer however, may have fell on deaf ears with Christians. In his effort to express the need for empathy that we all have lost “in the last six years”, he cheaply diverts to the policy of the Bush administration, in a not-so-clever attempt to argue that somehow George Bush is responsible for a lack of empathy in the United States. Aside from the fact that George Bush was put in office for his sound Christian beliefs, most Christians do not believe that they themselves have lost empathy, but rather that liberals have driven empathy out of our society with their secular policies. This is not my own belief, just to be clear, and may or may not be true.
From an objective point of view, it was rather clever. It allowed him to open doors to Christian voters, while at the same time wooing the left wing seculars who salivate over any suggestion of Christian or conservative hypocrisy.
Clinton just looks evil, as always, and miserably gaffed when answering this question, which should come as no surprise. Anyone who knows Hillary can admit that she utterly disdains Christian values, which showed through her stern lack of sincerity and empathy as she coldly delivered her answer, which was “the golden rule.” Hillary, I’m not sure who your religious adviser is, but fire them! The Golden Rule is not a bible passage, nor exclusively a biblical philosophy. It is a universal belief. You can argue that this was clever as well, as it allowed her to appeal to secular types without pulling a Paris. Nevertheless, I’m sure some Christian viewers sat scratching their heads wondering, “What passage was that?” Most Christians undoubtedly knew what she meant, since the Golden rule underlies most of the bible’s beliefs. But the question was about their favorite passage, not their favorite mantra. Hillary capped this off by saying, “and I believe it’s a good rule for politics too.” What’s that Hillary? Did you just say that your favorite bible passage also informs your political beliefs?
Senator Gravel said “love” is his favorite passage. No kidding Senator? That is my favorite passage too.
Kucinich pulled out a prayer card, and Edwards was able to actually quote the bible while remaining reverent enough to answer the question without diverting or grandstanding. Both of these candidates likely were effective in persuading Christian voters that they were supporters of the faith, and I commend their advisers for much better advising their candidates than others.
Richardson and Dodds gave equally lackluster responses, with Richardson referring to the Sermon on the Mount as an “issue” and Dodds cheekily saying that we all ought to be like the Good Samaritan. These weren’t necessarily terrible responses, but they weren’t very good either. Richardson pulled a copy-cat and tripped all over himself while delivering his response. Dodd’s response was not only canned, but delivered without ever taking the lid off.
That leaves us with Biden, who claimed that his favorite passage was Christ’s warning of the Pharisees. I’m not sure, but if that is his favorite lesson, many Christians might be of the opinion he has missed a thing or too. This is compounded by the fact that Biden’s so-called “Pharisees” are what many conservatives consider their “prophets.” Biden may have scored trivial points with voters who both simultaneously loath the evangelical movement and the catholic priest scandals, but on the whole, Biden most likely didn’t win any new votes. Making an uneducated guess, I would assume he was one of the few candidates who wasn’t trying very hard either.
I don’t intend for this article to be entirely about Christian beliefs however. It is rather an observation on the consultant-style politics that dominate our political battlefield today. .
The question and answer session that Russert and the candidates engaged in last night is a perfect example of when consultant style politics fail. This is because statistics, polls, and case-studies don’t cut through to the deeply held beliefs that Americans have, and want their candidates to have as well, whatever those beliefs may be.
It is sad indeed, that the polls inform the media, which in turn informs the public, who in turn decide the polls, in a circular frenzy that politicians have very effectively been able to manipulate over the years, usually the ones who are most connected, and best funded. These candidates will usually succeed in erecting an aura of inevitability for themselves, which the media in turn will feed into more and more, especially when you are well connected with the big media establishment.
Fortunately, this doesn’t always lead to success at the polls. Ask Howard Dean. Buying over the media doesn’t always buy you the candidacy. In the end, it’s the voters who vote at the polls. Right now, Hillary is the darling of the media. Whether she is the darling of the voters is not so clear however. The blogosphere has been rough with her, and this correlates with the opinions of many liberal friends of mine who more and more have been expressing their support for Edwards or Obama.
In my own and not so humble opinion, the presidential debates have been somewhat of a circus lately. These circus acts are often made even more entertaining by the collusive question crafting between the candidates’ campaign leaders and forum hosts. Can you say snowman in a conversation without laughing and cringing at the same time anymore? Tim Russert is always exciting, and so are the democrats. When it’s late at night after a long day and I’m looking for a good laugh, these debates have been great. But when I’m at the poll booth, and thinking of who to vote for, I surely won’t be voting for the guy who said “love” was his favorite bible passage, and I don’t think other Christian voters will be either.
Joe Southron is a Juris Doctoral candidate at Drexel University in Philadelphia and a Contributing Author to Law School Conservative. You can respond to his writings by emailing him at jfs32@drexel.edu.
