Article VI Blog

Fred Thompson: The Evangelical Choice?

David Domke thinks religious conservatives are ready to jump on the Thompson bandwagon, and that Romney is not going to do well among that group:

Mitt Romney has also been courting social conservatives, but his Mormon beliefs and questioned shifts on abortion and same-sex marriage present him with significant challenges. Consider that in the most recent data on religious voters, a poll conducted for Time magazine in May, Romney's approval rating among Protestants was far lower than that of other GOP candidates: McCain and Giuliani were each viewed favorably by roughly 55% of Protestants, whereas only 29% viewed Romney in the same light. This may be changing, but that's a chasm that won't be easily crossed.

Then there's this July 21 CNN/Opinion Research poll for South Carolina:

Republicans

Giuliani 28
McCain 20
Thompson 17
Gingrich 6
Romney 4

It's too early to say, of course, but if those poll numbers are accurate they are disturbing and very difficult to explain away. You can try all you want to blame Romney's poor showing in South Carolina, as well as Protestant lack of enthusiasm for him, on his changed position on abortion, but that's a non-starter. Thompson has not exactly been a conservative firebrand on those issues, and Giuliani's position on them flat-out opposes the views of most Evangelicals. Ideologically, there is not a dime's bit of difference ideologically between Romney and Thompson. Religiously, little is known about Thompson except that he was baptized in the Church of Christ as a child. Even so, Domke doesn't think Thompson has to say much to satisfy Evangelicals on that front:

In late March, Focus on the Family's James Dobson said he doubted that Thompson was a Christian. But [U.S. News & World Report writer Dan] Gilgoff–whose 2007 book The Jesus Machine documents the rising political influence of Dobson–reported that Dobson is now "rumored to be reassessing Thompson." Indeed, a Dobson spokesman laid out the political pathway for Reagan, er Thompson, telling CNN that "Thompson hasn't clearly communicated his religious faith, and many evangelical Christians might find this a barrier to supporting him."

Translation: show us a sign–a public sign–and we'll believe. Expect Thompson, therefore, to deliver a high-profile speech about values and faith in the coming months, perhaps even before he kicks off his campaign (now rumored to be set for just after Labor Day).

If Domke's right, and Thompson becomes the Evangelical favorite, the reasons why will be pretty clear.

John comments: There is little doubt that there is an Evangelical move to Thompson, but it is, at this moment, from a particular corner of Evangelicalism. That corner is the hard core near-fundamentalist types.

I think Lowell is being a bit hard, but not too much. The flip-flop thing is almost irretrievably tied up with Romney's faith. The faith creates "unease" and the changes of heart turn that unease into conviction. But please bear in mind it is pure emotion at this point. There is little or nothing really known about Thompson.

At the moment Thompson is not a candidate, he is "none of the above." There has been unease with the major candidates all along. People are looking for the perfect candidate and he does not exist (certainly SHE doesn't, he said, taking a huge swipe at you know who) - Thompson is not that either, and it will become apparent to most once Thompson actually sees the light of day - a day that seems to be getting farther and farther away.

What I find really interesting is that in the wake of the Treviño piece last week there has been a noticeable up-tick in the blogosphere of people trying to justify discussing religion and particularly Romney's religion. It seems like before people felt like they had an "evangelical" candidate they played the religion card close to their chest. What happens if Thompson does not turn out to be the perfect "evangelical" candidate and that bridge is burned? Politics can be a harsh mistress. It is awful early to bet the farm. (Quick - call the mixed metapher police )

Also, it should not be forgotten that it is the media's deepest desire for Romney to be rejected because of his faith, they can use that fact to attempt to neutralize the Religious Right in general. No matter what happens, that is the likely MSM narrative. That's why blogs like this one need to try and find what is really going on. And we will.

Adding some other stuff:

The LATimes Religion beat reporter discusses how such reporting has tested his faith. (HT: Hugh Hewitt.) It is a sad tale of covering the atrocities of almost all faiths, but it makes two important points. First the MSM hates religion. Secondly:

IN late 2001, I traveled to Salt Lake City to attend a conference of former Mormons. These people lived mostly in the Mormon Jell-O belt — Utah, Idaho, Arizona — so-named because of the plates of Jell-O that inevitably appear at Mormon gatherings.

They found themselves ostracized in their neighborhoods, schools and careers. Often, they were dead to their own families.

"If Mormons associate with you, they think they will somehow become contaminated and lose their faith too," Suzy Colver told me. "It's almost as if people who leave the church don't exist."

I personally think that runs both ways, creedals are afraid that mingling with Mormons will somehow contaminate them too. Not sure how that works. Lowell, I don't feel contaminated, do you? Haven't changed my faith either….

Lowell: Nope. And by the way, Lobdell's reporting about Mormon ostracism of those who leave the church is entirely anecdotal. The subject is complex, and I think any reporter who makes the effort to discuss it with a broad range of Mormons and disaffected Mormons would grasp that complexity. In my view (and I think I am in the majority) any Mormon who ostracizes a disaffected or former church member is not living his/her religion. Period.

There are some object lessons here.

Count on the Old Grey Lady to say that which has been said so many times before. They still think it's not news until they say so.

The BBC looks at left-leaning faith.

Well, that just about sums it up. Have to love those Letters to the Editor.

This guy is begging for trouble. There is no faith, including my own, where I would have a problem conjuring up a problematic doctrine if I wanted to.

And finally…

This would be funny if I didn't know there are people that actually thought that way. The problem with absurdity as humor is that it has to be, you know, actually absurd.

Meanwhile, this is legitimately funny:

Given the shortcomings of the other Republican candidates, Romney would be the clear front-runner, if not for one rarely discussed matter: his religion.

Clearly this guy has never read a single article written about Romney, since they all mention his religion.

Lowell: Yes, that is an amazing statement. I almost never agree with Al Hunt, but he's too smart to saying something that dumb. Maybe he meant other candidates don't discuss Romney's religion? I do think he was pretty close to the target with this:

The real root of anti-Mormon sentiment is the religion's passion for proselytizing - Romney and his five children all spent two years as church missionaries - and an illegitimate threat: to some, it's a weird cult.

Religious fundamentalists traditionally fear potential rivals. Four decades ago, some church-run colleges in the South were more receptive to Jews than Catholics on the faculties. That's because their daughters were much less likely to marry a Jew or convert to Judaism; Catholicism was more of a threat.

Now that is a subject that is truly rarely-discussed. To me, it's the elephant in the room, and it's getting bigger and bigger all the time.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted in Reading List | No Comments yet » | Print this post | Email This Post