|
|
|
|
Democrats and Religious Voters
Part One of Three By Dave Andrusko Good evening, and thanks to all our readers for taking time to read Today's News & Views. Part Two borrows from a thoughtful analysis t hat concludes it would be crazy for Democrats to embrace abortion even more. Part Three looks at euthanasia in the Netherland. Over at National Right to Life News Today (www.nationalrighttolifenews.org), we begin a powerful piece by bioethicist Wesley Smith. We also write about the selection of a true hero to pro-lifers as head of the United States Catholic Bishops. Please send your comments on Today's News & Views and National Right to Life News Today to daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha.
For example, as I write this, outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is muscling her caucus to allow her entire pro-abortion leadership team to remain in place after losing over 6o House Democratic seats. This is deep denial times ten. Likewise, the Abortion Establishment insists that the party double down. If Democratic candidates make abortion a high profile item, they will prevail. This is, of course, nonsense (see Part Two). But what to do about "religious voters"? Undeniably Democrats took a huge hit on November 2 and the question is why. The lead paragraph in a story in today's Roll Call newspaper offers an intriguing look at how "Democrats Lost the Faith of Religious Voters." Nathan Gonzales begins with, "Ever since Barack Obama uttered the words 'awesome God' in his 2004 convention speech, Democrats embarked on a multiyear journey to convince voters of faith. But any inroads Democrats made with religious voters over the past four years were essentially washed away in this year's midterm elections." To take just two statistical examples, "A couple of weeks ago, Democratic candidates received only 19 percent of the white evangelical vote compared with 77 percent for Republican candidates." In 2006 Democratic candidates won 28% of that vote; Obama carried 24% in 2008. Gonzales reports that White Catholic voters "swung dramatically toward the GOP, by 18 points earlier this month." In 2006 Democrats won white Catholic voters "narrowly" while Sen. John McCain "won them by only 5 points in the 2008 presidential contest." There is a wide variety of excuses/explanations. Everything from blaming the poor economy; to focusing too much on "more pressing issues"; to individual candidates having a different outreach team in place; to not have a large-scale, vigorous national outreach. A final excuse came from one particular candidate whose 2008 campaign staff came out of a "progressive faith movement," but whose staff this year "had the look, feel and personnel of a more traditional political campaign." More Mammon, less God, I guess. Having said all that, Gonzales then summarizes: "This cycle, the party's use of faith was dramatically different from the past two election cycles." By that he means "with their backs against the wall," the approach of Democratic candidates was either "non-existent" or a genuinely ugly attack (my term) on their opponent's faith. But all this manages to miss what we've written about repeatedly here and in Part Two. With a few exceptions, it hurts Democrats to be the party of abortion, especially (but not exclusively) with people of faith. To be pro-life is to be much closer to where the majority of the American electorate that to be pro-abortion. It also hurt to be the party of ObamaCare, which not only poses a direct threat to people's medical care, but also promotes abortion and rationing. Sure, it never pays to ignore people (in this case, people of faith), and you will always be in big trouble if you batter your opponent with charges no one in his or her right mind would believe. But when you are the wrong side of issues that matter deeply to a large segment of the American people, don't be surprised if you take a tremendous hit. Especially when the electorate understands that in addition to the candidate's own weaknesses, a vote for Democrat "X" is a vote for the pro-abortion leadership team of Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. |
When
you get your head handed to you electorally, you can engage in deep denial,
look reality square in the face, or try to finesse it/split the difference.
With Democrats having been clobbered both in Congress and (in some ways)
even worse in the state legislatures, they are employing all three options.