How Huckabee's "cosmopolitan" faith helps him reach out to both the old and new guards of evangelicalism.
What is a "cosmopolitan evangelical," and how does he or she differ from an everyday evangelical, if there is such a thing? Several sociologists have commented on a perceived shift in American evangelicalism's image, goals, and rhetoric, most notably Michael D. Lindsay, author of Faith in the Halls of Power: How Evangelicals Joined the American Elite. He thinks that if you want to see what this new breed of evangelical looks like, you only have to look as far as Mike Huckabee, who indisputably had the vote of conservative Christians to thank for his Iowa victory two weeks ago.
Huckabee, though quite comfortable with speaking publicly about his personal relationship with Christ, his conservative views on religious hot-button issues like gay marriage and abortion, and even God's providential role in his Iowa win, nonetheless differs from many conservative evangelicals before him, especially those in the Religious Right.
"I'm a conservative, but I'm not mad at anybody," Huckabee often says, and when once asked whether the Christian life was the best way of life, he answered, "Well it is for me..." but that he didn't want to come off as "judgmental, caustic or pushy." As David Brooks of The New York Times recently noted, "Huckabee is the first ironic evangelical on the national stage. He's funny, campy (see his Chuck Norris fixation) and he's not at war with modern culture." In other words, you won't hear Huckabee talking about his push to "take back America" anytime soon.
As last Saturday's South Carolina primary ended with Huckabee in second place behind John McCain by only a 3-percent margin, and Super Tuesday comes in two weeks, some pundits say Huckabee's success will rely largely on his ability to appeal to members of both the old and new guards of American evangelicalism, all the while appealing to non-evangelical American voters as well. As Lindsay writes on the blog The Imminent Frame,
Mike Huckabee must straddle the divide between the populists [old-guard evangelicals] and the cosmopolitans, convincing both that he is one of them. It’s a difficult balancing act, but Huckabee is singularly poised to unite both camps. Like Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan, he is able to exist on the margins of different groups and yet seem like an insider. To win, a candidate must appear as comfortable before factory workers as he is before titans of industry. Huckabee’s cosmopolitan faith helps him become all things to all people.
Jay Tolson, writing for U.S. News and World Report, echoes Lindsay's observation on the "Faith Matters" blog:
Whether Huckabee will learn to connect with a larger part of the electorate—or even see the need to do so—should become apparent in the coming primaries, particularly in Florida, a state with a strong core of evangelical voters but also a very diverse collection of other voters broadly representative of the American mix. . . . And how he comes through that trial may tell us as much about the new evangelicals as it does about Mike Huckabee.
Fortunately, the new evangelicals don't have to rely solely on a presidential win by Mike Huckabee to determine the strength of their voice in today's political arena.
Posted by Katelyn Beaty on January 21, 2008 3:40PM
Comments
Editorial sidebar: Somebody back me up here. Shouldn't the quote in the third paragraph read, "Huckabee is the first irenic evangelical on the national stage." I realize the quote is pulled directly from Brooks' column with the NYT, but I feel certain "ironic" is there instead of "irenic" because some copy editor was on cruise control with a spell checker.
If Brooks really meant to say "ironic," I don't get it. It doesn't make much sense (to me anyway). But if he meant to say "irenic" it makes perfect sense because Huckabee is "favoring, conducive to, or operating toward peace, moderation, or conciliation" (Merriam Webster). As Huckabee says, "I'm not mad at anybody."
Am I just missing the irony?
Posted by: Clay at January 21, 2008
Clay,
If you are right it would not surprise me. First of all, I regularly see typos like this in fields where you would expect a mastery of the English language to be a requirement. I keep seeing "it peaked my interest" instead of "it piqued my interest" among other things. Second, I didn't even know the word "irenic". You taught me something today.
On another note, Huckabee is really the best candidate the Republicans have. Too many of the Republicans just don't realize it yet. They're stuck in the "conventional wisdom" that he's a "liberal" or that he would be an easy kill for the Democrats. At least one prominent Democrat who had said that has later hinted that they really don't want to face Huckabee in the general election.
Posted by: Allen Fuller at January 21, 2008
I am so glad you posted this Clay. I am going with your option. NOW it makes sense to me too. Thanks!
I am one who has been busted up badly by spell check too.
Posted by: Wendy at January 22, 2008
Allen: Just FTR, I happen to be a full-bore Huckabite, and have supported his candidacy since around August. I'm 56, and he's the first candidate in my memory to whom I have ever sent money. I lose my "irenic" sensibilities when I hear Huck's views misstated and deliberately distorted, such as the bilge from the Club for Growth, or the paranoid blather of some hyper-free-market economic pundits on Fox or MSNBC, or the ridiculous "liberal" label by mudslinging Republican opponents. I'm glad Huckabee is an evangelical, and I strongly support his positions on life and family issues, but his appeal for me goes much further than his Christianity. I like his stands on social issues, fiscal issues, and justice issues. And perhaps just as important, I trust him. He is the genuine article. If I can trust the man, I can trust him as a politician, and as a President.
So, that's why I get irked when what should have been a good quote about Huckabee becomes a "huh?" quote because a NYT copy editor was asleep at the switch.
Posted by: Clay at January 22, 2008
The term "ironic" is no typo. Note that Brooks goes on to say that Huckabee is "funny" and "campy." Anybody who's seen the Colbert interviews with Huckabee will understand why Brooks calls Huckabee an "ironic" evangelical. The irony refers to Huckabee's attitude toward himself. He doesn't appear to take himself too seriously. The "ironic" does not refer to Huckabee's attitude to his evangelical beliefs, of course.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Posted by: Horace Jeffery Hodges at January 22, 2008
Huckabee has associated himself with John Hagee, in other words with the Judeo-'Christian' Pharisees against Christ. Just over a century before the birth of Christ, something very strange happened. Probably the worst group of people in the Bible ‘became Jews’. These people are condemned by all the major prophets. The Edomites were converted as a group to become Jews by John Hyrcanus, in about 120BC (Flavius Josephus, Antiquities, XIII ix 1; XV vii 9). Josephus, the Jewish historian who lived just after the time of Christ, says 'They (Edom) were hereafter no other than Jews'. The Judeo-Christians ignore this.
Posted by: John at January 22, 2008
I really like Mike Huckabee. McCain and Juliani are not socially
conservative. I like Romney's stand on the Economy, but he flip-flopped on the abortion issue; and I know Dr.Dobson did not seem to trust him. I also have reservations about the implications of a president who is a cult member; and Mormonism does not accept the basic tenets of Christianity. This qualifies it as a cult.
I know that God does not usually choose to interfere in matters that involve free will and human choice; but I'm praying that He will in this case. In addition, many of the criticisms that people have had with his record are based on scenarios where the truth has been exaggerated or warped. Mike Huckabee is funny and pleasant and I really enjoy hearing him speak. I am praying that evangelicals and others will step up and support him.
Posted by: Nancy Austin at January 22, 2008
The trouble with being on things to all people, is that, with the possible exception of St. Paul, you're probably going to look like a hypocrite, a phony and/or a bigot to some people. I don't know about the first two, but bigot is definitely a word to associate with Huckabee, though he's capricious in his choices.
For instance, he impressed at the Tavis Smiley/Cornell West debate, which GOP front runners shamefully didn't show up, then just before Martin Luther King Jr. day, he defended the indefensible, flying the Confederate flag...with a suggestion of non consensual sodomy with a foreign object for those who might disagree with him.
He would send a well received videotape to the racist Council of Conservative Citizens one year, then quite properly refuse to share the stage with a Holocaust denier the next year at that organization...though it's a disgrace to be invited by them in the first place, and anyone with neuron functioning wouldn't go near that organization anyway.
Posted by: Gregory Peterson at January 22, 2008
I have heard many comments condemning Mr. Huckabee for being an ordained minister, but I would rather have a minister than a hedge-fund trader (Mr. Romney) in the Whitehouse any day of the week. The terms Liberal and Conservative are thrown about by Christians too loosely. We let the discussion of right and wrong fall to the wayside. Christians let FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter influence them. Please, look at Rupert Murdoch's media world of sex and sensationalism. Look at Rush Limbaugh's glutonous, cigar-smoking, money-loving ways. Look at Ann Coulter's immodesty in dress and speech... and tell me that THEY are conservative. I hardly think so. Mr. Huckabee stands for something deeper than economic gain. More than anything else, the economy of our nation is determined by our nationa moral fiber. Rome didn't fall because of economic problems. It fell because it was immoral and corrupt. Mr. Romney represents Wall Street... the money lenders. Mr. Huckabee represents Main Street and American values. Think about it. Thank You.
Posted by: EricB at January 23, 2008
"Christians let FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter influence them."
I would hope the sentence would read "SOME Christians let FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter influence them."
Except for one Christian I know, most everyone else I know wouldn't give the above list much attention at all, except for maybe a momentary look of disgust and a quick channel change.
All of the above are usually subtly, and sometimes not so subtly, pervasively racist in their assumptions...so why are they so popular in post Civil Rights Movement America? Have we learned nothing from the 21 Century, except to be more subtly racist when not so subtle at all about anything else?
Posted by: Gregory Peterson at January 24, 2008
FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter
Except for one Christian I know, most everyone else I know wouldn't give the above list much attention at all, except for maybe a momentary look of disgust and a quick channel change
If the above is true of you then how can you state what have have said below?
All of the above are usually subtly, and sometimes not so subtly, pervasively racist in their assumptions...so why are they so popular in post Civil Rights Movement America? Have we learned nothing from the 21 Century, except to be more subtly racist when not so subtle at all about anything else?
Posted by: Doreen Pettit at January 27, 2008
Post a comment