Gov. Bush became President Bush by winning the support of socially conservative Christians. Can John McCain leave the senate without their support?
I mentioned last month that John McCain's trump card for socially conservative Christians would be his well-established opposition to abortion. But that just doesn't rally the troops like it used to.
In 2004, to stoke turnout among conservatives, Karl Rove engineered the addition of anti-gay-marriage voter initiatives to the ballots in Ohio and other states; last week, though, when the California Supreme Court voted to allow gay marriage in that state, only hard-core activists were able to muster much outrage. When it comes to the Constitution, McCain is on the wrong side of the voters, and of history
Save for California, I don't know any states that will be voting on gay marriage in November. That could make it even harder for McCain to win over those evangelical Christians the NYT reports remain wary of the presumptive Republican nominee:
Lori Viars, an evangelical activist in Warren County, Ohio, essentially put her life on hold in the fall of 2004 to run a phone bank for President Bush. Her efforts helped the president's ambitious push to turn out evangelicals and win that critical swing state in a close election.
But Ms. Viars, who is among a cluster of socially conservative activists in Ohio being courted by Senator John McCain's campaign through regular e-mail messages, is taking a wait-and-see attitude for now toward Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee.
"I think a lot of us are in a holding pattern," said Ms. Viars, who added that she wanted to see whom Mr. McCain picked for his running mate.
(skip)
The campaign has been peppering over 600 socially conservative grass-roots and national leaders with regular e-mail messages - highlighting, for example, Mr. McCain's statement criticizing a May 15 decision by the California Supreme Court overturning the state's ban on same-sex marriage, or his recent speech on his judicial philosophy. It has also held briefings for small groups of conservative leaders before key speeches. Charlie Black, one of Mr. McCain's senior advisers, recently sat down with a dozen prominent evangelical leaders in Washington, where he emphasized, among other things, Mr. McCain's consistent anti-abortion voting record.
Mr. McCain's outreach to Christian conservatives has been a quiet courting, reflecting a balancing act: his election hopes rely on drawing in the political middle and Democrats who might be turned off should he woo the religious right too heavily by, for instance, highlighting his anti-abortion position more on the campaign trail.
"If McCain tried Bush's strategy of just mobilizing the base, he would almost certainly fall short," said John C. Green, a senior fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. "Because the Republican brand name is less popular and the conservative base is restive, McCain has special needs to reach out to independent and moderate voters, but, of course, he can't completely neglect the evangelical and conservative base."
The instrumental role of evangelicals in Mr. Bush's victory in 2004 over Senator John Kerry is an oft-repeated tale at this point. Mr. Bush's openness about his personal faith and stances on social issues earned him a following among evangelicals, who represented about a quarter of the electorate in 2004. Exit polls in the 2004 election found that 78 percent of white "born again" or evangelical Protestants had voted for Mr. Bush.
In contrast, Mr. McCain's relationship with evangelicals has long been troubled. In 2000, when he was running against Mr. Bush for the Republican nomination, Mr. McCain castigated Pat Robertson and the Rev. Jerry Falwell as "agents of intolerance."
In a sign of the lingering distrust, Mr. McCain finished last out of nine Republican candidates in a straw poll last year at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, a gathering for socially conservative activists.
James C. Dobson, the influential founder of the evangelical group Focus on the Family, released a statement in February, when Mr. McCain was on the verge of securing the Republican nomination, affirming that he would not vote for Mr. McCain and would instead stay home if he became the nominee. Dr. Dobson later softened his stance and said he would vote but has remained critical of Mr. McCain.
"For John McCain to be competitive, he has to connect with the base to the point that they're intense enough that they're contagious," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. "Right now they're not even coughing."
We've heard about a million times how important socially conservative Christians -- often overgeneralized as evangelicals -- were to transforming Gov. Bush to President Bush. Maybe the machine that Falwell and Robertson and Dobson made is wearing out, but can a Republican actually attain the presidency without their backing?
This article was cross-posted at The God Blog.
Posted by Brad Greenberg on June 9, 2008 12:14PM

Comments
It's very hard to be enthusiastic about John McCain. I've been disliking him for a long time. Now he's thrown Hagee under the bus along with other religious leader. He's alienated conservative Christians. He's a panderer to dems and independents. He denigrates the President and Republicans all the time. I'm just getting warmed up.
Posted by: Melody at June 10, 2008
I'm not excited about McCain. I think his energy policies are wrong headed. He has bought into the global warming junk science hook line and sinker. That is a major major policy issue. I think his health care reform isn't any reform at all and Romney had a much better approach. His campaign finance reform I believe is unconstitutional and is being challenged as such. He worked with the gang of 14 to squelch some good conservative judges. And know he's for the tax cuts after being against them???? Come on. So personally if the dems get elected they'll mess things up so bad it might not be a bad thing.
Posted by: Doug at June 10, 2008
In Canada we have a similar problem: a Conservative leader (our prime minister) who is even less committed to social conservatism. But we also have no viable opposing political parties which have positive stands on most of the debatable issues from a morally conservative point of view.
Politics is the art of the possible. If McCain is the best candidate for president, well I would say that it will be important to vote for him, and to try to make sure that as many social conservatives as possible are elected to Congress.
Posted by: Ted Hewlett at June 10, 2008
I saw McCain the other day in Reno and I've never seen a nominee take so much incoming fire from his base-i.e. the fence, ANWAR, campaign finance reform, global warming and etc... But we are one vote from serious destruction of Roe. We've had 50 million abortions. That alone is enough for me. McCain's stem cell position is probably good enough. He opposes creating embryos, either by IVF or cloning. And since it's illegal to get paid for "eggs" for research that will crimp cloning. With the new reprograming technique being the hottest thing in stem cell research and with it giving scientists the functional equivalent of embryonic stem cells, and since it's cheaper, easier and more efficient than cloning, that should kill cloning and embryonic stem cell research in the near future just like confusing the tongues killed the Tower of Babel. 50 million abortions is enough. I'm pulling the lever for McCain.
Posted by: Don at June 10, 2008
I would say, Melody, that those are good reasons to support him. But, I won't. He and his campaign spent a good year, I've read, wooing Hagee without vetting him.
Most any Hagee sermon is probably disgusting, I've watched three or four random ones over the years, so there is little excuse for that exhibition of poor judgment by McCain and his staff. The same goes for Parsley. His personal Arizona SBC pastor is reportedly condescendingly and sotto voce anti-gay, which is unpardonable, but reportedly more warm and fuzzy than Hagee or Parsley, who are simply bizarre.
If memory serves, for instance, Hagee bragged that his wonderful father gave a critic face cancer! Not to mention that slavery is God's will...Christians should seize the land of their enemies and throw them in chains, forever. Brave words to broadcast from a former Confederate state (which, by the way, had invaded mine during the Civil War...and my great grandfather was part of Sherman's March to the Sea, guarding railroad crossings and bridges. Where "white" Southerners grateful to be freed from the yoke of autocratic, slaveholder tyranny? Not hardly.)
While you can't fault McCain, who had slave holding ancestors, come to think of it, for valor as a prisoner of war, he has otherwise heavily, perhaps excessively, relied upon his famous father, and his grandfather's fame and name (in Navy circles), and later, his wealthy second wife's beer money family, to establish and further his careers. Even then, he didn't make Admiral, and that's probably a message from the Navy that he shouldn't be President either.
Capt. and Senator should be adequate as life achievements for a non self-made man of average intelligence, but of above average wit, and they are impressive. (I made all of three stripes in the Air Force, in an uneventful and undistinguished single enlistment.) I think Obama will be less likely to run into the Peter Principle if elected.
Besides, McCain is sounding whiny these days, and talking down to a much better educated fellow senator, over 45, Black man as if to a boy, has the appearance of clueless, at best, racism. And haven't we had enough of that from Republican leaders?
Posted by: Gregory Peterson at June 10, 2008
Folks, I'm neither Republican, Democrat, or Independant, I simply vote for the person I believe can do the best job and be this nations best leader. After reading your comments I find only one worthwhile, but I do appreaciate the opinion(s). John McCain is without doubt the only cadidate that has U.S. interests at heart. When compared to the alternative I can't understand anyones doubt. To stay home and not vote as some have indicated as a possibility smacks at not believing or wanting to be a part of our consitutional based republic. Those who fail to vote have in my opinion, for what it's worth, no right to complain of the outcome. In these days of "out of control self-serving Congress" the only path we have in bringing sanity back to this country is to vote and force the issue(s) of consituency to the forefront. Vote your conscience, pray about it, make a wise decision,and support the most logical and experienced candidate, Senator McCain of course.
Posted by: Raymond at June 10, 2008
I think that the evangelical movement
has a long way to go.
We are living in a technological age
and it seems as though the evangelicals
are propagating 19th century style politics
which was popular during the time of Senator Anthony Comstock
who endorsed the same things that Dobson,Falwell,and Robertson endorsed in the 1980s and 90s
The ideology that they had was good
when the evangelical movement had its political muscle
under Ralph Reed's Christian Coalition
and the Promise Keepers movement
but I believe the mentality of the country has changed a lot
since those days
and McCain is bound to run into problems
also McCains oratory in making speeches is not very good
operating as a weak speech giver
Whereas Obama is known by many in the media as the black Kennedy
because of his ability to give Kennedyesque type speeches
which maybe part of the reason for Ted Kennedy's
endorsement of Obama being that Obama has reminicents of JFK speechwise
If McCain could rally the people the way Kennedy did
and Obama does then he might have a better chance
Also McCain is balding and that is not good for the camera
America has a Hollywood mentality and glamorizes image
for the camera and Obama takes the cake on that one
so thats another plus for him on top of the comments of the other people here
Lets face it whether we like it or not
the age of the Victorian morals
that Christians have held so dear
is dead in America unfortunately.
Posted by: Peter G.Albers at June 10, 2008
I've voted republican in the last five presidential elections and I will again this year, specially this year. I don't think Mr.Obama's liberal views on marriage and abortion, his lack of military and foreign policy experience and overall greenhorn makeup is the best for the country. I feel that he will mess things so bad that it will take a few decades to get the country in the right orbit again. I think that while McCain is not a hole-in-one he is by far the better man to call at 3 in the morning.
Posted by: Manuel N Marrero at June 10, 2008
Hey, an elegant prose poem from Mr. Albers. Thank you.
Posted by: Gregory Peterson at June 10, 2008
Why is it that Democrat candidates are anti-marriage and never been divorced, while Republican candidates are pro-marriage, and on their second or third wealthy trophy wife? What a show of commitment.
Hey, the criticisms about Obama were the same ones made about Abraham Lincoln. It's not all about experience, it's about judgment, and McCain showed where his mind is when I saw him on Charley Rose. McCain said the the Republican Party was about states' rights, the political theory of class privilege and white supremacy. The only rights they respect is the state's only right, which they themselves exercise as their duty and privilege, in determining who fits where in their suppositions of hierarchy. Neo-Medieval. Morally and intellectually bankrupt. After all, that's what Confederates said they had fought for (that, and Southern Rights...which was about unfettered slaveholding). Voting for McCain, if he actually believes in states' rights, would be immoral, overtly racist and almost seditious. He gave an oath to serve and protect the Constitution, as did I, and states' rights is not about serving and protecting the Constitution, it's about subverting it for personal power and greed as an alleged entitlement from God.
Posted by: Gregory Peterson at June 10, 2008
John McCain's strategy to court Evangelicals baffles me. John Hagee and Rod Parsley are not the most prominent leaders, but both bring plenty of downside.
Meanwhile, Obama has spoken at an AIDS conference at Saddleback. That's not an endorsement, but it demonstrates Obama has insight into the nuances of the Evangelical camp, and knows where votes can be found.
Truth be told, McCain may not be very comfortable with faith based values, or expressing them publicly. There may be good reasons for that; it will just make it a little more work to energize the Republican base.
Posted by: strut2k at June 11, 2008
John McCain's strategy to court Evangelicals baffles me. John Hagee and Rod Parsley are not the most prominent leaders, but both bring plenty of downside.
Meanwhile, Obama has spoken at an AIDS conference at Saddleback. That's not an endorsement, but it demonstrates Obama has insight into the nuances of the Evangelical camp, and knows where votes can be found.
Truth be told, McCain may not be very comfortable with faith based values, or expressing them publicly. There may be good reasons for that; it will just make it a little more work to energize the Republican base.
Posted by: strut2k at June 11, 2008
McCain left the impression during his 2000 campaign, whether accurate or not, that he didn't care much for evangelicals. That lingering impression is hurting him now as he courts evangelical votes, and, as others have said, his bungled efforts to court "evangelical leaders" such as Hagee and Parsley, aren't helping him much.
Posted by: John Hale at June 11, 2008
I have more respect for Todd Bentley, who is the guy leading the fiasco in Lakeland, than the two guys running for POTUS. At least this guy knows how to be a genuie con-artist.
Posted by: David at June 14, 2008
Post a comment