As a guest blogger, I’ve been asked by Dan Gilgoff to write some posts concerning my new book on politics and religion and its relevance to the present election cycle. I welcome the opportunity, and I thank Dan and the regular bloggers for hosting me here. Published a month ago by Simon & Schuster, my book is Onward Christian Soldiers: the Growing Political Power of Catholics and Evangelicals in the United States. Some have called it the anti-Dionne book because it argues that the influence of religious conservatives in American politics is far from over. Why? Two reasons: The United States remains a religiously-observant country producing “Christian soldiers” for political battle, and the reasons giving rise, in the first place, to the “Religious Right” have not gone away. I characterize those reasons in my book as clustered around the defense of the family, traditionally understood.
As Dan Gilgoff has chronicled so well with his “God-o-Meter,” this election cycle has witnessed an abundance of references to God, faith, and religious values. In fact, I have been using Gilgoff’s meter in various interviews as proof of the continuing influence of religiously-active voters. It’s obvious that the Democrats are attempting to close the “God-gap,” as described by Amy Sullivan, and that all the GOP candidates made a strong pitch to its base of religious conservatives. (It’s interesting that since his nomination, Sen. McCain has risen two notches, from 4 to 6, on God-o-Meter.)
Both Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama have remained at the top of the meter throughout the campaign, yet Sen. Obama has had trouble connecting with Catholic voters, except for a few of the primary states. That Obama finished 30 points behind Sen. Clinton in Pennsylvania was stunning given that he had the endorsement of the state’s most prominent and beloved Catholic politician, Sen. Bob Casey, Jr. If anyone, even his supporter Cong. Tim Roemer, doubted Sen. Obama had a Catholic problem, the Pennsylvania primary settled the issue.
In early January, I published a column on InsideCatholic.com, “Why Barack Obama Will Not Win the Catholic Vote.” It contained portions of an interview with Steve Wagner, the pollster who did most of the work on the “Catholic Voter Project” for Crisis magazine in 1998-1999. Wagner surprised me with his prediction of doom for Sen. Obama among Catholic voters. Wagner said Obama had not yet made “persuasive arguments on key social issues” and that his core constituency was to the left of most Catholics. The problems of his association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright have only corroborated the perception of his alignment with the political left. (Wright’s feisty performance at the National Press Club today was more bad news for Obama.)
Sen. Clinton, who has done well among Catholics, poses a much greater threat to Republicans and John McCain than Sen. Obama. Clinton’s reach into the religiously-active voters, especially Catholics, goes much further than Obama’s. No doubt Obama inspires intensity, but the numbers aren’t large enough to win in a national election.
Hillary Clinton has inherited some of the popularity her husband enjoyed among Catholic voters, but it is her clearly outlined social justice message that can attract Catholics much like Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” did in 2000.
A social justice message that connects to the core concerns of parents who want to raise their children in a less hostile and debilitating cultural climate can challenge the social conservatism of the GOP and its nominee. Whether the Democratic nominee will make that connection remains to be seen.