Connect with us

News

'You gotta be tough': White evangelicals remain enthusiastic about Donald Trump

Published

on

'You gotta be tough': White evangelicals remain enthusiastic about Donald Trump

First Church of God Pastor Charles Hundley sings a hymn during the morning service, Sunday, Jan. 7, in Des Moines, Iowa. Former President Donald Trump and his rivals for the GOP nomination have pushed for endorsements from pastors and faith communities. Evangelicals and religious Christian groups are traditionally critical to the Republican Party.

Charlie Neibergall/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Charlie Neibergall/AP


First Church of God Pastor Charles Hundley sings a hymn during the morning service, Sunday, Jan. 7, in Des Moines, Iowa. Former President Donald Trump and his rivals for the GOP nomination have pushed for endorsements from pastors and faith communities. Evangelicals and religious Christian groups are traditionally critical to the Republican Party.

Charlie Neibergall/AP

White evangelical Christians show no signs of backing away from Donald Trump. That appears to be one takeaway from Iowa’s Republican caucuses, where the former president won a decisive victory over several challengers.

In 2016, there was a lot of head-scratching about evangelical support for Trump – given his divorces, allegations of both extramarital affairs and sexual assault, and his insults toward women, immigrants, and others.

Advertisement

But many white evangelicals, like Shelley Buhrow, look past all that.

Nobody’s perfect

“Have you read the Bible?” Buhrow asked. “Many people in the Bible were married multiple times and they didn’t always do the perfect thing.”

Buhrow, who attended a pro-Trump event in a suburb outside Des Moines leading up to Monday’s Iowa caucuses, says she’s been a Trump supporter since his first Iowa caucus in 2016.

“People aren’t perfect,” Buhrow said. “God is perfect.”

Buhrow disregards the 91 state and federal criminal charges Trump is facing – including trying to overturn the 2020 election. She says they’re illegitimate and she doesn’t think they’ll stick.

Advertisement

A binary choice, no longer

In this file photo from 2020, People raise their arms in prayer during a rally for evangelical supporters of President Donald Trump at the King Jesus International Ministry church, Friday, Jan. 3, 2020, in Miami.

Lynne Sladky/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Lynne Sladky/AP

Advertisement


In this file photo from 2020, People raise their arms in prayer during a rally for evangelical supporters of President Donald Trump at the King Jesus International Ministry church, Friday, Jan. 3, 2020, in Miami.

Lynne Sladky/AP

Around 8 in ten white evangelicals supported Trump in the general election in 2016 and a similar number again in 2020, when he lost to President Biden. Some defended those votes as a choice between Trump, who would advance goals like restricting abortion, and a Democrat, who would not.

Luana Stoltenberg, a Republican state representative, said she had some initial concerns about Donald Trump when he first emerged on the political scene.

“I just knew him as, you know, the developer and kind of the playboy kind of a guy,” she remembered.

Advertisement

Stoltenberg had friends who “prayed through it” and believed Trump was “supposed to be” the president, and she herself quickly came around to supporting Trump in the 2016 election.

But this year, according to CNN entrance polls, more than half of white evangelicals in Iowa still chose Trump, even when they had several other options.

Many, like Brad Sherman, who’s both a state representative and an evangelical pastor, see Trump’s harsh style as an asset even though the former president sometimes “says things I wouldn’t say.”

“Yeah, he’s brash; he’s a fighter,” Sherman says. ‘That’s who we need right now in the political arena, in the environment that exists. You gotta be tough.”

A culture at a crossroads

White evangelicals find themselves in a paradoxical moment, as their overall share of the U.S. population steadily declines. They wield outsized power in American politics because of their grip on the Republican Party. But two long-term trends have resulted in waning numbers and cultural influence for white evangelicals: Increasing racial diversity, at the same time that Americans as a whole are becoming less religious. At the same time, Latino evangelical communities appear to be growing, a trend driven in part by immigration patterns.

Advertisement

Al Perez is an Iowa pastor who has worked on evangelical-led efforts to connect Republican candidates with voters of color in the state. Perez says sometimes the voices of non-white evangelicals have been left out conversations about Republican politics.

Perez didn’t endorse anyone in the Iowa caucuses, but he says he’s concerned about the way he’s seen some evangelicals talk about Trump, even comparing him to Jesus Christ.

“As an evangelical – Latino evangelical – I’m very concerned,” Perez said. “That this is almost…messianic, as though that’s the best way to describe it to you. I’m very concerned.”

Perez is part of the Pentecostal tradition within conservative Christianity, which emphasizes miracles and direct communication from God. He was concerned, he says, when some in his tradition became convinced that Trump would win the 2020 election because of what they believed were divine “prophecies” about Trump.

“I think the lines become blurred,” he explained “We cross certain lines when we think a certain candidate’s going to solve all the ills and problems of the world, of America.”

Advertisement

An increasingly political label

In this file photo from 2020, Pastor Paula White, left, and other faith leaders pray with President Donald Trump, center, during a rally for evangelical supporters at the King Jesus International Ministry church in Miami.

Lynne Sladky/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Lynne Sladky/AP

Advertisement


In this file photo from 2020, Pastor Paula White, left, and other faith leaders pray with President Donald Trump, center, during a rally for evangelical supporters at the King Jesus International Ministry church in Miami.

Lynne Sladky/AP

Samuel Perry, a sociologist at the University of Oklahoma, says even with recent victories like the overturning of the abortion-rights decision Roe v. Wade, many still see themselves as underdogs in a culture war.

“And they believe Trump is the guy who has in the past and continues to fight for them,” Perry said.

Since Trump’s rise, Perry says that the word “evangelical” has taken on an increasingly political meaning versus its religious or theological one.

Advertisement

“The conservative, Trump-supporting faction of evangelicalism, I think, has laid claim successfully to the evangelical space,” Perry explained, “in a way that if you don’t fit in that, and you don’t feel like all of what that term represents now is you, then then you back away.”

But Perry says most of those who still identify as evangelical show no signs of softening their support for Trump.

Still, moving even a relatively small number of those voters could make a big difference in November.

Doug Pagitt is executive director of Vote Common Good, which works to persuade evangelicals and Catholics to support progressive candidates and policies. His group will be heavily focused on a handful of key swing states this year.

“Because moving 3% of evangelicals away from voting for Donald Trump on Election Day makes it, by our estimates, impossible for him to win in those states,” Pagitt predicted.

Advertisement

That’s assuming Trump becomes the Republican nominee. For now, all eyes are on the Jan. 23 primary in New Hampshire – a state with fewer evangelical voters and more moderates – who may be somewhat more open to another candidate.

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

Published

on

US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets

The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.

“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.

“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.

In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.

“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.

Advertisement

Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.

This story has been updated.

Continue Reading

Trending