Sheâs not giving them one
With Election Day less than two weeks away, there are a lot of white evangelicals who do not want to vote for Donald Trump in November. But they probably will. Why?
Because they do not believe there is a place for them in Kamala Harrisâs America.
Many rank-and-file white evangelicals are fed up with Trump. I talk to them regularly. They live in my neighborhood. They are part of the constituency of Messiah University, the central Pennsylvania Christian college where I teach. They are part of my evangelical faith community. They live in my neighborhood. They are on social media.
These evangelicals are tired of Trump’s lies, the demonization of his enemies, his assault on democratic institutions, his refusal to accept the 2020 election results, the felony charges, and his defense of the January 6 insurrectionists.
They also believe abortion is murder and that there are only two genders.
Some of them are working class people who have never had any form of privilege in their lives and thus resent it when educated folks tell them that they now have “white privilege.” Some of them know that racism is a systemic problem in the United States, but think that efforts on behalf of diversity, equity, and inclusion, while important, have gone too far.
They know that Kamala Harris does not share their views. But they also know that Trump is bad for democracy and bad for the church. They are listening to see if the Harris campaign can cast a vision of democratic pluralism that respects themâa campaign âfor all Americans.â
But Harris seems to believe she can win without white evangelicals.
Take abortion. Roe v. Wade is gone, but abortion remains a major concern among white evangelicals. Harris never speaks about abortion as a moral problem. Instead, she talks in the language of rights. She says nothing about society’s collective responsibility to care for the unborn.
During her debate with Trump, Harris made an impassioned defense of abortion rights. Politically speaking, it was probably her best moment. But she did not address how she plans to reverse the upward trend in the number of abortions in America since 2020.
Does she care about the rise in abortions? It’s hard to tell. When Trump asked her if she favored abortions in the seventh, eighth, or ninth month of pregnancy, she shook her head sarcastically and said, âCome on.â White evangelicals wanted to hear a specific answer to this question. Harris did not provide one.
We still don’t know if Harris favors any limits on abortion. But we do know that she is the first major presidential candidate to campaign at an abortion clinic.
If Harris would strike a balanced tone on abortion she might peel some white evangelical votes away from Trump in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Michigan. Her crusade to restore Roe v. Wade (or codify the right to an abortion in federal law) has merit. But why not spend time on the trail talking about how her social policies can lift the poor and thus reduce the need for abortions?
Barack Obama is hitting the campaign trail for Harris this month. Perhaps she might learn a few lessons from his 2008 campaign. Obama was pro-choice, but he also acknowledged that good people could disagree on the issue.
He made a point of talking to evangelicals at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church and Messiah University’s Compassion Forum. He tried to speak in a language of faith that resonated with evangelical Christians.
Obama gave some white evangelicals a reason to support him and he ended up winning 26% of their vote.
The Harris campaign’s faith director, progressive pastor Jen Butler, seems to be focused more on solidifying Harris’s base among progressive Christians than trying to have a serious debate with previous Trump supporters who might be interested in changing their vote this time around.
And yes, there is an âEvangelicals for Harrisâ campaign. But its website does not include information on Harris’s views on abortion or gender identity. These are the policy categories that white evangelicals look for when they click on a campaign site. I don’t think Evangelicals for Harris is winning over many former Trump voters who are open to voting for the Democratic Partyâs candidate this time around.
I was recently talking to someone about just how close the presidential race is in my home state of Pennsylvania. Many evangelicals here are fed up with a Donald Trump-Doug Mastriano style of politics. But they are not on board with Harrisâat least not yet. They are looking for a reasonâany reasonâto pull the lever for her. Will Harris give them one? I really hope so. Even the smallest of gestures might do the trick.
John Fea teaches history at Messiah University, is a distinguished fellow at the Lumen Center in Madison, Wisconsin, and the editor of Current (CurrentPub.Com).
Perhaps you prefer -Summer Lee- style of politics. Your DJT hate has rendered you, groveling.
I have spoken with a good number of Democrats (both members and party officials) about getting their party to moderate on abortion, and the positive impact it would have on their electoral chances. Many of the members get it, but I was surprised how one official spoke with me very candidly on this matter, but I can not use her name, and I understand why.
She readily admitted that she and others know that moderation would lead many Evangelicals and Catholics to cross over and vote for the Democratic presidential candidate (we most recently spoke before Harris became the candidate), but some of the hard line wonât budge, and some would budge if they didnât fear the loss of some of their base.
For years I have tracked the poll numbers on abortion and politics, and my best guess is that the crossovers would far outnumber any loss of the base. And this official would appear to agree. So, for me, what the good professor says is spot on.
BTW, sometimes I consider joining the Democrats for Life to try and help generate movement. If any Current readers have done such, I would love to hear their opinions. Their organization can be found at: https://www.democratsforlife.org/
Given her recent declaration that there will be no religious exemptions, which means she would force Christian doctors to do abortions — or else — does not exactly endear me to her position. I recently voted for neither Trump nor Harris (mail-in voting) in part because of what you have said in this article. I adopted children from Ethiopia, Guatemala, and Latvia and do not appreciate Trump’s unhinged rhetoric. (I am also an academic economist who is against Trump’s tariffs — they cost Ford Motor Company more than a billion dollars in his term as president — and I also know the havoc that Harris’s rent controls and price controls will cause.)
I live in California and nine out of 10 political advertisements by Democrats make abortion front-and-center. There is no getting around the fact that Democrats consider abortion on demand — without limits — to be their number one priority. Forget anything else; it is abortion uber alles.
This is really good.
It seems as if every time Harris speaks about Christianity she puts her foot in her mouth. This election is going to be close. If she loses, the autopsy will be VERY revealing. Of course there is no guarantee that the Dems will know how to ask the right questions. This reminds me of the post-2004 autopsy when Jim Wallis was at his height as the Democratic Party’s religion guru. Obama got the message in 2008, Harris has not.
Given that presidents don’t typically have authority in such matters–any laws, state or federal, would go to the Supreme Court, and are there any?–it seems like it would be awfully simple for her just to say what she said about transgender surgeries, that she would follow the law. I suspect the reason she isn’t saying that is her internal polling is indicating there are no votes to be lost on the pro-life side that aren’t already lost?
This is a great piece! My sense is that Democrats are overreaching on abortion to please the most ideologically pro-choice (or even pro-abortion) parts of their base. I agree with Adenauer’s comments above. If Democrats moderated their position on abortion they could win more votes from Evangelicals who are disgusted with Trump, not to mention moderates. For example, Democrats could accept some restrictions such as on late-term abortions as well as the Hyde amendment. They could pledge to use social programs such as the child tax credit that Biden put in place in 2021 to reduce poverty. After all, the vast majority of women who have abortions are poor and seek to end unwanted pregnancies through abortion because they fell they have no other choice. In other words, Democrats could get 80-90% of what they want with abortion, plus added support for other parts of their agenda if they actually admitted abortion was a problem and tried to reduce it without making it illegal in most cases. The fact that they won’t change their approach is political malpractice. If Harris losses, and this is part of the reason, it will especially be so.