Panel on Religion and the 2024 election
Event sponsored by the Center for the Study of Evangelicalism
Last night I drove down to Colorado Springs to participate in a panel discussion on religion and the election. As I have down a couple of these panels since 2016, it was oddly familiar.
The event was sponsored by the new Center for the Study of Evangelicalism at the University of Colorado — Colorado Springs. The Center is directed by a religious studies scholar, a historian, and an anthropologist. I have been suggested for the advisory board.
We gathered in Grace and St. Steven’s Episcopal Church, which is a gorgeous facility. There were about 120 community members present. It’s safe to say that most were not pleased with the outcome of the election.
There were four of us on the panel. David Gardner from Colorado College, Paul Harvey from UCCS (the historian mentioned above), April Mack from Iliff Seminary, and me. Jeff Scholes of UCCS (the religious studies professor above) and long-time friend moderated.
It’s fair to say that we each brought our disciplines and past work to the table. It was a good conversation over the course of an hour, followed by a half hour of Q&A from the floor, and another half hour of post-session conversations. I won’t try to summarize everyone else’s observations.
Since I had prepared some remarks in a Word Document so that I could have relevant data at my fingertips, I thought a good use of this SubStack was to simply share my notes. The ninety-minute event was recorded and I have a copy of that video if anyone wants to spend the time.
We were given the questions a couple of days in advance which gave me the opportunity to try to organize my thoughts in some coherent fashion. Since these were my notes, the references herein are not properly cited. I’m glad to share sources if anyone is interested.
1) As ballots continue to be counted, and the outcome of the 2024 election becomes clearer, what do you see as the key forces, motivations, and movements that shaped this election?
a) The easy answer is frustration with the post-Covid inflationary spiral creating domestic inflationary pressures (food, gas, and rent) related to supply chain issues. Macroeconomic indicators improved but prices were slow to follow suit. Biden administration was slow to recognize this, touting macro forces and future investments as solutions. Harris tried but was not believed.
b) Immigration concerns follow, especially as seen in diverting scarce resources. Springfield Ohio: migrants weren’t eating pets but they were stressing infrastructure. Arlie Russell Hochschild’s Strangers in Their Own Land examining Tea Party era Louisiana. The Deep Story was that people were cutting in line and they were the wrong kinds of people. Demagoguing on imagined crime worked, not because it was true but because it fit the Deep Story.
c) Add in concerns about social change. PRRI this fall: 68% of Republicans and 68% of Evangelicals say society has changed for the worse since 1950. Demographic change. They won’t say this out loud and we’ll all accept the price of eggs as the logical answer.
2) There were several states that had strong turnout both for Republican candidates, and for abortion rights measures – how might we understand these seemingly incongruent outcomes, and what they suggest about how voters are negotiating their values at the ballot box?
a) I mentioned that Evangelicals mirrored Republicans on the social change question. This is similar to analysis I did seven years ago. I looked at only White Evangelical Republicans and examined the role of a variety of religion independent variables (attendance, born again, religion important) to see what impact they had. The takeaway is that they had no impact on what I called “Conservative Issues” like small government or opposition to immigration and welfare. On the other hand, they had a big impact on what I called “Moral Issues”. There were sizable religiosity difference on issues like opposition to Abortion, Same Sex Marriage, Unwed Mothers. So for “normal Republicans” they can vote for abortion protections. Harder for the more evangelical vote.
b) Colorado Polling Institute data from the week before the election: Those who attended church once a month or more opposed Prop 79 69% to 31%. Attending occasionally supported 79 by 59% to 41%. Never attenders came in at 81% to 19%.
c) One other factor worth mentioning: horrific news stories of women in crisis or dying due to draconian state laws created permission structure.
3) When discussing religion and politics in the contemporary moment, conversation often narrows to consider a specific kind of Christian conservatism – what other relationships between religion and politics are shaping our current landscape, and how might we disaggregate what is often portrayed as a monolithic Christian voting bloc?
a) I could talk all evening on this question. First, evangelicals have heard about perceived or real discrimination against Christians for five decades. Balmer, the Moral Majority and Bob Jones. Impact in 1980 election, 1992 Operation Rescue, 2004 Traditional Family Amendments. All to stop government from discriminating against Christians. A 2017 PRRI survey found that 67% of white evangelicals believed Christians were discriminated against. This contrasts belief that other groups faced discrimination (52% Trans folk, 49% Muslims, 35% Hispanics).
b) Then there is the influence of Christian Nationalism and the New Apostolic Reformation. Whitehead and Perry, in Taking America Back for God, found that just under 20% were what they called Ambassadors of CN. Another 32% were Accommodators. The NAR, documented in Matthew Taylor’s recent The Violent Take It By Force, is a network of prophets and apostles who operate independently of denominational structures. They played a major role in the runup and aftermath of the 2020 election. Espousing Seven Mountain dominionism. Like CN Ambassadors, they are a relatively small fraction but have vast social media influence. Most important, their rhetoric gets picked up by CN Accommodators and pastors/writers/podcasters who have been practicing Spiritual Warfare language for fifty years.
c) I have to mention the most amazing chart PRRI ever presented. The asked respondents if “an elected official who commits immoral acts can still behave ethically in the professional role.” In 2011, only 30% of White Evangelicals agreed. In 2016, 72% of them agreed. A pragmatic response to believing THEY are out to get you.
4) What religious actors and/or key issues should we be paying attention to in the coming months and years to best understand the shifting landscape of religious politics in the United States?
a) CN and NAR will continue to be important going forward. We shouldn’t be distracted by every patriotic church service or pastor bemoaning social change. The serious CN and NAR actors will use those images to deflect what they really are committed to doing.
b) Another factor to keep in mind that majorities of Mainline and Catholics also favored Trump. The CPI poll didn’t break by religious family but only by attendance. The role of Conservative Catholics in shaping argument will be worth watching.
c) There are some interesting shifts underway within the white evangelical segment. Political scientists and sociologists over recent decades have documented that part of the rise of the Nones or movement to Mainline churches is a result of the alignment of evangelicals with Republican politics. “If this is it, I’m out”. A result of this departure is an increased homogeneity of those left behind (not a joke).
d) Ryan Burge has recently documented that the percentage of self-identified evangelicals who attend church yearly or less grew from 29% in 2008 to 40% in 2023. This will solidify the evangelical-Republican alliance for decades to come. Note: According to another Burge analysis, Colorado’s percentage of adults who were unaffiliated grew from 32% in 2008 to 45% in 2022.
Please share your reactions, ask questions, or tell what I missed.
It is important and interesting to ask the question: What is next for the religious organizations that don't align with the results of this election?