Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
Talking to Republican friends at the Trumpian crossroads

Talking to Republican friends at the Trumpian crossroads

Last updated on: August 30, 2016 at 7:33 pm by Fred Clark

Talking to Republican friends at the Trumpian crossroads 2016-08-30T19:33:59-04:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Last week I praised Fritz Rohlfing, the state Republican Party chairman for Hawaii, for denouncing the candidate who hijacked his party’s nomination for a U.S. congressional district in his state.

I don’t know anything else about Fritz Rohlfing. I haven’t read deeply about the particulars of Hawaiian Republican politics. I’ve never met the man or even seen his picture. Given that he is a state chairman for the Republican Party, I would assume that he and I disagree — strongly — about quite a few things. I would guess that he and I have very different starting points and arrive at very different conclusions when it comes to things like health care, taxation, Social Security, climate change, public education, poverty, abortion, contraception, same-sex marriage, the Pentagon, and the separation of church and state. My commending him for denouncing the erratic, bigoted, nominal “Republican” nominee for the 2nd District seat doesn’t diminish any of those important disagreements. It doesn’t suggest that either one of us is dismissing those many disagreements as unimportant.

But this does involve my granting Rohlfing and his fellow Hawaii Republicans the benefit of the doubt. And, just as significantly, it involves him stepping up to show that this trust is not misplaced.

The statement from Rohlfing that I praised was this one:

I want it understood by the general public and the media that the recent inflammatory comments made by candidate for Congress (CD2) Angela Kaaihue do not represent the views, values, or the sentiments of our Party and its members. … Her vulgar, racially-bigoted, and religiously-intolerant descriptions of Democratic Party candidates are offensive, shameful, and unacceptable in public discourse. … I unconditionally denounce her despicable statements.

I saw in that statement much that was unquestionably true and that I emphatically agree with. Kaaihue’s “vulgar, racially bigoted, and religiously intolerant descriptions” of her opponents are, indeed, “offensive, shameful, and unacceptable in public discourse.” Denouncing such statements unconditionally is, without a doubt, the necessary and appropriate response. That’s why I praised Rohlfing for saying that, and recommended his statement as a model for anyone whose party nomination has been hijacked by an erratic bigot.

In saying so, of course, I also had another erratic bigot in mind — someone whose political success has been greater, and far more consequential for the future of America, and of the Republican Party. I mean Donald Trump, obviously, who captured the Republican Party’s national nomination for president despite — or perhaps because of — his habit of saying things every bit as “offensive, shameful, and unacceptable” and every bit as “inflammatory … vulgar, racially bigoted, and religiously intolerant” as anything said by poor befuddled Angela Kaaihue.

Kaaihue’s case is, perhaps, easier for Republicans to contend with. She doesn’t seem to have any long-term ideological ties to the party and appears to have chosen to run as a Republican based on little more than a coin-flip, or perhaps because she saw less formidable competition in that party’s primary campaign. And she hardly can be said to have won a resounding victory in her primary campaign, securing her nomination with far less than a majority of the total votes.

Both of those things also seem to be true of Donald Trump. And that means that, in Trump’s case just as in Kaaihue’s, there is space for Republican leaders to say that he is an interloper who does not “represent the views, values, or the sentiments of our Party and its members.”

FriendsAndFamily

These are my white evangelical friends and they are Very Nice People. I have watched, disheartened, as they have slowly transformed from Bush Republicans into Palin Republicans. I can’t bear to see them further transformed into Trump Republicans.

But that’s not entirely, unreservedly true. While not a majority, the primary voters who endorsed Donald Trump’s views, values, and sentiments — more than 13 million of them — were members of the Republican Party. And they didn’t just agree to accept his views and values, his racially bigoted and religiously intolerant statements — they enthused about him for those very reasons, overjoyed that at last their own, Republican views were being represented.

So we could go another way with Donald Trump. We could refuse to allow other Republicans to attempt to distance themselves from their nominee. In for a penny, in for a pound — he’s all yours. We could argue that the Republican Party created the environment for Donald Trump to thrive — that they seeded the ground and prepared the stage for just such a vulgar, bigoted, intolerant, inflammatory candidate to succeed. And it wouldn’t be hard to back that up with evidence — decades of it, tracing the roots of Trumpism back to Goldwater in 1964 and to Nixon’s Southern Strategy, and Reagan’s, to AM talk radio and Fox News. We could argue, convincingly, that Trump may be somewhat different in degree, but not in kind.

And we absolutely do need to discuss all of that, too. Urgently. There’s much there that needs to be confronted, acknowledged, unpacked and interrogated, reformed and repented of.

But I think that’s our destination, not our first step. Or, at least, it won’t be helpful as a first step in dealing with individual Republicans. Here, again, I would highlight the difference — and the similarity — between “You’re better than this” and “You should be ashamed of yourself.” Those are, ultimately, two ways of getting at the same idea, but one is much likelier to be heard and to be accepted.

I started talking about this before Hillary Clinton’s speech last week in Reno, Nevada, in which she took the same approach to discussing Trump as I took here to discussing Kaaihue. Clinton did not call on voters to reject Donald Trump as the embodiment and apotheosis of the Republican Party’s ideology. She called on — and created space for — Republicans to reject Donald Trump as an interloper, in the same terms that Fritz Rohlfing rejected Angela Kaaihue. She hammered home that point by citing a long list of Republican condemnations and counter-examples, praising prominent Republicans by name for rejecting the views, values and sentiments of Donald Trump.

Sure, there was a bit of political jiu jitsu involved in that — her praise of their expression of principles increases the already existing pressure on them to choose, clearly and explicitly, between those principles and support for their nominee. But Hillary Clinton didn’t create that awkward conflict, Donald Trump did. All she did was highlight that they now face the same choice Rohlfing faced in Hawaii — stick with your principles or stick with your nominee.

Here’s a smart Vox piece getting into all the politically savvy implications of this approach, and of its opposite. There are political reasons for some Democrats to emphasize Trump’s difference from a supposed Republican mainstream, and there are political reasons for some Democrats to emphasize Trump’s similarity and embodiment of those mainstream Republican views, values and sentiments. Steve Benen has some insights into all that as well. Clinton’s generous overture to Republicans from the top of the ticket may just be the “good cop” counterpart to the “bad cop” efforts of down-ballot Democrats working to show the connections between Trump’s values and those of his party.

But I’m not interested here in what’s “savvy,” or in playing some kind of 11-dimensional chess game. I’m thinking here, instead, of all the Very Nice People I know in white evangelicalism, Republicans all, who find themselves at a crossroads — forced to choose whether they will follow this path even all the way to Donald Trump. I am not thinking here in the abstract, but of very specific individuals — people I know and like, people I respect despite our deep political disagreements, people I’ve learned from and people I admire. I’m thinking of friends, relatives, church-members, teachers, authors, writers and correspondents.

I don’t want to defeat these folks in a scorched-earth total victory, I want to help them make the right choice at this Trumpian crossroads. I don’t want to shame them, but to help them escape the potential shame they’re in jeopardy of acquiring.

So, in those conversations over the coming weeks and months, I want to take the same path I took in discussing that Hawaii race, and the same path that Hillary Clinton took in her Reno speech. I want to extend the benefit of the doubt here and hope that they’ll latch onto it like a lifeline. That’s not because this allows them a chance to save face, but because it offers a chance at redemption — redemption of their own Republican identity, views, values and sentiments.

I don’t think that’s a sufficient, ultimate step, but I think it’s a promising first step that will allow further steps to be taken. I think it means choosing a fork in the road that can lead to the perhaps fruitful examination of where Trump comes from, and of why so many Republicans have been so eager and enthusiastic to embrace him for “saying what they’ve been thinking all along.”

When it comes to talking to those people, as individuals, as friends and neighbors, I want to be more of a hand-extending pastor and less of a finger-pointing prophet.

I want to say, “You’re better than this.” And I hope to see them seize the chance to prove me right.

evangelicals

religious right

Trump

Previous Post

August 30, 2016

Needed some sand in my flip-flops

Next Post

August 31, 2016 '[White] evangelicals and race -- a new chapter'?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Seek the Lord, all you humble of the land. Seek righteousness, seek what else?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Peace Humility Mercy Justice