Why Hillary Clinton Bombed With White Evangelical Voters

[BeyondGeography]

As with Wisconsin, she didn’t show up.

In 2008, candidate Barack Obama sat down for an interview during the primary with the evangelical magazine Christianity Today. He spoke about his conversion, his longtime church membership, and his belief in “the redemptive death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.” He said abortion should be less common and that “those who diminish the moral elements of the decision aren't expressing the full reality of it.” The interview was a valentine to evangelicals, and inside it read: “I’m listening.”

This election cycle, Christianity Today made multiple attempts to request an interview with Hillary Clinton, according to Kate Shellnutt, an editor there. The campaign never responded. Of course, campaigns turn down interview requests all the time. But the Clinton campaign was the only one that didn’t reply at all. And this wasn’t the only sign this year that the Democratic candidate had no interest in speaking to evangelical Christians. She spent little energy explaining her views on abortion to them and little time talking about religious freedom. She didn’t hire a full-time faith outreach director until June and had no one focused specifically on evangelical outreach. She didn’t give a major speech to the evangelical community and never met publicly with evangelical leaders. Religious publications reaching out to her campaign with questions were frequently met with silence. Some evangelical insiders are now asking: Why didn’t Hillary Clinton even try to get us to vote for her?

White evangelicals make up about one-quarter of the electorate, a huge group to ignore in an election that turned out to be won by very narrow margins in a handful of key states. In the end, according to exit polls, only 16 percent of that cohort voted for Clinton, compared with Obama’s 26 percent in 2008 and 20 percent in 2012. Trump’s share of the white evangelical vote, 81 percent, exceeded that of Mitt Romney in 2012 (78 percent), John McCain in 2008 (74 percent), and George W. Bush in 2004 (78 percent). “Not to have anyone reaching out to a quarter of the electorate is political malpractice,” the Obama campaign’s 2012 faith outreach director, Michael Wear, told me. Wear, whose book Reclaiming Hope: Lessons Learned from the Obama White House About the Future of Faith in America will be published in January, wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post recently that argued that the “simple difference between Obama’s two presidential campaigns and Clinton’s 2016 campaign is that Obama asked for the votes of white evangelicals and Clinton did not.”

More at: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/12/why_hillary_clinton_bombed_with_evangelical_voters.html

[JI7]

1. she was more religious than any of the dem nominees since jimmy carter

But her religion meant things like supporting mothers of innocent black people killed and defending young immigrants and refugees from war turn areas.

[nycbos]

2. Things that Christ might actually do.

There seems at least in America a big difference between Christians and followers of Jesus.

[JI7]

5. this election showed a large segment of white evangelicals are actually

White supremicists.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

6. Many of them are misogynists too (even the women).

The Bible tells them so, at least according to the passages they tend to prioritize.

[hamsterjill]

39. Yes, exactly.

"Pro life" and anti-woman.

Eve was the downfall of Eden, etc.

[yeoman6987]

52. What were they in 2008 and 2012 when they voted for president obama?

[JI7]

53. most of them didn't vote for Obama

[yeoman6987]

55. A lot did. Many in 200 districts did anyway

[JI7]

56. most didn't

[treestar]

54. that's what they really are

"Christian" is what they hide behind, as the religion of Europe.

[BeyondGeography]

3. How does that get in the way of filling out a questionnaire?

The sad part is, you're right:

Still, it didn’t have to be this way. McCarthy called Clinton “one of the most theologically grounded candidates since Carter.” She’s certainly more devout than Trump, who told an audience in Iowa last year that he has never sought forgiveness from God. And the evangelical population is increasingly attuned to some traditionally Democratic issues, including the environment, LGBT issues, and racial justice. Clinton would have had a decent affirmative case to make to them, if only she had tried. Yes, it still would have been a tough sell, and maybe she would have shaved off only a few thousand votes here or there. But this year, that’s all she needed. And even by making the effort, she could have shown that Democrats still want those votes and believe they deserve them.

[JI7]

4. i thought these people were about jesus. And many of them don't think women should work

[TexasBushwhacker]

8. They've been pissed at her since she said

"I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas..." back in 1992. The "deplorables" comment was boneheaded too, even if it was true.

[EffieBlack]

47. That's an excuse

I doubt that very many people who claimed to be so upset about the "deplorables" comment would have ever voted for Hillary anyway.

[ismnotwasm]

44. First--they never would have voted for her as she was for reproductive rights, period.

And a committed feminist. There are a number of single issue voters. Second, she had a lot of complete and utter bullshit coming at her from the right AND the left. I can only shudder when I imagine the reaction to her "reaching out" to evangelicals.

A lot of the post-mortum evaluation regarding Hilllary convienently forgets that people on her own side, or should have been, tossed her under that big-ass bus every chance they got.

Her ground game was good, but not good enough, that much is clear.

[dionysus]

64. So, totally ignore a huge voting bloc? Even a c token appearance to

Peel off a few votes?

Obama apparently decided it was worth it.

Add to the stack of not-her-faults, eh?

Ignores huge voting bloc.. not her fault.. they hated her anyways!

[baldguy]

37. +1000

The "Christian Right" has never been Christian or right about anything.

[Madam45for2923]

43. You are so right there! lol!

[Orsino]

61. As far as impressing church-goers, Clinton did it all.

Decades of involvement and lot of cross-denominational visibility.

Trump lets himself be photographed about once sitting in a church while not bursting into flames, waiting with visible impatience for God to pop out and tell him he's terrific? And gets crowned Christianity's great white hope?

Let's go ahead and admit that this was largely about Hillary Clinton's being a woman, and about the phallocentricity of white Evangelism.

[dubyadiprecession]

7. Trump leads a christian life for evangelicals?

Give me a f*%&in break!

[BeyondGeography]

9. And he outperformed Romney anyway

The article makes a pretty good case that it didn't have to be that way, if you care to read it.

In any case, I'm sure we'll have a better plan for this segment in '18-'20.

[dubyadiprecession]

11. Don't bet on it.

[LenaBaby61]

19. Don't bet on it.

Agreed.

In 2 years under their president tRump when many of these folks will have lost their jobs, health care or homes due to owing huge mortgages on them or are forced to work for a lower Federal Minimum than $7.25 where they're struggling to make ends meet or take care of a family, they'll still be blaming Pres. Obama, Democrats, Mexicans, or women or the blacks for their own bad life choices and pure unadulterated ignorant choice of voting for their boy tRump to lead this country over "evil" Hillary. Blame anybody but tRump and themselves.

I wonder what these evangelicals will do WHEN Roe v Wade is overturned (And it will be)? Will they be under the bridge (because they lost their jobs/homes) celebrating and making signs praising "God" for the unborn babies lives that will be "saved," (Who they nor the GOP/tRump will care one shit about once they're born) or will they be too busy trying to find one of those few low-wage, no-pension having scraps of jobs that tRump throws out there @ them every so often?

Some of these deplorables won't ever learn.

[JI7]

12. Romney bring mormon was probably worse to them

Than all the shit trump has done.

[BeyondGeography]

14. Romney posted the same numbers as GWB in 2004

and was four points better than McCain.

[standingtall]

17. Might make a good case

but the progression was clearly going in the other direction even before this election. Obama dropped 6% from 2008 to 2012.Let's not forget Obama was running against a Mormon in 2012 and still had a 6% drop in support. Sense it was an incumbent year she would've likely been viewed as an extension of Obama.

[standingtall]

18. Maybe a big part of the reason

Trump outperformed Romney with white evangelicals is because he is not a Mormon.

[coolbreeze77]

10. I don't blame her for not showing up. Why chase votes of people who typically don't vote for your

party? Why do we keep chasing after the republican base when we need to energize our own?

[BeyondGeography]

13. It's about losing a big chunk of voters 75-25 instead of 80-20

Because when you do get blown out to that extent, you have less margin for underperforming elsewhere. Not complicated.

[coolbreeze77]

22. I still say there are better opportunities else where.

[BeyondGeography]

23. Certainly

But the article makes clear she was pretty much not competing at all for these votes and that was a mistake.

[coolbreeze77]

24. That's one way of looking at it but I saw 2016 as a base election that we didn't win because

we didn't get the young and blacks out to vote because we didn't talk about their issues. She won by nearly 3 million votes but she didn't campaign in these areas in the midwest which means that if she had she would've probably won. Focusing on evangelicals wouldn't have helped anything.

[BeyondGeography]

26. The numbers simply don't back that statement up

Even though she lost white evangelical voters overwhelming, Hillary Clinton still won the popular vote, so it might be easy for Democrats to ignore this deficit. But Michael Wear, President Barack Obama’s religious outreach director for the 2012 campaign, recently made the case that if Clinton had simply matched Obama’s percentage of the white evangelical vote in Michigan and Florida, it would have overcome her losses in those states.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/gonzales/certainty-death-taxes-white-evangelicals#sthash.OWvSSzJl.dpuf

[coolbreeze77]

27. I don't trust any numbers at this point the numbers said she was going to win too.

[JustinL]

32. that same statement is true of many other subgroups

For example, according to the CNN exit polls, Clinton would have won both MI and FL had she replicated Obama's margins among 18-29 year olds or among African-Americans. Interestingly, winning the non-religious by the same margins as Obama would have had an even larger positive impact than losing white evangelicals by the same margin.

[BeyondGeography]

36. The obvious difference being

those are groups she actively pursued. But, I get it, evangelicals fit a broader pattern. Not just in terms of the numbers, though. Her relative lack of appeal, natural and in actual outreach, translated into lower vote totals.

[HoneyBadger]

40. People seem to go back to Clinton would have won if she replicated Obama

Something that I think everyone in either party knows. Thing is she could not replicate Obama, she needed to find her own path. Which lead through California and New York, places where she could have done less and still won.

[EffieBlack]

48. THANK you!

Certain white folks are the only voters that candidates are supposed to go chasing around after.

We never hear anyone make a big deal about what they need to do to get the support of blacl or brown voters. When we don't support a candidate, it's just assumed we either don't know any better or can't be persuaded - and then people shrug and move on to someone else. But white working class voters, regardless their history and attitudes, are treated as if their shit doesn't stink and everyone must fall all over themselves trying to get their love - even if it means ignoring our own base.

It's sickening.

[Quixote1818]

50. Trump went after Democrats in the rust belt and got them

Howard Dean talked about a 50 state strategy. You have to court EVERYONE and explain why Democratic policies will help them and why Republican policies will hurt them. Sanders went into Liberty University and they were very pleasant to him and he even had quite a few of them really clapping. If you can pull 1 or 2% of voters who don't normally vote for you it can mean the difference between winning and losing.

[triron]

15. screw this

It was the Russians, media and fbi

[BainsBane]

16. How about we just run Ted Cruz next time?

Or someone similar, because with all this focus on which kinds of Republicans we didn't win, it seems like some people think we should be like the GOP.

[coolbreeze77]

25. exactly

[JI7]

33. Ted Cruz lost the evangelicals to Trump which is more evidence they are voting on bigotry

[EffieBlack]

49. Bingo!

If we need to shapechange to attract more white Republicans, why not just go for it all the way?

[Starry Messenger]

20. GOTV is about mustering people who might actually vote for you

demonstrated by past voting patterns and data. This demo of hateful white supremacist shitcocks only show up for candidates who promise pain to groups they hate.

[standingtall]

21. I honestly don't think

any political figure from the Democratic party or any politician that generally shares the viewpoints of Democrats can reach these people,because these people have been conditioned to support right wing ideology for decades. Still it can be done,but it will take well organized institutions. Preferably an orthodox form of progressive Christians,but I don't see anything like that on the horizon.

[lame54]

28. Because they're fucking hypocrites

[radical noodle]

29. Good lord

We shouted to the rooftops about how progressive she needed to be. Planned Parenthood would have been one of the first things a Christianity Today interviewer wanted to know, and she has always supported PP. There go most Evangelicals right there, not to mention that Evangelicals often have the idea that a woman should somehow be on a pedestal somewhere in her apron holding a baby and certainly not making tough decisions daily.

But nonetheless, here's an op-ed in Christianity Today dated Sept 23, 2016, that kind of debunks the idea that they had no reason to vote for her and against Trump.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2016/october/ron-sider-why-i-am-voting-for-hillary-clinton.html

[HassleCat]

30. We wrote them off.

They were unworthy of voting for us.

[oasis]

31. deplorable hypocrites aren't worth the time. nt

[spin]

35. I wonder just how many votes Hillary lost when she labled half of Trump supporters as ...

deplorables and then added the word irredeemable to better describe them.

Now Hillary may have been totally correct but still that comment may have pissed off a number of voters and caused them to get off thier butts and vote against Hillary and for Trump. Such voters basically gave Hillary the finger by voting. I remenber a lot of conservatives who proudly started to lable themselves as Deplorables. Hillary didn't lose the really critical states by all tbat many votes.That one comment might have cost her the election. It could have been the straw that broke the camel's back.

I hate to say this but while Hillary has tremendous qualifications and experience she simply is not all that great at campaigning. Even so Hillary should have been able to beat an asshole like Trump. Perhaos she was simply the right candidate at the wrong time. i feel she could have easily won in 2008 against McCain. Unfortunately Obama had enough chatisma to win the Democratic primary.

[oasis]

41. Hillary's "Deplorables" comment was, of course, blown out of proportion.

"Teflon" Trump gets a pass on much worse. "Tremendous qualifications and experience" has little value nowadays.

[iluvtennis]

34. My simple answer is because Hillary is a woman...many Evangelicals think women...

...should be limited to certain positions and be President is not one they approve of. Look how long it took them to let women be clergy.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

45. Yep, being a woman disqualifies her for these people...

Although I wonder what would happen if an anti-abortion woman, like say Sarah Palin, ran against a pro-abortion man?

[iluvtennis]

46. yep, that's an interesting hypothesis. Would bet they overlook their values and go with the man...

....just like they did with Traitor Trump

[uponit7771]

60. +1

[BlueStater]

38. So they voted for a thrice-married sexual predator instead.

Fuck these phony, hypocritical asswipes.

[iluvtennis]

62. Yep, they did ...pathetic n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

42. I know it's a hugely unopopular view here, but I agree.

You can't simply discount huge sectors of the electorate.

Even if you can only shave off a few percentage points of the vote, it still matters.

[Emilybemily]

51. Fuck them

They worship Satan

[kcr]

57. How Hillary Clinton Lost The Election. She Ignored the Homophobes!

She just didn't reach out to them enough! What a loser she is. Dems will never learn! Why didn't she do some outreach at a few conversion camps? What a huge oversight.

Clinton Campaign and Dems Need to Learn a Lesson! Ignored the Needs of the Climate Deniers! We need to show them that we hear their pain, too. Why didn't she drive a few Hummers around? Make some appearances on an oil rig? There's some untapped votes, right there!

Clueless Out of Touch Dems, Ignoring the Plight of Disenfranchised Mink Farm Owners. Not once did she wear a fur coat! Think of the missed votes there!

[Hekate]

58. They don't like uppity Methodists? Actually this unpopular woman won the popular vote....

.....by THREE MILLION VOTES OVER HER OPPONENT.

Sorry if they were the "wrong" people in the "wrong" states.

[Garrett78]

59. She's been 'bombing' with white evangelicals for a long, long time.

One of the best articles I've read on why Clinton is so despised by some: "The deep disgust for Hillary Clinton that drives so many evangelicals to support Trump"

[SidDithers]

63. Because she didn't pander to their bigotry...nt

Sid

[Justice]

65. Turns out white evangelicals ......

wanted a candidate who broke more than half of the Ten Commandments!

Complete hypocrites.