As a Christian Trump voter, I am continually frustrated by the maligning by liberals in the press (but I repeat myself), Democrats, Never Trumpers, left-wing Christians, and even some conservative Christians, all of whom attempt to call out Christians for supporting Trump. Trump is an adulterer, womanizer, misogynist, liar, unprincipled businessman, a bully, and on and on, and any Christian who supports him must not be a real Christian.
Ralph Reed articulates a response for Christians like me in his new book For God and Country: The Christian Case for Trump. Reed honestly confronts Trump's well-known character issues, placing his presidency in proper historical and political context, and defends the idea that Trump was the best choice in 2016 and continues to promote ideas and policies that are important to Christians. As Reed writes, Trump "has mad mistakes and has come up short in his life but now advances policies that protect life, defend the First Amendment right to freedom of religion, strengthen the family, and support Israel."
Reed's perspective is unique in that he's the consummate political insider. He has been deeply involved in Republican politics since the Christian Coalition days in the 1980s and 1990s. Since then, as a Republican Party activist and now as a consultant with his firm Century Strategies, he's been intimately involved with political races, activism, and fund raising. As an insider, he has had behind-the-scenes access to political rallies, conventions, and campaigns over the course of many years.
Trump had talked about his presidential ambitions for many years, but no one never thought he was serious to go through with it. He called Reed to his office to talk about running in 2012, but got a sweet deal from NBC to extend his successful TV show, so he decided not to run. (Ironically, by giving him that lucrative contract, NBC put off Trump's running for president for 4 years. Surely he would have lost to an incumbent Obama. So arguably, Trump was elected in 2016 due, in part, to NBC's intervention 4-5 years earlier.)
After announcing his intent to run in 2016, Trump faced a huge field of candidates in the primaries. Two-thirds of Evangelicals supported a variety of other candidates besides Trump, but as candidates dropped out, support coalesced behind Trump. In the general election, the choice was clear. When faced with a choice between Hillary and Trump, "they faced a binary choice between him and Hillary (who had her own ethical and character issues), the vacancy on the Supreme Court, and the broader policy implications of the election." Plenty of Trump supporters had "concerns and reservations about Trump's character" but considered that "Hillary's character, dishonesty, and ethical lapses . . . were even greater."
Even though there were plenty of reasons to question Trump's commitment to the policy priorities that caused Evangelicals to support him, it didn't take long for him to prove himself. He was the first president to appear at the March for Life. He has appointed not one but two pro-life Supreme Court justices, as well as dozens of judges for lower courts. He moved the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. He has been a consistent voice on issue that are important to conservative and pro-life voters.
Reed's front-row view of the 2016 election and at key events of Trump's presidency is the best reason to read this book. But besides the historical perspective, Reed gives a reasonable defense of Trump from a Christian perspective. If you are a Christian Trump supporter, Reed will fill in any gaps in your thinking about what that support means. If you are a Christian Never Trumper, For God and Country will, at the very least, give you a bit more perspective on Trump supporters. As the 2020 election nears, I hope that Christian Trump voters will come out in even greater numbers than 2016 and that Never Trumpers will evaluate Trump on his conservative governance and cast a vote for him.
(Reed closes the book with a 25 page appendix, "Promises Made, Promises Kept." If you doubt Trump's record, at least peruse this list.)
I wanted to read this after seeing Reed interviewed by Eric Metaxas. Check it out:
Additional quotes:
"These self-appointed cultural elites point the finger at CHristians who support Trump, accusing them of bastardizing their faith and cheapening the Gospel by backing the Manhattan billionaire. They assert that Christians have surrendered their moral authority as a result and are disqualified from ever speaking out on matters of public morality again. In the simplest of terms, the media and the Left twist the Trump-Evangelical alliance into a weapon with which they hope to bludgeon people of faith into shame as silence." p. 8
"As Christians, effective citizenship requires that we work with individuals with whom we sometimes disagree and with whom we have theological and moral differences--some of them deep and abiding. . . . Given that the agenda offered by the Democratic nominees in 2016 (and again in 2020) is openly hostile to and completely antithetical to the principles of their biblical Christian faith, and most certainly to the right to life, Evangelicals and pro-life Roman Catholics are fully justified in supporting Trump for president." p. 19
"The marriage between Trump and the Evangelical movement would prove to be a shotgun wedding, with the real estate magnate in avid pursuit and most Evangelicals in love with someone else, at least initially. That changed with the passage of time and a herculean effort by Trump--aided by the horrifying prospect of a Hillary Clinton presidency." p. 55
"Despite the media's fixation on Trump's checkered past and occasionally awkward phrases, Evangelicals were driven far less by identity politics than they were by the issues. They also extended far more grace to Trump than the media ever did. Evangelicals accepted Trump for who and where he was spiritually, believing that by loving him and showing him kindness and mercy thay might have a sublime influence on him. . . . The chattering class misunderstood the Trump-Evangelical connection as purely transactional or the product of rank hypocrisy. In truth, it was based on shared values and his enthusiasm for championing them and the issues that animated Evangelicals. This resonated at the grassroots level, where many believed the GOP establishment had long promised to advance their issues, only to then pay lip service once in office." p. 72
"I had an accidental (or divinely ordered, depending on one's perspective) advantage over some of these leaders, having gotten to know Trump years before. He and I had many frank and candid conversations about his views on the issues, including those dear to Evangelicals." p. 84
"For Trump in 2016, the Scalia vacancy meant that for the first time in 156 years the presidency and control of the Supreme Court hung in the balance while a critical seat sat vacant. This would play a significant role in encouraging Evangelicals and other conservative Christians to put aside their reservations about Trump and strongly support him in the general election." p. 90
For Tony Perkins, of the Family Research Council, "it boiled down to a binary choice. 'We have a choice. Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump,' he said. Taking a veiled shot at Evangelical Never Trumpers, he called it 'irresponsible' to complain from the sidelines without taking sides. Perkins said, 'I want him to be successful, because if he's successful, America survives. That's the bottom line.'" p. 124
"Liberal reporters rushed to find other faith leaders to renounce Trump in what I believed was a calculated and systematic campaign to suppress Evangelical turnout." p. 133
"Soon the media would realize that voters of faith--led by a record turnout of Evangelicals--had provided the margin of victory on an historic night when Trump and down-the-ballot Republican Senate and House candidates won all over the country." p. 147
"Evangelicals and pro-life Roman Catholics were the largest and most vibrant single constituency in the electorate. From the day Donald Trump entered the presidential race, he appealed to them with a single-minded focus while Hillary and the Democratic Party ignored and insulted them at their own peril." p. 148
"What these critics really resented is that Evangelicals continued to support Trump because they faced a binary choice between him and Hillary (who had her own ethical and character issues), the vacancy on the Supreme Court, and the broader policy implications of the election." p. 150
"Evangelicals have never asserted that someone who fails to live up to Christ's teachings in their personal life can never make a positive contribution to their community and nation. That is a false and misleading caricature of the Christian faith drawn by those who mean it no good." p. 155
"Two-thirds of [Evangelicals] supported someone other than Donald Trump in the early Republican primaries. In the general election, they held deep reservations about both candidates. But in the final analysis, they viewed the protection of life from conception to natural death as both a biblical and moral issue, considered abortion-on-demand to be the most profound evil of their time, and saw Roe v. Wade as a black stain on the history of our country." p. 158
"People of faith, confronted with a less-than-perfect choice between two flawed candidates, chose to do all they could to protect innocent life." p. 159
"Without the Scalia vacancy and other pending Supreme Court appointments as a campaign issue, Trump might well have not been elected." p. 162
No comments:
Post a Comment