Christians: Yes, Let’s Vote Our Values
Image
On the whole, I’ve written a lot less about the voting choices before us in this particular election cycle. From my point of view, it’s pretty much 2020 all over again, only with more clarity about the cultural and character factors.
More clarity? I’m sure many don’t see it that way. I’m not saying people are seeing more clearly. Subjectively, things seem more muddled than ever. Objectively, though, the character and positions of the candidates are even more clear than in 2020.
In this post, I’m reacting a bit to Kevin Schaal’s post over at P&D the other day, and many others like it (e.g., Jerry Newcombe’s similar list over at Christian Post). I don’t disagree with much in that post, but I would differ in emphasis.
First, I fully agree with this:
Some Christians do not live or vote by biblical values. And some Christians have not been taught how their faith should impact their voting choices.
Then we read, “These are the values that are at stake in this election.” The list that follows isn’t bad. I’m all for freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, sanctity of life, individual stewardship, biblical marriage, and just balances.
My own full list of values to vote for would include those things. There are some values at stake in this election, though, that are upstream of several of the above.
My own short, prioritized list of values to vote for would look more like this:
1. Vote for the gospel.
I’m not in favor of expansive and ambiguous uses of the term “the gospel.” The gospel is the good news that Jesus died for sinners and rose again. But this news has far-reaching implications. What do I mean by “vote for the gospel” here? Vote with the goal of helping churches and ministries retain or regain their understanding of what their focus should be in society: effectively adorning (Titus 2:10) and proclaiming the gospel.
The conflation of political tactics, policies, and candidates with Christian belief, practice, and mission is a serious problem.
I anticipate an objection: “We can’t vote for gospel clarity. It’s not on the candidates’ agendas.” I’m not sure it isn’t, indirectly, but let’s say that’s true. My recommendation, across the political spectrum, is to look at candidates’ stated agendas, remove everything they are not actually capable of achieving (because Congress would have to do it, or an amendment would be required, and every state would have to do it). Then look at what’s left and ask, “How much of this is just pandering?”
After that couple of filters, there might not be much agenda left!
Assuming something remains, it’s time to ask: If results are so important, what are some likely unintended results of the candidates’ agenda? What kind of backlash policies—or, more importantly, cultural shifts—might we see?
We really didn’t think overturning Roe would result in “abortion rights” becoming an issue that is not only actively supported by one party, but now passively supported by the other as well. But here we are.
Voting for results is a tricky thing, none of us being prophets.
But if we’re going to vote for results, surely increased clarity about what Christianity really is, and is not, should be a result we prioritize.
2. Vote for rule of law.
We live in a system of governance that, by design of its founders, has law at its center. When the colonies decided to part from the authority of England, they created a document with representative leaders as signers.
Later, they experimented with the Articles of Confederation and insisted on a ratification process. Why? Because of the conviction that the best way to govern a society is for the governed to create law that then has authority over those who made it.
Eventually, the Constitution was ratified in place of the Articles. Every office and branch of the U.S. government now derives its authority from that legal document. Lesser roles and requirements derive from the laws passed through the representative-legislators legal framework this Constitution authorizes.
In short, in a republic, the law is king, and all other rulers are its deputies.
If we’re going to vote for results, we should vote for candidates who seem likely to respect and nurture the rule of law.
3. Vote for truth in public discourse.
In the U.S., we have a long tradition of messy public discourse. For as long as I’ve been paying attention, that has included a fair amount of misrepresentation, exaggeration, and outright lying about political opponents.
And that’s not even including the candidates’ claims about themselves.
I’ve occasionally been accused of idealism, but I don’t expect “honesty in political rhetoric” to become a real thing.
That said, before 2021, did the U.S. ever have a sitting president try to hang on to power on the fantasy that the election had been stolen from him? I may have read that something similar has happened before in U.S. history, but at best, it’s been a very long time.
For Christians, does anything matter more than truth? We could make a case that several things are equally important. Of course, we’d insist that the God of all truth is more important than truth itself. It ultimately has little importance without its connection to Him.
That established, Christians, of all people, ought to treasure truth anywhere and everywhere it can be found. We ought to despise lies, useful or otherwise. We should loathe the kind of exaggeration, distortion, and sloppiness that ends up being little better than outright lying. We should be repulsed by the intellectual laziness that lumps dissimilar things together, overgeneralizes, and prefers increased vehemence over increased accuracy. That doesn’t promote truth either.
Surely we ought to be people who value truth more than tribe and who refuse to reflexively accept or reject claims based on what leader, pundit, or group they are coming from.
If we’re going to vote for results, we should prioritize whatever votes might help us, as a society, value truth more.
Final thoughts
I’d be first the admit that this short list of core values to vote for could be used to argue for whatever candidate one “likes.” That doesn’t make it objectively true that they are an equally good, or equally poor, fit for both candidates (or all the rest, down-ballot).
No, I’m not trying to tell people who to vote for (or “vote against,” if they look at it that way). But I do want to encourage us to have the gospel, the rule of law, and truth on our minds as we make these difficult choices. I want to encourage us also think in terms of our culture as a whole, not just the slice that is regulated by policy.
Important policy is at stake. Bigger things than policy are also at stake.
Aaron Blumer 2016 Bio
Aaron Blumer is a Michigan native and graduate of Bob Jones University and Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). He and his family live in small-town western Wisconsin, not far from where he pastored for thirteen years. In his full time job, he is content manager for a law-enforcement digital library service. (Views expressed are the author's own and not his employer's, church's, etc.)
- 1324 views
It's so interesting how y'all are so suspicious of fraud, such as ballot stuffing in communities that you know so little about socio-culturally. There was much more momentum back in 2020 to vote against Trump in cities with a history of racial tension between black communities and the police, especially with the George Floyd protests going on. I saw it in my city, as well as in Detroit. I met a black Episcopal pastor in 2020 who organized nearly 1/3 of the churches in the city limits of Detroit with voter registration. I also talked with several colleagues in cities such as Philadelphia, Chicago, and Milwaukee, and similar efforts were going on. Resorting to believing conspiracies that cannot be proven, especially by ignoring the George Floyd factor for why the numbers were so big in urban communities, is simply intellectual laziness combined with motivated reasoning.
What's the difference from 2020 to 2024? Why did Trump double the black vote in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin from 2020 to 2024? Why did Trump get nearly 25% of male black votes in the United States this time around (as well as 45% of the Hispanic Vote)? To start, The national GOP and the state GOPs around the nation woke up to the fact that they needed to develop a broader coalition of people voting Republican than only its traditional white conservative base, especially since college-educated whites from the suburbs were drifting left. Since both blacks and Hispanics happen to be more socially conservative due to their Christian faith and background, Republicans finally decided to intentionally reach into minority and multi-racial communities, which had never been done before on such a large scale. For example, Republicans came to my door 3 different times in the past 6 months. Having lived in the inner-city since 1992, this was the first time Republicans took the time to reach out into my neighborhood. In the previous 8 presidential elections, they chose to ignore my community. Also, inflation was a huge concern and unchecked immigration for the past 4 years had negatively affected working class blacks competing for trade-skill jobs. Kamala stating that she would do nothing different than Biden while the working class (including black folks) were feeling the negative affects of inflation.
Also, Obama scolding black men for possibly not voting for Kamala (insinuating that it was because she was a woman) backfired on the Democrats. It actually created more of a barrier because Obama was directly patronizing black men.
Even though Kamala is biracial and grew up middle class through middle school, she has lived a privileged elite life since 9th grade, and working-class blacks felt that she wasn't real. She had an awful record as a prosecutor in California including a time where she was largely responsible for over-criminalization and incarceration of black men, while doing everything she could to defend and protect corrupt prosecutors under her when they were witholding evidence from defense attorneys. As a result 600 drug cases were dismissed. Anyway, there wasn't much enthusiasm for Kamala in cities such as Detroit and Philly. Because of these reasons so many blacks who voted for Biden chose to stay home because they didn't like either candidate.
Trump bringing on JD Vance as his vice-president was pure genius and helped solidify newly built coalitions. Vance builds common ground with black folks better than any candidate among Republicans that I've seen in my life time (except for maybe Jack Kemp). His working class background raised by his grandma relates to working class blacks and I've seen on more than one occasion where he won over majority black audiences, especially black men.
Deleted double post
JD, I saw the video of what he did. It was more than just running his hands up and down the mic. There were gestures with an open mouth as well. This is a man who was talking about the size of Arnold Palmer’s genitals a week earlier so it’s not like this is something beneath Trump’s character. It had nothing to do with me having a perverted mind, and I’m offended at your accusation.
EDIT: Since JD mentioned my post being slander, I went back and watch the video again. I will admit that it is possible JD is right and it was innocent. I'm not completely convinced, as I think it is totally within Trump's character to do that (re the Arnold Palmer quips). But I do admit that it just as easily might have been innocent as JD has said and I don't want to falsely accuse. I think that Trump is a master at doing or saying something outrageous and then claiming it is actually something else or is being misinterpreted. After a certain amount of that behavior you tend to lose the benefit of the doubt by observers. I wonder if members of SI would have shown the same benefit of the doubt that they show to Trump to Kamala Harris if she had done exactly the same thing.
I stand by what I said about it having nothing to do with me having a perverted mind, and it's offensive to be labeled as such. Many people have posted the video with the same assumption.
We could go on and on about the psychology of following candidates.
For instance, Trump and “misinformation.” Early on, he was mocked for suggesting that the Coronavirus came from the Wuhan lab. And he called it the China-virus. “Experts” at that time said, “No, it came from a bat in a market.”
Trump’s statements were used to paint him as a science-denier and a racist. It turned out he was right, but the belief that he’s a “racist” and “liar” persist anyway. After all, he “is” a liar.
As you said, he either does or doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt.
Joel, the trouble with the argument of historic motivation is that the "bump" for Biden is much larger than the bump for Obama. The total number of votes cast in 2004 was about 123 million, which rose to 131 million in 2008 and then dropped to 129 million in 2012. So the increase for Biden is ~2x as big.
Statistically, that's immense, especially when I consider that the "draw" for Biden was nowhere near as big as it was for Obama, and moreover it's at a time where the (yes, court-approved) changes in voting procedures were indeed objected to on the grounds that it could lead to ballot box stuffing.
Maybe there's a more innocent explanation, but a lot of those eased voting restrictions were still in place in 2024. If mail in ballots and such greatly increased participation in 2020, the same thing should have been in place in 2024. But it wasn't.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Ok. I reread. Not sure why that section was titled “vote for the Gospel.”
Do you mean, “Freedom of Speech and Religion”?
No. I mean voting for candidates who are not actively contributing to gospel confusion.
These bits might help…
The conflation of political tactics, policies, and candidates with Christian belief, practice, and mission is a serious problem.
…
But if we’re going to vote for results, surely increased clarity about what Christianity really is, and is not, should be a result we prioritize.
I could have said it better, I’m sure, but on the whole, I have seen lots of concern about this or that policy but Christians don’t seem to be taking seriously enough how the political environment confuses people regarding what Christian faith is really all about.
By the time we get to an actual vote, it’s a bit late to think about that, though, I admit. But most people are not actively supporting a candidate until election day, with their vote.
So what I’m trying to say on that subtopic is that there is a growing problem of conflating political agendas with Christian faith and Christian living. They are related, of course, but parties and candidates are not what our faith is about and better public policy is not really “saving” anyone.
But the Right these days is full of language that seemingly equates social/political policy with real Christianity… and Jesus is just branding. Personal faith in Christ and belief in the gospel are irrelevant in that whole mess.
About election fraud…
The media regarding 2020 have not been saying “no evidence fraud.” There is always fraud in every election, in the sense of some people trying to mess with the process, and a number who get caught. What they’ve been saying, entirely accurately, is that there is no evidence of the kind of large scale fraud that would be required to impact who won.
One project that the country really needs a non-partisan non-profit entity to take on is educating the public on how the process of collecting and securing votes actually works. There are layers and layers of protection in most states and counties, and interfering with that effectively on a large enough scale to swing a state (without eventually getting caught) would be extremely difficult in most states (probably all of them).
Trump culture…
Trump has brought a culture along with him in his rise to power. It includes placing a low value on truth, a highly selective regard for the rule of law, a lot of muddling of faith and politics, an emphasis on victimhood/grievance politics, and several other problems I could list.
I don’t know how conservativism recovers from all that, but it can’t hurt to have Christians start caring a lot more about these problems.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
To Aaron and Joel. I don't think either of you have explained the 20 million drop in total voters in 2024 compared to 2020. Joel, I thank you for explaining why many who voted for Biden in 2020 voted for Trump in 2024. That explains, in part, why Trump won, but doesn't explain the astonishing drop in vote totals. If it isn't ballot box stuffing of some sort, what actually explains it? I'd really like to know.
G. N. Barkman
You are totally right. The Deep State coordinated a concerted ballot stuffing exercise across 100,000 polling places. They executed this activity covering their tracks so well, that they eliminated any proof. In addition, they prevented anyone involved in this vast exercise to escape being caught and was able to prevent any of them from later confessing to their crime. It was a massive scale operation.
I personally believe it was carried out by the Pentaverate, a secret organization that is made up of five members, who run the world and meet triennially at a secret country mansion known as "The Meadows". It is made up of the the King, the Vatican, the Gettys, the Rothschilds, *and* Colonel Sanders.
Thanks, Larry!
Larry, good post. Why is it some people view the discrepancy and automatically go to ballot stuffing, instead of understanding the data first and coming to a logical conclusion? This goes back to what I posted on another thread. There is a framework in an individuals mind and when they see something that aligns to that framework (i.e. there was rampant election fraud in 2020), than that is what they chalk it up to.
Thank you, Larry. That answers my question. (I'm thankful to know that there really is no mystery.) (Oh, and dgszweda, pardon me, but your sarcasm is showing.)
G. N. Barkman
That article certainly helps explain the votes that were supposedly missing. However, I still want to point out that the fact it takes the U.S.A. so long to count votes after an election points to real problems in the system that need to be fixed. There’s no reason we shouldn’t know the results by the next day. The process of voting and counting needs some real work.
Looks like most of the votes to be counted are from California. If it took Google or Amazon that long to evaluate statistics for their businesses, they’d be behind the curve and laughed out of the room. Of course, votes are more important than that, so we can’t just leave out the votes beyond the lines of statistical importance, but even so, the states that aren’t getting this done need to look to other states that had their counts done quickly.
I’m sure part of it is lax laws that allow votes to arrive without verification or up to a week or so late, but those things shouldn’t be allowed anyway.
Dave Barnhart
What caused the Drop in the Democratic party from 2020 to 2024? Besides what Larry Nelson has said, I have also explained why the needle moved towards Trump in black communities and why there was a significant drop in enthusiasm among Harris supporters, which led to them staying home from voting (just like with Hillary Clinton in 2016).
But let's also look at Dearborn, MI. In 2020, 30,718 votes were cast for Biden, while 13,239 were cast for Trump, with a total of 44,997 votes. In 2024, Harris got 7,813 votes, Trump got 13,209 votes, while the rest went to 3rd party candidates, including Stein (who advocated cutting all support to Israel), for a total of 28,226. Because of Gaza, a large number of Arab-Americans stayed home or voted 3rd party. American support of what they believed was a genocide drained any momentum for Harris in Dearborn but also for many far-left Generation Z and millennials who get their news from TikTok. I personally know several far-left progressives who sat this election out because it was their way of virtue signaling in standing against the "Genocide" in Gaza. Why wasn't Harris able to garner any momentum on liberal college campuses across the country when she was supposed to have such a huge advantage because of her radical pro-choice stance? It was Gaza. The same radical identity politics that was used to usher in such a huge vote in 2020 for Biden because of the George Floyd protests came back to haunt Harris and the Democratic party in 2024.
I know it's hard for you, Bert, to conceive that cities like mine cast many more votes for Biden than for Obama, but popularity isn’t the only driving force for change. Instead, what I saw in 2020 was Anger and Fear beyond anything I had ever seen in my lifetime. The voting drives in 2007 and 2008 were big but paled compared to what I saw in 2020. Registering to vote Democrat for Biden for the radical pro-mask/social distancers and many of the George Floyd protesters was the ultimate virtue signal.
African-American voting rate actually went down from 2008 to 2020, from nearly 66% to about 62.4%. Like I said, they were less enthusiastic, at least nationwide, about Biden than they were about Obama, and it's worth noting that Trump took a larger share of both the African-American and Latino votes (21% of the latter) than previous Republicans in 2020.
As I'm parsing through, state by state, what I'm seeing is not really a racial or ethnic pattern, but a pattern where certain states--North Carolina, Pennsylvania, California, Arizona, Michigan--had 25-30% higher vote counts, while vote growth in other states was more in accord with population growth. It seems to correspond very well not with demographics, but rather with the ways votes were collected.
Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.
Discussion