Why some top evangelicals are standing by Trump

Evangelical leaders who are defending Trump, even after release of lewd video, say it’s all about the policy choice – not values. But that puts them in a difficult box.

Evan Vucci/AP
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins (r.), pictured here with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump (c.) and Retired Gen. William Boykin (l.) at an Oct. 3 town hall with the Retired American Warriors in Herndon, Va., has said in the wake of a 2005 lewd video that his support for Mr. Trump 'was never based upon shared values rather it was based upon shared concerns.'

The Republican Party is reeling after the release of a 2005 video in which Donald Trump speaks in vulgar terms of his aggressive sexual behavior toward women.

Top Republicans – including Sen. John McCain of Arizona – have abandoned Mr. Trump and now won’t vote for him. Some have called on him to drop out of the presidential race, and urged the Republican National Committee to replace him with running mate Mike Pence.

Others have rebuked Trump for both his language and actions of 11 years ago – but are in wait-and-see mode. Trump’s second debate with Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Sunday night at 9 p.m. Eastern, will be must-see TV, as he is expected to try to talk his way out of the biggest crisis of his campaign.

But perhaps the most curious aspect of this unprecedented episode is the reaction of evangelical Christian leaders. As Republican politicians – some in tight reelection races – have dumped Trump, prominent members of the Christian conservative movement have stood by him, even as they express revulsion over his actions.

The “grossly inappropriate language” in the Trump video “does not change the reality of the choice facing this country,” Gary Bauer, founder of the Campaign for Working Families PAC, said in a statement.

“Hillary Clinton is committed to enacting policies that will erode religious liberty, promote abortion, make our country less safe, and leave our borders unprotected,” said Mr. Bauer, a veteran of the Reagan administration and a GOP presidential candidate in 2000. Mrs. Clinton will continue economic policies that are “destroying” the American working class and middle class, he added.

Ralph Reed, former leader of the Christian Coalition and head of Trump’s religious advisory board, took the same approach – decry Trump’s language, but defend his candidacy, in the name of the policy choices Trump represents versus those of Clinton.

“People of faith are voting on issues like who will protect unborn life, defend religious freedom, grow the economy, appoint conservative judges and oppose the Iran nuclear deal,” Mr. Reed said in an email to The Washington Post.

Perhaps the most extraordinary comment came from Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, which hosts the annual Values Voters Summit in Washington – a major conference of social conservative activists.

Mr. Perkins said in a statement that his support for Trump in the general election “was never based upon shared values rather it was built upon shared concerns."

John Green, an expert on religion and politics at the University of Akron in Ohio, says this type of reaction isn’t surprising.

“I do think it bespeaks a kind of pragmatism,” says Professor Green. “We see this a lot in American politics. If people are principled, they are often ineffective. On the other hand, if pragmatists are effective, then they lose credibility. So they’re in a tough box here.”

Still, he says, the posture of evangelical leaders doesn’t mean that the rank-and-file will follow suit. Though the early indication, from a one-day Politico/Morning Consult poll taken Saturday, is that Trump voters are sticking with him.

It’s also true that some prominent Christian conservative leaders have never supported Trump. Russell Moore, the chief policy spokesman of the Southern Baptist Convention, has called Trump a “lost person” and prays that he repent of all sins and find Jesus. Of the Trump video, Mr. Moore tweeted: “To be pro-life means to say to the ethic of Margaret Sanger *and* to the ethic of Howard Stern: #Never.”

In another tweet, the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary also showed the cracks that have emerged among evangelicals over the Trump candidacy.

“I am humiliated by arguments about character I am hearing tonight from some evangelicals. Lord, help us,” tweeted Albert Mohler.

Perhaps no committed evangelical is in a tougher position than Trump’s running mate, Governor Pence of Indiana. He is reportedly beside himself over the video, and laid down the gauntlet to Trump on Twitter.

“We pray for his family and look forward to the opportunity he has to show what is in his heart when he goes before the nation tomorrow night,” Pence said Saturday on Twitter. 

Trump has already apologized for his lewd comments, and also made clear that he is fighting back in his usual way – playing defense by going on offense.

That was his approach in a video he released late Friday night, in response to the lewd 2005 video, which was from “Access Hollywood.” And it means going after former President Bill Clinton for his own aggressive sexual behavior toward women, and also accusing Hillary Clinton of being an “enabler” and of discrediting claims that turned out to be true. 

“Without overstating the case, [evangelicals’ defense of Trump] does remind me of when a lot of prominent feminists came to the defense of President Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky matter,” says Green, of the University of Akron. “They said, ‘We deplore the conduct, but look at all the positive things the Clinton administration has done for women.’ ”

For the Republican Party, the idea of getting Trump to quit the race and run Pence for president instead may have some appeal. After all, in his debate last week against Democratic veep nominee Tim Kaine, Pence was viewed as the “winner,” leading some Republicans to wish out loud that he was at the top of the GOP ticket. But in practical terms, it’s late for such a move. The election is Nov. 8, and early voting has begun in some states.

In tonight’s debate, not only does Trump have to address the video scandal, he has to overcome his poor performance in his first debate, which he followed with days of attacks against a former Miss Universe and questions about his taxes, after the leak of damaging information from an old tax return.

But Trump has made clear that he’s not dropping out – and not staying away from Twitter.

“Tremendous support (except for some Republican “leadership”). Thank you,” Trump tweeted Sunday morning. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why some top evangelicals are standing by Trump
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today