More Active Posts
Front Page
Faith advisors bridge “God gap”
 |
 9 Comments |
According to a recent LA Times article, former Prime Minister Tony Blair attended Mass secretly for a decade, but avoided discussing faith during his tenure in politics because Europeans tend to view religious people as “nutters.” Admission of faith in Europe, Blair said, leads to a whole series of suppositions that are not helpful to the practicing politician.
Not so in the United States where suppositions about religious folk are so helpful that candidates intentionally parade their religious credentials throughout the election process. During this most recent campaign, the Democratic candidates in particular have stepped up their religious rhetoric.
The Democratic move religionward came after “white evangelicals” helped Bush win the White House in 2004. Candidates began hiring faith-based advisors to broaden their appeal with religious voters—a move that seemed to pay off in the 2006 Congressional races.
The 2006 success is owed in part to Common Good Strategies, a faith-based consulting firm that devised a number of effective vote-baiting tactics for Democratic candidates. These include having candidates speak openly about their personal faiths, buying commercials on Christian television and radio, organizing private meetings with conservative clergy, using “recognizably biblical language, creating a new way of talking about contentious issues to neutralize divisive debates, enlisting pastors to write op-ed pieces, and buying mailing lists of religiously inclined voters. The group even helped candidates induce nuns to phonebank pro-life constituents for Democratic candidates, and it recently arranged a church visit for Chelsea Clinton. (The Clinton Campaign has an independent faith-based counselor on board as well).
Although there are doubtless good reasons for Christians to vote for a given candidate, when professionals are intentionally spinning politician’s identities to garner votes, the onus is on Christians to be savvy enough to look beyond what seems to be a marketing strategy.
Whereas a profession of faith might have stymied Blair’s arguably brilliant career in Europe, professions of faith might launch what could prove to be a deplorable career for a politician in America. If, as one commentator observed, affirmations of religious faith from presidents for the last half-century have borne “little resemblance to their behavior in office,” voters can’t necessarily count on campaign rhetoric no matter how nicely it’s packaged.
 |
Topic: Campaign 2008, Front Page, The Nation |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: Common Good Strategies, faith-based advisors, religion-and-politics |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Soul searching
This isn’t news Emily. It was reported even before Tony Blair left office.
Daily Mail - London
Blair ‘will meet the Pope, then become Catholic’
Last updated at 14:37pm on 22nd June 2007
Tony Blair will tomorrow meet with Pope Benedict XVI before he announces his conversion to Roman Catholicism, according to friends of the Prime Minister.
They say Mr Blair will formalise the switch to his wife’s faith shortly after he surrenders office next week.
http://tinyurl.com/yw3ao4
I recall one of LBJ’s daughters converted to RC but I’m not sure if that was due to marriage or if it was a fad. Lyndon’s daughter Lucy began spelling her name Luci at about the same time
Victoria:
This story isn’t about Blair, but using him to illustrate how religion is used to affect political voting. You’re right in that Blair’s conversion to RCC was covered last year, but take a look at the article again. It doesn’t even address his conversion, just a note about the differences between European and American attitudes regarding belief.
Kennethos,
Yes I agree, the thread is not just abuot Tony Blair, however that is what I wanted to comment on. I looked upon it differently.
What struck me was how terribly sad it is that a European political leader had to hide his church attendance. That is pitiable.
A question to those more in the know….would he have had to hide it if he were Baptist or something other than Church of England?
Genie, that’s an interesting question.
I do believe that anyone seeking office needs to be clear and HONEST about their religious beliefs.
Genie - I read in The Economist that the British consider anyone who is religious in any way to be a “nutter”. So yes, Blair would have wanted to hide no matter which denomination he belonged to.
Karen, that isn’t true, many British are Christians, and attend church. It would matter who you heard that from, even in the US, some would say the same thing.
Taken from the article above post #1 -
“But some lawyers believe the 1829 Emancipation Act, which gave Catholics full civil rights, may still prevent one from becoming PM.”
“Clauses in the Act state that no Catholic adviser to the monarch can hold civil or military office.”