Why do White Evangelicals prefer Trump when they have Better Options?

Why do White Evangelicals Prefer Trump when they Have Better Options?

In the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, approximately 80% of white evangelicals voted for Trump. Since then, they have remained some of Trump’s strongest supporters. This is somewhat strange, because his life runs contrary to evangelicals’ most cherished virtues. This must be unpacked a bit. Evangelicals are a subsection of Protestant Christianity which claim that their lives are guided by Biblical principles. Although this is somewhat true at an individual level (honest, hard-working, dedicated to their family, etc.), this is not accurate at a political level. Numerous surveys reveal that fewer than 15% of evangelicals have their political positions shaped by Scripture on important issues of our day (immigration, foreign policy, environment, health care, etc.). Their most important political concern has been to reduce the number of abortions taking place. Since Reagan, Republican presidential candidates have promised to re-shape the Supreme Court with enough conservative justices to overturn Roe v. Wade. During his presidency, Trump appointed three conservative justices to the Court, and as a result, Roe was overturned, and the legal status of abortion has been returned to the states.

Although Trump lost the 2020 election, he is running again and is way ahead of his Republican rivals: Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis, Chris Christie and Vivek Ramaswamy. My question for white evangelicals is the following: Why do you continue to support Trump when his lifestyle runs contrary to core Christian values and you have better options? Here is a small sample of his character flaws.

Trump is a racist. He began his campaign in 2015 by declaring that Mexicans were drug pushers, criminals, and rapists. In 2018 he called African countries, plus Haiti and El Salvador “shithole” countries.
Trump is a womanizer and treats women as objects. In his Access Hollywood tape, Trump affirmed “And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. … Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.”
He is a bully. In his rallies, he demeans others based on their physical handicaps, their looks, etc. instead of using reasonable, logical arguments.
He is a compulsive liar. On the day of his inauguration, he lied about the size of the crowd, then told hundreds of significant lies during his presidency, including the allegation that he won the 2020 election. You can google “Trump and lies” for a long list with evidence.
He is narcissistic. His demands for “loyalty” required people to violate the Constitution and their conscience. For those who violated their religious convictions, they have brought shame and disrepute to their faith.
His vanity has led him to make false predictions. He predicted that under his leadership, Republicans would win so many elections, they would “get tired of winning”. That turned out to be false. Republicans lost the 2018 midterm election, the 2020 presidential election, and the special election in Georgia. They underperformed in 2022. Republicans are, in fact, tired of losing with Trump.
His many crimes have led him to be charged with 91 counts in federal courts. It is likely that he will be found guilty of some felonies by the time of the election in November, 2024.

I know people who refuse to acknowledge any of these defects. This was understandable during the heat of the 2016 and 2020 elections, but is totally unreasonable today. There are better options: Haley, DeSantis, and Christie. They are fallen human beings (just like me). They have their own defects (just like me). They probably have skeletons in their closets (just like me). I have significant disagreements with each of them and some of their policies. Nevertheless, they all have been governors and have experience in constitutional positions of leadership. Each of them has a basic minimum integrity as public servants. Each of them would be a better option than Trump.

For further reading, I suggest the new book by Tim Alberta: The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory. American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism.

I Agree with Donald Trump (regarding his earlier position on the Fifth Amendment)

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution contains several rights, including the right to “remain silent” in court and not provide evidence that is “self-incriminating”. Its original intent was to limit the government’s power to coerce people to make false confessions of guilt. The common use today of “taking the Fifth” or “pleading the Fifth” is that guilty persons can remain silent and not provide answers that would incriminate them.

I have always had problems about people who “take the Fifth”. If they are truly innocent, what is the problem in answering questions with truthful answers? In other words, only people who are guilty use this amendment, and they do so with the hope of evading or postponing the truth about their guilt. The truth usually wins out. Guilty actions eventually come into the light and appropriate punishment is meted out.

Back in 2016 when Donald Trump was running for president, he pronounced his opinion about those who take the Fifth. At a rally in Iowa, he criticized some of Hillary Clinton’s staff who had utilized the amendment to remain silent: “Her staffers taking the Fifth Amendment, how about that? You see the mob takes the Fifth. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” During a presidential debate, Trump affirmed that “taking the Fifth” was “disgraceful”. I agree with Trump. When people are innocent, they should answer court questions and answer with the truth.

On Wednesday of this week, Trump appeared in a deposition with the New York Attorney General who is leading a civil investigation of the Trump organization’s finances. It is alleged that the organization overestimated the value of the company’s assets in order to obtain loans at low interest rates. At the same time, it seems that the company underestimated the value of those same assets in order to pay lower taxes. Two of Trump’s children (Ivanka and Don, Jr., who hold positions of leadership in the organization) appeared in depositions recently and gave answers to the questions. Nevertheless, former president Trump “pled the Fifth” over 440 times on Wednesday and refused to answer simple questions regarding the company’s financial assets. More than 440 times! Clear answers could have proved his innocence if that were the true situation. The refusal to answer legitimate question, at the very least, gives the impression of guilt.

Noted legal scholar, Alan Dershowitz, who served as attorney for Trump, yesterday told reporters that he was shocked upon hearing that the former president used the Fifth Amendment 440 times if he has “nothing to hide”.

Given that there exist financial documents from the Trump organization, its innocence or guilt will soon come to light. A Scriptural maxim is that “we will be judged by our own words”. Consistency between our words and our deeds is important for our ethical integrity. I agree with Trump’s words six years ago regarding the Fifth Amendment, and therefore, and based upon his own words, I do not approve of his refusal to answer the deposition questions on Wednesday.

Jesus and the Political Options of His Day

When Jesus walked upon this earth, Jerusalem and Palestine were under the control of the Roman Empire. In exchange for the payment of heavy tributes, the Jews had a small amount of religious freedom to practice their faith. There were four main political options for Palestinian Jews in the time of Jesus: the Zealots, the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Essenes.

The Zealots were a first century political movement that sought to overthrow Roman rule. They led a rebellion in 66 A.D. when Rome introduced imperial cult worship. Although initially successful, Rome sent in the troops and smashed the resistance in 70 A.D. and destroyed the temple. Although Jesus had a zealot among his disciples (Simon) and though he sympathized with the plight of the downtrodden Judeans, Jesus did not choose the Zealot path of violence.

On the other extreme were the Essenes. They originated about 100 B.C. and emphasized ritual purity. They also separated themselves from the rest of society and tended to form communities in the desert. The Essenes are not mentioned in the New Testament although some scholars suggest that John the Baptist was an Essene. Others try to connect this group with the Dead Sea Scrolls. Although he had some characteristics that were similar to the Essenes, Jesus definitely did not try to escape from society’s problems.

The two main religious/political groups that appear in Scripture were the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Both groups had members in the Sanhedrin, but the Sadducees held the majority. The high priest was a Sadducee as were the chief priests. The Sadducees were generally wealthier and politically more powerful. They were doctrinally more conservative and applied a more literal interpretation of the Old Testament and gave preference to the Law of Moses. They did not believe in an afterlife. On the other hand, the Pharisees were more liberal in their interpretation of the Bible and gave importance to oral tradition. They were not as rich and therefore had more favor with the poorer people. The Apostle Paul had been a Pharisee before his encounter with the risen Christ. Jesus agreed with the Pharisees on the doctrine of the resurrection, but he criticized both the Pharisees and Sadducees for their hypocrisy and legalism. Jesus refused to align his teaching and his messianic cause totally with either the Sadducees or the Pharisees.

Jesus provides some helpful insights in how to navigate today’s complex and divisive politics.

Jesus was a realist and knew that humans tended to abuse their authority. He said, “The rulers of this world lord it over their subjects” (Luke 22:25a) and told us not to follow their example. Power whether wielded by Republicans or Democrats frequently leads to corruption. Power given to the ruling authorities should be used to serve humanity, especially the most vulnerable among us.
Jesus cut through the hypocrisy of his day. He warned his followers to not believe candidates who exaggerate their own goodness and greatness: “they like to call themselves big Benefactors, those who do good” (Luke 22:25b). He told his disciples not to believe them. Today he would urge us to demand honesty in political advertising and to denounce lies wherever we find them. What is urgently needed in our country are citizens who demand honesty of the leaders of their own political party.
Although Jesus rejected the hypocrisy of the political groups in his culture, he welcomed those who were humble enough to seek the truth. Nicodemus was a Pharisee, but he came to Jesus seeking life. Jesus saw his humility and rewarded it and let him into greater truth.
The Bible teaches that God is the defender of the “the orphan, the widow, and the stranger” because they are more vulnerable to the injustices imposed by the powerful. Jesus demonstrated in word and deed that these “despised by the world” were his brothers and sisters and bore with them the image of God (Matthew 25:31-46).

During this election season, Jesus urges us to consider both policies and personal character. We need to favor those policies that serve the neediest among us. We also need to evaluate a candidate’s character (honesty, humility, integrity) as we make our election decisions. Choose well.