The Results
In a stunning reversal of expectations, Donald Trump won the 2016 election, capturing 306 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton’s 232. (After the electoral college voted on December 19, the final vote total came to 304 Trump, 227 Clinton, 3 Colin Powell, 1 Ron Paul, 1 Bernie Sanders, and 1 Faith Spotted Eagle. Ironically, more electors defected from Clinton than did from Trump.) Certainly, this was a result that few in the mainstream media expected and which the polls did not show. It’s been over 7 weeks since the election, but people are still asking the question, “How did this happen?”
Unlike what many of the liberal media talking points are saying, Trump did not win because a disproportionate number of racist bigoted white men voted for him. In fact, the data shows otherwise. Trump actually received a higher percentage of the vote among racial minorities compared to Mitt Romney in 2012.
Ultimately, Trump won because he won the Rust Belt states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. His message of economic populism (something I mostly disagree with) resonated with many blue-collar voters in those states who feared losing their jobs in a growing global economy. When it comes down to it, most people will vote for their own self-interests.
Evangelicals and Trump
One of the reasons why Hillary Clinton was predicted to win was that changing demographics are trending in a direction that is more favorable to Democrats – a more racially diverse population and an older more conservative population dying out and being replaced by more liberal Millennials. Sean Trende, a senior elections analyst at RealClearPolitics, wrote a good article called “The God That Failed,” in which he went through the recent trends in elections to show how that really hasn’t panned out yet.
In his article, Trende highlights a particular demographic that I want to draw attention to, one that I am a part of – the Evangelical Christians. Many people are asking how a conservative evangelical Christian could vote for someone who has been married 3 times and over the course of his life, and, during the campaign, has said and done many, many things that are contrary to Christian principles.
Trende offers some good insight:
You may wonder why this group voted in historic numbers for a man like Trump. Perhaps, as some have suggested, they are hypocrites. Perhaps they are merely partisans. But I will make a further suggestion: They are scared.
Consider that over the course of the past few years, Democrats and liberals have: booed the inclusion of God in their platform at the 2012 convention (this is disputed, but it is the perception); endorsed a regulation that would allow transgendered students to use the bathroom and locker room corresponding to their identity; attempted to force small businesses to cover drugs they believe induce abortions; attempted to force nuns to provide contraceptive coverage; forced Brendan Eich to step down as chief executive officer of Mozilla due to his opposition to marriage equality; fined a small Christian bakery over $140,000 for refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding; vigorously opposed a law in Indiana that would provide protections against similar regulations – despite having overwhelmingly supported similar laws when they protected Native American religious rights – and then scoured the Indiana countryside trying to find a business that would be affected by the law before settling upon a small pizza place in the middle of nowhere and harassing the owners. In 2015, the United States solicitor general suggested that churches might lose their tax exempt status if they refused to perform same-sex marriages. In 2016, the Democratic nominee endorsed repealing the Hyde Amendment, thereby endorsing federal funding for elective abortions.
Another large issue was the vacancy on the Supreme Court. It seems Mitch McConnell’s gambit paid off and was able to stall the nomination process until after the election. With many important cases likely to come to the Supreme court within the next couple of years dealing with abortion and transgender issues, filling that vacancy with a lifetime appointment of a conservative justice weighed heavily on the minds of many Christians.
But even with many of these issues on people’s minds, I feel that additional explanation is necessary. I can’t presume to speak for all Christians, but I will give my reasoning for why I voted for Trump.
Why I Voted for Trump
Ever since Trump got the nomination for the Republican party, I felt as if I was in a moral dilemma. I basically had 3 options for voting: Clinton, Trump, or 3rd party. Do I vote for the person I disagreed with 0n almost everything? Do I vote for someone who has made reprehensible statements? Or do I vote for someone who I agree with but has no chance of winning? I had to weigh the policy positions of each candidate. Then there was also the small matter of the character of each candidate.
Hillary Clinton
Clinton’s policies are mostly antithetical to my own, whether it be the role of government, economics, foreign policy, social issues like abortion or gay marriage, religious liberty, etc. I could perhaps find some agreement on civil rights and criminal justice reform, but that’s about it.
As far as character goes, Clinton was viewed in many ways as corrupt. When you are a Washington insider for many decades, most politicians will say or do things that are wrong and would regret if they ever came to light. Whether it was doublespeak with Wall Street, poor decision-making in Benghazi, the private email server, or pay for play with the Clinton Foundation, many scandals haunted her throughout the campaign. Each of these took on a life of its own. I don’t know enough about each scandal to say whether they were blown out of proportion or not (some of them probably were), but even if only one of these was true or many of them were half true, that would cast reasonable doubt upon her character and judgment.
Undoubtedly, as a polished politician, her tone and choice of words are far superior to Trump’s. Certainly, these have a large bearing on how we should judge presidential candidates, but we also need to use discernment. Someone who speaks the wrong thing in the right way is inferior to the one who speaks the right thing in the wrong way. At the end of the day, we want people who believe right things, even if they express themselves poorly. We need to be able to look beyond tone and word choice and vote based on the actual substance of their policies and character.
With this in mind, I found many of Hillary Clinton’s positions to be unacceptable and inexcusable (abortion being top of the list). People like to chalk up policy differences like this to simple disagreements or matters of opinion, but this issue is not just a simple policy difference. We are talking about life and death for human beings.
Donald Trump
Strictly on a policy basis, I agreed with Trump more often than I agreed with Clinton. However, it wasn’t as if I was in love with what he was saying, especially when it came to civil liberties and trade. But all in all, I would prefer him to Clinton on a policy level.
Some of the things Trump said were inexcusable, plain and simple. I won’t defend any of the racist or sexist statements he’s made. In my judgment, it seemed to me that the statements made came more from a motivation to strike back at those who criticized or challenged him than from having animus towards any particular group of people. I think it was more rhetoric and stupidity than anything else. But that doesn’t make what he said excusable in any way. Even if it was just rhetoric, I recognize that this can have (and has had) significant repercussions beyond mere words to affecting the culture we live in. This was one of many considerations I had swirling around in my mind.
3rd Party Candidates
There were 3rd party candidates that lined up more with my beliefs. Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party) was far superior to Trump and Clinton on economics but unfortunately is pro-choice and supports gay marriage. Evan Mcmullin (Independent) wasn’t even registered in California. Darrell Castle (Constitution Party) seemed to line up most with my beliefs. But none of them had any reasonable shot of winning. But should that have mattered?
Evaluation
With all this in mind, I had to think about what voting should really mean. I had to decide whether I wanted my vote to be an expression of my ideals or whether I wanted my vote to make a practical difference. Writing an article about common voting fallacies helped me sort out my own thoughts. I certainly wanted to vote for someone who shares my beliefs and values. Who doesn’t? We all look for someone we can support because we believe they will represent our ideals. I don’t expect anyone to agree with me 100% of the time, but neither Trump or Clinton shared enough of my values for me to openly advocate for them. One of the 3rd party candidates seemed to be the best option.
However, I also had to think about what my vote would actually do on a practical level. If I voted 3rd party, would it prevent Trump or Clinton from getting into office? Would it inspire others to vote for a 3rd party in 4 years? Would it help a 3rd party gain traction for future elections? No matter what question I asked, I came up with the answers “No.” The best shot a 3rd party candidate had was Gary Johnson. His support started to dwindle when he couldn’t get on the debate stage, and then fell off even more the last few weeks before the election. I didn’t see him getting the necessary 5% of the vote nationwide in order to obtain federal funding for future elections (a practical benefit that would have made me potentially vote for him).
Voting for someone to reflect my ideals would have felt better, but I came to the conclusion that if I didn’t use my vote in such a way that considered the practical implications, then that would have been irresponsible of me. So then, how could I make the greatest practical difference? Practically speaking, I could also do very little. I knew Clinton would win California handily, so I didn’t see any practical value in voting for Trump until I read an article by Wayne Grudem. While I agreed and disagreed with various parts of the article, there was one thing he said that stuck out to me.
In addition, your vote sends a signal. Every vote in every state affects the margin of victory for the winning candidate. A large nationwide victory gives a strong political mandate and a lot of political clout going forward. A small victory gives a weak mandate and less political clout going forward.
There I found the one practical thing I could do. By voting for Trump, I could potentially reduce Clinton’s mandate after the election (at the time, I was expecting her to win in a landslide). So I voted from Trump. It wasn’t an endorsement of him. It was just the greatest good that I could accomplish in my position. In the end, I feel at peace with how I voted.
Looking Forward
Overall, I am cautiously optimistic. I hope that people’s (or my own) worst fears about Donald Trump don’t come true. Luckily, we live in a country with checks and balances. The president doesn’t have unlimited power. He is checked by the Congress, the Supreme Court, but most importantly, the people. In 4 years, we can elect someone else. Until then, we ought to hope and pray that God can use someone like Donald Trump (with his many faults) to accomplish good in this country.