Christian Nation Idea Strongest in the South and Midwest

 


If you lay an electoral map over the results of a poll asking respondents about the proper role of religion in government over the electoral college, we have a good representation of the next election. We see Vice President Vance talking often promoting Christianity. He knows the map.

An interesting poll recently indicated how far apart the country is on the matter of religion in government. The two coasts have little use for it. The South and Midwest poll in favor of political boss Jesus. 

The link points out that the pattern shown polling in favor of a Christian nation matches closely the electoral votes for Trump. When Trump and Vance talk of a Christian nation the purpose is to hold on to that particular set of electoral college votes.

One can see the campaign ahead in Midwestern states where agricultural prices have been hurt be stupid tariff policies. Voters there will be told, "Sure, tariffs hurt farm income and raised the prices of some goods made in China. But think of this. Do you want this country to be some godless atheist place where gay people marry and schools change kids from girls to boys and visa versa. Vote the way Jesus wants you to vote. Vote Republican." Whether its Vance or Rubio, he will do well. 

I see news reports that Obama feels he should have seen the political and religious game being played with the minds of those who eventually replaced him with Trump. But, what could he have done? He tried playing the "I am a Christian" card when he ran for his first term. He was roundly ridiculed by the right as not belonging to a proper brand of church. Liberal people like me did not like him playing that card.

Long term voting patterns are that Democrats hold the Presidency more years that Republicans. Republican hold Congress more years than Democrats. What we Democrats can hope is that the slow erosion of organized religion and a slowing of the redistricting game will help us just a little as time goes on and we may hold Congress more years in the future.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient God, Bel (Baal), the Main Character in an Ancient Play

Image
In a British museum is a preserved stone tablet from Babylon. It dates to about 2,000 BCE. Someone labored patiently to inscribe an entire passion play featuring the god Bel. I reiterate this is a stone tablet, not a recopied papyrus. The play begins with the god Bel arrested by soldiers and taken off the stage. He reappears at a trial in the Hall of Judgement. Bel is innocent but is sentenced to death. In the next scene Bel is accosted by a mob. He is despised and rejected. The actor playing Bel is then taken by guard to a hilltop in a sacred grove. Two criminals are taken with him. One of these is released. The the audience then leaves the theater and follows the actor Bel and his guards to the top of a hill where the death scene is enacted by hanging from a tree. The audience returns to the theater for the dramatic final scenes. The dead Bel is stripped and prepared for burial. On a theatrical hill to the side of the stage is a tomb where the body is placed. A stone is rolle...
Read more

What Was the "Argument" in the Election

Image
I hate to add my blog to the piles of blogs and pundits analyzing and pondering the meaning of the just passed election. But that's what I feel like doing today. I've always like Senator Ted Cruz's summary of politics. He once said, "First, win the argument. Then, win the election." I think there is a way of applying that to anti abortion Catholics and Protestants. The link talks of Catholics who now feel they have no political home because Republicans let them down with Trump but they remain against abortion rights. Taking Cruz's win-the-argument thesis, I'd call the past election about an argument between two groups. One group's argument was, "Trump's a jerk." The other's argument was, "Abortion is wrong." The group, "Trump's a jerk," won the argument and then the election.  While one can argue the election, or any election, it about more complex issues, I believe in the end elections hinge on very simple ar...
Read more

Will We Ever Know How Accurate Current Bibles Are

Image
When I discuss the many times the Bible was copied and recopied by scribes over a couple of thousand years, the reply is often, "I have a book by this (or that) expert who says the Bible is 99% accurate to its original writers." The 99% claim appears in various places defending the Bible. There is one thing we know absolutely: There is no surviving original copy of the Bible. Even the oldest surviving material is a generation or two after the time some of the Bible was written. This means no one can claim he has, or ever will, compare the current Bible to the original Bible and find the two are 99% the same. We cannot claim either that it is not 99% accurate. For the sake of discussion, however, assume the current Bible is 99% accurate. That would mean the one word out of every 100 was inaccurate. It could still mean an important misreading of the original text. An example is the passage referring to punishment for a man who kills a fetus. In the oldest know materia...
Read more