Friday, October 25, 2024

If Harris loses/Trump wins US election it will of course be the ‘fault’ of Catholics

 

In the run-up to the US presidential election in 2000 between George W. Bush and Al Gore, the Washington Post’s legendary columnist EJ Dionne wrote: “There is no Catholic vote. And yet, it matters.”

The reason there is doubt around the existence of a unified Catholic vote is that such a voting bloc is far too diverse to pin down to a particular set of voting habits or priorities. 

Catholics make up 23 per cent of the US population and are divided along various ethnic and social lines. White Catholics vote in decisively different ways to their Latino counterparts, while regular Mass-goers are much more likely to vote for the Republican Party – often referred to as the GOP, standing for its nickname of Grand Old Party – than their non-attending co-religionists.

Moreover, Catholics, more than any other religious group, do not overwhelmingly favour one political party. For example, 75 per cent of Latter-Day Saints are Republicans, and 69 per cent of Jews are Democrats. But the Catholic vote sits in the middle, with 52 per cent voting Republican and 44 per cent Democrat, according to the polls. Not since the 1960s, when Catholics rallied for John F. Kennedy, have they voted decisively for a single candidate. 

The Catholic vote is also fluid, changing according to economic progression and easily influenced by moral debates. Compared with other religious or ethnic groups, Catholics are willing to change their voting habits based on changing circumstances. As the Catholic population has become wealthier, their support for the Democratic Party has waned. Since the passing of Roe v. Wade in 1973, and as the culture wars intensified, Catholics have increasingly sided with the GOP.

In contrast, other religious groups have remained more consistent. Jewish Americans, for instance, voted by 72 per cent for Al Smith, the Democratic presidential candidate in 1928 (who also happens to be the first Roman Catholic and Irish-American who ran for president as the nominee of a major party). Fast forward almost 100 years, and they supported Biden with 68 per cent of their vote, with little variation in the elections in between. Similarly, over 80 per cent of evangelical Protestants supported Herbert Hoover in 1928, and 84 per cent voted for Donald Trump in 2020, again with little change in between.

Around seven key swing states are likely to decide this election, and Pennsylvania could prove one of the most significant. The state holds 19 Electoral College votes, and whoever wins Pennsylvania has an 80 per cent chance of winning the presidency, it is estimated. The state’s Catholic population is roughly the same as the national average, sitting at 24 per cent.

For the past 20 years, the Catholic vote has aligned with the winning candidate, favouring George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and then Joe Biden. Now with the tightest presidential race in a generation, and with Trump seemingly gaining support from Catholics, Harris’s downfall may lie in her inability to achieve the same. 

There are two possible factors explaining Trump pulling ahead, and neither has to do with Trump himself, as much as the media go on about him. The first is that Harris, as she pointed out in the presidential debate, is clearly not Joe Biden. Biden’s second bid for the presidency was seen by everyone, except Biden, as untenable. His on-air mental decline confirmed this perception. However, in his first presidential race, he managed to garner Catholic support, when Hilary Clinton did not. And he may have managed it in this presidential race, had he been left as the Democrats’ nominee.

It is true that Biden is anathema to many conservative Catholics who cite his laxity on pro-life issues as abhorrent. His name, along with that of Nancy Pelosi, is akin to a pejorative in the view of many orthodox US Catholics who denounce their leaders who profess Catholicism but erode its influence from the most influential positions.

However, many average US Catholics see things differently. For one, Biden is the most frequent church-attending president in recent memory. Additionally, he is of Irish descent, and about 25 per cent of US Catholics claim Irish ancestry, with many more holding admiration for the Emerald Isle.

Throughout his political career, Biden has focused on issues that align with Catholic social teaching, such as concerns for the poor and working-class struggles, while his contradictory stance with the Church hierarchy on sexual morality reflects many of the inconsistencies average US Catholics experience in their own lives. For many Catholics in the US, particularly older generations, Biden is “one of them”.

Harris, on the other hand, has made no effort to appeal to Catholics, which, in fairness, could be said to be a sign of authenticity from a member of the Third Baptist Church in San Francisco. She controversially missed the Al Smith dinner – an annual New York charity event supporting Catholic charities and, yes, named after the same Al Smith of earlier – making her the first presidential candidate to do so in 40 years.

And while Biden may not have fully upheld Catholic values in the political arena, Harris, by contrast, has been actively opposed to them, which even for liberal Catholics, could make her problematic.

As California’s attorney general, Harris opposed religious exemptions for private companies, such as Hobby Lobby, a chain of craft stores, after the Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that the family-run business could be exempt from providing contraception in employee health insurance plans based on religious beliefs. 

She also came under fire from Catholic groups in 2018 when, during a Senate confirmation hearing, Harris questioned judicial nominee Brian Buescher about his membership in the Knights of Columbus. Groups like the Knights of Columbus represent the kind of cultural Catholicism that endeared Biden to many, and in this instance, Harris was seen as openly opposing it.

As mentioned, Biden may not have always adhered to Church teachings, but he was rarely seen as intentionally antagonistic toward the Church.

The second factor is the “Vance Effect”. Young Catholic Americans, as is well-documented, are more traditional and often take their faith more seriously than older generations. For them, going to church is a deliberate choice that goes against the cultural norms of their age group. They are often fiercely pro-life, counter-cultural and many prefer the Traditional Latin Mass.

Catholics of this ilk see themselves reflected in JD Vance, who, rather than being a cradle Catholic and part of the related cultural legacy as Biden is – akin to being a member of a working men’s club – has embraced his faith in response to his disillusionment with a society driven by consumption and pleasure.

This resonates with many young Catholics and trumps whether someone is a cradle Catholic or convert. For these young Catholics, being a faithful Catholic is a decision they have made, born from the sense that something is wrong with hedonistic 21st-century consumerism, alongside a belief that Catholicism provides the answer. They see, and respond to, Vance doing the same.

The presence of Vance on the Republican ticket may have turned a younger generation of traditionalist Catholics from simply viewing Trump as the less problematic candidate to seeing him as someone connected to the Catholic worldview through his running mate. Vance is also the heir apparent to the “MAGA” dynasty: a vote for Trump in 2024 could help pave the way for a traditional Catholic president in 2028. That, surprisingly, rarely gets mentioned or considered as a factor in this election – and it probably should.

The advance of secularism in society may suggest that Harris has been right not to have sought the Catholic vote. Each presidential campaign has seen a reduction in religious rhetoric, and the rise of the “nones” — those Americans with no religious affiliation — making it arguably less necessary to court Catholics. However, she could come to regret this. 

Biden’s Catholicism likely played a role in his 2020 victory, and Vance could attract a new generation of Catholic voters. Alienating any group – whether pockets of traditionalists or the main body of the largest religious denomination in the country – could be the difference between winning and losing in such a close election.

Given the great polarisation around the presidential candidates and this election race in general, it means that Catholics should likely steel themselves for taking some, if not most, of the blame from everyone else, should it go a particular way. Though Catholics could likely counter and offer the following point to a secular society that routinely ignored or criticised them and their Church: Well, we tried to tell you about a few things, but you never listened. What were we meant to do?

Photo: Pope Benedict XVI greets the crowd at the Nationals Park stadium in Washington, DC, USA, 17 April 2008. The home stadium of the Washington Nationals baseball team became a ‘church for a day’ when Pope Benedict XVI celebrated the first of two huge open-air masses during his six-day visit to the United States. (Photo credit should read VINCENZO PINTO/AFP via Getty Images.)

Catholic Herald: https://catholicherald.co.uk/if-harris-loses-trump-wins-the-us-election-it-will-of-course-be-the-fault-of-catholics/

No comments:


Thank you for visiting.

Followers

Kamsahamnida, Dziekuje, Terima kasih, Doh je, Grazie, Tesekur, Gracias, Dank u, Shukran

free counters