Evangelicals Should Capitalize on Trump’s Victory
Donald Trump will be moving back into the White House in January. Early Wednesday morning, the 2024 presidential race was called, and the American people elected Donald J. Trump as the 47th President of the United States. His victory in this election was perhaps the greatest political comeback at the presidential level in American history, outdoing Grover Cleveland’s nonconsecutive terms in office in the late nineteenth century and Richard Nixon’s storming back in 1968 after losing (with the help of Chicago Mayor Richard J. Daley) to JKF in 1960.
Trump ran through a deadly gauntlet to get back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. He successfully evaded multiple assassination attempts, the Democrats’ myriad efforts to jail him and confiscate his personal wealth through lawfare, the Intelligence Community’s machinations to frame him even before his first term began, and two impeachments.
Trump’s win is a rejection of the personalities and policies offered by the Democrats. More importantly, it’s a searing rebuke of the bipartisan ruling class’s arrogance, incompetence, and clear disdain for large swaths of the country—and a repudiation of their supposed divine right to rule.
Fortunately, increasing numbers of voters are seeing through the successive waves of propaganda pushed out by our state media. They understand the depth of the supposed smart set’s gross malfeasance, which sits atop a foundation of malevolence for their way of life. What else should these Americans think after constantly being told to repent for everything they believe in—and even the color of their skin—or else be replaced with “real Americans” from the third world?
As Julie Ponzi wrote in a symposium at The American Mind, contrary to our so-called benevolent rulers, “a legitimately obtained majority of the people [should be] responsible for the direction of the United States of America.” A Trump victory opens the possibility for a recovery of politics itself—not in the sense that the people will rule directly (the American founders, after all, despised democracy in the Aristotelian sense), but that voters will choose those who have the wisdom to do what’s best for America—not leech its vitality for their own benefit.
Given the state of our current electoral map, the significance of Trump’s victory should not be overlooked. A country this divided gave him wins both in the Electoral College (what matters according the Constitution) and the popular vote (the mandate for governing)—which is perhaps the closest we can come to a landslide in 2024. Rather than accept an even more radical administration—and an even more bungling one—than Joe Biden’s, American voters sided with Trump’s America First agenda. That, of course, is focused on policing our porous borders and deporting millions of illegal aliens, curbing inflation, and using tariffs as a method of statecraft rather than accede to the desires of the coastal upper crust and supposed foreign policy mavens at Foggy Bottom.
Trump unexpectedly won a majority of white women, while also making historic gains among both black men (20%) and Hispanic men (54%). (As Jeremy Carl points out, many minority voters stayed home, thinking that Trump was decent enough that they didn’t need to vote against him.) And young men shifted to him in big numbers, according to the Wall Street Journal. Additionally, Trump gained support in every demographic, with the exception of voters 65 and older and white, college-educated women.
A chart going around social media from the Financial Times shows that Trump made improvements in every state save two. When CNN’s John King went to his digital elections map on Tuesday night to see the places where Harris outperformed Joe Biden by 3% or more, he came up with nothing, to the shock of Jake Tapper. Shockingly, New York is closer to going red (Harris +10) than Texas is going blue (Trump +14).
What, exactly, will the media industrial complex learn from all of this? Based on past experience: Nothing. Instead, they will triple—no, quadruple down—blaming tens of millions of Americans for their various -isms and continue insulting them on a regular basis. An example of their hubris going forward occurred during PBS’s coverage of the election, when Jonathan Capehart said in NPR-ish tones, “I can’t help but wonder if the American people have given up on democracy.” “Democracy” for the ruling class simply means perpetuating their unopposed rule at home and abroad. There’s zero consideration that what the American people evidently want actually might be good for them and the country, rather than a platform dreamed up by Heinrich Himmler.
There will be no soul-searching or figuring out what happened by doing on the ground reporting or undertaking any fundamental rethinking of what they believe. Like the 1619 Project’s Nikole Hannah-Jones, leftist identity politics logically forces them to lay the blame ultimately on the United States: for this group, our country’s horrific history and traditions are why Harris lost. They see themselves as living in a country born in the cradle of slavery—which still infests every major institution today. But the “America” they love never has been and never will be. (It’s a godsend that the Trump administration rather than a Harris administration will be overseeing the nationwide celebrations of America’s 250th anniversary in 2026.)
Despite the election data on demographics, most evangelical elites will use this as yet another cudgel to wield against white evangelicals in the pews. And they will have plenty of fodder: Samuel Perry reports that 81% of white evangelicals voted for Trump this time around. But no matter—the fundamentalist moralism of the evangelical elites will not cease until morale improves.
Of course, this tired tactic will predictably backfire in big ways. Josh Abbotoy rightly argues that it will “ensure that [evangelicalism will] have no voice in Trump’s administration.” Somehow, the Ethics and Religious and Liberty Commission will be even more ignored than they already are (it’s well known around D.C. that taking a meeting with the ERLC is the most useless thing congressional staff can do with their time). Trump and his advisors will prefer to court growing constituencies and enact their preferences instead.
Additionally, evangelicals who feel alienated from Big Eva’s poor political thinking could end up leaving the evangelical church altogether. Keller-esque rhetoric that “America is Babylon” and Christians are “exiles in a strange land” no longer has purchase power for them. More and more, they understand that the effect of bad biblical exegesis from evangelical elites (and those outside of evangelicalism) sows confusion and second-guessing, dampens political involvement, makes ambiguity a central value, and shifts the indefensible to being an acceptable position. And they see how often the elites use thinly-veiled platitudes as a method to get their own way.
More organizations like the Center for Baptist Leadership that hold to orthodoxy and are politically savvy are needed to hold Big Eva accountable and ultimately replace them. The Russell Moores and David Frenches of evangelicalism, along with their After Party cronies and movements like Evangelicals for Harris, need to be marginalized. Fortunately, that already seems to be happening—the 2024 election is another example of their waning influence over the evangelicals they purport to be leading.
We should thank God for his mercy that Donald John Trump and James David Vance won in 2024 and that evil is being held at bay (for now) at the presidential level. We should pray a collect from the Book of Common Prayer that Trump and Vance, along with elected leaders at every level of government, would “promote thy glory and the welfare of this people” and give them the “spirit of wisdom, courage, and true godliness.” This is a major electoral win that Christians can use to influence the nation for good. As Solomon wrote in Proverbs 3:27, “Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand to do it.” Christians should get to it.
Image Credit: Unsplash
There are two possible outcomes to Trump’s reelection. First, the US will become a Christian Fascist state, which is something Chris Hedges has been warning us about for decades. Or second, we will become the Russia of the West in that we will become an oligarchy with religious overtones. In either case we see a return to increase authoritarianism with hierarchy and some parts of Christianity taking the lead in that authoritarianism.
Celebrate now. Because eventually this election will be cursed and will cause many to want to blot it from the history of our nation.
Are you taking part of the military coup you’re proposing, or are you wanting other people to do the dirty work you fantasize about?
Andrew,
Where did you see coup in that comment?
Or, do you agree with my predictions or not?
November 2, 2024: “We really don’t have much of a democracy with equality, but if Trump wins, what we have will be taken away and perhaps a military coup would be our only chance at restoring America”
https://americanreformer.org/2024/11/the-2024-election-who-will-win/
I think your predictions are hyperbolic, hysterical, and unfounded.
Andrew,
But I didn’t say it in the above post.
Also, my comment was about preventing dictatorship and considering Jan 6 as well as the world leaders whom Trump has publicly expressed admiration for or jealousy of, saying that Trump’s presidency could turn into a dictatorship is not an overreaction.
Are you going to fight on the front lines? Or should other people do your bidding? If given the chance, would you assassinate Trump?
Andrew,
I am not requesting anything from anyone. I am simply saying that the only way that can defeat the power that Trump is seeking is a military coup. That talks more about the power that Trump is seeking more than how to reverse what will happen.
And so are you concerned about the power that Trump is seeking?
I have no concern about the power he is harnessing.
Now answer my question, would you assassinate Trump if you were given the chance? Why or why not?
Andrew,
Why even ask the question? My guess is that that is the association you want to make with me.
Would I assassinate anyone who was or would be elected President?
ABSOLUTELY NOT
But you already knew that. Any Christian who read about the history of David and Saul would answer the question the same way I did. Then add to that history the perspectives of Howard Zion and Martin Luther King Jr.
If you have no concerns with the power Trump is garnering, then perhaps you have little regard for The Constitution since that document was, in part, about the separation of powers.
Good. Glad we can clear that up. It sure seems like you would do anything else, including supporting a coup, to stop the guy.
And give me a break about Trump violating the Constitution. If anything, the stated goals of DOGE will align the executive branch more with its Constitutionally expressed intent. I would love to see the fourth branch of government, the 3 letter agencies, lose as much power as possible.
Andrew,
There was nothing to clear up and you know that.
If you want responses, then engage in rational discussions rather than using questions to imply wrong things.
As for the intent of The Constitution regarding the executive branch, again there is a separation of powers. Putting the Justice Department under any significant control of a President, especially those who might be demanding personal loyalty oaths, is certainly against the intent of a document that sought the balance of powers.
We can make assumptions based on the information you have given us.
I’m just curious why you are so hysterical about the DOJ under Trump, when we have seen it abuse its power in the Biden administration in the ways you assert Trump will use it.
If, and when, you turn out to be wrong in this dichotomy you’ve offered, I wonder if you’ll admit it and finally stop with all the nonsense posting. I’m hedging my bet on that possibility.
Gojira,
If I am wrong in my predictions, I will admit it. But being wrong doesn’t mean one is posting nonsense.
What’s nonsense is trying to get people to reflexively reject or accept what someone says.
Greetings Curt…Happy Veteran’s Day. 3rd generation military, my four 18 year-olds voted Trump with me last Tuesday, and I couldn’t be more pleased with the results. Already looking forward to our Semiquincentennial or Quarter Millennial in 2026! I remember driving a lot of miles as a child to see the American Freedom Train in 1976!
Chris Hedges is a self-described socialist and anarchist. Certainly his warnings don’t resonate here.
Curious about your use of the word authoritarianism. Authority is a pretty big idea in Romans 13. Is authoritarianism the term that’s used only when we don’t like that authority? Is there a better kind than Christian authority?
I trust the baseball umpire to call balls and strikes. I don’t like it when he’s demonstrably wrong, or squeezing the strike zone for one team more than the other. Even worse when he’s squeezing my team. This election seems to be a pretty big repudiation of the squeeze that’s been being put on one side of the country…so the people have spoken, and replaced the authority. Hard to imagine you can’t see my perspective that the democrats were exercising authoritarianism, leaning on an institutional oligarchy, with anti-religious (which mirror religious) overtones.
I look forward to what you call a curse being a blessing, as well as a period of history that is great for all Americans and their descendants. Be Blessed!
John,
You bring up an extremely important point in seeing if there is a distinction between following authority structures as the Bible has directed us and authoritarianism.
Authoritarianism can refer to how a ruler rules, but it also can refer how we respond to what we read or hear from others. The latter form of authoritarianism deals more with personality traits.
For example, how do we respond to someone who disagrees with what one holds to be traditional values. Here, traditional values can be relative to the groups one belongs to. Do we expect people to automatically agree with and submit to those values? Do we show hostility to those who disagree with our traditional values? Do we think in black-white terms good and evil can be determined by those who agree with or disagree with our traditional values? Do we value strong leaders who have the power to punish those who to one’s traditional values? Do we have a negative view of people in general? Do we use irrelevant criteria that is favorable to our traditional values to determine whether what one is saying is true or false?
See, mere disagreement is not authoritarian. There are non-authoritarian ways to react to those who don’t hold to one’s traditional values as well as authoritarian ways. The latter involves a heavy-handed reaction to those who differ.
Also, I am not talking about how we react to God and His commands. I am talking about how we react to people and their ideologies and traditional values. So that even when one’s traditional values are aligned with God’s commands, do we look to punish those who differ or do we try to understand their perspective and perhaps win them over to our perspective to some significant degree?
Do some here celebrate Trump because of how they envision him punishing those who don’t hold to their traditional values?
In addition, one could read what Erich Fromm has to say about the two kinds of authoritarian personality types: the active authoritarian (the leader) and the passive authoritarian (the follower) and how context can cause some to be a leader in some settings and a follower in other settings.
So look at that last sentence in your comment to me. Where does that put you?
In terms of me and others I know who are dismayed by the election results. One of our great fears are over how some people with whom we are well acquainted will fare during a Trump presidency. One of my fears is how Trump will then treat those political opponents whom he has demonized.
Hi Curt, thanks for your reply. I’m certain my apologetic is often lengthy and inconsistent…but you referenced traditional values, so I’ll go with a public and personal example.
Publicly, I support whatever position Trump wants to give Richard Grenell. Is is lifestyle traditional, no. Has he supported America’s interests within his government roles? As far as I can tell. It’s hard for me to believe that Trump allows Grenell such privileged access, while also wanting to demonize and punish him in a heavy-handed way for his lifestyle.
On a personal note, my daughter just committed to a D1 sports program. We have our official visit this weekend. This program forfeited multiple matches against a team that has a transgender athlete. This athlete has demonstrated male strength and abilities…because he is male. The Trump administration has committed to protect my daughter from this non-traditional participation in women’s sports. The democrats did not make that same commitment, instead putting their perceived right of the individual above the will and safety of the majority.
Do I think of both of these issues in black-and-white terms? You bet I do. Grenell is going to get a job to look after America’s interests. By voting for Trump, I voted essentially to hire Grenell to do that. I’m more than pleased. Am I happy that my daughter’s future school took a stand against men playing in women’s sports…absolutely. And my daughter just took part in the election process for the first time, knowing that she was supporting her fellow athletes’ safety.
Time will tell if your fear about what Trump will do to his opponents will come to fruition. Non-traditional values holders have not used the law, the media, the administrative state against him. Those are the people that should have some concern, at least if they have a conscience. Trump has been a ‘let’s make a deal, live and let live’ type of leader rather than an ideologue who is going to try to force his ideas down the country’s throat. I cannot say the same about this current ‘pseudo-climate, open border, teachers are smarter than parents’ administration. I’m happy my side won…but I’ve not spent time gloating or collecting leftist tears.
I’m praying that Trump gets after the business of what I heard him say he’ll do, and not what you heard him say he’ll do. We definitely hear him (and read the articles on this website) differently. Be blessed!
John,
When I refer to traditional values, again those values are relative to the circles one runs in. Traditional values for Capitalists are different than those of Socialists. Traditional values of religiously conservative Christians are different from those who embrace liberal theology. If we don’t consider traditional values as relative to the circles one travels in, then only conservatives could be authoritarians. But such is not the case.
I have never heard of Grenell. As for Transgendered participating in sports. I am against transgendered participating in the sports that were designated for the other biological sex. I don’t think that my position opposes full equality for the Transgendered. What I think the problem is that both conservatives, in general, and the LGBT community, again in general, conflate biological sex with gender identity. The emergence of the Transgendered as shown that our former classifications of people as being either male or female are outdated and no longer serve society. Gender dysphoria is real and can have physical causes. And so I have no problem recognizing someone’s change in gender. But that doesn’t alter their biological sex.
Either of those are fine with me. Not my first choice, but it works.
In fact, I would crawl over broken glass if it meant that the rampant degeneracy in America would be subdued to the level of a Russia of the West or a Christian Fascist state. We are no longer a people capable of participatory government. We need a monarch to restore order, law, culture, heritage, morality, to our demos.
James,
But is that how the Scriptures want us to react and respond to their “degenerate” sins? Think about the parable of the two men praying and Paul’s and James’s warnings not to judge others. Do you want God to judge you for the sins you commit as much as you want God to judge those degenerate people?
This is a severe misunderstanding of these passages and the intent of those who judge sin through the law. Additionally, we *know* God is going to judge us for the sins we commit, we are blessed with our salvation through Christ; so this is a moot point.
Should a murderer not be punished by righteous law?
Andrew,
Maybe it is you who misunderstands. My comments on judging do not preclude the punishment of crimes. At the same time, consider the quote from James’s comment:
‘In fact, I would crawl over broken glass if it meant that the rampant degeneracy in America would be subdued to the level of a Russia of the West or a Christian Fascist state.‘
First, Russia is a very corrupt nation. They don’t seem to have a society that has the same level of participation in sexual sins that we have, but then again, who knows for sure. But James’s willingness to trade a free society in order to curb sexual sins not only shows that he seems to be unaware of the New Testament’s solution to the problem, but that he is talking about the pain he is willing to endure while I am talking about the pain that all of us might have to endure and that that pain would hurt the reputation of the Church and the tarnish the reputation of the Gospel.
I see nothing wrong with James’ statement. Are we any worse than Russia?
Lol, lmao even. You act like the church’s reputation isn’t tarnished by cloaking itself in modern liberalism to appeal to the secular world.
Andrew,
So you would like those who are degenerate to get theirs now? Who would the degenerate include?
I am not implying the “get theirs now,” rather that their lifestyle and actions are no longer supported by the state. In the case of degenerate criminals, they will get justice for their actions. In the case of degenerate sinners, their sin will not be celebrated and they will be encouraged to repent of their sin in the name of Christ. I hold myself to that standard, because that is what scripture says.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”
This is the American degeneracy that needs addressed in 2024.
Trump paid hush money to a porn star. And yet he defends traditional evangelical beliefs. If you can’t see the parallels between that and Babylon, you’re hopeless.