Does character still matter to our politicians? Yes, it does, but not in the same way as before.
“Character is on the ballot” are common refrains from pundits and voters alike during any election cycle. But is that still true? For many evangelicals and conservatives, the answer is yes, but not as important as in the past.
“Who will support policies that reflect the kind of people we want in our society?”
Evangelical Christians and conservatives have faced increasing criticism since Donald Trump entered the political mainstream in 2015. Observers have noted our opposition to Bill Clinton in the late 1990s after his sex scandal, and our subsequent opposition to Trump, who had his own flaws and controversies. Point out your support. They ask, “What can you give me?” Are we hypocrites who only want power? Is it a matter of putting “our man” in power while blaming “other men”?
i don't think so. That's not all.
my co-host “The Bully's Pulpit”Podcaster Eric Teetsel shares his thoughts on what's changed. In the 1990s, the political climate was different. At the time, the gap between Republican and Democratic policies was less pronounced than it is today. On important issues like abortion, Democrats said abortion should be “safe, legal and rare.” Both parties supported border security. Opinions on foreign policy were more unified than divided. There was a difference, but it wasn't a ditch.
In this environment, characters often acted as tiebreakers. Absent deep policy rifts, integrity, honesty, and moral standing carried considerable weight in determining which candidate better represented the country's values. For evangelicals, and voters in general, character was an important factor. This is because personality provides insight into a candidate's leadership potential in a relatively concerted political field. Small scandals can derail campaigns because they act as differentiators in an environment of similar policy positions. Consider Howard Dean's 2004 Campaign end cry;That was considered unsuitable for a presidential candidate. This standard is almost unthinkable today.
Since then, the ground has changed dramatically.
Today we face very contrasting policy bases. The issue is no longer primarily a debate about taxes and spending. They have become ideological battlegrounds. We are at odds over fundamental moral issues that will shape the future of our society: marriage, gender ideology, religious freedom, unrestricted abortion, censorship, and national security.
Differences between political parties do not increase over time. They are assertive.
In this polarized environment, candidates' personal characteristics have become less salient. Moral flaws and scandals are now common in all political arenas, and there is no truly “ideal” candidate. Candidates often level character flaws, and policy has emerged as a clear differentiator.
Let me be clear: We are still looking for leaders with strong character. But when both parties present morally flawed candidates, other factors must take precedence. For many, the question is: Who will support policies that reflect the kind of people we want in society?
This change is not about justifying sin or devaluing integrity. It's about the stakes in today's political climate.
Policies reflect the values that shape the future, determine rights and freedoms, and build the moral fabric of a nation.
When policies differ widely, as they do now, the battle lines become clearer. For example, many evangelicals supported Donald Trump not because they were unaware of his flaws, but because his policies were more in line with their beliefs than those of his opponent. be. The same logic applies to future candidates who may not be perfect role models, but who align with our values and support policies that protect our freedoms.
So is this hypocrisy? I don't think so. This is a readjustment to account for the changed world around us.
People often accuse people of hypocrisy without explaining how the political situation has developed. This is not an excuse for moral failure. It's about weighing them differently in a time when the stakes are incredibly high. Evangelicals are not saying that a leader's personal integrity is unimportant. But we are now in a situation where the character of a candidate's policies, rather than their personal perfection, often determines the future of the country.
Policies reflect collective character. They determine the moral and ethical direction of society. While we still seek leaders who can set a positive example, the truth is we can no longer afford to focus solely on our personal lives.
Today, policies reflect the values that shape the future, determine rights and freedoms, and shape the moral fabric of nations.
So, does personality matter? absolutely. But in today's climate, the most important persona is embedded in the policies leaders support. That's not hypocrisy. It is an adaptation to a political situation in which our values face unprecedented challenges. In such an environment, we need to consider the candidate's full character: both his personal life and the value his policies bring to the country.
For evangelicals, voting is more than just choosing someone. It is about choosing policies that align with Biblical truth and protecting the foundations that allow the gospel to flourish.
Today, a candidate's policy character speaks louder than a candidate's personal character. It is a choice we are making for our children, our community, and our faith.
