PLANK JULY 18, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Mega-church pastor and best-selling evangelical author Rick Warren announced earlier this week that he plans to hold a presidential forum, as he did during the 2008 campaign. Warren has not yet set a date for the event, nor does he have an agreement with the Obama and Romney campaigns for their participation. But both candidates have at least some reason to consider accepting the chance to discuss their faith publicly.
I won’t review the reasons why many American voters like to hear about the faith of their presidential candidates. And, yes, Romney continues to deal with questions about Mormonism while Obama is still attacked by conservatives who charge he is a secret Muslim. But the reason both men might benefit from talking about something as personal as faith in a national forum is that many voters are still struggling to get a handle on who these private, introverted men are.
That became clear two years ago when the Pew Research Center released a study indicating that Americans knew less about Obama several years into his term than they did while he was running for the presidency. In that study, a plurality of Americans (43%) said that they had no idea what religion Obama practiced. During the 2008 campaign, 51% of Americans could identify Obama as a Christian; barely one-third could do the same by August 2010. And lest you think that trend was purely the result of Fox News misinformation, it held true for Democrats in general and for African-Americans. Between 2008 and 2010, the percentage of Democrats who said they knew Obama was a Christian dropped from 55 to 41%.
Still, before Obama RSVPs for Warren’s forum, he should keep in mind a few important points. The first is the setting. The sanctuary at Saddleback Church seats approximately 5,000 people. If I’m remembering correctly, in 2008, both the Obama and McCain campaigns were given 100 tickets to distribute to their supporters. The remainder of the seats were filled by Saddleback members who donated up to $500 in order to attend the event. That means the presidential candidates spoke to a crowd that was not just overwhelmingly evangelical, but older, wealthier, and likely more conservative than the average evangelical gathering.
In his announcement on Monday, Warren said that 5,000 tickets to this year’s event would be distributed through a lottery system. If that’s the case, then the Democrats would be wise to get as many of their supporters as possible to enter that lottery.
Even if Obama supporters end up with a fair number of seats at the forum, the campaign’s communications team needs to be smarter than it was in 2008 about setting expectations. In the last campaign, the Obama team acted as if the Saddleback forum was just an ordinary campaign appearance at a neutral site instead of the first-ever presidential forum hosted by a Southern Baptist pastor for a conservative evangelical crowd. If Obama’s flacks had done their job, their spin to reporters would have been that Obama won just by showing up to the event and being willing to field questions. But they didn’t, and post-forum coverage focused on the difference between the slightly chilly reception the crowd gave Obama and the warm welcome that McCain enjoyed.
Finally, Obama should consider that Warren either lied about his plans for the 2008 forum or bowed to pressure from other conservatives regarding the topics up for discussion. In the week before the earlier event, Warren told TIME’s David van Biema that his questions would center on four areas: poverty, HIV/AIDS, climate change, and human rights. “There is no Christian religious test,” said Warren.
The night of forum, however, Warren stuck to a more conservative script, quizzing the candidates about gay marriage, judges, and abortion—and only briefly touching on poverty and climate change. As one progressive religious leader told me at the time: “They hadn’t done their research on Warren. Obama wasn’t prepared for the Saddleback thing at all, and Warren bushwhacked him.”
In the months following the forum, Obama aides didn’t bother to learn much more about Warren. That became clear when the pastor was invited to give a prayer at Obama’s Inauguration, and political liberals reacted with outrage, citing Warren’s endorsement of the anti-gay marriage Prop 8 in California, his controversial comments about homosexuality following the election, and a Fox News appearance in which he agreed that the President of Iran should be assassinated.
There’s nothing wrong with Obama agreeing to another forum at Saddleback. But he needs to know his aides aren’t sending him into a lion’s den unprepared.
15 comments
Informative.
- Nusholtz
July 18, 2012 at 3:46pm
What does Obama need to know? That Warren is as trustworthy as that snake in the Garden of Eden. I don't expect Obama will announce that he accepts Jesus as his savior. He could copy the former charlatan-in-chief and take a copy of the Bible with him. Of course, he could babble on about how ACA will result in millions having healthier and longer lives. Good luck with that one. My suggestion: sin. Not to commit sins while there, but talk about sin. Evangelicals love nothing better than talking about sin. Let the congregation know that he has sinned, that he prays daily for forgiveness for his sins, that he prays for guidance as president. To close the deal, he could tell the congregation that he and Bibi prayed together. It's not the power of prayer, but the power of piety that will win this audience. There is no greater expression of faith than piety.
- rayward
July 18, 2012 at 4:25pm
One reason for a non-trivial number of people not knowing what religion Obama practices might be because, on the face of the evidence, it's very possible that he doesn't have one. I'm not asserting that he's an out and out Athiest, but likely more agnostic (which is really an Athiest who doesn't want to get into an argument). If this is the case, I'd regard it as his greatest achievement, although it's likely to change the otherwise guaranteed litmus test of religiousness that our leaders have to pass.
- Nari224
July 18, 2012 at 4:44pm
Why would Obama dignify this person with a visit?
- Sophia
July 18, 2012 at 4:44pm
But otherwise I'm pretty happy that Obama is more than capable of handling Warren without needing any help from his aides. And without a teleprompter!
- Nari224
July 18, 2012 at 4:47pm
What a pompous ass Warren is--dispensing lottery tickets for the privilege of watching him grill presidential candidates. He seems to think he's St. Peter at the gate. What a power freak. Of course, I can see how he'd be an egomaniac when millions of idiots are bowing to him. Who cares what the specific religious beliefs of a president are? Obviously, a lot of fools. One of the most disgusting things about America is the false piety of its Christians who think they're responsible for all the good in our history. This is not even a Christian nation. Its founders were mostly Deists. They knew the dangers of a nation's leaders declaring themselves to be believers in this or that religion, like they did in Tudor and Stuart England. And like they do today in Iran.
- magboy47.
July 19, 2012 at 2:51am
Rick Warren is an evangelical Christian pastor. Of course, he's not to be trusted.
- orray2
July 19, 2012 at 9:38am
Since I covered the Saddleback Forum for The Huffington Post and interviewed many attendees before and after (as well as attending the post-event spin scrum for the press), here are a few inaccuracies in Ms. Sulivan's article. The audience in the sanctuary paid $2500 for seats, or, were given seats as a thank-you for major commitment church volunteer work, like running a youth sports program. The church members in other buildings, seeing a live feed, paid $500 a seat. The audience(s) ages and education and income ran the gamut. Almost half told me pre-event they planned to vote for Obama--who, by the way, was already a friend of Rick Warren and had spoken at Saddleback before. Obama got into trouble at Saddleback that Saturday night when he answered a question about abortion by saying "that's above my pay grade." This demurral did not go over well because the previous Sunday Warren had told his church members that what mattered most McCain v. Obama was which man displayed the most leadership qualities. And McCain was in top form that evening--forthright, vibrant, sure of himself. One of the few campaign appearances McCain nailed. Finally, Obama chose Warren for the Inauguration because he truly believed (then) that his new presidency would be an ideological rift-closer. Warren's stances, moreover, are no more conservative than those of other pastors, especially African-American, who counsel Obama. Mayhill Fowler
- junehill
July 19, 2012 at 10:23am
Ms. Fowler, great comment. I don't know your political affiliation, but hopefully we'll see more of you here.
- austinous
July 19, 2012 at 12:15pm
Ms. Fowler asked all 5,000 plus if they intended to vote for Obama? As to Obama's answer to the question about abortion, the question was: "At what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?" Obama's answer: ""I think that, whether you’re looking at it from the theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." Obama later clarified: ""Yes. I mean, what I intended to say is that, as a Christian, I have a lot of humility about understanding when does the soul enter into…" Does it show "leadership qualities" to profess that you know when life begins? Or does it show "leadership qualities" to admit that neither you nor anybody else in the building knows when life begins. I will express my preference for president someone who has the humility not to profess to know the answers to questions that only God could know. Of course, George W. Bush is a man with few doubts about anything, when life begins included, and that didn't turn out so well for a whole lot of folks, including lots of Americans.
- rayward
July 19, 2012 at 1:02pm
Based solely on the headline and accompanying photo, Obama needs to know that Rick Warren is a closeted gay man.
- wildboy
July 19, 2012 at 1:07pm
Mayhill Fowler, making news right here on our Little Old Forum! Feel free to quote me on rural Pennsylvanians being bitter and clinging to their guns and religion. Just don't use my real name, which I won't give you under any circumstances.
- wildboy
July 19, 2012 at 1:11pm
Rayward, if he wanted to say he didn't know, he should have said that. Am I the only one who thinks that "above my pay grade" is a really stupid way of evading?
- austinous
July 19, 2012 at 5:00pm
Have I ever referred to God as being above my pay grade? I may have, though I don't recall. But He definitely is above my pay grade. Do I know when life begins. Why we are here. Why so many suffer while they are here. When life ends. What if anything comes after. Obama had the humility to acknowledge that the answer to such questions is above his pay grade. I suspect that some wouldn't agree it's above theirs, maybe even Warren, maybe even some readers of TNR.
- rayward
July 19, 2012 at 6:04pm
Rayward, I wasn't very clear - my issue was more semantic than substantial. If you don't know something, you say that you don't. If Obama had said that he didn't know (with the context he gave later), I would have had no issue with it. As I said, maybe it's just me, but I see the term "above my pay grade" as nothing more than evading an uncomfortable question.
- austinous
July 20, 2012 at 8:49am