How evangelicals dug their own hole

I have railed against evangelicals this election cycle because their petulance has put the party in the position it's in -- having to support a man that a majority of the base isn't fond of. How is this they're fault? Dan Gilgoff explains in his piece today, and the blame is rightly assigned to evangelical leaders that refused to back the better man:

Though he has the support of some conservative Christian figures, including Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas and onetime presidential candidate Gary Bauer, the hatred for McCain in much of the Christian right is irreversible.

"I am convinced Sen. McCain is not a conservative, and in fact, has gone out of his way to stick his thumb in the eyes of those who are," Focus on the Family founder James Dobson said earlier this month, adding that he "will not vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience."

Romney, by contrast, had plenty of Christian right patrons, including Bob Jones University's chancellor, Bob Jones III, and Moral Majority co-founder Paul Weyrich. In an interview last year, Dobson acknowledged that "there are conservative Christians who will not vote for (Romney) because of his Mormon faith," but he said that wasn't necessarily "the correct view or my view."

As Dobson warmed to Romney — the two had a getting-to-know-you session at Focus' Colorado Springs headquarters last year — he could have opened a dialogue with his millions of radio listeners about why evangelicals should feel comfortable voting for a Mormon, even if they rejected his theology.

Instead, he took public swipes at Republican candidates Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and John McCain, leaving his evangelical fans to deduce his support for Romney and Huckabee by process of elimination.

A good deal of the evangelical problem came in their own inherent distrust of Mitt Romney due to his faith. Now, I'm not calling them bigots, but I am holding them responsible for getting us McCain instead of sticking with a guy who was clearly better. I know a lot of people call Mitt a "flip-flopper," but that's not true. Mitt's views have changed over the years, and he's not gone back to where he started. I chastise Republicans who make that assertion of Mitt Romney, and I condemn evangelicals for attacking him, or refusing to back him, based on his faith.

Nancy French, a blogger and co-founder of Evangelicals for Mitt, sums up the evangelical crack up succinctly:

"We got used to having one of our own in the White House for eight years" — George W. Bush — "when in reality, that's not the way the Christian right usually operates."

She's spot-on. It used to be that they worked for the betterment of the party. They worked quietly to get Reagan and Bush 41 elected. They worked their butts off for George W. Bush's two victories. But, as I have explained, they got too big for their britches, and believed they could command the field. In an open election, where there is no incumbent, that is a dangerous prospect. While they were looking for one particular candidate, they immediately excluded others. In doing so, they handed us McCain.

If we lose this election, evangelicals will have no one to blame but themselves.

Publius II