Trump v. the Pope, continuted

Our books have discussed Trump's low character, which was on display this weekend. His political judgment is getting worse, as is clear from his attacks on the Pope and his Jesus posts.

pic.twitter.com/nzzWbUK1VY

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 15, 2026

 

Elizabeth Dias and Motoko Rich at NYT:

Donald Trump ascended to office 10 years ago while publicly jousting with Pope Francis, who was routinely making headlines for the progressive Catholicism he elevated, pushing the Roman Catholic Church to focus on climate change and the rights of immigrants. The pope suggested that Mr. Trump was “not Christian”; Mr. Trump fired back that Francis was “disgraceful.”

Mr. Trump capitalized on growing discontent among conservative Christians and won the White House. The chasm only further widened between the Vatican and conservative American Catholics, who often saw in Mr. Trump a champion.

Pope Leo XIV, who was elected less than a year ago, is not Francis. For Mr. Trump, who is now in his second term, he presents a new foil at the Vatican with a markedly different standing among Catholics. As the first American in the seat of St. Peter, he has a native fluency in American politics and culture, and his leadership is supported across broad swaths of the American church.

....

Unlike his predecessor, Leo has growing support from conservative Catholics in pews across the United States. As the anniversary of his election approaches next month, he has so significantly rebuilt the Vatican’s relationship with the American Catholic right that many in Mr. Trump’s own camp rushed to the pope’s defense on Monday.

Interviews with conservatives attending Mass at Catholic parishes across the country revealed significant displeasure with the president for his harsh criticism of the pope, a dynamic hard to imagine not long ago.

...

Leo has an 84 percent favorability rating among American Catholics, with overwhelmingly high support regardless of political party, according to a Pew Research Center survey from last year. Francis’ favorability rating was just as high the first year of his papacy, but by the time of his death it had dropped to 78 percent.

Trump Attacks the Pope and Compares HImself to Jesus (not kidding)

 Our books have discussed Trump's low character, which was on display this weekend.

Trump attacks the Pope in a Truth Social rant, calling him “weak” and attacking his views on foreign policy, Iran, and even his legitimacy as pontiff—claiming he wouldn’t be Pope if Trump weren’t president. pic.twitter.com/hsBOFeq7pi

— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) April 13, 2026

The president posted this not long after attacking the Pope: pic.twitter.com/RlRhO63ZCo

— Adam Wren (@adamwren) April 13, 2026

Breaking News: Pope Leo XIV said he had “no fear of the Trump administration” after President Trump lashed out at him on social media. https://t.co/kMG1tDPHND

— The New York Times (@nytimes) April 13, 2026

Trump v. Catholics

Our most recent book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. The second Trump administration has been full of ominous developments -- now including a war in the Middle East.

Ellie Quinlan Houghtaling at TNR:

 Relations between the U.S. and the Catholic Church have not been the same since January, when senior U.S. defense officials shared an abrasive message with a Vatican official.

Days after Pope Leo XIV delivered his State of the World speech, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby summoned Cardinal Christophe Pierre, the Vatican’s U.S. representative, to a closed-door Pentagon meeting for a bitter lecture.

“The United States,” Colby said, according to a blistering new report by The Free Press, “has the military power to do whatever it wants in the world. The Catholic Church had better take its side.”

One U.S. official present at the meeting brought up the Avignon papacy, a period in the 14th century in which the French monarchy bent the Catholic Church into submission, ordering an attack on Pope Boniface VIII that led to his downfall and subsequent death and forcing the papacy to relocate from Rome to Avignon, a region inside France.

The Trump administration had taken issue with the pope’s critique of its militaristic proclivities. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and other top Pentagon officials were particularly aggrieved by portions of Leo’s January 9 speech in which the pope argued that “a diplomacy that promotes dialogue and seeks consensus among all parties is being replaced by a diplomacy based on force,” and that “war is back in vogue, and a zeal for war is spreading.”

The pope’s address was dissected line by line and interpreted as a hostile message toward the administration, reported Letters from Leo Substack writer Christopher Hale.

It was difficult not to interpret Leo’s comments as an immediate commentary on Donald Trump’s second administration, which had at that point bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities, kidnapped Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, fiercely advocated for the dissolution of NATO, and threatened America’s allies, including claiming that the U.S. would seize control of Canada and Greenland.

But the blatant intimidation tactic is the first of its kind ever made by American officials to the Catholic Church. There are no public records of any previous meetings between Vatican and U.S. officials at the Pentagon, let alone an instance in which the world power suggested that it could force the Bishop of Rome into captivity.

The Vatican was so alarmed by the Pentagon’s warning that Pope Leo cancelled his plans to visit the U.S. later in the year, reported Hale, who noted that “many in the Vatican saw the Pentagon’s reference to an Avignon papacy as a threat to use military force against the Holy See.”

Pope Leo calls Trump’s ‘whole civilization’ Iran threat ‘truly unacceptable’https://t.co/5IYt7BhsMb

— The Hill (@thehill) April 8, 2026

Leo XIV on Trump and Vance

Our forthcoming book is The Comeback: The 2024 Elections and American Politics. 

Zach Kessel and Jon Levine at The Washington Free Beacon

Pope Leo XIV, formerly known as Robert Prevost, voted in several Republican primaries before being elevated as successor to Pope Francis, election records obtained by the Washington Free Beacon show.

Leo XIV, who previously lived in Chicago, voted in Republican primaries during the 2012, 2014, and 2016 election cycles, according to records from conservative polling firm Pulse Decision Science.

Illinois does not allow voters to register with a political party, so the pope’s voting record does not mean he was a registered Republican. The records do, however, indicate that he only voted in primary elections on the GOP side.

Federal Election Commission and Illinois State Board of Elections databases do not list the newly elected pope as having donated to any political campaigns.

Matt Knee, Pulse Decision Science’s chief data officer, told the Free Beacon the pope’s voting history and public pronouncements lead him to believe Leo XIV is a former Republican.

"The fact that he hasn’t voted in a Republican primary since 2016 and, in fact, didn’t vote in the general in ‘16—and his public statements—if I had to guess, he certainly would fit the profile of a former or Never Trump-type ex-Republican," Knee said.

 Isaac Schorr at Mediaite:

Pope Leo XIV’s social media presence is causing quite the stir.

Shortly after news broke that he had been selected as the new pontiff, observers began scouring over his X account for clues as to his leanings.

It wouldn’t take Sherlock Holmes to decipher them. His last post on the platform was a retweet that read “As Trump & Bukele use Oval to 🤣 Feds’ illicit deportation of a US resident (https://bit.ly/3ROMjnP), once an undoc-ed Salvadorean himself, now-DC Aux +Evelio asks, ‘Do you not see the suffering? Is your conscience not disturbed? How can you stay quiet?'”

A few posts down, Leo XIV shared articles about Vice President JD Vance’s explanation of ordo amoris, one of which bore the headline “JD Vance is wrong: Jesus doesn’t ask us to rank our love for others.”

 

JD Vance is wrong: Jesus doesn't ask us to rank our love for others https://t.co/hDKPKuMXmu via @NCRonline

— Robert Prevost (@drprevost) February 3, 2025

As a result, President Donald Trump’s most faithful fans online are not taking to the new pope especially well. “THIS IS THE NEW POPE!” wrote Laura Loomer, the self-proclaimed “white nationalist” with considerable influence on the president. “His name is Robert Prevost. He’s the first American Pope. He is anti-Trump, anti-MAGA, pro-open Borders, and a total Marxist like Pope Francis. Catholics don’t have anything good to look forward to. Just another Marxist puppet in the Vatican”

Week of Offensiveness

Our recent book is titled Divided We Stand: The 2020 Elections and American Politics.  Trump has praised Vivek Ramaswamy, done interviews with Tucker Carlson, and dined with Nick Fuentes.

Vivek Ramaswamy: “I find it offensive that we have professional politicians on this stage that will make a pilgrimage to Kyiv to their pope Zelensky without doing the same think for people in Maui or the south side of Chicago…”

pic.twitter.com/3A23aG6vaX

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) August 24, 2023

I missed it but holy shit my Catholic friends are PISSED at Vivek for his Pope comment.

— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) August 24, 2023

My Jewish friends are as pissed at Ramaswamy as my Catholic friends. Holy cow.

— Erick Erickson (@EWErickson) August 24, 2023

MacGregor goes full Der Stürmer in this interview with Tucker, blaming the war on Ukraine on American Jews holding a multi-generational grudge against Russia. (Watch the video below.)

Disgusting and disturbing that a sitting senator like JD Vance would endorse. https://t.co/MJK2WWOGCZ

— Christian Vanderbrouk 🇺🇸🇺🇦🌻 (@UrbanAchievr) August 23, 2023

White supremacist and Trump loyalist Nick Fuentes called the former president's mugshot a "symbol" people can "rally behind" -- like the swastika.https://t.co/cRSJe0gU6W

— Eyes on the Right (@EyesOnTheRight) August 26, 2023

Religion and the Parties

 In Defying the Odds, we talk about the social and economic divides that enabled Trump to enter the White House. In Divided We Stand, we discuss how these divides played out in 2020.

Public Religion Research Institute:

Both major political parties are majority Christian, with 83% of Republicans and 69% of Democrats identifying as Christian. The biggest difference in the religious makeup of self-identified Republicans and Democrats is the proportion of white Christians compared to Christians of color and the religiously unaffiliated. Two-thirds of Republicans (68%) identify as white and Christian, compared to 39% of Democrats. Among Republicans, 29% are white evangelical Protestants, 22% are white mainline Protestants, and 15% are white Catholics. Among Democrats, those numbers fall to 9%, 16%, and 13%, respectively.

By contrast, 13% of Democrats are Black Protestants, 10% are Hispanic Catholics, and 4% are Hispanic Protestants, compared to only 2%, 3%, and 3%, respectively, among Republicans. Nearly one in four Democrats (23%) are religiously unaffiliated, compared to 13% of Republicans.

The religious makeup of Democrats generally resembles that of younger Americans ages 18–29, who are 27% white Christian, 26% Christian of color, 7% another religion, and 36% unaffiliated, and ages 30–49, who are 40% white Christian, 32% Christian of color, 4% another religion, and 23% unaffiliated. The Republican breakdown is more akin to groups of Americans over age 65, who are 59% white Christian, 20% Christian of color, 4% another religion, and 14% unaffiliated. Notably, no age group is as white and Christian as Republicans.

"Against God"

In Defying the Odds, we discuss the 2016 campaign. The 2019 update includes a chapter on the 2018 midterms. The 2020 race, the subject of our next book, is well underway.

Julie Zauzmer and  Sarah Pulliam Bailey at WP:

When Pope Francis visited the United States in 2015, his welcomer-in-chief was then-Vice President Joe Biden.

Almost wherever Francis went, Biden was there — in the White House and the Capitol, and also in sacred spaces, including at Mass at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception. Biden followed the pope from Washington to Philadelphia, leading a farewell ceremony for the visiting dignitary he has called “the single most popular figure in the world.”

This week, President Trump painted a very different picture of Biden, mocking his presumptive Democratic opponent as a man hostile to religion. “Take away your guns, take away your Second Amendment. No religion, no anything,” Trump said of Biden on Thursday. “Hurt the Bible. Hurt God. He’s against God. He’s against guns. He’s against energy, our kind of energy.”

...
 Others noted that Biden almost always has rosary beads in his pocket, and frequently holds them in his hand — including while he monitored the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden in 2011. He has written and spoken at length of how faith helped him grieve the loss of his first wife and daughter many years ago, and his son Beau more recently.

In 2011, George P. Matysek Jr. wrote at The Narthex:

The New York Times is reporting that as U.S. military forces began their mission to kill or capture Osama bin Laden May 1, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. “fingered his rosary beads” in the Situation Room of the White House.

It’s not the first time we have heard about Biden’s rosary. An Irish Catholic from Scranton, the vice president carries his rosary with him. It is said that when he underwent brain surgery, he asked doctors if he could keep a rosary under his pillow.

Patrick Crowley, Cincinnati Enquirer, October 23, 2005:

 Biden said that if he runs for president, he intends to aggressively defend his own values as well as those of the Democratic Party.

"If I'm the nominee, Republicans will be sorry," he said. "The next Republican that tells me I'm not religious I'm going to shove my rosary beads down their throat.

"I am so sick and tired of this pontificating about us not being the party of faith," said Biden, a Roman Catholic who has served in the Senate since the Nixon administration.

Feinstein's Religious Test

In Defying the Odds, we discuss cultural reasons for Trump's victory.  Trump got 60% of the non-Hispanic Catholic vote.  One reason is that Democrats seem bent on insulting their beliefs.

Michael McGough in LAT:

Is Sen. Dianne Feinstein an anti-Catholic bigot? Did she violate the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution’s ban on a “religious test” for public office when she worried this week that a Catholic nominee for a federal appeals court might be unduly influenced by her religious beliefs because, as she told the nominee, “the dogma lives loudly within you.”

Feinstein’s comments at a hearing Wednesday of the Senate Judiciary Committee were directed to Notre Dame law professor Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals (and, as some noted, a mother of seven). The response on Twitter was immediate and righteously indignant.
...
I don’t think Feinstein is a bigot or a descendant of the 19th Century Know-Nothings who muttered about “rum, Romanism and rebellion.” But she went too far in raising doubts about whether Barrett would allow her religious views to affect her rulings as a judge (particularly about abortion rights, Feinstein’s priority when it comes to judicial nominations)...Barrett didn’t deserve such treatment, despite a claim by a liberal interest group, the Alliance for Justice, that “Barrett has said that judges should be free to put their personal views ahead of their judicial oath to faithfully follow the law.”

Nowhere in its screed against Barrett did the group substantiate this extraordinary accusation. It cited a 1998 article Barrett co-wrote as a law student that argued that a Catholic trial judge with religious objections to capital punishment should recuse herself from deciding whether to impose a death sentence. That, of course, is the opposite of suggesting that a judge should issue a ruling based on her religion.

Fake Tocqueville Rides Again

In  Defying the Odds, we discuss the conservative media.

Breitbart has an article attacking a papal adviser.  At one point, it quotes Tocqueville.

And in one of the most famous passages of that same work, the Frenchman described what he believed to be the source of America’s “greatness” (his term).

I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers – and it was not there . . . in her fertile fields and boundless forests and it was not there . . . in her rich mines and her vast world commerce – and it was not there . . . in her democratic Congress and her matchless Constitution – and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.

This quotation is fake.  As I have been pointing out for 22 years, Tocqueville never wrote any such thing.  Many politicians -- including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and Ben Carson -- have used the fake quotation. Hillary Clinton alluded to it in her acceptance speech.

It  apparently started many years ago. In his 1940 farewell speech (Congressional Record, September 11, 1940, 11902.) , Senator Henry Ashurst (D-Arizona) attributed the first several lines of that passage to Tocqueville, then offered the last line as his own summation. Barry Popik has pointed to even earlier sources -- but not Tocqueville.  Sherwood Eddy used it in a 1941 book on the American dream, and Eisenhower quoted it (without attribution to Tocqueville) in 1952 speech.

Again, Tocqueville did not write it.

Why Trump Would Have to Object to a Catholic Judge

Maggie Haberman reports at The New York Times:

Donald J. Trump said Sunday that a Muslim judge might have trouble remaining neutral in a lawsuit against him, extending his race-based criticism of the jurist overseeing the case to include religion and opening another path for Democrats who have criticized him sharply for his remarks.

The comments, in an interview with John Dickerson, the host of CBS’s “Face the Nation,” come amid growing disapproval from fellow Republicans over his attacks on Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel, a federal judge in California overseeing a suit against the defunct Trump University, whose impartiality Mr. Trump questioned based on the judge’s Mexican heritage.
...

Mr. Dickerson asked Mr. Trump if, in his view, a Muslim judge would be similarly biased because of the Republican presumptive nominee’s call for a ban on Muslim immigrants. “It’s possible, yes,” Mr. Trump said. “Yeah. That would be possible. Absolutely.”

By this logic, Trump would also have to object to a Roman Catholic judge.

On January 24, the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights issued this release:

Bill Donohue comments on a remark made by Donald Trump’s national spokeswoman, Katrina Pierson:

On December 18, 2011, Katrina Pierson sent the following tweet:

“Just saw a commercial from Catholic Church stating that Catholic Church was started by Jesus. I bet they believe that too.”

No one makes a comment like this without harboring an animus against Catholicism. It would be instructive to learn more about Pierson’s thoughts on the subject. Perhaps she can share them with us.

In the meantime, Pierson needs to apologize to Catholics for making such a snide remark. We would also like to hear assurances from Donald Trump that he will not tolerate anti-Catholicism in his campaign.

On February 18, the New York Times reported:

Donald J. Trump said it was “disgraceful” that Pope Francis questioned his faith on Thursday and suggested that his presidency would be the answer to the Vatican’s prayers because he would protect it from terrorists if elected.

As he returned to Rome after his six-day visit to Mexico, Francis said, “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian,” in response to a question about Mr. Trump aboard the papal airliner.

At The Washington Post on February 29, Philip Bump reported that Trump's father apparently joined in anti-Catholic Klan activity:

On Memorial Day 1927, brawls erupted in New York led by sympathizers of the Italian fascist movement and the Ku Klux Klan. In the fascist brawl, which took place in the Bronx, two Italian men were killed by anti-fascists. In Queens, 1,000 white-robed Klansmen marched through the Jamaica neighborhood, eventually spurring an all-out brawl in which seven men were arrested.

One of those arrested was Fred Trump of 175-24 Devonshire Rd. in Jamaica.

This is Donald Trump's father. Trump had a brother named Fred, but he wasn't born until more than a decade later. The Fred Trump at Devonshire Road was the Fred C. Trump who lived there with his mother, according to the 1930 Census.

The predication for the Klan to march, according to a flier passed around Jamaica beforehand, was that "Native-born Protestant Americans" were being "assaulted by Roman Catholic police of New York City." "Liberty and Democracy have been trampled upon," it continued, "when native-born Protestant Americans dare to organize to protect one flag, the American flag; one school, the public school; and one language, the English language."

Of course, objecting to a Roman Catholic jurist would be a bit of a problem if a Trump case ever reached the Supreme Court.  Five of the eight current justices are Catholic, including the four Republican appointees: Roberts, Alito, Thomas, and Kennedy.  Democratic appointee Sonia Sotomayor is also Catholic.

Religious and Pro-Life People Against Trump

Life News reports:

A group of pro-life women leaders have a message for pro-life voters ahead of the first presidential primary and caucus votes next month: Don’t vote for Donald Trump, he can’t be trusted on abortion.

In a letter provided to LifeNews, the group of pro-life women leaders claim Trump is not trustworthy on the abortion issue because offhanded comments he’s made make it appear he supports pro-abortion judges on the Supreme Court or a pro-abortion vice-presidential running mate. The group includes heavy hitters like Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony List and Penny Nance of Concerned Women for America and black pro-life activist Star Parker.

Catholic Vote opposes Trump:

While we share much of the frustration over the failure of the GOP to make significant progress, we are reminded of Republicans’ once oft-quoted criticism of President Bill Clinton: character matters.

Donald J. Trump left his first wife and married his mistress, only to leave her a few years later for another mistress. Reportedly he left his second wife by leaking the news to a NY newspaper and left the headline on the bed for his wife to find. In his book, The Art of the Deal, Trump bragged about having sex with many women, including some who were married. He has appeared on the cover of Playboy Magazine with a model wearing only his tuxedo jacket. He has mocked the disability of a NY Times reporter. He belittled John McCain for being a prisoner of war. His casino in Atlantic City was the first in the country to open up a strip club. His Twitter account is a running barrage of insults, lies, and personal attacks on anyone who disagrees with him. And did we mention he famously cheats at golf? Now who does that remind you of?

Now ask yourself: does this man have the character becoming of the President of the United States?

Dr. Everett Piper, President, president of Oklahoma Wesleyan University:

On January 18, Jerry Falwell, Jr. welcomed Donald Trump to Liberty University to speak in the school’s chapel. As the college president who wrote the “this is not a daycare” article that received so much national attention recently, I have been asked by the media if I would be next: Will I be inviting Mr. Trump to Oklahoma Wesleyan University to speak in our chapel service? My answer has been simple and brief. No, I will not.

...

Anyone who is pro-abortion is not on my side. Anyone who calls women “pigs,” “ugly,” “fat” and “pieces of a–” is not on my side. Anyone who mocks the handicapped is not on my side. Anyone who has argued the merits of a government takeover of banks, student loans, the auto industry and healthcare is not on my side. Anyone who has been on the cover of Playboy and proud of it, who brags of his sexual history with multiple women and who owns strip clubs in his casinos is not on my side. Anyone who believes the government can wrest control of the definition of marriage from the church is not on my side. Anyone who ignores the separation of powers and boasts of making the executive branch even more imperial is not on my side.

...

I refuse to let my desire to win “trump” my moral compass. I will not sell my soul or my university’s to a political process that values victory more than virtue.

No, Donald Trump will not be speaking at Oklahoma Wesleyan University.

Trevin Wax writes at the Religion News Service:

Trump says he is pro-life because of a “superstar” child who could have been aborted.

Consider how he responded to a reporter who wondered if he would have become pro-life had the child been a “loser”: “Probably not, but I’ve never thought of it. I would say no, but in this case it was an easy one because he’s such an outstanding person.”

To summarize Trump’s view: “I’m pro-life because we shouldn’t abort fetuses that may grow up to be outstanding people.”

But opponents of abortion take a different position: “I’m pro-life because we shouldn’t kill innocent human beings, no matter who they might grow up to be.”

Trump’s reason for being pro-life depends on the potential outcome of the child in the womb, rather than the fact that there is a child in the womb. But the pro-life ethic is grounded in the inherent worth of all humanity. It is wrong to commit violence against innocent human beings. Full stop.

And that’s where, ironically, Trump’s position sounds similar to the pro-choice idea that the human fetus is “potential life” or that the value of the unborn depends on whether or not the child is “wanted.”

Trump's Anti-Catholic Spokesperson

Peter Hasson reports at The Daily Caller:

The nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization is demanding an apology from Trump campaign spokeswoman Katrina Pierson for a tweet in which she openly mocked the Catholic Church. Bill Donohue, the president of the Catholic League, said that he also wants Donald Trump to give assurances that he will not tolerate anti-Catholicism in his campaign.

“No one makes a comment like this without harboring an animus against Catholicism. It would be instructive to learn more about Pierson’s thoughts on the subject. Perhaps she can share them with us,” Donohue said in a press release on Monday. “In the meantime, Pierson needs to apologize to Catholics for making such a snide remark. We would also like to hear assurances from Donald Trump that he will not tolerate anti-Catholicism in his campaign.”

For the record, Matthew 16:18 (KJV!) says:  "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."  Thus He made Peter the first pope.

Jeb Bush and Christian Conservatives

Tim Alberta and Tiffany Stanley write at National Journal:

[P]owerful Christian conservatives are operating what amounts to a stealth campaign on Bush's behalf. Some are old allies from the Florida days; others are holdovers from George W. Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns. Some are both, including Ralph Reed, president of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, a longtime friend of Jeb's who served as Southeast regional chairman of George W.'s 2004 reelection effort (and thus practically lived in Florida). Multiple GOP sources say that Reed has been urging Jeb Bush for several years to make a 2016 run and spoke with him recently to game out the campaign. Like many of the organizations that Bush's supporters lead, Reed's coalition demands impartiality from its leaders, so Reed can't openly back his man—unless, as some suspect will happen, Reed ultimately decides to join the campaign officially. (Reed declined to comment for this story.)

While the candidate isn't hitting the hustings to woo rank-and-file Christian voters, he's been busy surreptitiously building a formidable coalition of socially conservative luminaries. Last summer, Bush flew to Colorado for a private luncheon with the brass of Focus on the Family. Several of America's best-connected evangelicals broke bread with Bush, including Jim Daly, Focus's president, whose radio program reaches a large, loyal audience, and Tim Goeglein, who was the faith liaison in George W. Bush's White House. People familiar with the meeting—and unaffiliated with Bush—say the former governor made a striking impression, one that echoed through the uppermost echelons of the evangelical world. (Neither Daly nor Goeglein would comment.)
...
In this endeavor, his old friend Jim Towey will be a key asset. When Bush first ran for governor in 1994, Towey was on the other side, serving as Gov. Chiles's director of Florida's Health and Human Services agency. The loss that sparked Bush's conversion led to an after-election lunch with Towey, a relative stranger but also a high-profile Catholic whose brain Bush was eager to pick. The two quickly became the closest of friends, and that friendship, in turn, led to Towey's appointment as the second director of George W. Bush's faith-based initiatives. Towey is now president of Miami's Ave Maria University, one of the nation's foremost incubators of conservative Catholic doctrine, while serving unofficially as Bush's point man for religious outreach.

GOP Voter Contact

Some recent articles have discussed high-tech voter contact efforts for Romney and the GOP.  But will they be enough to counter the other side?

The New York Times looks at the return of Ralph Reed:

Three years ago, Mr. Reed formed the Faith and Freedom Coalition and began assembling what he calls the largest-ever database of reliably conservative religious voters. In the coming weeks, he says, each of those 17.1 million registered voters in 15 key states will receive three phone calls and at least three pieces of mail. Seven million of them will get e-mail and text messages. Two million will be visited by one of more than 5,000 volunteers. Over 25 million voter guides will be distributed in 117,000 churches.

...

To identify religious voters most likely to vote Republican, the group used 171 data points.
It acquired megachurch membership lists. It mined public records for holders of hunting or boating licenses, and warranty surveys for people who answered yes to the question “Do you read the Bible?” It determined who had downloaded conservative-themed books, like “Going Rogue” by Sarah Palin, onto their e-readers, and whether those people also drove pickup trucks. It drilled down further, looking for married voters with children, preferably owners of homes worth more than $100,000.

Finally, names that overlapped at least a dozen or so data points were overlaid with voting records to yield a database with the addresses and, in many cases, e-mail addresses and cellphone numbers of the more than 17 million faith-centric registered voters — not just evangelical Protestants but also Mass-attending Catholics. The group is also reaching out to nearly two million more people who have never registered to vote.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution adds:

Reed has taken data from consumer marketers and the Republican National Committee, mixed with his own files from the George W. Bush campaigns — when Reed helped Bush court social conservatives — and the Christian Coalition. FFC narrowed its efforts primarily to voters in presidential swing states. It will contact each of them between seven and 12 times – a text message, a call, an email, a postcard, a knock on the door.

When early voting begins in each swing state, FFC’s targeted voters will each get a text message telling them to vote, and the message links to a map for smartphone users showing them where their early voting site is.

“Not everybody in a church is going to vote Republican; not everybody in the most conservative evangelical church is going to vote Republican, for a variety of reasons,” said Sasha Issenberg, journalist and author of “The Victory Lab,” a new book about the science of campaigns. “So this type of politics is always a game of margins, we have just gotten a lot better. The most advanced tools have made us a lot better about shrinking the margins that you’re playing with." 

The Washington Post reports:

In the key battleground states, Obama’s celebrated network of organizing experts and neighborhood captains is being challenged by a conservative coalition that includes the National Rifle Association, the billionaire-backed Americans for Prosperity and a newly muscular College Republicans organization with a $16 million budget.

The conservative groups “are fully funded and ready for hand-to-hand combat,” said Steve Rosenthal, a Democratic organizer.

Rosenthal co-founded the Atlas Project, which is tracking voter statistics and other data to guide Democratic groups as they design precinct-level voter-outreach strategies. He describes the Obama operation as “second to none,” but in reviewing data in recent weeks, he has grown alarmed by what he views as a successful years-long campaign on the right that could alter the landscape.

Why Santorum Won Louisiana

Gary Langer writes at ABC:

A strongly conservative, religiously inspired Republican electorate turned the tables on Mitt Romney in Louisiana, supplying Rick Santorum with both an easy win and a sharp riposte to Romney’s victory in Illinois four days earlier.

Santorum was boosted by one of the highest concentrations of very conservative voters in any primary this year. Evangelicals, while less dominant than in most other Southern states, backed him by a record margin over Romney. And Santorum’s tally was his best to date among voters focused on supporting a candidate who shares their religious beliefs.

Even in this inhospitable environment, Romney again prevailed as most likely to defeat Barack Obama in November, by 43 to 33 percent vs. Santorum. But that was Santorum’s best score on this question in any of the nine contests to date in which it’s been asked. In previous races, voters picked Romney as more electable by a 32-point margin; in Illinois, by 38. In Louisiana, Santorum shaved that to 10. 

Though Romney has usually won the Catholic vote, Louisiana was different:  Santorum won this group 48-30 percent.

Religiously inspired voting more generally ran high in the state. Sixty-four percent of primary voters said they go to church at least weekly; they backed Santorum by 56-24 percent, while less-frequent (or non-) churchgoers much more narrowly favored Romney, 39-28 percent. More, 73 percent, said it mattered to them to support a candidate who shares their religious beliefs, and 41 percent said it mattered a great deal – more than said so in Illinois by 17 and 18 points, respectively.

Summing Up Entrance & Exit Polls So far

AEI has a nice compilation:

• In every state in which an entrance or exit poll was conducted, voters have selected the ability to defeat Obama as the candidate quality that mattered most.
• Romney has usually won the votes of those who checked “can defeat Obama” as the most important candidate quality for them. With the exception of Massachusetts, he has not won the votes of those who checked “true conservative.”
•  Ideological, class, and religious divisions continue in the Republican electorate. Romney usually loses “very conservative” voters, but he does well with the “somewhat conservative” and “moderate/liberal” voters. He does better among suburban voters than rural ones and less religious than more religious voters. He has won at least a plurality of non-evangelical voters in every exit/entrance poll state except Georgia where Gingrich won them narrowly. Romney does well with college-educated and upper-income voters. He has almost always done better with college than non-college voters. With the exception of South Carolina and Georgia, Romney has won the votes of those with family incomes of $100,000 or more.
• Romney has done pretty well with Tea Party supporters, but not with strong Tea Party supporters.
•  Tea Party supporters have backed the winner in every contest except Ohio, where Santorum edged out Romney by 1 percentage point. Santorum and Gingrich split their votes in Mississippi.
• In exit and entrance poll states, the Republican electorate has been about 90 percent white. In Florida, whites were 83 percent of voters. 
• Abortion was cited as the top issue by more than 10 percent of voters in Michigan, Mississippi, Iowa, Ohio, Tennessee, and Oklahoma. In 15 of the 17 states for which we have exit/entrance poll data, “illegal immigration” was included as a category voters could check. In no state for which we  have an entrance or exit poll was it the top issue. In no state did 15 percent of voters select it as the number-one issue. Only in Arizona did more than 10 percent of voters check it as their top issue. The economy has been the top issue everywhere.

The table also shows that Romney has carried the Catholic vote everywhere except Tennessee and South Carolina.

Romney's Non-Evangelical Base

Pew Forum reports:

In the caucuses and primaries that Mitt Romney has won so far in the race for the Republican nomination, Romney’s wins have come on the strength of his support among non-evangelical voters. His fortunes among white born-again/evangelical voters have fluctuated from state to state. Entrance and exit polls show that he has received less support from evangelicals than from non-evangelicals.

In six of the seven states where exit or entrance polling has been conducted, the polls asked voters about their religious affiliation (Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, and so on). Romney won the Catholic vote by a margin of 25 or more points in three of these states and earned victories of 15 or more points among Protestants in three states.

About Last Night

Romney won big in Arizona, which had forfeited half its delegates in order to have a winner-take-all primary this early.

Michigan also lost half its delegates.  But more media attention focused less on the delegate count than on the popular vote, which Romney won narrowly.

Santorum got about half the votes of Democrats who voted in the Michigan GOP primary. So did "Operation Hilarity" have an effect? Maybe not as much as Kos would have liked. Aaron Blake explains at The Washington Post:

Exit polls showed 9 percent of voters identified themselves as Democrats and 12 percent identified themselves as strong opponents of the tea party — a dead giveaway that their sympathies probably don’t lie with the Republican Party.

That’s higher than in any contest in the presidential race so far. And among both of these groups, Santorum did well, taking about half of the vote.

But looking at it another way, that haul isn’t terribly novel.

First, the 9 percent of Democrats voting was just slightly more than it was in 2008. In that election, 7 percent of Republican primary voters self-identified as Democrats, even though there was a Democratic primary held the same day (though it should be noted thatPresident Obama wasn’t on the ballot)

Given that there was no competitive Democratic primary on Tuesday, it’s not surprising that more Democrats would take part in the GOP primary. But the difference isn’t even statistically significant compared to four years ago.

Second, the effort paled in comparison to the last time there was a real campaign to get Democrats to cross over.

While Democrats voting for Santorum comprised roughly 5 percent of the vote on Tuesday, in the 2000 race, Democrats supporting John McCain made up about 14 percent of voters overall.

At The Daily Beast, Peter Boyer observes:

But the most striking feature of Santorum’s double-header defeat Tuesday was his failure to win a majority of his fellow Catholic faithful, who went for the Mormon Romney by a 6-point margin in both Arizona and Michigan.

...

In Michigan’s open primary, four in 10 voters were self-described Democrats or independents, and Santorum attracted their votes by a wide margin. That helped to bring him close enough to be able to claim a moral victory. But Santorum lost the two cohorts he ought to have won if he hoped to emerge today as a credible threat to Romney—his fellow Catholics, and another key group in this primary season: voters describing themselves as Republicans.

Santorum v. JFK

At ABC, George Stephanopoulos reports on his Sunday interview with Santorum:

GOP presidential hopeful Rick Santorum said today that watching John F. Kennedy’s speech to the Baptist ministers in Houston in 1960 made him want to “throw up.”

“To say that people of faith have no role in the public square? You bet that makes you throw up. What kind of country do we live that says only people of non-faith can come into the public square and make their case?” Santorum said.

“That makes me throw up and it should make every American who is seen from the president, someone who is now trying to tell people of faith that you will do what the government says, we are going to impose our values on you, not that you can’t come to the public square and argue against it, but now we’re going to turn around and say we’re going to impose our values from the government on people of faith, which of course is the next logical step when people of faith, at least according to John Kennedy, have no role in the public square,” he said.

To put it mildly, such remarks were politically imprudent. By more than a 2-1 margin, Republicans remember JFK favorably.  Moreover, Santorum could have made the same point without criticizing Kennedy.  Indeed, it would have been clever to quote Barack Obama's 2006 speech on religion and politics:

But what I am suggesting is this - secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryant, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King - indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history - were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. So to say that men and women should not inject their "personal morality" into public policy debates is a practical absurdity. Our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Santorum and Romney in Michigan

At The Holland Sentinel, Lloyd Green writes:

A Santorum upset in Michigan would be huge. Romney did not just win the Michigan primary four years ago. His father was Michigan’s governor and headed up American Motors. Romney grew up in Bloomfield Hills and attended Cranbrook. Not surprisingly, Romney strongest support is in Oakland County, according to polls.

Santorum looks like he is connecting with Catholic voters who make up 30 percent of the Michigan GOP primary vote and with evangelical voters who cast nearly 40 percent of primary votes in 2008.

Going negative on Santorum will not necessarily help Romney. Santorum is not Newt Gingrich and he poses a smaller target for attacks.

Right now, Santorum is buoyed by high favorable ratings and is riding the wave of the culture wars moving to the campaign foreground.

The Obama administration’s family planning mandate on religiously affiliated hospitals and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling on same-sex marriage in California is catnip for Santorum. He has consistently targeted values voters.

Romney appears uncomfortable handling this cultural tsunami. His attempts to address social issues are complicated by his prior stances.

But Romney’s perceived inability to connect is not just about religion or culture. Up until now, Romney has not viscerally demonstrated that he “gets” popular concerns and fears. Working- and middle-class America is at the heart of the Republican Party. In 2008, white working-class voters favored John McCain by 19 points. Unemployment remains above 8 percent nationally and is 9.3 percent in Michigan.

Romney may be hamstrung by his demeanor, record and proposals. He has not sufficiently addressed the concerns of the GOP’s base, other than to say that he will grow the economy or claim that he is “severely conservative.”