A kind of calm has settled on the state Capitol in the aftermath of the Iowa caucuses.
If the revolution hasn’t been called off, it has at least been significantly narrowed. With the rise of Ted Cruz on the Republican side, and the survival of Hillary Clinton in the Democratic race, the world has been placed back on its axis.
Plenty of turmoil lies ahead, but Iowa has reassured us that the laws of political physics haven’t been repealed. Not yet.
For months, Donald Trump has threatened to turn the Republican party into something new and different – a place where ideological litmus tests, in place for decades, are cast aside. A place where religion is something on par with membership in the Rotary Club.
One can argue that such change is needed, that Republicans should be desperate for new blood and new thinking. But transforming the base of a political party is no small thing. Big slices of cheese get moved.
On Monday, evangelicals were assured that their place as the first voice in the Republican presidential machine is secure. Conservative Christians in Iowa stirred themselves and turned out in record numbers, in largest part for Cruz.
The Texas senator described the tide of evangelical support as ”a testament to their yearnings to get back to our core commitments: free market principles, constitutional liberties and the Judeo-Christian values that built this great nation.”
So a revolution, yes. But a familiar one within familiar confines.
On Tuesday, 150 or so Southern Baptist pastors gathered at the Capitol to push for passage of several “religious liberty” measures now before the Legislature – intended to shelter religious conservatives from the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s approval of gay marriage.
It was a preliminary event. The big one is next Wednesday, when evangelist Franklin Graham, son of Billy, is expected to draw thousands to the park across from the Capitol. Franklin’s primary agenda: Reassertion of evangelical clout in the race for president.
After Tuesday’s press conference, I asked two of the men who spoke what they made of the results in Iowa. Both were careful. Donald Trump has support within evangelical circles – just not enough.
The Rev. Robert White, executive director of the Georgia Baptist Mission Board, said he expected the Republican presidential contest to narrow itself to a two-man contest, between Cruz and Marco Rubio, by the time it wends its way to Georgia on March 1.
And that is just fine by him.
But it was the Rev. Mike Griffin, who handles lobbying for Georgia Baptists, who struck the nail on the head. “Ultimately, a populist movement is not necessarily what conservatives are looking for,” he said.
Iowa decreased the chances of a populist revolt on the Democratic side as well. However slim the margin, Hillary Clinton’s victory deprived Bernie Sanders, the U.S. senator from Vermont, of a torch he needed to set things alight. Though he didn’t admit it.
“What Iowa has begun tonight is a political revolution,” Sanders said as he exited the state. His list of grievances is long and powerful: a “corrupt campaign finance system,” a “rigged” economy that has capped incomes for the middle and lower class, and a generation of college students buried by tuition debt.
Sanders will do well next week in New Hampshire, his neighbor state. As in Iowa, New Hampshire’s Democratic party is very white and very liberal.
But as the race turns to Nevada, South Carolina, then Georgia and the Deep South, the soil for Sanders is far less fertile. Clinton’s advantage among African-Americans, who dominate Democratic politics in the South, has been described as the result of relationships that have been cultivated for decades. Beginning with her days as first lady of Arkansas.
And that is true. But Clinton has another advantage as well. Though more accurately, it is a Sanders disadvantage.
After consulting with those Southern Baptists at the Capitol, I walked across the street and just happened to run into House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams, D-Atlanta.
We talked of Iowa, the contest headed Georgia’s way – and Sanders’ message. The Vermont senator is riding a wave of discontent among white voters who, for the first time, have found they have been left behind. In Georgia, though their leaders are pledged to Clinton, Sanders’ message will resonate with many rank-and-file union members.
But black voters in Georgia — and the rest of the South — are no strangers to pay disparities, to killing debt, to “rigged” systems. They’ve been there for decades, if not centuries.
In other words, “the sense of emergency and the sense of discovery” in Sanders’ speeches may not translate here, Abrams said. “In the South in particular, pragmatism tends to win out. We want what we want, but we want someone who knows how to get it,”
“What Bernie has done is very effectually encapsulate a single message of economic populism and income inequality,” the state lawmaker said. “And he has a singular focus and target, which are the big banks. While that is very persuasive, there are so many layers of policy that go into dismantling this. What Hillary suggests is, not only do you want someone who’s demonstrated a capacity for solving these issues, you want someone who has done it in the past.”
New rage could peg a candidate as new to the situation.
In other words, the first round of voting in the 2016 presidential campaign has uncovered at least one thing: Among a certain class of Democrats and Republicans, revolution is so 2015.
About the Author
