Does character still matter in our politicians? Yes, it does, but not in the same way it did in the past.

“Character is on the ballot.” This is a common refrain from pundits and voters alike during any election season. But is that still true today? For many evangelicals and conservatives, the answer is “yes” — just not with the same weight it held in the past.

Since Donald Trump entered the mainstream political scene in 2015, evangelical Christians and conservatives have faced growing criticism. Observers note our opposition to Bill Clinton in the late 1990s after his sex scandal and then point to our support for Trump, a man with his own flaws and controversies. They ask, “What gives?” Are we hypocrites seeking only power? Is it a matter of having “our guy” in office while condemning “the other guy”? . .

My co-host on “The Bully Pulpit”podcast, Eric Teetsel, has a theory about what’s changed. In the 1990s, the political landscape was different. Back then, the gap between Republican and Democratic policies was not as stark as it is today. On key issues like abortion, Democrats insisted it should be “safe, legal, and rare.” Both parties supported border security. Foreign policy views were more aligned than divided. The differences were there, but they weren’t chasms.

In this environment, character often served as the tiebreaker. Without a deep policy divide, 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 a critical factor because it provided insight into a candidate’s potential for leadership in a relatively aligned political field. Small scandals could derail campaigns because, in a landscape of similar policy positions, they served as differentiators. Think about Howard Dean’s 2004 campaign-ending scream; it seemed unbecoming for a presidential candidate. That standard feels almost unthinkable today. (Read more from “Why Calling Trump-Voting Christians ‘Hypocrites’ Is a Lie That Will Continue to Fail” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

President-elect Donald Trump’s unexpected picks for Department of Justice (DOJ) leadership roles send a clear message to the establishment: this term, his agenda will not be held captive by career bureaucrats.

After being burned by his own choices in his first administration and prosecuted by the Biden-Harris DOJ, his decision to nominate Republican Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz as attorney general and his defense attorneys for the other top slots reflects Trump’s desire to be surrounded by people who fully support his vision for the department — and who are willing to stand up to bureaucratic forces working to undermine his efforts.

“Gaetz is clearly an outsider and disruptor, and that’s the point,” former federal prosecutor Andrew Cherkasky told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Gaetz is “exactly what President Trump promised for the DOJ during his campaign, namely to end the department’s left-leaning focus on lawfare, censorship, and election interference.” He’s “a loyalist who is often in Trump’s orbit” that won’t put up the same resistance as former Attorney General William Barr, Cherkasky said.

Article III project senior counsel Will Chamberlain wrote on X the Gaetz pick is best understood as “a statement by Trump that it’s not 2016 anymore and there will be no internal coup against the sitting President.” (Read more from “Trump Sends His Clearest Message Yet To DOJ Bureaucrats With Unexpected Leadership Picks” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr