Overview of Democrats Find God
This episode of Today, Explained examines an unlikely political test case in Kansas: Democrat Adam Hamilton, a Methodist megachurch pastor and self-described “radical centrist,” is running for U.S. Senate in a deeply red state and managing to attract religious voters who would normally lean Republican. Through campaign trail reporting and an interview with religion scholar Ryan Burge, the episode asks a bigger question: can Democrats win back religious Americans, and what would that require?
What the Episode Is About
Christian Paz travels across Kansas to follow Hamilton’s campaign and speak with voters at church-like campaign events, senior centers, and small-town gatherings. The race is notable because:
- Kansas voted heavily for Trump in 2024, yet the Senate contest is surprisingly competitive.
- Republican incumbent Roger Marshall is underperforming and dealing with scandals.
- Hamilton is drawing support from some Republicans and independents by emphasizing faith, moderation, and community.
The episode frames Kansas as a possible bellwether for how Democrats might appeal to religious voters in a post-Trump era.
Why Adam Hamilton Is Different
Hamilton’s appeal comes from a mix of political moderation and religious credibility:
- He is a Methodist pastor with deep roots in Kansas religious life.
- He presents himself as someone who can speak to Christians without sounding extreme.
- He uses religious language naturally, referencing scripture, church history, and moral reflection.
- He is comfortable talking about issues like abortion, LGBTQ rights, and immigration in a nuanced way rather than in culture-war slogans.
His abortion stance
Hamilton supports legal abortion access, but he describes himself as personally conflicted and “pro-life with a heavy heart.” He tells a story about his mother nearly traveling to Switzerland for an abortion before deciding to have him. That personal framing helps him connect with voters across ideological lines, even if it doesn’t convince everyone.
Voter Reaction in Kansas
The reporting shows two broad reactions:
Supportive Republicans and independents
Some longtime Republicans say they are willing to back Hamilton because:
- They feel alienated by Trump-era politics.
- They want a return to community and decency.
- Hamilton sounds sincere, morally grounded, and familiar to churchgoers.
- They see him as someone who understands both faith and public service.
Voters he probably won’t win
The episode also shows the limits of his appeal. For some conservative voters, no amount of religious language or moderation can overcome disagreement on core issues like:
- immigration
- abortion
- LGBTQ rights
One older voter’s reaction to Hamilton’s immigration answer makes that clear: even when he emphasizes border security and humane treatment, she still sees him as a Democrat and therefore unacceptable.
The “God Gap” and How Democrats Lost Religious Voters
The second half of the episode shifts from Kansas to the national picture with religion scholar Ryan Burge. He explains that the modern “God Gap”—the divide between religious voters and Democrats—began growing in the early 1990s.
Burge’s main points
- The non-religious share of Americans began rising sharply in the 1990s, especially among liberals and Democrats.
- Over time, Republicans leaned harder into Christianity as part of their political identity.
- Democrats increasingly avoided talking about Christianity, partly because they wanted to be a big-tent, pluralist coalition.
- That strategy left many Christian voters feeling ignored.
Burge argues that Democrats made a strategic mistake by focusing heavily on smaller or more culturally salient parts of their coalition while failing to speak to the much larger number of religious Americans.
The Messaging Problem for Democrats
The episode argues that Democrats face a unique challenge: their coalition is religiously diverse and often internally divided.
Why it’s hard
- Democrats include atheists, agnostics, black Protestants, Catholic voters, Jews, Muslims, and others.
- Messaging that pleases one group can alienate another.
- As a result, Democrats often avoid religious language altogether.
- Republicans, by contrast, can more easily frame Christianity as part of their political brand.
Burge’s broader critique is that Democrats are often afraid of upsetting the “1%” of their coalition that is most activist or ideological, even when broader, more moderate religious voters might respond well to more careful language.
What Democrats Should Do Instead
Burge suggests Democrats should not abandon their policy positions, but should communicate them differently.
On abortion, for example
He argues Democrats should avoid celebratory or absolutist rhetoric and instead:
- acknowledge that abortion is morally difficult
- speak to conscience, ambiguity, and compassion
- recognize that many Christians support legal access in some circumstances
- avoid framing the issue in a way that feels dismissive of religious moral concerns
His larger point: Democrats can be pro-choice without sounding morally flippant to religious voters.
Main Takeaways
- Kansas is a political experiment: it shows that a religious Democrat can, in certain conditions, compete in very red territory.
- Hamilton is unusual: his combination of faith, moderation, and local credibility is hard to replicate.
- Democrats have not just a messaging problem, but a cultural one: many religious voters feel the party no longer speaks their language.
- Religion still matters politically: even as America becomes more secular, religious voters remain concentrated in crucial battleground states.
- Democrats may not be able to ignore Christianity if they want to compete in the Senate and presidential elections.
Bottom Line
The episode’s central argument is that Democrats do not need to become Republicans to win religious voters—but they do need to stop treating religion as politically irrelevant. Adam Hamilton’s campaign shows that faith can still be a powerful bridge, but only if Democrats are willing to speak more openly, more respectfully, and more morally about the issues that matter to religious Americans.