Evaluating Political Leaders and Candidates Through Biblical Principles

Looking Beyond Party Labels, Campaign Advertising, Personalities, and Promises to Make Wise and Informed Decisions

Choosing political leaders can be difficult.

Candidates make promises.

Campaigns advertise.

Political parties promote their nominees.

Opponents attack one another.

News organizations report and interpret events.

Commentators offer opinions.

Social media delivers an endless stream of claims, clips, statistics, accusations, endorsements, and outrage.

Friends tell us what they believe.

Church members may reach different conclusions.

A candidate may tell us exactly what we want to hear.

Another candidate may make us uncomfortable while raising questions we still need to consider.

How should a Christian voter sort through all of this?

Scripture does not give us a list of candidates or political parties.

It does give us principles that should shape the way we seek truth, exercise discernment, evaluate character, consider justice, recognize the proper role of government, love our neighbors, and make decisions.

James wrote:

“But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God.” – James 1:5 (NASB 1995)

Evaluating candidates should therefore involve more than asking:

“Which candidate do I like?”

We should ask:

“What is true?”

“What does this office require?”

“What does this candidate actually believe?”

“What has this person actually done?”

“What is this candidate proposing?”

“Does the person have the character, competence, judgment, and experience necessary for this office?”

“What are the likely consequences of the candidate’s policies?”

And ultimately:

“How can I make this decision faithfully before God?”

Diverse adult voters carefully reviewing candidate information and public records together before an election.

Wise voting requires more than campaign advertisements and political slogans. Christians can research candidates carefully, examine their records, ask good questions, pray for wisdom, and vote according to an informed conscience.

Begin With the Office, Not the Candidate

Before evaluating candidates, understand the office they are seeking.

What does this official actually do?

What authority does the office possess?

What authority does it not possess?

What constitutional or legal limits apply?

A presidential candidate may promise something Congress must enact.

A member of Congress may promise something controlled primarily by state government.

A governor may be blamed for something controlled by a local government.

A mayor may be blamed for something controlled by the state legislature.

A school-board candidate may make promises outside the board’s authority.

Before deciding whether a promise impresses you, ask:

“Does this office actually have the authority to do that?”

Understanding the office helps us evaluate whether campaign promises are realistic.

Identify the Responsibilities of the Office

Different offices require different qualifications.

A mayor may need strong administrative ability and knowledge of municipal finances.

A legislator needs to understand lawmaking, budgets, negotiation, constitutional limits, and constituent representation.

A governor or president must manage an executive branch, select advisers, respond to crises, administer laws, and make major appointments.

A judge requires legal knowledge, impartiality, sound reasoning, judicial temperament, and respect for the proper role of the judiciary.

A school-board member needs to understand governance, educational policy, budgets, parental concerns, and the proper responsibilities of the board.

Ask:

“What qualities are especially important for this particular office?”

A person can be admirable and still be poorly suited for a particular responsibility.

Start With Reliable Information

Before evaluating a candidate, gather information.

Do not begin with campaign advertisements.

Do not begin with political memes.

Do not begin with a ten-second video clip.

Do not begin with someone else’s summary of what the candidate supposedly believes.

Begin as close to the original source as practical.

Look for the candidate’s official positions.

Read speeches or extended interviews.

Watch debates.

Examine previous voting records when the candidate has held legislative office.

Look at legislation sponsored.

Review budgets proposed or supported.

Examine executive actions, vetoes, appointments, or policies when relevant.

Read official government records.

Look at court opinions when evaluating judges where judicial elections apply.

Read the actual legislation when a controversial vote becomes important.

Primary sources will not answer every question, but they can help prevent other people from doing all of our thinking for us.

How Do I Find a Politician’s Actual Record?

This is one of the most practical questions a voter can ask.

If the candidate currently holds or previously held public office, begin with the government body where the person served.

For a member of Congress, look for official congressional voting records, legislation sponsored, committee assignments, and public statements.

For a state legislator, examine the state legislature’s official website for bills, votes, committee work, and legislative history.

For a mayor, governor, president, or other executive official, examine budgets, executive orders or actions, vetoes, appointments, policies, and official records relevant to the office.

For city council members, county commissioners, and school-board members, look for agendas, meeting minutes, recorded votes, budgets, policies, and meeting videos when available.

You may also examine reputable nonpartisan or ideologically diverse organizations that compile public records.

But whenever a secondary source makes an important claim, ask:

“Can I find the original record?”

The closer you can get to the actual vote, bill, budget, policy, speech, order, or official document, the better.

Learn How to Read a Voting Record

A voting record can be very useful.

It can also be misleading when taken out of context.

Suppose an advertisement says:

“Representative Smith voted against funding for veterans.”

That sounds serious.

But what actually happened?

Find the bill.

Was veterans’ funding the primary purpose of the bill?

Was it one provision in a much larger spending package?

Were unrelated provisions included?

Did the representative support another version of the legislation?

Did the person object to the amount of spending rather than the purpose?

Was there a procedural vote rather than a final vote?

Did the bill contain something else the representative believed was harmful?

After investigating, you may conclude that the advertisement was accurate.

Or you may conclude that it was technically true but seriously misleading.

The important lesson is:

Do not let the advertisement make the decision for you.

Find the record.

Examine Patterns Rather Than One Convenient Vote

One vote can be important.

But patterns are usually more revealing.

Suppose a candidate says:

“I have always supported fiscal responsibility.”

Look at several years of budgets and votes.

Suppose a candidate says:

“I have consistently defended religious liberty.”

Examine relevant votes, executive actions, court decisions, or policy statements.

Suppose a candidate says:

“I have always supported strong public safety.”

Look at budgets, legislation, policies, and actual decisions.

Ask:

Does the overall record support the campaign claim?

A long record will rarely be perfectly consistent.

The goal is not to find perfection.

It is to understand the pattern.

Find Out What the Candidate Actually Wants to Do

Campaign slogans are not policy plans.

“Make government work.”

“Protect families.”

“Lower costs.”

“Invest in our future.”

“Restore freedom.”

“Keep our communities safe.”

Candidates from very different political perspectives may use attractive phrases.

Ask what the phrase means in practice.

What law would you change?

What program would you create?

What program would you eliminate?

What tax would you increase or decrease?

How much would it change?

What spending would you increase?

What spending would you cut?

What regulation would you adopt or repeal?

What would you do during your first year?

How much would your proposal cost?

How would you pay for it?

Specific answers allow meaningful evaluation.

Compare Promises With Authority

Candidates sometimes promise things their office cannot accomplish alone.

Ask:

Does this require legislation?

Does this require state approval?

Does this require local action?

Would courts review it?

Does the Constitution limit this authority?

Does the official control the funding?

A candidate who repeatedly promises things outside the authority of the office may misunderstand government—or may simply be telling voters what they want to hear.

Neither possibility should be ignored.

Compare Promises With Past Performance

If the candidate has previously held office, ask:

Did this person make similar promises before?

Were they fulfilled?

If not:

Why not?

Sometimes there is a reasonable explanation.

The legislature rejected the proposal.

A court struck it down.

Economic conditions changed.

An emergency intervened.

The official reconsidered after receiving better information.

But sometimes promises are forgotten after Election Day.

A useful question for an incumbent is:

“You promised ____ during your last campaign. What happened?”

Let the candidate explain.

Then evaluate the answer.

Check Dates

Old information regularly circulates online as though it happened yesterday.

A quotation may be ten years old.

A video may be from another election.

A policy may have changed.

A bill may have been amended.

An accusation may already have been investigated.

A statistic may no longer be current.

Before reacting, ask:

When did this happen?

Is this still the candidate’s position?

What happened afterward?

Dates provide context.

Watch the Entire Exchange When Possible

Short political clips can be highly misleading.

A candidate may appear to say something outrageous because the beginning or end of the statement was removed.

Or the full context may confirm that the candidate said exactly what the clip suggests.

The only way to know is to look.

When a short clip becomes important to your evaluation, find the longer interview, speech, debate, hearing, or meeting when practical.

Ask:

What question was being answered?

What came immediately before this statement?

What came after it?

Context does not automatically excuse troubling words.

It helps us understand them accurately.

Separate News Reporting From Opinion

News, analysis, commentary, and political advocacy are not the same thing.

A commentator may openly advocate for a candidate.

An editorial expresses an opinion.

A campaign advertisement is persuasion.

A news report should primarily report information, though decisions about what to cover and emphasize can still influence presentation.

Learn what kind of material you are consuming.

Ask:

Is this reporting?

Analysis?

Opinion?

Campaign material?

Advocacy?

Satire?

A social-media post from someone who was not there?

Knowing the source helps us evaluate the claim.

Do Not Depend Upon Only One Information Source

If every source you consult tells you that your preferred political side is always right and the other side is always foolish or evil, broaden your information sources.

Read responsible reporting from more than one perspective.

Listen to thoughtful people with whom you disagree.

Compare claims.

Then look for primary evidence.

Proverbs says:

“The first to plead his case seems right, Until another comes and examines him.” – Proverbs 18:17 (NASB 1995)

Hearing another argument does not require accepting it.

It helps us test our own reasoning.

Beware of Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias is our tendency to notice and accept information that supports what we already believe while dismissing information that challenges us.

Political campaigns depend heavily upon this human tendency.

Ask yourself:

Would I believe this story as quickly if it were about the candidate I support?

Would I demand stronger evidence if the accusation were against my candidate?

Would I excuse this behavior if the other party did it?

Am I searching for truth—or ammunition?

Christians should want the truth even when it is politically inconvenient.

Evaluate Character

Character matters because authority magnifies the consequences of personal choices.

Consider:

Honesty.

Integrity.

Humility.

Self-control.

Courage.

Faithfulness to commitments.

Respect for law.

Willingness to accept accountability.

Treatment of opponents.

Use of power.

Handling of money.

Response to mistakes.

Freedom from corruption.

Do not require sinless perfection.

No candidate can meet that standard.

Look for patterns.

Evaluate Competence

Good character alone does not guarantee good government.

Ask:

Does this person understand the office?

Has the candidate demonstrated sound judgment?

Can the person manage the responsibilities involved?

Does the candidate understand budgets and tradeoffs?

Can the person select competent advisers?

Can the candidate make difficult decisions under pressure?

Can the person work constructively with people who disagree?

Does the candidate understand constitutional and legal limits?

Competence matters because poor leadership can harm people even when intentions are good.

Evaluate Policies

Christians should consider what candidates actually propose to do with governmental authority.

Ask:

Does this policy promote justice?

Does it respect human dignity?

Does it respect legitimate liberty?

Does it protect religious freedom and conscience?

Does it respect the rule of law?

Does it remain within proper governmental authority?

What effect may it have on families and communities?

What effect may it have on people who are poor or vulnerable?

What effect may it have on public safety?

What effect may it have on taxpayers?

What effect may it have on future generations?

What unintended consequences are reasonably foreseeable?

Christians may agree about a biblical principle while disagreeing about which public policy will best apply it.

That requires humility.

Ask About Costs

Every campaign promise involving government resources has a cost.

If a candidate proposes a new program, ask:

How much will it cost?

Who will pay?

Will taxes increase?

Will government borrow the money?

Will another program be reduced?

Is the cost temporary or continuing?

What happens if estimates are wrong?

If a candidate promises tax cuts, ask:

Which taxes?

By how much?

How will reduced revenue affect spending, deficits, debt, or services?

If a candidate promises spending cuts, ask:

Which programs?

How much?

What services change?

What are the consequences?

Responsible voters should examine both benefits and costs.

Evaluate Respect for Constitutional Limits

One of the most revealing questions you can ask a candidate is:

“What would you like government to accomplish that you believe this particular office does not have authority to do?”

A candidate who cannot identify any limits on his or her own power should concern us.

Ask:

Does this candidate respect separation of powers?

Does the person respect federal, state, and local responsibilities?

Does the candidate respect due process?

Does the person respect religious liberty and freedom of speech?

Does the candidate believe legal limits still apply when they prevent a desired political outcome?

Do not evaluate respect for constitutional limits only when the opposing party controls government.

The test matters most when our own side has power.

What If the Candidate Is Not a Christian?

A candidate does not have to share our Christian faith for Christians to evaluate that person fairly.

We are choosing a civil official, not a pastor.

Ask:

Is the candidate honest?

Competent?

Just?

Trustworthy?

Respectful of law?

Respectful of religious liberty?

Respectful of people whose beliefs differ?

Capable of exercising authority responsibly?

Willing to accept accountability?

Able to admit mistakes?

Prepared for the office?

A candidate who identifies as Christian should be evaluated carefully too.

Religious identification should not become a substitute for examining character and record.

Jesus said:

“You will know them by their fruits.” – Matthew 7:16 (NASB 1995)

What About Patriotism?

Love of country can be admirable.

But patriotic language alone is not a qualification for office.

Look beyond flags, slogans, speeches, and campaign imagery.

Ask:

Does this person’s conduct demonstrate responsible love of country?

Does the candidate respect constitutional government?

Does the person protect the liberties of citizens who disagree?

Does the candidate value national security without treating liberty as unimportant?

Does the person respect peaceful political processes?

Can the candidate acknowledge national mistakes while appreciating national achievements?

Christian patriotism should never become political idolatry.

Our country deserves responsible citizenship.

God deserves our ultimate allegiance.

What About Military Service?

Military veterans deserve appropriate honor for their service.

Military experience may provide valuable preparation in leadership, discipline, teamwork, sacrifice, national security, responsibility, and crisis decision-making.

But military service does not automatically qualify someone for every public office.

Ask:

What responsibilities did the candidate have?

What leadership experience resulted?

What did the person learn?

How does that experience prepare the candidate for this office?

The same principle applies to other backgrounds.

Business experience.

Legal experience.

Education.

Medicine.

Ministry.

Community service.

Previous political office.

Experience matters, but one impressive credential should not replace evaluation of the whole candidate.

Evaluate Experience Without Assuming “Outsider” or “Insider” Is Automatically Better

Political campaigns often praise candidates for being outsiders.

Other candidates emphasize years of government experience.

Neither characteristic automatically establishes fitness.

An outsider may bring new ideas and independence.

An outsider may also lack understanding of how government works.

An experienced official may understand institutions, lawmaking, budgets, and administration.

An experienced official may also become too comfortable with political power or entrenched interests.

Ask:

What has this person’s experience prepared him or her to do?

What weaknesses may come with that background?

Evaluate the person rather than the label.

Look at Who Surrounds the Candidate

No major leader governs alone.

Presidents, governors, mayors, and other executives select advisers and appointees.

Legislators work with staff and colleagues.

Candidates receive support from organizations and influential people.

Do not assume a candidate agrees with every supporter.

But ask:

Who are the candidate’s principal advisers?

Who is likely to receive important appointments?

Does the candidate surround himself or herself with competent people?

Are advisers willing to disagree?

What kind of judgment does the candidate demonstrate in choosing people?

Personnel decisions can reveal leadership priorities.

Consider Judicial Appointments and Other Long-Term Decisions

Some offices have consequences extending well beyond one term.

Presidents and governors may appoint judges.

Executives may appoint agency leaders.

Officials may make long-term financial commitments.

Legislatures may create permanent programs.

Local governments may approve projects affecting communities for decades.

When evaluating a candidate, ask not only:

“What will this person do next year?”

but also:

“What decisions could continue affecting people long after this person leaves office?”

How Does the Candidate Respond to Questions?

Pay attention when candidates are asked difficult questions.

Do they answer?

Change the subject?

Attack the questioner?

Give only slogans?

Acknowledge uncertainty?

Explain tradeoffs?

Admit weaknesses in their proposal?

A candidate does not need to have an immediate answer to every question.

Sometimes:

“I don’t know yet, but I will find out”

is more trustworthy than pretending to know everything.

Questions Citizens Can Ask Candidates

When you attend a candidate forum, town hall, public meeting, campaign event, or communicate with a campaign, consider asking specific questions.

“What are the three most important responsibilities of the office you are seeking?”

“What constitutional or legal limits apply to this office?”

“What is one thing you would like government to accomplish but believe this office does not have authority to do?”

“What specific spending would you increase?”

“What specific spending would you reduce?”

“How would you pay for your major proposals?”

“What taxes, if any, would you increase or decrease?”

“How would your proposal affect government debt or long-term obligations?”

“What protections will you support for religious liberty and freedom of conscience?”

“How will you protect the rights of citizens who strongly disagree with you?”

“What is one position you have changed during your public life, and what changed your mind?”

“Tell us about a significant mistake you made in leadership and what you learned.”

“Under what circumstances would you oppose your own political party?”

“How should citizens hold you accountable if you break an important campaign promise?”

“What evidence would cause you to reconsider one of your major policies?”

“How will you communicate with constituents after the election?”

“What experience best prepares you for this office?”

“What is the strongest argument against one of your major proposals, and how do you answer it?”

That final question can be particularly revealing.

A leader who understands only his or her own argument may not yet understand the issue well enough.

Ask Questions About Issues You Care About

If you care deeply about prison reform, ask specific questions about sentencing, rehabilitation, victims, reentry, recidivism, costs, or whatever aspect concerns you.

If taxes concern you, ask what the candidate would increase, decrease, or change.

If government spending concerns you, ask for specific programs and numbers.

If schools concern you, ask about curriculum, parental involvement, textbook selection, student safety, academic achievement, and the proper responsibilities of local and state government.

If religious liberty concerns you, ask about conscience protections and accommodations.

If healthcare concerns you, ask about costs, access, safety, evidence, regulation, individual choice, and the proper role of government.

If public safety concerns you, ask how the candidate would protect communities while respecting constitutional liberties.

Do not ask only:

“Are you for education?”

Nearly everyone will say yes.

Ask what the candidate would actually do.

Evaluate Whether Promises Are Measurable

A useful campaign promise should eventually allow citizens to ask whether it happened.

Compare:

“I will strengthen our economy.”

with:

“I will propose reducing this specific tax from ____ to ____.”

Compare:

“I will improve our schools.”

with:

“I will propose ____ and measure the result by ____.”

Specific promises make accountability easier.

When candidates remain vague, ask for specifics.

What If Neither Candidate Is a Good Choice?

Sometimes an election presents voters with candidates about whom they have serious concerns.

Do not pretend the concerns do not exist.

Evaluate the candidates honestly.

Consider:

Character.

Competence.

Policies.

Record.

Constitutional responsibilities.

Likely appointments.

Ability to govern.

Potential good.

Potential harm.

Long-term consequences.

Available alternatives.

Pray.

Research.

Seek wise counsel.

Then act according to conscience.

Christians may sometimes reach different conclusions about a difficult election without either person necessarily abandoning biblical faithfulness.

The “Lesser of Two Evils” Question

Christians sometimes describe voting between two deeply flawed candidates as choosing the “lesser of two evils.”

That expression can confuse the issue.

We should never personally commit evil so that good may result.

Paul rejected that principle:

“And why not say (as we are slanderously reported and as some claim that we say), ‘Let us do evil that good may come’? Their condemnation is just.” – Romans 3:8 (NASB 1995)

But casting a vote for an imperfect candidate does not necessarily mean endorsing everything that person has done or believes.

A voter may conclude:

“Neither candidate is my ideal choice, but after evaluating the responsibilities of this office and the likely consequences, I believe one is the better available choice.”

Another Christian may conclude that conscience prevents supporting either major candidate and choose another lawful option available.

These can be difficult matters of prudential judgment.

We should approach them with humility.

A Vote Is Not a Declaration of Personal Loyalty

Voting for someone does not require becoming that politician’s defender.

You can vote for someone and later criticize that person’s policy.

You can vote for someone and demand an investigation when evidence warrants one.

You can vote for someone and oppose a future decision.

You can vote for someone and decide not to vote for the person again.

You can vote for someone while acknowledging serious weaknesses.

Your ballot does not belong to a political party.

Your conscience does not belong to a candidate.

And your ultimate allegiance belongs to Jesus Christ.

What About Third-Party or Independent Candidates?

When another candidate appears on the ballot, evaluate that person using the same principles.

Character.

Competence.

Policies.

Record.

Qualifications.

Understanding of the office.

Likely consequences.

Also consider the practical realities of the election as part of your judgment.

Christians may disagree about how heavily electoral viability should influence a voting decision.

One believer may conclude that voting for a less viable candidate best expresses conscience.

Another may conclude that choosing between the two candidates most likely to win is the wiser way to influence the outcome.

Scripture does not give a universal formula for that calculation.

Pray, become informed, and act conscientiously.

What About Leaving a Race Blank?

A ballot contains multiple races and sometimes ballot measures.

A voter does not have to make the same decision in every race.

You may feel well informed about one contest and uncertain about another.

You may conclude that you cannot support any candidate in a particular race.

Election rules vary, but where a voter may lawfully leave a particular contest blank, doing so is different from refusing to participate in every election.

The important point is not to make political decisions casually.

Use your opportunities thoughtfully and conscientiously.

Do Not Let Fear Make the Decision

Campaigns frequently tell voters that catastrophe will occur if the opponent wins.

Some elections genuinely have serious consequences.

But fear can interfere with discernment.

Ask:

Is this claim realistic?

What authority would the candidate actually have?

What institutions limit that authority?

What evidence supports the predicted outcome?

Is the campaign describing a genuine danger or attempting to frighten me into voting without thinking?

Christians should take real dangers seriously without allowing fear to become our master.

Paul wrote:

“For God has not given us a spirit of timidity, but of power and love and discipline.” – 2 Timothy 1:7 (NASB 1995)

Do Not Let Anger Make the Decision Either

Anger can alert us that something is wrong.

But anger can also make us careless.

A candidate may deliberately provoke anger because angry voters are easier to mobilize.

Before voting primarily against someone you dislike, ask:

What am I actually voting for?

Have I evaluated the candidate I support as carefully as the candidate I oppose?

Would I tolerate this behavior from the other party?

A Christian ballot should be guided by wisdom rather than political rage.

Do Not Base Your Vote on One Personality Trait

Some voters prefer forceful leaders.

Others prefer calm leaders.

Some appreciate polished speakers.

Others distrust them.

Some like outsiders.

Others value experience.

Personality matters because temperament affects leadership.

But charisma is not competence.

Confidence is not wisdom.

Quietness is not weakness.

Aggressiveness is not courage.

A polished speaker is not necessarily dishonest.

An unpolished speaker is not necessarily authentic.

Look beyond style.

Consider the People Affected by Your Vote

Christian voting should include love of neighbor.

Ask how policies may affect:

Children.

Families.

Workers.

Businesses.

People in poverty.

People with disabilities.

Older adults.

Victims of crime.

People accused of crime.

Taxpayers.

Religious communities.

People who disagree politically.

Future generations.

Citizens should consider both intended benefits and possible unintended harms.

No policy affects everyone identically.

Wisdom requires looking beyond ourselves.

Pray Before Making the Final Decision

After researching candidates, pray.

Ask God for wisdom.

Ask Him to reveal bias.

Ask whether fear is controlling you.

Ask whether anger is controlling you.

Ask whether party loyalty is preventing you from seeing something clearly.

Ask whether personal financial interest is dominating your judgment.

Ask whether dislike of someone’s personality is overshadowing more important considerations.

Ask whether admiration for a candidate is causing you to excuse wrongdoing.

Ask for courage to vote according to conscience.

And ask for humility to recognize that another sincere Christian may reach a different conclusion.

A Practical Candidate Evaluation

Before voting, write down the office being filled.

Then write the candidates’ names.

For each candidate, examine:

Character

Integrity

Honesty

Competence

Experience

Judgment

Record

Policies

Respect for constitutional limits

Respect for religious liberty and conscience

Understanding of the proper role of government

Fiscal responsibility

Treatment of opponents

Ability to accept criticism

Response to mistakes

Likely appointments

Major campaign promises

Potential benefits

Potential harms

Long-term consequences

Then identify which considerations matter most for that particular office.

Do not simply count categories.

Some concerns may be far more significant than others.

Pray over what you have learned.

Then vote according to your informed Christian conscience.

Practical Application

Choose one candidate you are currently interested in evaluating.

Find the official responsibilities of the office being sought.

Read the candidate’s own stated positions.

If the candidate has held office, find the official government record.

Examine several important votes rather than one campaign-selected vote.

Find at least one major claim made about the candidate by an opponent and investigate the original evidence.

Find at least one major claim made by the candidate’s own campaign and verify it.

Watch one extended interview, speech, debate, or candidate forum rather than relying only on clips.

Read thoughtful analysis from more than one perspective.

Check the dates of controversial statements.

Compare campaign promises with the actual authority of the office.

Identify the candidate’s major spending and tax proposals.

Ask how those proposals would be funded.

Evaluate character and competence as well as policy.

Consider constitutional limits and religious liberty.

Consider how policies may affect people other than yourself.

Write down questions you still need answered.

Contact the campaign when appropriate.

Pray before reaching your conclusion.

And after the election, continue evaluating the winner’s actual record rather than assuming your responsibility ended when you voted.

Questions for Personal Reflection

Do I know what authority the office I am voting for actually possesses?

Do I rely too heavily on campaign advertising?

Have I ever looked at an official voting record myself?

Do I know the difference between a procedural vote and final passage of a bill?

Do I read beyond headlines and bill titles?

Do I compare campaign promises with what candidates actually have authority to accomplish?

Do I check the date and context of political claims?

Do I listen to more than one perspective?

Would I apply the same standard of evidence to a candidate I support and one I oppose?

Do I evaluate character, competence, and policy together?

Do I ask what government programs will cost and who will pay?

Do I care whether candidates respect limits on their own authority?

Do I assume a Christian label automatically makes someone the better candidate?

Do I assume patriotism or military service automatically establishes fitness for office?

Can I vote for an imperfect candidate without becoming that person’s unconditional defender?

If both candidates concern me, do I prayerfully weigh the actual choices rather than simply giving up?

Am I willing to consider another Christian’s reasoning without assuming that a different vote proves spiritual unfaithfulness?

Does fear determine my vote?

Does anger determine my vote?

Do I consider how my political choices affect my neighbors?

Have I prayed seriously before making my decision?

A Prayer for Wisdom in Evaluating Political Leaders

Father, thank You for the privilege and responsibility of participating in government. Give us wisdom as we evaluate those who seek public office. Help us look beyond advertisements, slogans, personalities, party labels, fear, anger, and political pressure. Teach us to seek truth carefully, examine records fairly, understand the responsibilities of each office, and distinguish promises from what government can actually accomplish. Give us discernment as we consider character, competence, policies, judgment, experience, constitutional limits, religious liberty, public safety, stewardship, justice, and the effects of government decisions upon our neighbors. Keep us from excusing wrongdoing in candidates we support or believing accusations against opponents without evidence. Help us make difficult choices with humility when no candidate fully represents our convictions. Guard us from placing our hope in political leaders. Give us informed consciences, courageous hearts, charitable attitudes toward those who reach different conclusions, and unwavering allegiance to Jesus Christ. In His name, Amen.

Christian Citizenship

Christian Living