(Blog) The Elections are Over; But Houston, I Think We Have a Problem! - Ep. 1009 - November 4, 2026

2026 Election Results: The Church's Deeper Problem

Alan Smith and Jeff Rowland see the 2026 election results as a warning about the spiritual condition of the nation and the church. Their central concern is what voters' choices reveal about America's relationship with God and Scripture.

Our November 4, 2026, episode of The Smith and Rowland Show opens with a football joke about Tampa Bay beating Atlanta 16-0 without throwing a pass. But the conversation quickly turns to a deeper concern: how Christians can remain faithful when the surrounding culture embraces beliefs they consider contrary to the Bible.

"The Real Problem Was Never on the Ballot"

Jeff introduces the discussion with a statement that frames the entire episode:

"The real problem was never on the ballot."

For him, the election exposes a problem that reaches beyond party control. Millions of Americans, he argues, support candidates and proposals whose values conflict with Scripture. His disappointment centers on that support and what it suggests about the country's direction.

Both hosts expected Democrats to gain ground. They acknowledge the historical tendency for a president's party to lose seats during midterm elections. However, Alan says the scale of the outcome exceeded even his worst expectations. Both describe it as a Democratic "tsunami."

Jeff also recalls hearing a sermon from around 1970 in which a preacher condemned communism as a sin against God. He contrasts that message with what he sees as growing American support for communist ideas and candidates.

In his view, the contrast reveals how far the country has moved since Americans fought communism overseas in the late 1960s. He connects that change to a continuing rejection of God.

Why Particular Races Troubled Them Most

Jeff says three races concerned him more than the overall number of Democratic victories. Among the candidates he names are Abdul El-Sayed and James Talarico.

He says he'd heard the candidates in those races speak about God and Scripture in ways he regarded as blasphemous. Their reported victories therefore carried a spiritual meaning for him beyond the usual disappointment of losing an election.

Jeff is especially troubled by the decisive Michigan result he describes. His concern is that a substantial majority deliberately supported a candidate whose beliefs and positions he considers incompatible with biblical Christianity.

The hosts also criticize ministers who enter politics while teaching views about God and gender that they reject. Jeff points to statements describing God as nonbinary and recognizing several genders. He regards those statements as false teaching, particularly when they come from people who claim Christian authority.

Alan explains his sense of increased danger with a pointed comparison: living beside a neighbor with a barking dog is different from living beside someone who raises alligators. His point is that the consequences of choosing certain leaders could be much more serious than those of earlier political disagreements.

These are the hosts' judgments about the candidates and their teachings. Their focus is the moral and spiritual significance they attach to voters' choices.

State Results and the Political Consequences Jeff Fears

Texas and North Carolina draw particular concern

Jeff says some results surprised him, including those in Texas and South Carolina and the breadth of the vote in North Carolina.

He describes North Carolina, where the hosts live, as having become a liberal state. In his assessment, the eastern part of the state has spread a political outlook he associates with dependence on government assistance.

His explanation for Texas includes two factors. First, he believes moderate Republicans, including the Bush political establishment, oppose Trump. Second, he argues that people moving into Texas from California and New York have helped change its politics.

Presidential elections and district lines

Jeff then considers the longer-term consequences if Texas consistently votes Democratic in presidential elections. He argues that losing Texas, California, and New York would make the Republican path to the White House extremely difficult, even with Florida.

He also worries that Democratic control in the states could lead to district boundaries drawn in the party's favor.

For those reasons, Jeff rejects reassurance that treats the outcome as an ordinary midterm correction. Although he says his trust remains in the Lord, he believes concern for the nation's future is justified.

Alan anticipates substantial "buyer's remorse" as voters experience the consequences of their choices over the following three years. Jeff says he hopes that assessment proves right.

The Economic Argument That Gave Them Some Confidence

The hosts also discuss economic commentary associated with Susan Kokinda. They agree with much of the argument they heard, even though they don't share its full sense of reassurance.

As they summarize it, the analysis places Europe and European financial interests at the center of a long-running global economic system. They also discuss the claim that powerful financial interests have funded opposing sides in wars.

Within that interpretation, Trump's tariffs and efforts to return manufacturing to the United States are part of an attempt to separate the American economy from globalism. Both hosts support that direction.

Alan takes encouragement from the argument that Trump anticipated political setbacks and put policies in place that would continue working despite them. He mentions border measures as another example of changes already established.

Neither host considers those policies permanently secure. They acknowledge that political opponents could eventually change them, while arguing that a reversal would take time.

Jeff agrees that the economic framework may be difficult to dismantle immediately. However, his principal concern remains outside the economic argument.

Why Economic Strength Doesn't Settle the Spiritual Question

Jeff draws a firm distinction between economic performance and God's blessing. In his view, a nation can build a strong economic system while making spiritual choices that carry serious consequences.

He identifies several concerns: political philosophies he considers hostile to the Bible, opposition to the church and Christian teaching, and a political climate he believes is turning against Israel.

He also returns to religious leaders who, in his judgment, use Christian titles while teaching against Scripture. Their public success troubles him because he sees it as evidence that spiritual discernment has weakened.

For Jeff, economic reasoning alone can't resolve those concerns. Voters may believe they've made a practical choice, but he argues that the nation will still reap the consequences of its moral decisions.

Alan agrees. Their shared position is that economic prosperity can't substitute for spiritual faithfulness.

The Church's Responsibility for the Nation's Direction

The statement "As the church goes, so goes the nation" becomes one of the episode's central themes.

Both hosts believe the church's condition helps shape the wider culture. Therefore, they don't place all responsibility for the election on political parties, candidates, or voters outside the church.

Alan mentions seeing a claim that "70-some percent" of Christians didn't vote. He explicitly says he doesn't know whether the figure is correct, so it remains an unconfirmed number in their discussion.

Jeff raises another concern: greater participation by people who identify as Christian wouldn't necessarily produce the outcome the hosts want. The question is also how those Christians understand Scripture and how that understanding shapes their votes.

That exchange moves the discussion beyond turnout. In their view, Christian identification by itself doesn't establish biblical conviction.

Later, Jeff extends the same reasoning to consequences. If the nation's direction began with failures inside the church, he asks whether the church might experience the consequences before the country does, or at least as a prelude to them.

The question turns their attention toward what churches may face in the years ahead.

Selfishness, Consumerism, and the Habit of Claiming Victimhood

When Jeff asks where the country's thinking came from, Alan traces much of it to selfishness.

He describes an American culture attached to buying things and expecting possessions to produce happiness. The United States buys enormous amounts of goods, he says, and eventually fills landfills with them. Yet the desire for more continues.

Alan connects that appetite to entitlement and the belief that personal desire should determine what a person can do or become. He sees narcissistic traits in the country's broader behavior, while making clear that he isn't describing every American.

His criticism also reaches the habit of building an identity around mistreatment. Alan acknowledges that people suffer unfairly. But he argues that hardship is part of everyone's life and shouldn't become a permanent claim to victimhood.

He applies that principle to Christians disappointed by the election. They may be living with the consequences of other people's choices, but he doesn't believe those choices must determine their identity or conduct.

That conviction leads to the biblical example both hosts return to: Daniel in Babylon.

Daniel in Babylon as a Model for Christian Faithfulness

Alan compares the hosts' sense of America's condition to waking up in Babylon.

Daniel's example matters to him because Daniel lived within a culture that didn't share his faith. He held a position of authority and served faithfully, yet he maintained convictions he wouldn't surrender.

The hosts point to Daniel's prayer life and his decisions about food as examples of that refusal to compromise. His participation in public life didn't require him to abandon his relationship with God.

Alan also stresses that Daniel didn't have to change all of Babylon before he could live faithfully within it. That distinction matters to Christians who feel overwhelmed by the country's direction.

The discussion briefly returns to political humor when the hosts mention a Kansas candidate's reported comments about giving up meat. Their exchange follows the reference to Daniel's food choices, although their larger concern remains the freedom to hold to personal convictions.

For both men, Daniel provides a pattern of integrity within an unfaithful culture. A hostile environment doesn't require Christians to become like the people around them.

Disappointment Doesn't Have to Become Despair

Alan describes himself as hurt, angry, and disappointed. He doesn't pretend that Christians must feel happy about every political outcome.

However, he distinguishes those emotions from despair. He still believes God can change the country's direction, and he refuses to treat himself as powerless because others made choices he opposes.

"I am not going to be a victim of everybody else's bad behavior."

Jeff agrees with that position. He describes faithfulness in Babylon as continuing to love God, maintaining Christian integrity, and speaking openly about Christian convictions.

Neither host promises that this approach removes national consequences. Instead, they believe a Christian can remain faithful while living through them.

Jeff also argues that preserving joy under those conditions will require greater faith, diligence, commitment, and surrender to God's Word. He expects the surrounding pressure to demand more of believers.

Their confidence rests in God's faithfulness rather than an expectation that political circumstances will quickly improve.

Revival, Crisis, and the Consequences of Sin

When Jeff asks what it would take for the country to recover, Alan answers that the same thing could have prevented the situation: revival among God's people.

Both believe recovery remains possible. Yet Alan wonders whether the country will turn toward God without experiencing a major crisis.

He recalls the response after the September 11 attacks, when people returned to churches in fear and uncertainty. In his assessment, that response didn't last. He sees a recurring pattern in which fear sends people toward God while pride draws them away.

Alan continues to ask for grace and mercy. At the same time, he argues that people can't escape every consequence of their own sin.

He doesn't describe God as simply inflicting harm on the country. Instead, he emphasizes the damage people bring upon themselves through their choices.

Jeff also recalls prophecies associated with Rick Joyner and wonders whether events might move in that direction. He raises the possibility without claiming that a particular prophecy is being fulfilled.

Their discussion remains a reflection on consequences and the need for revival, rather than a fixed prediction of the next national crisis.

Deception in Churches and Their End-Times Concerns

The same spiritual problem inside and outside the church

The hosts argue that the deception they see in politics also appears in churches.

Alan recounts a story he'd read about an Ohio megachurch pastor and his wife publicly announcing that another woman had entered their marriage. According to his account, the pastor defended the arrangement by referring to biblical men who had multiple wives.

Alan also mentions a reported standing ovation from the congregation, though he expresses uncertainty about that part of the story.

For both hosts, the account illustrates their concern that churches can approve conduct they regard as contrary to Scripture. Jeff connects that concern to the religious and gender teachings discussed earlier in the episode. He sees the same spiritual deception operating in both places.

The rapture and the spirit of Antichrist

Alan also raises the possibility that the present dispensation, which he calls the day of God's grace, may be nearing its conclusion. Within his understanding of end-times events, the rapture of the church comes next.

Jeff says the cultural conditions appear increasingly receptive to an antichrist figure. They argue that many Americans could welcome such a leader.

Their concern includes churches as well as the wider country. They speak of the spirit of Antichrist entering homes and congregations through teaching that rejects God's Word.

These comments express their theological interpretation of the moment, not a dated prediction.

What the Hosts Believe the Church Must Face Next

As the episode closes, Jeff returns to the question of what the church can expect over the next couple of years.

Alan describes two possible responses. Churches can withdraw in defeat and wait for Jesus to return, or they can continue opposing what they understand to be evil.

He uses the language of a spiritual army, with sword and shield, to describe the second response. He also cites his support for war in Iran as an expression of his belief that evil must be opposed, even when those opposing it are outnumbered.

Within the church, however, he puts the first responsibility on preaching. Pastors need to explain what evil is before congregations can recognize what they're being called to resist.

Jeff agrees. Both reject the idea that an election loss requires Christians to become passive.

This was our first live podcast in a long time. Alan and Jeff said future episodes would continue examining the church's direction in the years ahead, and they invited listeners to subscribe and turn on notifications for those live conversations.

Faithfulness Beyond the Election

The strongest concern in this conversation is the spiritual condition that Alan and Jeff believe the election exposed. Their hope for recovery rests in revival, with the church taking responsibility for its own faithfulness.

Daniel's example gives that hope a concrete form. Even in Babylon, they argue, Christians can maintain their integrity, remain devoted to God, and refuse to let disappointment become surrender.

"Text generated by [rightblogger] based on (Smith and Rowland Video), The Elections are Over; But Houston, I Think We Have a Problem! - Ep. 1009 - November 4, 2026"