Former Barack Obama adviser Michael Wear's assertion this morning to Christian Today that Donald Trump's victory should partly at least be blamed on Hillary Clinton's "almost complete disregard" for engaging with faith communities – especially white evangelicals and Catholics – represents a real tension between the outgoing President and his former Secretary of State.

Part of their differences are down to ongoing bitterness on the part of Clinton that Obama had the audacity to challenge her for the Democratic nomination in 2008: bitterness which will surely be enhanced rather than reduced today, after Trump seized the presidency which so many pollster so wrongly claimed was in her grip. Recently leaked emails among insiders reveal claims that Clinton "hates" Obama. That in itself demonstrates part of the problem with Clinton's character, but that's another story. 

But Wear's comments almost certainly reflect a real concern among some Democrats that Clinton neglected faith communities in her campaign, largely – and uncharacteristically – avoiding church campaign stops and refusing to talk about her own Methodist-based faith.

Evangelical Christians ended up backing Trump by 81 per cent to 16 per cent, according to ABC News, in probably the biggest ever evangelical majority in a US presidential race.

Meanwhile, an ABC-Washington Post poll showed 54 per cent of white Catholics voting for Trump, with 38 per cent voting for Clinton.

So, what went wrong for Clinton?

First, there was her refusal to discuss her faith or even matters of faith generally.

As even her long-time friend of Clinton Lissa Muscatine told the New York Times back in January: "It's been a remarkably private part of this hugely public person's existence. It's almost like, because it's so private and has motivated her so deeply, that she doesn't talk about it."

That may have been putting it politely.

Observers were dismayed that it was only in January when, at a town-hall-style gathering inside a gymnasium in Knoxville, Clinton came out as a passionate Christian. Asked by a Democrat-leaning voter about her beliefs, she opened up: "I am a person of faith. I am a Christian. I am a Methodist. I have been raised Methodist. I feel very grateful for the instructions and support I received starting in my family but through my church, and I think that any of us who are Christian have a constantly, constant, conversation in our own heads about what we are called to do and how we are asked to do it, and I think it is absolutely appropriate for people to have very strong convictions and also, though, to discuss those with other people of faith..."

Sadly for many Democrats and indeed ultimately for her, this was an all too rare statement, a one off.

The void of her subsequent radio silence about faith was filled by criticism among leading Christian voices that she was running on the most liberal - some would say secularist - platform in major American political history.

Crucially, that platform called for a wide expansion of abortion access, including the overturning of two key amendments in US law: the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal money from directly funding abortions, and the Helms Amendment, which bans federal dollars from funding abortions abroad.

These changes led even Wear, a committed Democrat, to call the Clinton campaign's position on abortion "morally reprehensible". He told the Catholic News Agency (CNA) in July that the "extreme" position shut out millions of pro-life voters.

The Democrat position on abortion used to be that it should be "rare". Hillary Clinton herself has used this word repeatedly over the years.

When Hillary's husband Bill Clinton ran for president in 1996, abortion was mentioned once in the Democratic platform. This time it was mentioned 19 times.

Also in July, Dr Matthew Bunson, EWTN Senior Contributor, said: "In [Bill Clinton's 1996 platform], there was specific reference to 'conscience.' You will not find that word in the Democratic platform in 2016."

And Dr Charles Camosy, a theology professor at Fordham University, explained to the CNA that the 2016 language portrayed "abortion on demand to be a social good worthy of explicit government support with tax dollars from everyone...I don't think anyone who is on the side of justice for the vulnerable, of non-violence, could support something like that".

As Wear says, the Democrat party must now examine its relationship with faith groups, especially conservative Christians.

Because in the end, both white Catholics and evangelicals abandoned Clinton just as decisively as she appeared to abandon them.