The Religion poll data is ominious for Obama

[NAO]

Polls still say he has a lead overall, but in all the major religious groups he is way behind all the potential Republicans.

Catholics (white and non-white), evangelicals (no surprise), and mainline protestants are all polling strongly to (whatever) republican candidate. Even Jews are flocking to the GOP.

And they've had 4 years to whip their flocks into a frenzy, and that was BEFORE the "religious freedom" (aka contraception) debacle.

Churches are used to register voters and even used as POLLING places. I hope this election does not turn on the "religious freedom", but that is the only issue powerful enough to trump the economy.

[BeyondGeography]

1. Link?

[NAO]

4. from a DU thread

from this thread:


Contraception Rope-a-Dope: Obama leads Romney/Santorum 59-38 among women (Pew)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002308219

and this link in particular:

http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-detailed_tables/2-13-12%20Horserace%20tables.pdf

look closely at the breakout by religion section.

[BeyondGeography]

13. The only ugly number I see is evangelicals

No surprise there.

The gender gap is far more of a problem for the other side than any religious affiliation issues. Unaffiliated is the fastest growing religious group and he's up 40 there.

[GoCubsGo]

35. And, it's mostly the Southern evangelicals.

No surprise there, either. There's a bit more to it than religious beliefs in that number, I'm sad to say.

[janet118]

44. And that poll is heavily weighted to the South . . .

over twice as many respondents in the South as in the Northeast.

[RandySF]

14. You have to be careful with subgroups.

Samples tend to be so small as to make them unreliable.

[babylonsister]

2. ???????????? Proof? Supposition?? Desire??? nt

[NAO]

6. link is in post #4 -nt

[jberryhill]

3. What poll?

[pinto]

5. Would you cite some published polling data?

Thanks.

[NAO]

7. link is in post #4 -nt

[alittlelark]

8. Ominous Concern!!!

W/O link

The correct spelling is Ominous.

[NAO]

12. spelling errors correlate to fear

which is why tea-party signs have so many.

[Ruby the Liberal]

9. A bit of a stretch here.

Sorry, not seeing that at either link (one being a repost of the other).

Where are you getting this "Even Jews are flocking to the GOP" claim? Even if you interpret "Unaffiliated" as somehow "Jew" that is 68-28.

[NAO]

11. unaffilated I am taking to be secular/no religion, link to Jewish poll data from Pew

Pew Poll

Trends in Party Identification of Religious Groups
Jewish Support for GOP Rises
http://www.pewforum.org/Politics-and-Elections/Trends-in-Party-Identification-of-Religious-Groups.aspx

[Ruby the Liberal]

15. 4 points in 4 years is "flocking"?

*yawn*

Your concern is duly noted.

[Cali_Democrat]

19. 4 points (in one poll) means they're flocking, I tell ya!

[Major Hogwash]

34. Holy sheeeet!! That means my basketball team got flocked in their last game!

They lost by 4 points!

We are soooooooo doomed.

[bowens43]

10. complete nonsense.

[Drunken Irishman]

16. So, just to make sure I'm getting this...

Obama has an eight-point lead over Romney (bigger than his actual win over McCain in '08) nationally, leads women 59-38 (won women by only a 56-43 margin in '08), grabs 44% of the white vote (won only 43% back in '08, compared to 41 for Kerry in '04 and 42 for Gore in '00), wins the total Catholic vote by a margin of 52-44 (won it 54-45 last go around) and I'm supposed to find these numbers ominous?

They pretty much look identical to his numbers from '08 - which led to an electoral landslide and a comfortable margin nationally.

Your concern is duly noted.

[Ecumenist]

17. Somehow, I don't think you need to worry too much. Were you aware of all the so called

flocking these types did in the last election cycle? There's nothing new under the sun. This ish has been hapening with increasin regularity since Ronnie, "St Alzheimers" raygun.

[Lifelong Protester]

20. Wow! Om INM ious

Now that is scary.

[demosincebirth]

21. This is bogus, for sure. No effing way the majority of Catholics and main line Protestants are

trending for the GOP.

[Drunken Irishman]

22. They're not. Obama's doing about as well among Catholics as he did in '08...

White Catholics will continually vote Republican (they have ever since the 1960s), so that shouldn't be a surprise. However, in the poll this poster cites as ominous, Obama is actually doing among women voters than he did in '08 and white voters (albeit, by only a point). The thing is, in '08, Obama received more of the white vote than Kerry in '04, Gore in '00, Clinton in '92, Dukakis in '88, Mondale in '84 and Carter in '80 - with only Clinton in '96 matching his overall total.

So, I think this poster is just trying to stir up concern. There is no evidence Obama is losing the support of any of those sub-groups - especially compared to his numbers in '08.

[demosincebirth]

36. I don't know where you live, but in my neck of the woods the majority of Catholics (white) have been

voting democrat for years. You add the Latinos and Black Catholics and that gives Obama a good chunk of the Catholic vote. Of course it may be different outside of the liberal Bay Area.

[Drunken Irishman]

38. At the presidential-level, Democrats have struggled with the White Catholic vote for 30 years...

Obama won the Catholic vote in 2008, however, lost the White Catholic vote to McCain 47-52.

Clinton and Carter are the only two Democratic candidates to win the White Catholic vote since '72 - and Clinton only did it with a plurality (meaning his overall percentage wasn't much different than Obama's).

Here's how it breaks down by president.

2008: McCain won the White Catholic vote 52-47
2004: Bush won the White Catholic vote 56-43
2000: Bush won the White Catholic vote 52-45
1996: Clinton won the White Catholic vote 48-41
1992: Clinton won the White Catholic vote 42-37
1988: Bush won the White Catholic vote 56-43
1984: Reagan won the White Catholic vote 57-42
1980: Reagan won the White Catholic vote 51-40
1976: Carter won the White Catholic vote 52-46
1972: Nixon won the White Catholic vote 57-42

So, it's clear what these numbers mean. Carter was the last Democrat to win a majority of the White Catholic vote and that was almost 40 years ago.

Clinton's two elections where he won the White Catholic vote was with less than 50% of the total vote and only 42% in '92. That means, in both elections, more White Catholics voted against Clinton.

Beyond that, it's clear the White Catholic vote is becoming less and less influential overall. Just look at '04 and '88. Kerry received the same percent of White Catholic vote as Dukakis did and yet was far more competitive nationally, and within the electoral college, than Dukakis - who lost to Bush by eight points nationally.

Obama won't win the White Catholic vote. But he doesn't have to - as '08 showed.

[intaglio]

23. Percentages are fine but

What were the raw numbers? I very strongly suspect that the selected percentages were only for those willing to identify their religion and omitted those who refused to give such an identity. Note "Unaffiliated" is not such a classification.

Polls that omit raw numbers are deceptive and raise doubts about the veracity of the polling organisation.

[Rowdyboy]

24. What a silly thread....woooh....the religious polling looks ominous...wooh.....

Obama is doomed, I tell you doomed. Oh, wait, he running far above any of the idiots who think they can replace him. Maybe he's not doomed after all. Woooooooh......

I'm so scairt I'm crappin my pants. Woooooooh.......

[Grateful for Hope]

25. Thanks for your concern. n/t

[Ian62]

26. Not an issue

I don't believe this is that much of an issue.
Neither Santorum or Gingrich can win the nomination.
Neither are on ballots for 564 worth of delegates.
Neither has a national ground organisation set up.
Neither has enough money or time to set one up.
Sure - they will get the odd success.
And take some delegates in proportional states.

Romney is going to be nominee - and he is a mormon.
Romney has cash, Gop elites to rig elections and Faux news.

Fervent evangelical groups will have a bit of thinking to do

I don't believe it will be any more of an issue than previous elections.

Got to break down which religious groups are supporting which candidate to get a better picture.
I don't have that info.

[grantcart]

27. untrue

First of all edit the poll so we don't have to double click to get the source

http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-detailed_tables/2-13-12%20Horserace%20tables.pdf

All Catholics

Obama 52 - 44

Unaffiliated

Obama 68 -28

White Mainline Protestant

Obama 46 -50

If you added in non white Protestant that would mean that Obama is leading Cathollics, Mainline Protestant and Unaffiliated people that identify themselves as being religious.

These are great numbers.

[TwilightGardener]

28. "Religious Freedom"--that's the GOP catchphrase for denying women their rights.

Why are you using it? Edit to add: the contraceptive thing isn't a "debacle", it's the law being applied fairly across all large employers and insurers.

[Tarheel_Dem]

29. Aw Geez. More "concern"?

[Odin2005]

30. Enjoy your short stay.

[scheming daemons]

32. OP has been a member since 2004

[Skwid]

37. Yeah we just hate those goddamn newbies, right?

[Ikonoklast]

40. No, we wait for them to out themselves.

Like you did.

[alittlelark]

45. LOL

Too true!

[cliffordu]

31. Uhh......

Just as soon as you link some real data, I'll set my hair on fire.

Until then, the gasoline stays in the bucket, where it belongs.....

[Pisces]

33. Thanks for your concern

[mucifer]

39. It's especially offensive in that these European Jews were victims of an attempted genocide.

It gives us this sense that hitler tried to destroy every one of us and then the mormons are trying to pray us out of existence. I just can't quite explain why it makes a lot of us very upset. Yes, praying us out of existence is nothing in reality. But, it is REALLY offensive.

[Thrill]

41. Democrats rarely poll good in those areas

I guess the Jews are a bit of a concern. But come election time they usually know the Republicans are full of shit and come back

[renie408]

42. OH MY GOD!! NO!! PANIC!! PANIC!! PANIC!!

You know...or not.

Cause somebody is lying somewhere. If 83% of Americans claim to be Christian and he isn't polling well with religious groups, but he is over all leading in the polls..something ain't right.

And it is FEBRUARY. I will start worrying about polls in September. They are going to change a hundred times between now and the election.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/beliefnet_poll_010718.html

[Lydia Leftcoast]

43. First of all, most religious groups have no problems with contraception

and if you vote at a church--which may be the only non-home building in a given neighborhood--you vote in the social hall, not in the sanctuary, and by law, the church cannot have any political material visible. (That's true of any polling place.)

Before Oregon instituted vote by mail, I voted in a Missouri Synod Lutheran Church (the second most conservative branch of Lutheranism). Voters went in through an entrance that led straight to the social hall and the voting area was devoid of political material or anything that wasn't announcing stuff like rehearsals for the church's Sunday school Christmas pageant or something like that.

[MineralMan]

46. I'm confident that you are way off-base on this.

Very confident.

[NAO]

47. I hope you're right. Thanks for your reassurance

I just don't want to be blinded by partisanship like I was in 2004. I didn't think there was any way a president as awful and as hated as Bush could possibly win. And religion was credited as a major factor in his win.

So yes, I am quite sober and concerned when the RCC makes an alliance with the Evangelicals and makes an all out assault from the pulpit on Obama. When they announce they are going to run attack ads on radio and TV, it ratchets up my concern. The bishops even said they are going to be combing through everything Obama has done to find other areas where he has "violated religious freedom" and bring those issues into the churches and the TV ads.

Nothing else comes close to the "on the ground" organization of the churches. And the RCC is one wealthy Super-PAC, and they don't even need Citizens United to pour unlimited funds into the election. Try to revoke their tax exempt status (the logical thing to do) and they will really shriek about persecution.

For these people, religious freedom (which is what they claim this is about) trumps the economy or any other real-world concern.

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
- Voltaire