Posted on 11/07/2012 3:49:11 PM PST by MadIsh32
In his re-election victory, Democrat Barack Obama narrowly defeated Republican Mitt Romney in the national popular vote (50% to 48%)1. Obama’s margin of victory was much smaller than in 2008 when he defeated John McCain by a 53% to 46% margin, and he lost ground among white evangelical Protestants and white Catholics.
But the basic religious contours of the 2012 electorate resemble recent elections – traditionally Republican groups such as white evangelicals and weekly churchgoers strongly backed Romney, while traditionally Democratic groups such as black Protestants, Hispanic Catholics, Jews and the religiously unaffiliated backed Obama by large margins.
The vast majority of the practicing Catholics I know vote Republican. (Unfortunately, I also know of some who wouldn't vote for Romney because they didn't view him as conservative enough - an opinion shared by some voters here on this forum.) IMHO, it has more to do with location: The northeast tends to vote Dem, and many Catholics live in the northeast.
Conservative Catholics can claim all they want that anyone calling themselves Catholic who votes liberal isn't REALLY a Catholic,
Catholics who vote GOP and Catholics who vote Dem are both Catholics. However, here's a factor to consider: Cradle Catholics tend to continue to self-identify as Catholic even when they no longer practice the faith. So, these exit polls may be lumping everyone together, including people who were raised Catholic but really no longer are practicing - they're secular. The real Catholic vote is reflected in those who attend Mass regularly (weekly), as we're obligated to do, and reportedly the majority of that group voted for Romney. This study is being challenged, and I don't know how accurate it is, but the numbers are at this link.
Like I said, there must be something in the water here in NY because those Catholics who are practicing Catholics who voted dem ARE cradle Catholics.
There was a comment on the RF many months ago made by a Catholic about NY Catholics. That was that there is something about the Catholic mentality that exists in WNY (Buffalo area) and he thought it was cause of the bishops who were in charge of the dioceses there. He said it was really off from what he encountered elsewhere.
Of course, that is the only Catholic I ever knew, being raised there and living there for decades.
After moving to CNY (Syracuse area) I encountered a different breed of Catholic. It’s still a heavily Catholic area, but for the most part they are quite different. A whole different mentality, although there is still my neighbor who is liberal to the core. And she tells me all her friends voted for obama because of the handouts, primarily obamacare. They want their guaranteed healthcare and medicine and SSI.
Catholics split politically in NJ and PA, too. Most of the practicing Catholics I happen to know are Republican, but, while there are some very conservative Catholic parishes, there are also some liberal ones.
your posts are accusative yet not giving a response for why evangelicals, white evangelicals with no historical baggage of Democrats vote for them -- do you have any reason for why evangelicals voted for OBama?
that puts as a lie your post's statements hitting Catholics alone.
It seems that hispanics as a group voted more for Obama -- even Evangelical hispanics -- more voted for Obama than Romney
And, as I asked above, where is your explanation for 20% of white evangelicals who voted for Obama?
Evangelicals as a % of the population are more than Catholics -- and if you bunch with Protestants, then a larger number of white evangelicals and other protestants voted for Obama than white Catholics
Do you have any reason you can give for this or is the focus on the 25% of the electorate that are Catholics, just damage control on your side?
Stop lying — you’re the one sending curses by PM, not bible scriptural quotes. Stop it.
We need to have more activity against this, correct
50% of Catholics (i.e. 12% of the voting block) and 20% of evangelicals (i.e. 7% of the voting block) and 42% of Protestant/other (i.e. 10% of the voting block) voted for Obama
Now, 121 million odd voted, and 62 million voted for 0. that means that 21 million non-Cathlics voted for Obama, out of which 9 million evangelicals voted for Obama and 14.5 million Catholic idiots voted for him as well
Now as you are a self-avowed e, can you explain why 21 million Protestants (far outshadowing the 14 million Catholic idiots) voted for Obama?
Or to give you some lee-way, can you explain why 9 million evangelicals voted for Obama? that's nearly as many as the 14 million Catholics
I call the Catholics who voted for 0 as idiots (or worse) and I intend getting something done about them. What are you doing among the evangelicals?
Read the Bible, Lera, here's one for you
John 8:44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
Colossians 1:9
We continually ask God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all the wisdom and understanding that the Spirit gives,
>Do you have any reason you can give for this or is the focus on the 25% of the electorate that are Catholics, just damage control on your side?<
Cronos, all your foment in your numerous posts to me simply exhibits just that, damage control in the light of the fact that more than twice as many Catholics voted for Obama and are more liberal than evangelicals as a whole.
You keep on demanding an answer as to why (just) 20% of evangelicals voted for Obama, which presupposes we are claiming all evangelicals are true to their name, and the explanation is that the enemy sows tares among the wheat , or that they lack discernment (and who may engage in racism), and such were problems with the N.T. church.
And this question which is a red herring which diverts from issue, which is the fact that evangelicals have voted far more conservatively than Catholics for as long as they were compared, and did so again.
And your argument that they constituted a larger share of the voting block, and comparing numbers of voters is a specious attempt to impugn them, as it is percentages that matter, not how many millions out of the 20% of evangelicals versus the 50% of Catholics who voted liberal!
And the problem is that NO religious group voted as conservatively as evangelicals. And they did so more in this election than even Mormons (if very close).
And white evangelical support for Obama dropped nationally by 6 percentage points since 2008. (http://blogs.denverpost.com/hark/2012/11/07/evangelicals-catholics-nones-parsing-god-vote/1401/?doing_wp_cron=1352465721.4368638992309570312500)
Thus your incessant demand for an answer as to why just 20% of evangelicals voted for Obama, which given answer is obvious, is an irrelevant diversion, as the issue was and remains that those who Rome treats as members in life and in death, even Ted Kennedy types, are far more liberal overall than evangelicals. Your are basically focusing on a gnat and swallowing a camel.
That said, the title “evangelical” is increasingly being used by those who deny the movements basic historical tents, just as liberal RCs do (and the more literally they see the Bible, as evangelicals the more conservative they are).
You keep on demanding an answer as to why some Catholics voted for Obama, which presupposes we are claiming all Catholics are true to their name, and the explanation is that the enemy sows tares among the wheat , or that they lack discernment (and who may engage in racism), and such were problems with the N.T. church.
Why did 9 million odd evangelicals and 21 million Protestants/Other Christians vote for Obama?
If your post claims that some of your folks are more conservative, then why this large number voting for Obama?
Instead of focusing on that, your posts are playing diversion
20% voting for Obama is still not good enough -- and there is no historical baggage to vote for the Dems.
do you have an explanation for why 9 million evangelicals voted O?
you have any facts for this statement?
And quite frankly, 9 million evangelicals voting for Obama compared to 14 million is not a gnat to a camel comparison. Neither number is good, but the number of evangelicals voting for 0 is not miniscule...
in fact, you said yourself that And white evangelical support for Obama dropped nationally by 6 percentage points since 2008. -- about the same as white Catholic support -- and you also point out that more Hispanic evangelicals voted for Obama than for Romney -- so the voting pattern is highly ethnically charged.
First,many of the evangelicals you quote are black. It would be foolish to think they will not vote Obama if he had a tail and horns. You are still making excuses for the Catholic numbers. We have trouble in our midst and pointing to others won't fix anything. I've done it too and it gets the problem no where. My "I know you are, but what am I?", comment dealt with just this point. Prots could worship goats and that wouldn't change the fact that half of Catholics voted for Obama. My burden is how to get the Church's attention. I think their heads are so far in the sand they can't breath anymore.
I think it's a shame Jews vote for people who hate Israel, but that's none of my business. Prots vote the way they vote, but I have no say. My problem seems to be I have no say in the Catholic faith. Chasing evangelicals around doesn't fix anything in the Catholic church. What are we to do about the 50% that scoff at our own faith?
I say something should happen to them but the church fathers seem to disagree. If we are taught we are the true faith, what are we to make of the confusion in the church? So far it seems the right answer is to ignore and deny. It may make you feel good to point at others, but it fixed NOTHING in our church. Evangelizing evangelicals is fine, but what are you going to tell them if our church is splitting down the middle?
I have been watching Gateway church sermons in Dallas Tex over the internet for the last few weeks. He actually made statement from the pulpit on how to vote. He gave the scriptures to back it up and told them if they knew the right thing and did the wrong thing, that is sin. Are you going to follow God or your wants? Texas went something like 57% for Romney. I don't know about you, but I hear almost nothing that could be construed as voting advice from the church. The latest letter about religious liberty was about it. Now I doubt Osteen in Houston said a word because he wouldn't want to offend any of his flock. Which church is more like what is happening in the Catholic church? I fear it is more like the Osteen church. The Word of God is like a sword that divides. Ear tickling is not what we should be striving for.
PS. on #99 and the “numbers”. On a political note and not a Spiritual note, If the number had been 45% for Obama instead of 50%, would Romney have won? Truly, I’m worried about the Spiritual aspect of the numbers in the church, but what good is it to have a billion Catholics if they vote the wrong way? All over the world, Catholics seem to cling to socialism and communists. Could Chavez stay in power if the church came out against him? He says he’s Catholic and the people line up at the counter to get their free stuff and vote him back in. A word, just a word, from the pope could make a huge difference in the world if he would just be a little more confrontational. Many dictatorships would fail if the people turned against them, but as long as the church teaches government dependence, the people will think the more socialist the government, the more godly they are. Some are so stupid, you have to spell it out for them in no uncertain terms. The church could do that for them, but IMHO, the church is sometimes the PROBLEM. I remember the Irish were willing to die for a country of their own, but what kind of country would it have been? Just another socialist Eurotrash hellhole probably because the church doesn’t teach liberty. It teaches the rich are going to hell and the government needs to play God. My reading of Scripture shows Jesus telling His followers THEY were to help the poor, not rely on Caesar. Apparently that is not being taught in South and Central America and most of Africa and I doubt much of America.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.