Skip to comments.More than 6 million self-described “evangelicals” voted for Obama
Posted on 11/09/2012 4:58:17 PM PST by Iam1ru1-2
As the smoke clears from the wreckage of the Romney defeat on Tuesday, some intriguing yet disturbing facts are coming to light.
* Fewer people overall voted in 2012 (about 117 million) compared to 2008 (about 125 million).
* President Obama received some 6.6 million fewer votes in 2012 than he did in 2008 (60,217,329 in 2012 votes compared to 66,882,230 votes in 2008).
* One would think that such a dynamic would have helped Romney win clearly it did not.
* Incredibly, Governor Romney received nearly 1 million fewer votes in 2012 than Sen. John McCain received in 2008. (In 2008, McCain won 58,343,671 votes. In 2012, Romney won only 57,486,044 votes.)
Why? How was it possible for Romney to do worse than McCain? It will take some time to sift through all of the data. But here is some of what we know from the 2012 election day exit polls:
The President received a whopping 71% of the Hispanic vote (which was 10% of the total votes cast), compared to only 27% for Romney (McCain got 31% of the Hispanic vote in 2008). Obama also won 56% of the moderate vote, which was interesting given that Romney (who got 41%) was widely perceived by the GOP base as being a Massachusetts moderate. The President lost married women (getting only 46% of their vote to Romneys 53%). But won decisively among unmarried women (67% to Romneys 31%).
That said, what Im looking at most closely is the Christian vote, and here is where I see trouble:
42% of the Protestant Christian vote went for Obama in 2012. This was down from 45% in 2008. 57% of the Protestant Christian vote went for Romney in 2012. This was up from 54% that McCain won in 2008. When you zoom in a bit, you find that 21% of self-identified, white, born-again, evangelical Christians voted for President Obama in 2012.
Youd think this decrease in evangelical votes for Obama would have helped win the race for Romney, but it didnt. 78% of evangelical Christians voted for Romney in 2012. Yes, this was up from the 74% that McCain received in 2008, but it wasnt nearly enough.
To put it more precisely, about 5 million fewer evangelicals voted for Obama in 2012 than in 2008. Meanwhile, some 4.7 million more evangelicals voted for Romney than voted for McCain. Yet Romney still couldnt win.
Meanwhile, 50% of the Catholic vote went for Obama in 2012. This was down from the 54% that Obama won in 2008. 48% of the Catholic vote went for Romney in 2012. This was up from the 45% that McCain won in 2008. Yet it still wasnt enough.
Now consider this additional data:
In 2008, white, born-again, evangelical Christians represented 26% of the total vote for president, according to the exit polls.
In 2012, white, born-again, evangelical Christians represented 26% of the total vote for president, according to the exit polls.
In other words, we saw no change at all in the size of the evangelical vote, no net gain, certainly no surge, no record evangelical turnout, despite expectations of this.
Of the 117 million people who voted on Tuesday, therefore, about 30 million (26%) were evangelicals. Of this, 21% or about 6.4 million evangelicals voted for Obama.
By comparison, of the 125 million people who voted in 2008, 32.5 million (26%) were evangelicals. At the time, Obama won 24% of evangelicals, or about 7.8 million people.
Whats more, in 2008, 27% of the total vote for president was Catholic, according to the exit polls. In 2012, only 25% of the total vote for president was Catholic.
Remarkably, this means that Romney got a higher percentage of the Catholic vote than McCain, but millions of fewer Catholics actually voted in 2012, despite having Rep. Paul Ryan, a practicing Catholic, on the ticket.
What does all this mean? A few observations:
During the GOP primaries in 2012, it was reported that there was record turnout by evangelical voters they were fired up and mobilized then (though largely behind Sen. Rick Santorum.)
There were concerns by a number of Christian leaders going into the 2012 elections that Romneys Mormonism might suppress evangelical and conservative voter turnout.
The Romney campaign worked hard to not only to win the evangelical vote but to turn out more evangelicals to the polls but it did not work.
Despite Obamas pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, anti-religious freedom record a record presumably abhorrent both to evangelicals and conservative Catholics Romney simply was not able to cut deeply enough into Obamas evangelical and Catholic vote.
If Romney had been able win over significantly more evangelicals and/or dramatically increased evangelical turnout in the right states he would have won the election handily.
It is stunning to think that more than 6 million self-described evangelical Christians would vote for a President who supports abortion on demand; supported the same-sex marriage ballot initiatives that successed in Maryland, Maine and Washington; and was on the cover of Newsweek as Americas first gay president. Did these self-professed believers surrender their Biblical convictions in the voting booth, or did they never really have deep Biblical convictions on the critical issues to begin with?
Whatever their reasons, these so-called evangelicals doomed Romney and a number of down-ballot candidates for the House and Senate.
This is what happens when the Church is weak and fails to disciple believers to turn Biblical faith into action. Given the enormous number of evangelical Christians in the U.S., this bloc could still affect enormous positive change for their issues if they were to unify and vote for the pro-life, pro-marriage candidate as a bloc.
What will it take to educate, register and mobilize Christians to vote on the basis of Biblical principles, and what kind of candidates could best mobilize them?
This is a critical question that Christian political leaders as well as pastors must serious consider. As we have seen, just a few million more evangelicals voting for pro-life, pro-marriage candidates could offset other demographics that are becoming more liberal.
That said, we need national candidates who take values issues as seriously as economic and fiscal issues, and have strong credentials on these values issues, and can talk about these issues in a winsome, compassionate, effective manner.
We need pastors registering voters in their churches and teaching the people in their congregations the importance of the civic duty of voting.
None of this should come, however, at the expense of pastors and other Christian leaders clearly, boldly and unequivocally teaching and preaching the Word, proclaiming the Gospel, and making disciples, and helping believers learn to live out their faith in a real and practical way in their communities, including being salt and light to preserve what is good in society. What we need most in America isnt a political revival but a sweeping series of spiritual revivals a Third Great Awakening. As men and womens hearts are transformed by the Gospel of Jesus Christ, they will, in time, vote for the values they are internalizing from the Bible. As I wrote about in Implosion, if we dont see a Third Great Awakening soon, Im not convinced we will be able to turn this dear nation around in time.
Cool. So can the GOP stop pandering to Evangelicals now, please?
Maybe the mormon haters really are that sick.
Anti Mormon psy op pieces were allowed to remain here on FR. I flagged a few but they were never yanked.
Some vote union over religion.
Sadly the race was within 350,000 votes. The ground game computer foul up and some 99% turnout precincts were the difference. Need to spend the 300 million on early voting. Our people turn out on game day.
Any Christian who voted for 0 is apostate.
Not all Evangelicals are Conservatives. Some are brain dead and easliy seduced by liberalism. Ofcourse one can’t dismiss many Evangelicals would vote for a Marxist over a Mormon.
Real Christians do not vote for abortion and homosexuality.
The devil has fooled many into believing that they are Christians, but they are not.
The religionists are an inconsistent voting bloc anyway. Too many socialistic tendencies among many of them whom believe it’s God’s will to spread the wealth. The GOP loses more than it gains by pandering to them with hardline SoCon rhetoric.
But this won't stop some brainstems from taking the opportunity to beat on authentic evangelicals, who are among the most loyal conservative voters there are.
For all Repbulicans and conservatives talk about social issues, and align them with general Judeo-Christian values, it may be that, when all is said and done, most people don’t vote their faith. That is counter intuitive for conservatives, we usually expect this of liberals, not conservatives.
Now, if christians and social conservatives don’t go to the polls, because they feel if they don’t have a perfect candidate, they will stay home, then shame on them. That’s what leaves us with a second Obama term. And you can’t tell me that a second Obama term would be better than a Romney term.
In the next four years, we can all expect to open our wallets to Obama, and expect to pay for all the things we may find religiously objectionable in Obamacare.
Preach it. You speak TRUTH. Same with any Christian who is a Democrat.
A significant portion are typically conservative on social issues alone, but could care less about fiscal conservatism. Ø’s fairness platitudes likely resonate with many of them.
What alternative universe are YOU living in?
Pandering to Evangelicals? Like endorsing the repeal of DADT? Mitt’s pro-abortion record? Being for gay marriages?
Romney, Like McCain 4 years ago, ignored the base. And now fools blame us for them losing?
> authentic evangelicals, who are among the most loyal
> conservative voters there are.
Thanks, skeeter. You nailed it.
Lots of folks call themselves Christians but have no idea what that means.
One thing 0bamao has right.
We ain’t a Christian nation.
It does not have to be fraud. I know “evangelicals” who equate government with God when it comes to social justice nor do they see the sin in wealth redistribution.
Look at the liberalism within the church itself that directly contradicts the bible. The term evangelical is meaningless now - the range of church doctrines varies from the far left - black liberation theology - to churches that are strictly based on biblical principles without the fluff. In between, you have the charming prosperity doctrine churches, the new age churches, and lots of others that don’t resemble my church.
It does not surprise me that many people who enter a building on Sunday voted for Obama. I am not surprised at all.
Inevitably, we’ll all be held to account for the choices we’ve made in our lives. Good luck to the abortion crowd in coming up with a plausible excuse for that one.
What I’d like to know is why can’t the GOP seem to have a hodge podge big tent coalition like the Dems seem to maintain. Evangelicals and country club Republicans managed to co exist during the Reagan years.