Posted on 11/07/2008 7:23:40 AM PST by Alex Murphy
So much for the "new evangelicals."
For the past two years, hundreds of articles have appeared in newspapers across America making the claim that the old religious right was moving left and that Barack Obama, with his religiously infused rhetoric and various "outreach efforts," was leading the charge. A year ago, David Kirkpatrick predicted the "evangelical crackup" on the cover of the New York Times Magazine. "Jesus Rode a Donkey: Why Republicans Don't Have the Corner on Christ," "Thy Kingdom Come: How the Religious Right Distorts the Faith and Threatens America" and "Souled Out: Reclaiming Faith and Politics After the Religious Right" are just three of the dozens of books released since 2004 that suggested that evangelicals were rethinking their loyalty to the Republican Party and conservatism in general. The new evangelicals, just in case anyone missed the storyline, were not so backward as to vote on issues like abortion and gay marriage. They were enlightened about the environment and favored government aid to the poor.
Well, whoever these new evangelicals were, they didn't show up at the polls on Tuesday.
John McCain won 74% of white born-again Protestants' votes. And while this was four percentage points lower than George Bush's share in 2004, President Bush's re-election was "the highpoint" for evangelical support of Republicans at least since 1980, according to John Green, a pollster at the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. It's become something of a cliché that Mr. Bush has a "special relationship" with his fellow evangelicals -- but it's true. And it's a little unrealistic to expect that Sen. McCain would enjoy the same relationship with them, given that he is not one of their own. But he did just as well as, if not better than, every other GOP candidate in the past...
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
A pox on them then. How stupid can they get? I guess they showed it Tuesday. Don’t have to guess anymore, LOL. Kennedy was very charismatic and handsome. That’ll get a lot of votes. Jindal is honest, has integrity and good character. If Catholics can’t see that, then they need to repent. M
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k6KUDv1wzraWhwlBt1
The left has invaded religions, religions where you can believe in abortion and still call yourself religious.
AM's profile page: 55% McCain, 43% Obama - Weekly mass-attending Catholics
I have no doubt that 99%+ of the RC freepers vote for the conservative it's the body as a whole that doesn't.
I think a large factor is the clergy. The clergy is probably just as much a factor in the Evangelical Churches. Thus you see a high % among White Evangelicals but a low % among Hispanics and a terrible % among Blacks.
Do you have any particular "Born Again Christian" in mind?
The way you phrase it, you make it appear like Catholics deliberately reject candidates purely because they're "Born Again Christians". They don't. Catholics (using the broad, CINO-inclusive definition) vote for liberal, state welfare-loving candidates. It's not a vote against an evangelical. It's a vote for the historical party of Catholics; the Democrats.
There are all sorts of historical reasons why, most centering around poor Catholic immigrants from Europe, but it's not because of animosity to evangelicals.
I have no doubt. But why are there so few conservative RC's?
I would ask a similar question of Black Evangelicals, or Hispanic Evangelicals.
In this last election we had a candidate that not only supports abortion, but supports infanticide. How any Christian can turn a blind eye to this makes me wonder whether they really are a Christian.
I would agree here at FR. We share a common bond in our conservatism, but as a body I'm not aware of the % exceeding 60%.
25% of the electorate is Roman Catholic. About half are not apostates. McCain got about 55 million votes, whic means he got about 14 million votes from Roman Catholics, the practicing kind. I don’t speak for the apostates.
Frankly, I am stunned by the numbers. I had thought Catholics would turn the tide against Obama this time around. The bishops were much, much more vocal this election cycle. On our local RC radio station Fr. Corapi's no holds barred anti-abortion sermons were played four times a day.....for weeks. There was no mistaking where my pastor stood and he hosted an electoral novena to pray for our country. I personally know of no Catholic that supported Obama. So I don't know who these "Catholics" are who claimed to support Obama.
Because the dominant culture overshadows religiosity. An hour of church on Sunday is no match for the godless public schools, the MSM, and the statist government.
I am too!
I thought the Bishops had been very clear.
In Evangelical churches there is a tendency to self segregate and I'm stunned as well that the %'s weren't higher among all the different churches. The argument about when life begins is mute when a candidate supports infanticide (allowing a live baby to die).
The Nazis had no need to murder the Jews. They did it because of hatred. American culture is on the same course vis-a-vis cultural hatred of evangelicals.
If Bush himself got 78% in 2004 and that was the highest any Republican has ever gotten, higher than Reagan ever got, in a good year for the GOP against an awful candidate like Kerry who made no attempt to court evangelicals, and Bush is a southern evangelical himself with direct personal ties to Billy Graham and other leaders, and he got his first real start in nat’l politics as the head of his father’s outreach to evangelicals and had been courting them and cultivating for close to 20 years by the time 2004 rolled around, and the economy was in fine shape so socail issues were more important, and the younger evangelicals weren’t sold like they are on Obama to at least some degree, etc...
there’s no way Jindal or anyone else gets 85% of them. I’d say the high 70s that Bush got is pretty much the ceiling.
All things considered, McCain’s 74% was a damn good shownig. If the economy hadn’t tanked the last 6 weeks he’d have gotten at least 76% or so, pretty much the same as Bush.
but 85% is a pipe dream.
You don’t need non-believers to blame for the damage, your average mainstream Evangelical is ecumenical, pluralistic, and agrees with prosperity gospel/name it and claim it/health and wealthy materialistic message.
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.