BTW, the claim that "Catholics supported Obama" is true only if you include non-churchgoers and Hispanics. Exclude either group and Catholics rejected Obama twice. Exclude both groups, and the margin is substantial. I'm not sure why the church should catch any blame at all for how non-churchgoing "Catholics" vote; if they don't obey the church when she tells them to attend Mass weekly, they're hardly going to obey the church when they go into the voting booth.
Yes, non-churchgoing Catholics should be included in those who supported Obama if the same criteria is being used for other people too. And Catholics themselves don’t focus primarily on one’s personal relationship to Jesus to decide if one is Catholic or not. Being a Catholic begins with baptism, usually as an infant, and also has far more to do with family identification and culture for that reason. For over 40 years I lived in a city that’s 77% Catholic (Buffalo, NY), and I can vouch that “lapsed Catholics” tended to consider themselves Catholic, unless they altogether left Catholicism for another belief, including atheism, and despite not “practicing,” at different times in their lives where religion was appropriate (like marriage, “First Communion,” confirmation for teens, and funerals), they turned to the Catholic Church. They also had a Catholic understanding of Christianity, which they tended to bring to life (Buffalo, a highly liberal Democratic place, was and is post-Christian and largely antagonistic to anything more than a moderate amount of faith - anything more is commonly seen as zealotry). And, too, “lapsed Catholics” tend to remain tied to the Catholic Church if they don’t embrace another belief through their family ties. Overall, there is an undeniable connection between heavily Catholic (or Catholic heritage, if you will) areas and voting Democrat, just as there is between heavily evangelical areas and voting Republican.