Religion and the vote in the 2008 election
KEY WEST _ At the final session of the Faith Angle conference today, two prominent survey researchers, John C. Green and Anna Greenberg, examined a variety of polling data about the relationship between religious affiliation and voting behavior in this year's presidential election.
The chart above shows the bottom line, and reinforces patterns that have been in place for at least the last two decades -- Democrats are favored by minority ethnic and religious groups, as well as by less observant white Christians, while Republicans are favored by more observant white Christians. The chart was generated by Green (left), who is a political science professor at the University of Akron, and also a senior fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, which is the sponsor of the conference.
Green suggested that the basic structure of "faith-based politics" did not change much since the 2004 campaign -- despite unprecedented efforts by the Obama campaign to move religious voters, and a lot of erroneous predictions by pundits -- but that it was enough to elect Obama. "It was not very different than we’ve seen in the past, but different enough to have a different result,'' he said. He said the Democrats made their biggest gains among minority religious groups (particularly Hispanic Protestants) and failed to make significant gains among white Christians (although there was some movement to the Democrats among evangelicals who go to church less than weekly, and among young evangelicals).
The minimal change demonstrates, Green said, "that these basic differences are deeply embedded.''
"Religious groups are strongly partisan these days, and deeply embedded into the party coalitions,'' Green said -- meaning that groups like black Protestants and Jews are important parts of the Democratic coalition, while white evangelicals play a similar role for the Republican Party. "In the short run, there is only a limited capacity for religious groups to move.''
Among Catholics, Green said, the data shows increasing polarization, with weekly communicants shifting more to the right, and less frequent Massgoers shifting further to the left.
Greenberg (right), is a Democratic pollster and senior vice president at Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research. She had several interesting findings -- among them, that Barack Obama was clearly underperforming (compared to previous Democratic candidates) among Jewish voters through much of the campaign, but that he wound up with about 78 percent of the Jewish vote -- which is typical for a Democratic presidential candidate. Greenberg, who said "I was actually pretty shocked" at how well Obama did among Jews, said it was not clear how Obama succeeded in moving Jews back to the Democratic column, but speculated that it was the combined effect of concern among Jewish voters about Sarah Palin's social conservatism, and what Greenberg described as the reassuring effect on Jewish votes of Obama's performance during the debates. Green agreed, saying, "Many Jews are Democrats, and once they became reassured that some of these problems were not serious, they went back to their partisanship...Once the Jewish community became reassured that Obama was going to be all right -- not that he was going to be excellent -- that was enough.''
Perhaps Greenberg's most interesting finding, though, has to do with young evangelicals -- a population of increasing interest to scholars and journalists because of the perception that they may exhibit different political behaviors than their elders. Greenberg said that research shows that young evangelicals in fact are more liberal than older evangelicals on multiple issues -- including gay marriage (below), global warming, and the Iraq War -- but are not moving on abortion -- young evangelicals are just as strongly opposed to abortion as are older evangelicals.
Green said that, although white evangelicals are still strongly Republican, there is clearly change taking place among younger evangelicals. "Generational change happens all the time on a steady basis, but there are points of time when it has a big effect, and evangelicals are going through one of those times, on religious terms, social terms, and political terms.''
Comment
Permalink
E-mail
I am amazed how much the muslim voice is ignored. You articles does not mention the Muslim votes. as Muslims went in drove to vote for Obama and get ride of the repubican. We start believing that the media is doing this on purpose. There is over 100,000 Muslims in Massachuesets and over 10 millions in USA that is more than the jewish population in America.
This article just illustrates the obvious, that liberals, with the Democratic party as its vehicle, is ruining the nation that anyone over 50 grew up in, which was based on the Judaeo-Christian ethic, and a secular government that was neutral between the various denominations, but had a positive neutrality toward religion in general. Now the religion of secularity rules.
Why is it always gay gay gay with you Mr Paulson?
I have to say God is responsible for the secular bend in the good ole USA . Finally he/she had his/her say ! Religion is losing it's torrid grip on the world and in the USA !!! Thank you God...
This article just illustrates the obvious, that Conservatives, with the Republican Party as its vehicle, has ruined the nation that anyone over 50 grew up in, which was based on separation of Church and State as envisioned by the Founding Fathers. The extreme far right-wing evangelical anti-government ideology that has polarized the country, trashed the Constitution, started two wars, and bankrupted the nation has been thrown out of power. It will take decades to fix the mess they made.
Amen to that gaudete!
Dear gaudete, What this article illustrates is the failure of the over 50 Christians to read the Sermon on the Mount. Christians should have a consistent ethic of life which includes not only opposition to abortion but opposition to hunger, the death penalty, unjust war and health care only for those who can afford it. They would rather vote for the Republican golden idol of greed party than vote Christ's values.
Marc, sorry, but religion only losing (lost) its grip in eurabia, and the decadent parts of the US. If you don't stand with the Judaeo-Christian ethic on which europe and the US were founded, have fun with Sharia.
Publicus, Of course Christians are against hunger, and give billions every year to alleviate. I give about 10% of my money to hunger relief; can you claim as much? The Catholic Church and many other denominations are against the death penalty. Christians are not republicans (i am an independent), but we are conservatives, in the sense we want to conserve the US as it was founded, as a pyramid with a base of 90% Bible-based Judae0-Christian ethic, with a thin 10% slice of secular deism, to ensure that no one denomination was established as the only religion of the nation. We don't love the republican party, as you say, obsessed with the rich and their money, but only in contrast with the pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, pro-big government dems.
Gaudete, I'm afraid it's not liberals that are ruining this nation. If you haven't checked, it's you conservatives who've been in charge, not just for these past 8 years, but for most of the past 28 years. And the Christianists have been at the forefront of the party of greed and death - that would be the Republican Party. This nation was not built on a "Judaeo-Christian ethic", but instead was built on Enlightenment principles, owing more to Locke, for example, than to any religious leaders. You are free here to practice any religion, or to practice none at all, without interference from the government or from proselytizers from other belief systems. You are not free to impose your religion's dictates on anyone. In this country, it is the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and the other founding documents, plus treaties and myriad legislation that comprise the law of the land. Not scripture.
liberalism is mental disorder.
gaudete, there is a big difference between being pro-choice and pro-abortion. In a transparent, specious effort to demonize liberals, you chose to use the latter, which says a lot about you.
If I were a woman, I don't think I could have an abortion, but I don't feel I have the right to make that decision for a woman.
You clearly use the term "pro abortion" simply to make liberals look like a bunch of monsters.
If you truly believe liberals are pro-abortion, which of course they are not, you are out of touch, but, then, you don't truly believe they are now do you?
How original of you, Ryan.
Do you have anything of substance to offer to this exchange?
It is said that the number of abortions in America actually increased by quite a bit when W. was in power, as opposed to Clinton. This has been attributed to the cuts to government programs such as maternity leave. This is an example of a republican party that is decidedly un-christian, who appeal to God in order to win votes on but whose economic policies make it impossible to put judeo-christian values into practice.
On the Left, why is it always said that religious people are trying to impose their beliefs on other people. We try not to impose, but propose. Either that, or in fairness you should admit that y'all on the left are trying to impose your ideas on us, in this ideological culture war.
Devon,
Regarding abortion issue terminology, either both sides should get their term of preference, pro-choice or pro-life, or both sides should get the terms they don't like, pro-abortion and anti-choice. This would only be fair, even liberal, but of course that's not the policy of the Times, Globe etc.
gaudete, no that would not be fair.
"Pro-choice" says what it means: that regardless of how one personally feels about abortion, one acknowledges and supports a woman's right to choose.
"Pro-life" insinuates that anyone who is "pro-choice" is pro-death, which is most certainly not accurate. "Pro-abortion" insinuates malicious and sinister intent.
Conservatism is a heart disorder.
__________
Gaudete wrote: "y'all"
Was there any doubt?
Gaudete...I say you're trying to impose your beliefs because, frankly, you are. And you invariably start with that bit of nonsense claiming that America was founded on Judaeo-Christian principles. It most certainly was not. That's a matter of historical fact. But you religionists need to continually propagate that lie as an excuse to try to enforce your own idea of Biblical Sharia law on everyone else. And it's you people who have engaged the culture wars again and again. It has worked for you in the sense that it allowed you to seize political power. As a means of imposing, not proposing.
"If you don't stand with the Judaeo-Christian ethic on which europe and the US were founded, have fun with Sharia."
The US was founded on secular ideals. Please stop spreading the myth that Christianity is the reason (or only reason) this nation was founded.
Unbelievers are right in most of their thinking
You might be one for whom religious beliefs are not just irrelevant, but baseless. You might be right: myths and a religious fantasy have influenced human minds with larger strength than reality, and the “God” of main line traditions simply does not exist. Most people don’t dare to confront their religious beliefs, opt for the status quo, or become marginalized.
Bishop John Shelby Spong says that “Christianity Reformed From its Roots – A Life Centered in God” “rightly points out that those who seek to defend Christianity’s past are also killing Christianity’s future.” I accepted the challenge of finding the One who may be recognized even by Gnostics and atheists: the Existence! Eminent philosophers and thinkers might give you an idea if this book might be an insightful reading for you (links below). You may look also at excerpts at Amazon.com.
Jairo Mejia, M. Psych., Santa Clara University
Retired Episcopal Priest
Carmel Valley, California
http://www.mbay.net/~jmejia/Grudzen.htm
http://www.mbay.net/~jmejia/Churcher.htm
This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.
Blogger
E-mail mpaulson@globe.com.
Articles of Faith on Twitter
views
featured comments
Faith-based gardening: A rose for the popebrowse this blog
by categoryEVENTS
CAUSES
BLOGROLL
Headlines
Media blogs
Media criticism
Politics
Catholicism
Episcopalianism
Evangelicalism
Islam
Judaism
Mormonism
Unitarian Universalism
ALSO OF INTEREST
From our archives
Ma Siss's Place
Benedict visits the US
O'Malley's elevation
The new pope
Pope John Paul II
Parish closings
Catholic church abuse
INside Boston.com