Skip to main content

Another 2012 loser.
Prior to the election, Greg Dworkin and I were having a chat about implications of white evangelicals doing better at the polls than they did in 2004. Greg noted that Ralph Reed, white evangelical huckster plenipotentiary, would be in big trouble if they didn't duplicate their performance of 2004. Well, they did even better than 2004 and they still lost.

You need no better proof than Ralph Reed himself:

A national post-election survey commissioned by the Faith and Freedom Coalition last night found that the evangelical vote increased in 2012 to a record 27% of the electorate and that white evangelicals voted roughly 78% for Mitt Romney to 21% for Barack Obama.  This was the highest share of the vote in modern political history for evangelicals, Reed said.

“Evangelicals turned out in record numbers and voted as heavily for Mitt Romney yesterday as they did for George W. Bush in 2004,” Reed observed. “That is an astonishing outcome that few would have predicted even a few months ago.  But Romney underperformed with younger voters and minorities and that in the end made the difference for Obama.”

Republicans cannot use the excuse that their base voters didn't turn out for this election as they did in 2008. White evangelical conservatives did turn out exactly as they said they would over and over again this election cycle. The problem for Republicans is there are not enough of them to win a national election anymore. At least not in the states that count. Detroit isn't bankrupt, but the 'Southern Strategy' is.

Originally posted to Triple-B in the Building on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:09 PM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  More young white evangelicals voting for Obama... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DEMonrat ankle biter, Sarea, Plu

    no doubt.

    •  You think so? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Gooserock, DEMonrat ankle biter, cany

      Or are there fewer young evangelicals?  I mean, more young people rejecting their parent's religion (I mean politics).

      Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

      by yet another liberal on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:15:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Highest Turnout Ever, I'd Say Reports of the Demis (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        erush1345

        of fundamentalism are premature.

        We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

        by Gooserock on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:19:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Actually (7+ / 0-)

        There is a movement amongst some young evangelicals that are tired of battling over the wedge issues of abortion and lbgt rights and are more concerned with ending poverty and working on environmentalism.

        Redefining God's work

        In a similar vein, Mrs Sullivan says that the evangelical right's focus on abortion and gay marriage “overshadows broader social justice issues”. She insists that among evangelicals of her generation such views are not unusual, and the data back her up. In a 2008 poll, a plurality (44%) of young evangelicals characterised their “political views on social issues (health care, poverty)” as “liberal”. Younger evangelicals are more likely than older ones to favour environmental protection and same-sex marriage. And although they remain overwhelmingly pro-life, nearly one-third of them voted for Mr Obama, suggesting greater willingness to vote for a candidate who believes that abortion must remain a matter of choice.

        Then there are the more numinous trends. In 1968 Martin Luther King called Sunday morning “the most segregated hour of Christian America”; today there are a growing number of multicultural evangelical churches, largely driven by young Christians. Soong Chan-Rah, a Korean-American pastor and professor of evangelism at Chicago's North Park seminary, says the rise in multicultural evangelical churches coincides with a decline in the numbers of traditional white evangelicals, and that the newer kind practise a form of evangelical Christianity distinct from the “white, middle-class and Southern” version. These churches, he says, “don't have that sense of triumphalism, that sense that America has to be a great Christian nation.”

        •  The post-modern Evangelicals and fundamentalist (0+ / 0-)

          Dominists are dividing over the behavior of the political party claiming to be the one true bastion of God's faithful remnant.  It doesn't mean that the post-moderns are necessarily parting ways with the GOP or that they will vote (D) on much, or come to align with the DNC party.  It may more likely mean they'll be running and backing some of their own under both (D) and (R) labels.  It's the prospect of some of this group seeking entree with the DNC party that may bring this to a point within our own ranks. It's the logical outcome of the post-modern way of thinking that 'retaking' the GOP didn't get it all for them so what they will have to do is also 'retake' the DNC.  And we were frustrated by 'Blue Dog Democrats' who often aligned with the GOP agenda rather than the DNC and prevented real party discipline from taking hold.  I'm not sure what we'll call these when they come seeking a place within our big tent but it's likely they will come.

          When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

          by antirove on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 01:25:14 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  goes back to Falwell's notion of steeplejacking (0+ / 0-)

            and using stealth members to take control of churches.  Works for politics too though Jerry lies mouldering in his grave

          •  The same applies to Big Money (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jfdunphy

            and this year was something of an aberration in that respect anyway.  Big Money will make a very visible presence within the Dems well before the 2016 presidential campaign cycle gets under way.  Count on it.  The Talivangelicals would be wise to likewise becomes "double-breasted" in the vernacular, and everything I'm reading suggests that they will start doing so, even if grudgingly and hesitantly.

            Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

            by ActivistGuy on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 08:15:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  we call them "defeated" (0+ / 0-)

            in the Dem primary when they run if they haul their religion onto the campaign platforms. If they keep their religion private, that's another matter.

            the Republican brand is totally bankrupt.

            by vlyons on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 10:45:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Wow! (12+ / 0-)

    So TX and MS and AL and TN and OK and AR got a lot more evangelicals out to vote.

    Good work, ralph.......

  •  This is the key (17+ / 0-)
    At least not in the states that count.
    Those evangelical voters helped Romney run up the score in Alabama, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Kentucky, etc.

    But it doesn't really matter if you win Arkansas by 18% or 21% now does it?

    "I believe that, as long as there is plenty, poverty is evil." ~Bobby Kennedy

    by Grizzard on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:14:23 PM PST

    •  Trying to compare exit polls (4+ / 0-)

      between, say, texas/Oklahoma/alabama, etc. and Ohio/Michigan/Pennsylvania...but for Texas et.al. there seem to be none available. I would need to see them to do any sort of analysis.

      I have found some exit polling on Indiana, though

      White Evangelicals or 'born-again Christians" were 35% of the electorate in Indiana and 80% of those voted for Romney, 19% for Obama.

      In Ohio, WEs were 31% of the Ohio Electorate, 69% voted for Romney and 31% voted for Obama.

      In Michigan, WEs were 28% of the electorate, 74% voted for Romney, 26% voted for Obama.

      •  Suh-weet, I found an exit poll from (3+ / 0-)

        Alabama

        WEs were 47% of the electorate in Alabama, of those 90% voted for Romney, 9% for Obama.

        •  And Mississippi (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rovertheoctopus

          50% of the electorate WEs, 95% of those voted for Romney.

          Ralph Reed is probably right but, as someone said above, if you get a greater turnout of WEs in Mississippi, who really gives a fuck in the bigger picture of things as it concerns 2012 electoral politics.

          •  And Romney's win margins declined in Mississippi (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Chitown Kev, dougymi, Little Flower

            Mississippi is going through some substantial population decline in many counties. White growth was only 0.5% from 2000 to 2010, but Hispanics doubled. Asians up 38%, and blacks up 6%.

            And it's not the only place. The number of votes for either side dropped in Oklahoma and Kansas. Rural populations have stagnated, and population growth swells in the suburbs keep the overall state populations from declining.

            There's your demographic shift in action. All the evangelical votes can't recoup for the bigger picture.

            "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." ~Edward Abbey ////\\\\ "To be a poor man is hard, but to be a poor race in a land of dollars is the very bottom of hardships." ~W.E.B. DuBois

            by rovertheoctopus on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:42:12 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The Ev movement (0+ / 0-)

              accommodated very successfully to the move to the suburbs via the "Prosperity Gospel" or "Gospel of Abundance" rhetoric, to the point where suburban evangelical congregations vastly overwhelm rural congregations both in the number and size of the churches.  The whole megachurch phenomenon is by definition a suburban one, only sustainable by a large population base, and providing a prefab sense of community, something that doesn't really exist in most suburbs.  For all their faults, small towns and rural areas have strong communal identities that don't need to be substituted for by some canned product.

              Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

              by ActivistGuy on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 08:26:03 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Looks like (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Chitown Kev

          WE in the South = pure identity politics.

          WE in the Upper Midwest = part identity politics, but tempered by economic populism.

          Interesting.  Sooner or later at least in the Midwest, WE are going to have to adapt to a new concept of American national identity.  The dead-ender WE voters in exurban Atlanta... not so much.  

          “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

          by ivorybill on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:38:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  This 29% (7+ / 0-)

      angry, embittered minority is going to force the GOP to implode, or they will become irrelevant.  OK with that, either way.

      I'm hoping that as the world changes, younger evangelicals realize that their faith no longer requires them to be assholes.  I still can't figure out how or why protestant christians around the country turned into such dead-enders with white identity politics.  Sure, there are always Elmer Gantry types, or their Joe Walsh political equivalents, but at some point it becomes untenable for a national political party to be run by these sorts of clowns

      “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

      by ivorybill on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:31:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  look to their ministers (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ivorybill

        locally most of the minister associations are in bed with the GOP

      •  The Southern Baptist Church split (0+ / 0-)

        with the Norther Baptist Church over slavery long before the Civil War. Northern Evangelicals never had such a strong investment in Curse of Ham theology in particular and racism in general, and many were dead set against it.

        It is worth noting, in addition, that the Southern Baptist Convention, afraid of shrinking to irrelevance (see The Incredible Shrinking Church, by Frank Page, a former President of the SBC) have embraced minorities, and have even elected themselves a Black President. A Fundamentalist Black President, but Black nonetheless. Curse of Ham doctrine is still popular in some of the smaller and nastier Baptist churches and some other Evangelical denominations. Along with those that go for God Hates Fags and God Wants You to Kill Abortion Doctors because It's the Culture of Life, Stupid.

        America—We built that!

        by Mokurai on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 04:03:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  heck Arkansas by 99% win doesn't really matter (0+ / 0-)

      99%r 1 O in arkansas due to evangelical turnout would have still meant squat

    •  wingers are now complaining that the EC (0+ / 0-)

      should be abolished and everything should be by popular vote

  •  Which goes to show that the whole (3+ / 0-)

    "forced to pay for birth control" business worked with evangelicals who can use birth control, but not with Catholics who shouldn't per the Pope.

    Economics is a social *science*. Can we base future economic decisions on math?

    by blue aardvark on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:16:28 PM PST

    •  last report I saw said fewer than 5% (3+ / 0-)

      of RCs follow the Pope's instructions on birth control.  Like getting around the ban on divorces, getting around the BC ban is easy as the contraceptives are prescribed for other reasons  

      •  And there's limits to what they can find out. (0+ / 0-)

        Ban on divorces, there's evidence.

        Have a low number of kids and don't believe breaking the BC ban is a sin? No reason to mention what you're doing in Confession and an easy no-lie out of explaining that you only use birth control methods God approves of. The bishops and priests don't have access to medical records.

        Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

        by Cassandra Waites on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 02:15:02 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Don't think all evangelicals can. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark

      There are some groups, including the SBC in my personal experience, where all hormonal birth control and IUDs are quietly religiously classified as abortion methods.

      I'm growing fairly certain that one of the ladies who seemed to dislike me greatly in my old church was presuming that any young woman so long unmarried as I and with no babies or pregnancies must be using birth control she considered (and was actively trying to get the state constitution to consider murder, I'm not kidding) abortive. Because no one is ever actually abstinent.

      Nominally, evangelical couples outside the fundamentalist Quiverfull movements can use birth control. However, barrier methods and surgical sterilization are the only permissible options in many congregations (if they argue for embryonic personhood, this applies to them).

      Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

      by Cassandra Waites on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 02:04:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The fact that conservatives continue to line the (14+ / 0-)

    ... pockets of conmen like Ralph Reed and Karl Rove makes me feel better about the future fortunes of the Democratic Party.

    I hope these suckers marks people keep throwing money at these carnival barkers.

  •  very interesting (7+ / 0-)

    But it does make the sting of defeat that much worse for the GOP. Add that to an expanding Democratic electorate based on demographics against their base issues and they really have to change.

    However, I don't see that change happening yet. The bubble is still intact for the most part. One key will be if the super rich pony up millions for Rove again in the face of the changing demo numbers.

    The Spice must Flow!

    by Texdude50 on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:20:38 PM PST

    •  Far too many people who should know better (0+ / 0-)

      are taking that line, that the Rs have to change. This assumes that facts and reason have something to do with the matter. It presupposes that winning elections is somehow more important to True Believers than remaining as the Faithful Remnant whom God will reward, even if only in Heaven.

      You can't make sense of any of what they do without understanding Cognitive Dissonance, as laid out in When Prophecy Fails, by Leon Festinger, Henry Riecken and Stanley Schachter. When prophecy fails, the faithful double down, like Linus in his ever-more-sincere pumpkin patch awaiting the Great Pumpkin, or the Pacific Island Cargo Cultists who can see the airplanes full of cargo flying over their ever-more-sincere landing strips.

      I am with the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I have lots of spaghetti and other noodle products on the shelf in the pantry, because I go out and buy them.

      May he touch you with his noodly appendage. Ramen.

      Unfortunately, what the most hidebound Evangelicals have to do is die of old age and let their more enlightened children and the minority converts pry the levers of power from their cold, dead, hands, or just go somewhere else. Fortunately, that is just what they are doing.

      America—We built that!

      by Mokurai on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 04:23:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You've somewhat misread.... (0+ / 0-)

        ....When Prophecy Fails, IIRC. What that study demonstrated was that true believers doubled down after the first major disconfirmation. It was only after the second major disconfirmation that their world began to fall apart.

        If Obama's second term is in any way an obvious success, it might be at that point that the whole house of fundie cards collapses.

        "They smash your face in, and say you were always ugly." (Solzhenitsyn)

        by sagesource on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:37:17 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The superrich (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ConcernedCitizenYouBet

      will return to their traditional policy of being double-breasted, buying likely pols wholesale on both sides of the aisle.  They let Rove lead them into a blind alley this time, but they didn't get to be superrich  by liking to throw their money away.

      Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

      by ActivistGuy on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 08:35:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Did Romney retroactively baptise Christianists? (4+ / 0-)

    Can Christianists call Mormons a cult any longer?
    It's kind of a mixed marriage is it not?
    Naah...Mittens muffed it, the marriage is OFF.

    •  Billy Graham (via his son) took them off the list. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jabney, Cassandra Waites, The Nose

      You can't make this stuff up.

      by David54 on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:37:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  real question = will Billy Grahm put back in cult (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cassandra Waites, The Nose

      on his website when referring to mormons?

      i give it 3 more days and the Grahm website will list mormonism as a cult again

    •  The more interesting question is will Mormons (0+ / 0-)

      and Catholics ultimately be blamed by the Protestant fundamentalist sectarian partisans for the GOP failure to oust Obama or retake the Senate?  

      They're response to failure is to do more stridently whatever they feel they failed to do for The Lord and do whatever they imagine it will take to show God they're really on His side now.  I think we'll be seeing the Protestant fundamentalists wondering aloud whether God turned his back on them due to their trusting the future of Christian America to a Mormon bishop (Romney) as well as a Catholic (Ryan), even if the 93 year old Billy Graham granted his imprimatur in the last days before the election.  I'm not saying Mormons are any more right or wrong than Assembly of God members but my point is the conservative Protestants can't help but see failure through the lense of faith--as a failure to be pure enough and faithful enough in their God's narrow eyes. Being yoked to those they don't honestly recognize as truly Christian will be cited as reasons God rejected their bid to gain control of America's Destiny.

      This impulse to return to more rigid and exclusive beliefs will sharpen even as many within the GOP are realizing they cannot afford to shrink their circle further, and ignore women's issues, especially single women, single women head of households, youth values, hispanics and Afro-Americans.  Plus they cannot really muster a significant voting presence without maintaining a working alignment and commitment to the hardline Catholics.  This may not be so easy when there is much within Catholic tradition which may find better expression within the DNC platform (assuming Women's Reproductive rights recedes as a flaming issue) where compassion and dignity for the needy and elders is a platform element.  

      The GOP is in for a harsh struggle with it's built-in racism, genderism, and conflicting religious identities, as well as grappling with how to make nice with 'traditional' GOP moderates who've been sidelined and these will be quick demand back their dominant place in the party, to retake 'the Center'--and try to make it more about being the GOP as a pragmatic political party, perhaps more inclusive of Libertarians, rather than being God's Own Purity Party.

      I shall predict that 'secular' versus 'sacred' cultural war will devolve from national focus to a angry intra-Party struggle in the coming months.  The realignments will create some real losers.  Such as Karl Rove for blowing of nearly $500 million on negative ads that failed to work and failure to correctly model the electorate.  The reliance upon people like Karl Rove will be cited as examples of how God failed to reward their faith in the words of men, 'false prophets', who claimed they could win the Kingdom of God for them through spreading fear, confusion and intimidation. I think his cynical treatment of Evangelical and Catholic voters will finally come home to roost.That plus the angry billionaires who have had to swallow what a wasted investment Rove's organizations were is likely to mean Rove will retire to teach somewhere and do 'research' for future books.  I'm not sure what will happen with the Koch brothers.  They'll not stop pushing their business agenda, but it's likely they may seek multiple avenues to do this rather than try to put all their eggs in the Republican's basket of gut-issue politics.

      When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

      by antirove on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 01:10:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  "We're Outnumbered." --Rush Limbaugh. (13+ / 0-)

    Sweetest words I ever heard from the Great Gasbag.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:26:24 PM PST

  •  but but but Karl Rove says that Obama suppressed (3+ / 0-)

    the vote by going negative on Romney!!
    OMG it's Rove v Reed.
    I have to get some popcorn immediately.

    We're not perfect, but they're nuts! -- Barney Frank

    by Tamar on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:31:12 PM PST

  •  What gets me... (4+ / 0-)

    is Obama received approx. 21% of the white evangelical vote.

    That's 21% who have bucked the trend of the fact-free, racist, conspiracy theory-driven culture in which they inhabit.

    Obama receiving 21% of the white evangelical vote is outstanding.

    "You just gotta keep on livin man! L-I-V-I-N!" - Wooderson

    by wyvern on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:35:19 PM PST

    •  may be union members, auto workers, etc. (0+ / 0-)
    •  Yeah, but that's less (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wyvern

      then the share of the white evangelical vote that Obama received in 2008.

      Not much less (he received 24% in 2008) but still less.

    •  If white evangelicals represented 27%... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Berkeley Fred

      of the electorate, and they split 78% for Romney and 21% for Obama, that means that the rest of the electorate---everyone who is not a white evangelical Protestant---went 62% for Obama and 37% for Romney---a 25 point advantage!  I was shocked when I did the arithmetic just now; that is flabbergasting!

      Never ever wonder why these people get such a loud voice in the Republican Party.  Never ever wonder why sometimes reasonable, pro-business, country club types in the Republican Party always end up pandering to these people.  Be highly, highly suspect of any talk about establishment types casting off in any way the social conservative wing of the party.  It is simply a fact that without fervent support from white evangelical Protestants, there would be no Republican Party.

      Of course what this also means is that there is probably a better chance than we would ever think---or hope---that a Santorum type could actually get the nomination in 2016!

  •  This also tells us that (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Plu

    the millions of Republican are single issue voters. Their single issue is that they don't want a Democratic President.

    Mitt Romney's flip flops on choice did not matter to them ultimately. They didn't hold their nose. They enthusiastically supported Romney more than Bush.

    Their turnout is evidence that they will support anyone they think can beat a Democrat, even if that person is a proven serial liar.

    The choice of our lifetime: Mitt Romney, It Takes A Pillage or President Barack Obama, Forward Together.

    by FiredUpInCA on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 12:57:22 PM PST

  •  I live in a small blue city (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sarea

    surrounded by a very red county -- Pennsyltucky version.

    The local paper reported that GOP turnout was down.  Romney took the county (no surprise) but not the city (good for us!) but not by as much -- not even close -- as in 2004.  I forget what they said about 2008.  But I DO remember that the headline was about how few people were enthusiastic about Romney.

    So that's what happened here.

    To make the argument that the media has a left- or right-wing, or a liberal or a conservative bias, is like asking if the problem with Al-Qaeda is do they use too much oil in their hummus. Al Franken

    by Youffraita on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 01:00:21 PM PST

    •  Romney Got 2M Fewer Votes Than McCain. (0+ / 0-)

      http://spectator.org/...

      In 2008, John McCain received 59.9 million. Romney got over 2 million fewer votes than McCain. And in the final count, he will almost certainly have received considerably fewer votes than McCain.
      If the evangelicals voted in droves, Romney must have lost a lot of anti-NeoCon conservatives and Paulites.
  •  Reed is not in jail. Why? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    parakinesis, Yosef 52

    He screwed churches out of money claiming he would use it to stop the building of gambling casinos.  He screwed Native Americans out of money claiming he would use it to stop the building of Non-Indian gambling casinos.  He was Abramoff's flunky.

    Everyone is crying out for peace; no one's crying out for justice...

    by mojave mike on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 01:30:00 PM PST

  •  bottom line is Reed's constituency is a dying (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    demographic so each cycle while more may vote there are fewer of them to vote.  Proof of the pudding is the number of TP stalwarts who lost this cycle and the Democratic pick-up in the Senate

  •  I wouldn't believe anything Reed says, including (0+ / 0-)

    some  evangelical exit he can--and does--lie about almost everything.

    When I see Pew do this kind of polling I will believe it. But until then, no.

    It's to Reed's advantage to clear hurtles like this. Unlike Rove's failures which are clear to see, Reed can--and probably does--hide them.

    So I suggest we take anything and everything he says with a grain of salt. Actually, I'd just use the whole shaker.

    202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

    by cany on Thu Nov 08, 2012 at 01:54:37 PM PST

    •  Funny you should mention Pew (0+ / 0-)

      They have some early results out, which imply Reed's about right on the voter lean among evangelicals. However, they indicate he's a bit high on the evangelicals' fraction of all voters. The share hasn't started outright declining, but does seem to have plateaued.

      Contrariwise, the numbers in the Pew table don't add up to 100%, so the early Pew results may have the wrong number on the Evangelicals. Nohow, Pew indicates in the fine print they may need re-weighing for national demographic stuff.

  •  So Victoria Jackson was off-base in (0+ / 0-)

    bitterly tweeting and blaming the Romney loss on fellow Christians who didn't vote (she said [it] was disgusting). When she gets wind of this, she will need to find someone else to blame. Maybe the Jews? Christians for the last 1500 years have found them to be suitable scapegoats. Annnnnnd . . . wait for it . . . exit polls say Obama did win 69% of the Jewish vote.

  •  I should send this to my mom, her head will (4+ / 0-)

    explode. She is evangelical and thinks anyone who voted for Romney is going to hell. She has been furious over the past couple of months at the support he has gotten from evangelical leaders.

    •  Say what you will (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ThatPoshGirl

      but the evangelical right is just a cover for their real religion, which is the GOP.  The same goes for the leaders of my former church, the Catholic bishops.  Both are wholly owned subsidiaries of the GOP.  Unfortunately for them, a lot of their followers actually are able to put two and two together and see that the original message of Christianity and the GOP are incompatible.  And like so many of us, they are leaving organized religious groups bent on mind control.

  •  Please note: DK next edition (7+ / 0-)

    needs us to give ability to add more mojo to comments in recycled diaries.

    That said, Ralph Reed is Elmer Gantry looking for the next tent revival.

    Remember, you can't have crazy without az.

    by Desert Rose on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:05:48 PM PST

  •  Where Is Your God Now? (0+ / 0-)

    There’s always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby

    by bernardpliers on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:06:42 PM PST

  •  Evangelical Christian My Arse (6+ / 0-)

    Ralph Reed is a slimy little crook - a phony Jesus-boy who makes his living suckering the rubes. He is a shameless little grifter.

    End of rant.

    Canada - where a pack of smokes is ten bucks and a heart transplant is free.

    by dpc on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:06:53 PM PST

    •  He's smart enough... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dpc

      .,..to understand that the religious demographic is an easy mark with their gullibility, lack of critical thinking, and contempt for facts, science and education.  

      The pious are nothing if not a huckster's dream.  

  •  The GOP is fuct (4+ / 0-)

    They can't win without their evangelical base and they can't win because of their evangelical base.

    Picture a bright blue ball just spinnin' spinnin' free. It's dizzy with possibility.

    by lockewasright on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:10:40 PM PST

  •  Judging from the election maps (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    majcmb1

    Romney's in good shape to be President -- of the Confederate States of America. (Except for FL and VA.)

    "If we ever needed to vote we sure do need to vote now" -- Rev. William Barber, NAACP

    by Cali Scribe on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:23:33 PM PST

  •  Community Organizer Thumps "Corporate Genius" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    majcmb1

    What's so tasty about the latest discussion threads is, the GOP would lambaste Obama for being a "community organizer" and a one-term Senator. "A know-nothing!" Fox News would scream.

    Two national elections later, looks like the "community organizer" drop-kicked their purported business genius, as well as the GOP's $1.2+ billion attempt to swindle yet another election. And now, the rightwing religious nuts, the antiscience brigade, also were smoked.

    Does it get any better than this? I also believe this election, in particular, will reverberate for many, many years after Obama's second term concludes.

  •  that was one of the reasons limbaugh said romney (0+ / 0-)

    would win

    IMO many of the turnout questions can be related to talk radio- from the reaction to limbaugh's attacks on sandra fluke to the fact they could convince so many of themselves to believe they were going to win in anticipation of when it was close and rove and fox would beat everyone and call it for romney they would start rioting and they could intimidate the pansy ass liberals take it to the supremes again.

    This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

    by certainot on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:26:32 PM PST

  •  I think Ralph is gay and he voted for Obama. (2+ / 0-)

    He represents those 21% ers. :)

    peace

    keith.

    "Love is what we were born with. Fear is what we learned here." Marianne Williamson

    by Canadian Green Card Alien on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:28:17 PM PST

  •  Mr. Reed answers the wrong question (6+ / 0-)

    The key question is not how many GOP votes the religious right brought in, it is how many votes they drove out.

    A new birth of freedom..

    by docterry on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:30:28 PM PST

  •  27 percent? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OLinda, bontemps2012

    the evangelical vote increased in 2012 to a record 27% of the electorate

    Hm, there's that number again

  •  How do they justify to God voting for a (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, bontemps2012

    pathological liar who was unprincipled, greedy and without compassion. The bum doesn't even pay his fair share of his earnings that his wife bragged about without getting it back from a church trust tax free and then taking it off his taxes again. This is freaking triple dipping. I see nothing in his actions or beliefs that even tangentially line up with Christian doctrine. I mean real Christian doctrine not this race based trash
    pushed by the so called Religious Right fronted by Reed. If Reed is so happy about the turnout, he should wait and see how many more people desert their churches. The number of persons who now don't identify with a denomination has increased greatly. I suspect when the deluded in these churches come out of their whipped up election preaching frenzy, a good number will have remorse that they didn't really evaluate the man they voted for. They voted for issues and thinly coated racism. Sick. Sick. Sick. That makes this guy more money. That is all he is interested in.
    .

  •  I see no difference in southern evangelicals (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky, bontemps2012

    Kluxers and confederates. I remember seeing confederate uniforms in the closets of known evangelicals my grandmother and aunt worked for. I made the mistake of going through their front door once and the owner hit me on the head with a two by four. I was about 9 and he was a evangelical preacher. They are vicious haters and still very angry.

  •  Forgive my ignorance (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bontemps2012

    I'm from Chicago and I don't even know what an Evangelical consists of.  And how long before they start turning on the Catholics and Lutherans?  We already know how they feel about non-Christians.

    "Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for me--and I welcome their hatred." Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by djbender on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:52:09 PM PST

  •  Evangelicals are losing members. Most (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vicky

    Everyone has met an Obama liberal who has family of evangelical roots (well, at least I've met more than a few).  That Obama liberal moved away from the family as part of a rejection of fundamentalism.  Obama has made serious gains among white voters who are not evangelical.  That's how one can lose white voters by 20 points overall yet run within 5-7 points among white voters in blue and non-southern blue states. Fundamentalism is losing salience because it is losing
     the argument on culture, race, gender and science.  It is also losing the argument on the role of government.  By the next election much of the south will be more like Ohio:  a mix of liberal, progressive areas and hardened conservative regions with a faily significant number of swing voters.  After 8 years of Democratic rule, the South will be more open o a Dmocratic message.

    Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

    by khyber900 on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 07:53:18 PM PST

  •  Some of the sweetest words ever written: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon, Vicky
    White evangelical conservatives did turn out exactly as they said they would over and over again this election cycle. The problem for Republicans is there are not enough of them to win a national election anymore.
    I am still smiling.
  •  Curious - Demographics of those who voted for O? (0+ / 0-)

    I wonder what regions, education level, age and gender of those evangelical whites that voted for Obama? No doubt overwhelmingly more highly educated, more women, more young, more urban. Still, I'd like to see the breakdown to confirm, I'm guessing that data doesn't exist though.

    My wife and I consider ourselves evangelical (though we don't believe the proselytizing techniques espoused by typical evangelicals are very effective).

    We are under 30, have higher degrees, and are urban (though we voted for O in suburban PA, we are urban at heart - we have lived most of our time together in NYC and Baltimore)

    •  I was thinking the same thing about the Evang vote (0+ / 0-)

      21% Evangelical voted for Obama? I also wonder if there is a network of Evang's that are all bobbleheads -- yes, yes, I agree -- and then a group that is outside that network and is rational. Snark.

      Artist, what is your reason for calling yourself evangelical? And how do you fit Democratic values into that? What sort of evangelical community do you associate with?

      Full disclosure: I am a non-practicing athiest/agnostic, but I have an amateur anthropological interest in religion. I don't really like the concept of proselytizing at all, so I'd like to know more about what you consider effective.

  •  Grifters gonna grift. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ConcernedCitizenYouBet

    Life is good. Injustice? Not so much.

    by westyny on Sat Nov 10, 2012 at 08:41:41 PM PST

  •  27%... 27%... (0+ / 0-)
    A national post-election survey commissioned by the Faith and Freedom Coalition last night found that the evangelical vote increased in 2012 to a record 27% of the electorate and that white evangelicals voted roughly 78% for Mitt Romney to 21% for Barack Obama.
    That number rings a bell...  I wonder where I've seen that number before...
  •  No matter how many Bible Humpers there are (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bontemps2012

    you can't push a rotten candidate over the finish line.  

  •  Evangelicals [sic] (0+ / 0-)

    A true evangelical Christian, one who really wanted to spread the news of God's love through His Son, wouldn't stop at John 3:16; they'd keep going for one more verse.  "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."

    Oh, and for the benefit of Allen West, here's Acts 2:44:  "All the believers were together and had everything in common."

  •  All Americans ARE NOT Christians (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bontemps2012

    When are the Repubs going to realize that America is land in which you can worship any way you want to.  America is the land where you can be Atheists, Agnostic or Whatever.

    Everyone in America does not believe in Religion....and that is their right.......

    The majority of Americans are NOT evangelicals....And no one has the right to tell another AMerica how live, believe or worship....

    There are still millions of Americans that have never voted in the life and don't plan to........

    Evangelicals just stay in the so-called "bible belt", mostly southern states and some midwest......and live your freely as you should, live everyone else alone.........

  •  Double counting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bontemps2012

    So in essence, Romney and company counted on the Evangelicals to bring their vote, the Tea Party to bring their vote and the racist peanut throwers to bring out their vote.

    But they didn't count on them all being the SAME voter.

    Doh!

    "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

    by Wynter on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 02:40:22 AM PST

  •  Evangelicals=27%. But single-issue anti-abortion (0+ / 0-)

    makes up 15% of the electorate all by itself.

    SIAB voters have been getting conned by the Republican Party since the 1980s. That's one helluva con.

    The key, here, seems to be neutralizing the abortion issue. Dwight Eisenhower did it, very effectively. Nixon adopted the same approach.

    But it's hopeless talking to Democrats about adopting more subtle political tactics. We've tried.

    This crap is going to go on and on and on.

  •  My sis and BIL were two evangelical votes (0+ / 0-)

    for Obama.  My sister has a chronic, debilitating disease, and they will go bankrupt if Obamacare is't fully implemented.  Also the fact that their daughter came out about a year and a half ago means that they now don't see gays as an evil force.

    Why evangelicals will always turn out for the anti-choice anti-gay party, they have scared off their more moderate voters and will continue to.

  •  I still find it amusing (0+ / 0-)

    ...that southern white evangelicals voted for the Mormon and the Catholic, both of whom in everyday life many would see as having horns and tails. Just sayin'.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site