The Religious Divide
July 16th, 2008 at 02:49am Mark Noonan
Pretty stark:
A new Gallup Poll claims to show that registered voters who say religion is important in their lives tend to support presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain by a margin of 50 to 40 percent, while those who say religion is unimportant to their lives tend to support presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama by a margin of 55 to 36 percent.
About two-thirds of the registered voters surveyed by Gallup said that religion is important to them.
According to the Gallup Poll, which surveyed 95,000 registered voters from March through June 2008, the divide in voting preference is not confined to white Protestants but is manifested among non-Hispanic white Catholics as well.
Non-Hispanic white Catholics who say religion is important in their daily lives support McCain over Obama by 53 percent to 37 percent. Those who say religion is not important slightly favor Obama by a margin of 47 percent to 45 percent.
Hispanic Catholics, black non-Catholic Christians, and those who do not have a specific religious identity reportedly tend to support Barack Obama, but their support apparently is little affected by the importance of religion in their lives.
Hispanic Catholics who say religion is important in their lives support Obama over McCain 57 to 31, while those who say religion is not important support Obama by a margin of 63 to 30 percent.
Meanwhile, among the 12% of respondents who have no religious identity, Obama cleans up with 65% to McCain’s 26%. Obama will, of course, try to move some religious voters his way; McCain, meanwhile, will try to expand his appeal to religious voters…and the election may very well turn on just who shows up…believers, or unbelievers.
There is a sad note in this, however - we are, in many ways, a house divided against itself, just as we were in the 1850’s - and just as it was back then, we will not forever remain divided, but will become all one thing, or all the other. Our fervent hope, of course, is that the passions which divide us never lead us to view those who disagree as our enemies.
This election may settle a lot of things, one way or the other - an Obama Presidency would cement ultra-liberal control of the judiciary while the Obama plan to massively increase government may place such a large number of Americans on government dependency (in one form or another) that we’ll have an European style electorate wedded to welfare and unwilling - even at the cost of national destruction - to modify their demands. On the other hand, the election of McCain will cement a conservative majority in the judiciary, while McCain’s proposals to reign in government spending and end pork would get government further out of Americans’ lives, and thus retain in America that sense of independence which is one of the two mainstays of our national strength (the other is our continued strong religious belief, especially as relative to the rest of the western world).
It is a crucial election, and pettifogging complaints that the candidate isn’t pure on ideology are worse than stupid - for each side, to stand aside is to give up the fight, perhaps for good and all.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Religion, Republicans
28 Comments
1. congressive | July 16th, 2008 at 5:12 am
“an Obama Presidency would cement ultra-liberal control of the judiciary while the Obama plan to massively increase government may place such a large number of Americans on government dependency (in one form or another) that we’ll have an European style electorate wedded to welfare and unwilling - even at the cost of national destruction - to modify their demands.”
One can dream, can’t one? :-)
Actually, any growth through government programs will be partially offset by the reduction in government as a result of ending the Iraq occupation, if Barack has the nerve to actually do it.
I look forward to the end of billionaire welfare like the instant bank bailouts, while homeowner help flounders in the halls of Congress. I look forward to the end of billionaire welfare in the form of massive tax cuts for unprecedentedly profitable oil giants, and Warrent Buffet tax cuts, while us working shmoes get $600 that will be taken back next year. Oh yes. Look it up. The “booster” check is not free after all.
As for religion, well, we’re stuck with superstition I’m afraid, no pun intended. Religio-delusionals will continue to seek God’s advice, then announce that God’s will just so happens to be their will, too. So we all better do what the God-talkers tell us, right? Or we’ll either burn in hell, or not get our 72 virgins, depending on your specific delusion.
Since the pulpit will always be a powerful political force, both candidates will pander to religions, sadly.
2. Magnum Serpentine | July 16th, 2008 at 5:35 am
I believe a lot of people forget that there is this treaty signed by the United States that states the United States is not a christian Nation.
1796 Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11.
Been looking into fact check, There seems to be more Republics working for them than there are Democratics therefore its a Republic organization.
thank god this nation is not a Theocracy and under McSame it will be.
Finally I believe that the United States Supreme court lately, is the most judicial activist in its entire history. Justice Roberts and the other republic justices constantly phone the Family Rights leaders to ask if they can sneeze , let alone what they should vote on various bills. The Supreme Court is suppose to be independent. It has not been independent since Sandra Day O’Connor left.
Next.
3. Fredrick Schwartz | July 16th, 2008 at 7:34 am
The freddie fannie bailout is SOCIALISM says GOP Senator Bunning.
4. Retired Spook | July 16th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Meanwhile, among the 12% of respondents who have no religious identity, Obama cleans up with 65% to McCain’s 26%.
This certainly lends credence to the famous G. K. Chesterton quote:
Our fervent hope, of course, is that the passions which divide us never lead us to view those who disagree as our enemies.
Sadly, Mark, I think that’s the path down which we’re headed. An Obama victory this fall would only hasten the journey. Absent a successful assault by the Left on the 2nd Amendment, it can only end badly — for both sides.
5. neocon | July 16th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Spook,
Our resident liberals have always reminded me of the saying:
Those who stand for nothing, will fall for anything.
And Obama’s empty rhetoric has certainly tipped them over.
Mags,
I gotta tell you, you are quickly advancing to the next level of idiocy. Your posts are hysterical and I now look forward to them in nearly every thread.
Ignoring the bill of rights, and the proclamations of our founders as they relate judeo-christian values, and instead pointing to one article in the 1796 Treaty, which is true (see if you can figure that one out), further cements your stature here as the king of idiocy, surpassing Frederick.
But don’t underestimate Frederick, his idiotometer can red line quickly.
have a collectively partisan day
merci beaucoup
neocon
6. Retired Spook | July 16th, 2008 at 9:07 am
neocon,
I wouldn’t mind so much if lunatics like MS and Fredrick were standing on a soapbox in the park spouting their idiocy as the majority of the public walked by shaking their heads. Sadly, the mindset exhibited by our resident Leftists has captured the heart and soul of the Party of Jefferson. How he must be turning over in his grave. As I said in the previous comment, I fear this can only end badly — unless someone comes along who appeals to such a broad majority that the radicals on the left and right fringes are completely marginalized. When Obama was first touted as a presidential hopeful, I had fleeting thoughts that he might be that person. Then I started reading about his brief political career, and it quickly became clear that, not only would he not be a uniter, he would, more than likely, divide the country even further.
Only 111 more days to go — pass the popcorn.
7. HeyNow | July 16th, 2008 at 9:13 am
The fear mongers rear their head once again….
http://www.wftv.com/news/16879991/detail.html
8. neocon | July 16th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Spook,
I tend to agree with Robert Redford (maybe the only time) that Obamas defeat will put an end to a lot of what is wrong with the Party of Jefferson.
They are completely driven by rhetoric and emotion, are to completely beholden to special interests that have zero foundation in reality, and this impending defeat will be a huge blow to their psyche.
Having little core values, or beliefs grounded in conviction, they will splinter.
Pass the popcorn indeed.
neocon
9. Retired Spook | July 16th, 2008 at 9:31 am
Yeah, HeyNow, we can’t have any of the “free speech” crap now, can we?
BTW, you did notice the following sentence, didn’t you?
10. Retired Spook | July 16th, 2008 at 9:36 am
neocon, just thinking out loud here — what do you think would happen if Obama’s poll numbers have plumeted so dramatically by the time of the Donk convention that the delegates have second thoughts and give Hillary the nod? Not likely, but certainly not out of the realm of possibility. Would that not be an orgasmic moment in American politics?
11. js | July 16th, 2008 at 9:47 am
i think the original DNC is long gone…taken over by socialists and communists like hillary and obama…even teddy is growing a sound streak of socialism that was severly absent is his father…
the dnc was a proud party…and spearheaded the anti communist movement from the 50s…yet…the promise of the socialists was to become the DNC…and it has…the party of the people…it makes putin proud…and inspires the peoples party in china….
redford said that if obama loses…the dnc is dead…but i propose that redford is an old man…and his thinking is befuddled…because the real democrat party already died….
12. Some Assembly Required | July 16th, 2008 at 10:06 am
RS, I believe that scenario would spell the death of the democratic party. Though in all honesty I really don’t think it would surprise me if (and thats a big if) if happened. I’m pretty sure I’d be voting for Nader If that happened as well.
13. neocon | July 16th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Spook,
While unlikely, it is still a possibility. And, the fact that Hillary is remaining under the radar since bowing out, suggests that she is probably angling towards that.
The more the general electorate gets to know Obama, the worse his poll numbers are. I am enjoying watching this unfold.
14. Retired Spook | July 16th, 2008 at 10:39 am
I am enjoying watching this unfold.
Me too.
15. Sunny | July 16th, 2008 at 11:34 am
“unless someone comes along who appeals to such a broad majority that the radicals on the left and right fringes are completely marginalized. When Obama was first touted as a presidential hopeful, I had fleeting thoughts that he might be that person.” Spook
Come on Spook - you actually thought that Barack Obama might be the person who would marginalize the radicals on the left and right? Serious – you really had that thought??
I would like to see religion completely left out of our election process. There are too many religious radicals in this country (as well as the Muslim world) and I believe that all radicals are dangerous regardless of their religious beliefs. We are choosing the CEO of our nation, not our local pastor, rabbi or priest. When was the last time a major company hired a CEO based on his/her religious beliefs? Our country needs a president that understands business and foreign policy. It really is time to take religion out of politics.
16. js | July 16th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
if religion was not part of our society…it should be left out of our government…yet…there are 62 million adherents just to the catholic faith alone…not counting other christian churches…nor does it include children or other non member/ passing participation in services…
to say they dont have a right to representation in our government would give them a full and righteous cause for revolution….
17. Retired Spook | July 16th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Come on Spook - you actually thought that Barack Obama might be the person who would marginalize the radicals on the left and right? Serious – you really had that thought?
Yes, Sunny, I actually did; until I learned more about him. I think most people, if they’d engage in a little introspection, want to be led by someone that the majority likes and and trusts. Reagan was such a man. The only people who hated Reagan were on the far left fringe.
18. Calvert | July 16th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
“redford said that if obama loses…the dnc is dead…but i propose that redford is an old man…and his thinking is befuddled…because the real democrat party already died….”
Another gem from js. I agree Redford is old and his thinking is befuddled and he probably can’t remember what he said 2 weeks ago. Having said that….John McCain is one year older than Robert Redford and his mind is most definitely befuddled. :)
19. Horseshoe | July 16th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Obama a family man with currently one wife. McCain allegedly committs adultry and dumps his first wife for a younger model with money. Go figure why the religious whackos go for the latter. MY guess is Rongals Reagan placed divorce on the family value side of the ledger.
Here is to the first Mrs McCain who will never be up on a stage.
20. Horseshoe | July 16th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno.”
– Sen. John McCain, speaking to a Republican dinner, June 1998.
Yeah those Republican family values the religious right go nuts over.
21. Retired Spook | July 16th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Horseshoe,
Do you always repeat stuff you see on Crooks & Liars and Ameriblog without verifying it. No one likes a gossip — please leave and don’t come back.
22. Xavier Cugat | July 16th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Spook,
I still believe that Obama is the man to unify the great middle majority.
I aver that the ultra-left caricature of him is manufactured. Most of that is generated by quoting his “liberal voting” record score from various conservative sources as testimony about how liberal he is. But I suspect few have ever explored what’s behind that scoring.
And I bet that more than a few of you would disagree with the categorization of some votes labeled as “liberal”.
Using the National Journal’s scoring system, here are just two example Obama votes that classified him as a “liberal”:
Voted yea on a measure to “Establish a Senate Office of Public Integrity to handle ethics complaints against senators”
Voted yea on a measure to “Create a national action plan for reducing oil consumption by 35 percent by 2030″
Are those two votes really liberal? Or are they just practical?
Most of Obama’s 2007-08 “liberal voting score” were driven by a series of his Iraq votes. And even the National Journal yielded that this wasn’t a crystal clear conservative issue:
23. Retired Spook | July 16th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
I still believe that Obama is the man to unify the great middle majority
You know what, Xavier; I hope you’re right. If he’s elected, he will be my President too, and I’ll certainly give him every benefit of the doubt until such time as his actions prove my suspicions right (or not).
24. Jeremiah | July 16th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Factamundo #1. Christianity is America’s foundation.
Factamundo #2. 75% of Christians have become complacent.
Factamundo #3. Complacency of Christians led to to denied rights; rights that are guaranteed in the Constitution - Christian teachers do not have the freedom to teach some of the things they’d like to. Many teachers have been denied jobs because they said something “wrong.”
Factamundo #4. Christians have allowed the ACLU to misinterpret the Constitution.
Factamundo #5. 8 generations of our children who have received their education in public schools have been told lies and therefore, have been totally brainwashed..and thus, we are the affected of said public school systems.
Factamundo #6. 70 some years worth of public school education has produced for us the following: 1. Rise in pornographic material. 2. Rise in violence. 3. Rise in sexually transmitted diseases. 4. Rise in murder. 5. The redefining of civil pathologies by coercing ideologies that are evil, to try and turn wrong into “right”. So far, they have succeeded. For example - The worth of human life. The public school system has taught children to “question” whether or not a human being is existant at conception.
Factamundo #7. Take one law change it’s meaning, and you can turn a nation completely under, and that’s what liberals have done with the so called “Separation of Church and State.” The end result? A morally bankrupt America.
Barack Obama is a product of these last generations in which morality was removed from public school.
I tell you my honest opinion. I believe God is going to raise Atheists and Communists up in order to reveal Himself to them…Just like God done Pharoah. It was only by the grace of God that Pharoah had any power at all, yet Pharoah wouldn’t listen and kept God’s people in bondage–and warning after warning, God finally let loose torrents of wrath, plagues of raw power.
Folks, you can call me crazy, delusional, stupid, whatever….but I believe God can and will do the same here in America.
Atheists have enslaved us to their law of “Separation of Church and State” the same as Pharoah did the Israelites, and I don’t think God’s going to put up with it much longer.
Go ahead, call me what you want…but you just wait and see..
25. neil | July 17th, 2008 at 12:42 am
You are so right Jeremiah! America is on a very slippery slope of which judgment will eventually come from the Almighty. Faith in this great country is misrepresented so much because so many people that call themselves Christians do not actually even have a born again relationship with Jesus Christ. Many people have taken our religious freedoms for granted and it looks as though we may start loosing them if we allow a liberal POTUS selecting judges that do not respect our Constitution or the rule of law according to the Constitution.
26. congressive | July 17th, 2008 at 2:18 am
A man who ceases to believe in God does not believe in nothing; he believes in anything.
More accurately, a man who professes to “believe” in anything, including God, professes to be ignorant of facts and chooses to remain that way.
27. Sunny | July 17th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
FACTOMUNDO # 8: Christian Americans have the choice to send their children to parochial/church schools if that is the educational experience they prefer. No one is forced to send their children to public schools.
28. Jack&hellip | August 11th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
model torrents
) Some individuals or companies have abused the TrackBack feature to insert spam links on some blogs (see sping). Many blogs have stopped