Barack Obama outperforms Gore and Kerry among Protestants and evangelicals

by Transplanted Texan, Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 09:59:21 PM EST

I am currently working on a senior honors thesis about the religious right. I've seen several headlines today that say while Obama won the Catholic vote, Democrats didn't really make inroads among the evangelical community - but I disagree.  I've spent some time today looking at consortium and CBS exit polls from every presidential election since 1972, and a preliminary scan shows three very interesting findings:

  • Barack Obama received a higher share of the Protestant vote, 45%, than any other Democratic nominee since at least 1972, the earliest year for which I have data. By comparison, in 2004 Kerry received 40% of the Protestant vote and in 2000 Gore received 42%. The previous high was 43.7% for Jimmy Carter in 1976. The low is George McGovern in 1972 with 28.4%.

  • The general "Protestant" category includes the liberal mainline denominations. Unfortunately, voters have only been asked if they consider themselves white evangelical or born-again in 2008 and 2004. In '04, 23% of voters said yes, and in '08, 26%. Kerry received 21% of that vote, and Obama 24. (In 2000, voters were asked if they were part of the religious right, and only 14% said yes. The term "religious right" is likely seen as offensive, so fewer voters were willing to claim it as a label. Of those voters, 18% voted for Gore.)

  • Barack Obama outperformed both Al Gore and John Kerry in terms of church attendance. More than weekly - Gore 36%, Kerry 35, Obama 43. Weekly - Gore 40, Kerry 41, Obama 43. Monthly - Gore 51, Kerry 49, Obama 53.

I'm not going to read anything into these numbers tonight; that's what my thesis is for. But the raw data is interesting, and suggests that the Emerging Church movement (Brian McLaren, Tony Campolo, etc.) may indeed be a strong ally for progressives, and that Leah Daughtry can keep on rockin'.




Tags: Barack Obama, John Kerry, Al Gore, Christianity, religion, polls, religious right (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 15 Comments :: Post a Comment


Protestants and evangelicals (2.00 / 2)

Black voters are overwhelmingly Protestant.  Obama's strength in that community surely helped his margin.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 10:36:38 PM EST

I wonder how much of that effect was Obama, (none / 0)

and how much McCain.  Granted, Palin helped bring home the base, but Obama is genuinely religious.  McCain called his wife a C**t in public.  I would be interested if Obama's 2012 opponent is religious and, if so, if these numbers hold.

And a friendly comment from a professor in the social sciences: one of our biggest pet peeves is people treating "data" as singular instead of plural ("datum" is singular).  It should be "the raw data are interesting, and suggest that ..."  You'll get some serious brownie points from your advisor for getting that one correct.  :-)


by Oly on Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 11:04:59 PM EST

Re: I wonder how much of that effect was Obama, (none / 0)

Dems also improved on the evangelical vote from '04 to '06, so we'll see in 8 years...

And thanks for the grammar tip!


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 11:39:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Transplanted Texan... (none / 0)

where did you find consortium and CBS exit polls going back to 1972?  I'd like to get my hands on some of that raw data.

I've not heard of Catholics being described as part of the Religious Right.  But I've already heard anecdotally that the Catholic Church influence was a factor in the very narrow approval of Proposition 8 here in California (including among the Hispanic and Asian communities).  

The intersection of religion and politics is a fascinating topic.  I, for one, would find it interesting if you share or ask people's opinion about various issues/theories you come across in the writing of your thesis.

I know that Obama wanted to do aggressive religious outreach since the Spring of 2007.  But it never seemed to get off the ground in any material way (maybe I'm wrong about that).  I think he will keep trying from the White House.  You should try to contact Joshua DuBois (worked for Obama), who I know worked with McLaren.  


Our Moment Is Now
by mboehm on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 01:13:19 AM EST

Re: Transplanted Texan... (2.00 / 1)

Exit polls are available from Roper. Unfortunately, you have to pay to use them; I have student access through Dartmouth.
http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/electio ns/common/exitpolls.html

Some definitions of the RR include conservative Catholics, but I specifically mentioned them so as to suggest that I don't consider them part of the RR. The white evangelical born-again voters are the RR; winnning Catholics speaks to larger issues of faith and politics.

Thanks for the suggestion re: DuBois and others. While I'd love to do such a thing, my thesis scope is already too broad and needs to be narrowed a bit. But I'll certainly keep it in mind!


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 09:52:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not sure abt the reading (none / 0)

I think you are missing the fact that a) a sizeable portion of African-American population is Evangelical and b) a sizeable portion of the Hispanic community is regular church-going (and Catholic). So tehre might be other dynamics at work here.


by ann0nymous on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 03:58:58 AM EST

Re: Not sure abt the reading (none / 0)

Re: evangelicals, that's true of Protestants in general, but the exit poll question I'm referring to asks voters if they are white evangelicals/born-agains. You're right about the church-going question, though. And there are almost always multiple dynamics at work; I just think this is one of them. One of many.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 09:53:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Overreaching once again (1.00 / 1)

Obama, having garnered a solid majority, seems to have improved across the board from what either Gore or Kerry achieved previously.  Therefore, blips like 3-4% in subpopulations, which are probably within the margin of error, tells you NOTHING.

I bet Obama also increased support among "godless" people too.  How would you read such "raw data"?

This is a stupid post.


by Sieglinde on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 07:58:21 AM EST

Re: Overreaching once again (none / 0)

Not necessarily because the Emerging Church movement is one that is being embraced by young evangelicals, who tend to be more progressive in their politics. I would suspect that younger snapshot of this demographic is what fueled Obama to those stronger numbers.


by Safe As Houses on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 09:30:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Overreaching once again (none / 0)

Proof, please.

Till then, your suspicions are unfounded.


by Sieglinde on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 04:26:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Overreaching once again (none / 0)

The last Pew study on faith is proof of SAH's point. The fact that you haven't seen those numbers hardly makes SAH's beliefs "suspicions."


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 09:56:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Overreaching once again (none / 0)

Your point would be well taken if you weren't crass enough to throw around the insults. There's no reason to use words like "stupid;" it's a rather arrogant thing to do.

You're right, he did increase in every measure possible, but this is also against the backdrop of events like the Saddleback Forum and the '06 evangelical vote.


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Thu Nov 06, 2008 at 09:55:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Overreaching once again (none / 0)

What you say, "You're right, he did increase in every measure possible,"  does not bolster your assertion that Obama has made inroads specifically among the evangelical community.

Your baseless assertion, and your pathetic efforts to reestablish the power of the evangelicals in the national discourse, remains so, independent of my crassness.

The fact of the matter is, the evangelicals are not a major constituency of this Democratic majority.  Arguing otherwise without any real numbers isn't productive.


by Sieglinde on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 06:29:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Overreaching once again (none / 0)

I never said they were a major constituency of our party. If you think I did, then you clearly didn't read my post; mind sending me a link to the one you did read and mistakenly attributed to me?


The Wayward Episcopalian
by Transplanted Texan on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 07:19:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Overreaching once again (none / 0)

So what is the point of your post, anyway?

Nitpicking the lice in the data?


by Sieglinde on Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 04:09:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: