Dispelling the myth that a majority of christians in the US are liberal. They are not.

[cleanhippie]

Very religious white Americans continue to be one of the most Republican segments of the U.S. population: 62% identify with or lean toward the Republican Party, more than twice the number who identify as Democrats or lean Democratic. This Republican skew is reversed among nonreligious whites, who are more likely to affiliate with the Democratic Party by a 17-percentage-point margin.



The 62% of very religious whites who identify as Republicans contrasts with the 48% of whites and the 40% of all Americans who identify as Republicans.

These results are based on an analysis of Gallup Daily tracking data from July 1 through Oct. 26, 2011, consisting of more than 116,000 interviews.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150443/Religious-Whites-Identify-GOP.aspx?utm_source=add%2Bthis&utm_medium=addthis.com&utm_campaign=sharing#.Tq6Nv2zwwYA.twitter

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


So there it is, something that we atheists have known for some time, but that our liberal christian friends keep telling us is not true.

:shrug:

[dmallind]

1. Yep - I did a breakdown of Pew data a while back too

Calculated that having religion be very important to you made you much more likely to be a Republican and far less likely to be a Democrat irrespective of race and ethnicity (which I suspect will br the "yeah buts" used to excuse these data).

[Starboard Tack]

36. Did you open the link to see the results for other ethnicities?

Religious Blacks and Asians lean overwhelmingly Democrat. Otherwise you are correct, though the poll itself is flawed. I think "very religious" is a poor descriptor, as an individual's religiosity is not easy to measure. Fundamentalist might have been more appropriate.
Many people consider themselves to be very religious, but not fundamentalist. Christian fundamentalists are almost exclusively Republican. Christian liberals are almost exclusively Democrat.

[LAGC]

44. There have been other polls as well.

People who go to church every week are much more likely to vote Republican, whereas people who go to church seldom or never overwhelmingly self-identify as Democratic.

Even within the same religion, with Catholics being a prime example, most Catholics vote Democratic, but not those who go to church every week. Wonder why that is?

[Starboard Tack]

48. What is your problem? Religiosity does not equal fundamentalism or frequency of attending church

Why the fuck do you care how many people go to church how many times a week? Just because you and I may not share their religious beliefs doesn't invalidate them. I don't care how many polls there have been. It doesn't mean shit, except to the people taking the polls and, apparently, you. Get over it. People can believe whatever the fuck they want and vote for whomever they want. If Catholics vote Democratic just because fundamentalists don't consider them Christian or because the Kennedys are Catholic, then they are doing it for the wrong reasons, but if it helps us, so what.
BTW there are plenty of religious people who never go to church. Some are Christian, some are Jewish, some are Muslim and many are non-conformist, but religious, nevertheless.

[LAGC]

49. Wow, relax dude.

You act like I insulted your mother or something. LOL.

I was merely pointing out that even amongst non-fundamentalist religious sects, frequency of church attendance is usually a pretty good indicator of political leanings. Its not really rocket science -- obviously the people who take their religion more seriously and attend services more regularly tend to be more traditionalist (hence, conservative.) Liberals tend to not take religion as seriously or literally, and thus don't attend services as often.

Just an interesting observation, that's all. Read that however you want.

[Starboard Tack]

51. I am very relaxed and apologize if I gave the opposite impression.

I guess my point is that church attendance and religiosity are not the same. I have met many deeply religious people who never attend institutional services. Admittedly. most are Democrats, but that does not detract from their faith. I may not share that faith, but I respect it, just as I respect anyone's beliefs, or non-beliefs.
I have dear family members of various faiths and flavors of faith, none of which I share, but all of which I respect. Most of them do not subscribe to literal interpretations of their holy books, and they tend to vote Democrat. Those who are fundamentalist Christians in their beliefs tend to vote Republican. Jews lean Democratic. Muslims lean Democratic. Catholics lean Democratic. That leaves all the other Christians who are not extreme, born again, fundies. Many of those are solid, liberal activists and so important to the Democratic Party. This is a big tent. Let's not shut out genuine people of faith.:toast:

[LAGC]

52. It's all good.

And I agree, we can't win elections without liberal people of faith.

[muriel_volestrangler]

53. Not true for Asians

The figures from the link are:

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com.nyud.net:8080/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/yktk-vp9yec8ne_vbh9z7g.gif

There is still a clear link of religiousness and voting Republican, for Asians; and a 12% difference is not 'overwhelming'. Only for non-Hispanic Blacks is being religious linked with being slightly more likely to vote Democratic (the net difference varying very slightly, between 68 and 65%).

[dmallind]

56. Don't think so

"Very religious" is, and can only be, a self applied descriptor, since religiosity is subjective. The poll allowed people the ability to label themselves. Your division of Christians is both a reflexive tautology and irrelevant. The whole point of the poll question here was to determine how the very religious align politically. Obiously Christian liberals will be overwhelmingly Democratic but that's not the question. The question is how many very religious (and somewhat religious) Christians ARE Democratic. And the answer is "nowhere near as many as are Republican".

[Starboard Tack]

58. Being religious and declaring one's religiosity are different things.

I find the poll pretty meaningless, as we already know where the Republican base lies. Nowhere close to the values of a faith that they have co-opted and distorted with their bible thumping and bigotry. To equate those right-wing evangelicals with black southern baptists, liberal Christians and devout Muslims and Jews is insulting.
I do not put much credence in phone conducted polls anymore, because they are conducted almost exclusively on landlines that are not on the national do-not-call list. Private landlines are becoming rarer by the day and I would wager that a disproportionate number are owned by elderly folk, mostly rural, housebound and glad to talk to any stranger on the phone.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. My theory is certain Christians who tend to vote republican choose their political and religious

leaders based on their authoritarian leanings. My sister once considered converting to Catholicism from Judaism. Our mother kept asking her for her reasons. Finally, my sister just spit out the essential motivation: she liked not being responsible for decisions and following an authority who would tell her what was right and wrong. No mistakes, no accountability. A perfect life (and life after death).

I'm not religious by a long shot, but I do respect those Christians who read the Bible, try to analyze and understand the nuances, the message, and struggle to be better people according to their doctrines. But here's the difference: they're self-regulated and responsible for their mistakes and just try harder the next time. Their attitude toward their religious leaders is respect for the training in the seminaries and/or religious colleges but strive to find their own God, their own truth. This is not easy and requires doubt and trial-and-error.

[rug]

3. A third of republicans are nonreligious.

[cleanhippie]

6. And?

[dmallind]

8. Bullshit - a third of the nonreligious are Republican - VERY different thing.

[rug]

9. You're right. But that's more damning.

[dmallind]

10. To whom? That the nonreligious are half as likely as the very religious to be Rep damns which?

[rug]

12. One third of nonbelievers voting republican dispels the myth that they are ipso facto progressive.

[Goblinmonger]

14. Do you deny

that they are more progressive than believers?

I mean, hey, Ayn Rand has her followers.

[rug]

18. Poorly phrased question.

I do say that there are a higher proportion of progressives among nonreligious. I also say there are more religious progressives than nonreligious progressives. But that's just a function of greater numbers. I don't know what "more progressive" means.

[dmallind]

16. A myth in your mind - never heard anyone claim that they are so to greater degree than this shows.

[rug]

19. You haven't been paying attention.

[RaleighNCDUer]

22. Do you really think there are any progressive non-believers who have

not heard of Ayn Rand?

We know full well that SOME non-believers are idiots, psychopaths and lunatics. Just as we know that SOME deeply religious people are hard-core progressives. Both are outside the trends.

[dmallind]

28. So you have no example of such claims to offer eh?

Not claims that nonbelievers are MORE likely to be liberal - these claims are of course validated by the data above, but that nonbelievers are BY DEFINITION liberal. Anybody who claimed that would indded be not paying attention, but unless you can give some examples of these claims on DU, that charge cannot be laid on me.

[rug]

30. Read # 14.

[dmallind]

31. Read it already - contains or refers to no syuch claim. Stay on topic

[dmallind]

11. Would you prefer then an electorate entirely of the very religious or nonreligious given these data?

[rug]

13. I would base nothing on this data.

[dmallind]

15. Why not? What is the failing you see in the methodology?

[rug]

20. For one thing, it says nothing about liberals, despite the OP's misleading headline.

It simply states inclination toward party affiliation. I would base very little on self-proclaimed anonymous party affiliation. It says nothing about progressive policies.

[dmallind]

29. It says EVERYTHING though about which party would be elected, no? Stop changing the topic

If only the religious voted, Republicans would win every time. If only the nonreligious did, Democrats would win every time. And you REALLY can't say which of those you would prefer - or just really don't want to?

Plus I am pretty damn sure we can say Democratic voters are more liberal than Republican ones, so the OP stands

[rug]

38. No, it simply says how many people self-identify with which party.

And I'm pretty damn sure a lot of nonreligious voted for Reagan and Bush. If not, even by these numbers, they would not have won.

[dmallind]

55. So you suggest people identify with a party and do not vote for them in this magnitude? Why?

And I'm pterry damn sure the religious voted for Reagan and Bush at a far far higher rate than the nonreligious, or they certainly would not have won.

[RaleighNCDUer]

17. You say that as if there is some equivenency there.

With non-religious making up app. 15% of the general population, your great big 33% works out to 5 out of every hundred republicans being non-religious. That means 95% are either very religious or moderately religious, with the very religious predominating.

That puts the non-religious republicans in the same sort of demographic as Log Cabin republicans - choosing to be an extreme minority in a party that hates them, and which would, if possible, arrest or kill them.

[rug]

27. See 9.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

24. I think that's almost certainly nonsense - do you have a source?

The OP says that 1/3 of the nonreligious are republicans, which probably means less than 5% of the populace and less than 15% of Republicans.

[rug]

26. Corrected, see 9.

[SheilaT]

4. I hav enot been under the impression

that most self-styled Christians are liberal since the 1970's.

There was a time when the Catholic Church took the side of the poor and down-trodden, and so was somewhat by default liberal. Those days are long gone.

In the end, anyone who sincerely believes in any one of the monotheistic religions (I don't know enough about the poly-theistic ones to comment)is up against the "We are right, the rest of you are wrong", of their teachings. Which is why my problem is essentially with organized religions themselves,and not necessarily the underlying belief systems.

[cleanhippie]

7. Your last line really nails the point...

[PassingFair]

5. 60%....

of Howard Dean supporters (who participated in a
voluntary poll) in the 2004 race were NON-RELIGIOUS, even though
Dr. Dean listed himself as a Congregationalist.

That surprised even me at the time. But then, Dr. Dean
cut through the crap....

People who tend to identify as "Progressives" tend to
think that religion should butt out of politics.

I find that people who identify as "Liberals" tend to
be more religious (most Dem Catholics I know identify
as "Liberal Catholics").

These are not absolutes, of course.

[madrchsod]

21. i did`t know there was a myth....

i doubt liberal christians claim they are a majority.

[cleanhippie]

25. Then you need to read through the threads here in R&T. That claim is made frequently.

[dtexdem]

23. Myth? Or little-known fallacy?

Whoever thought that the very-religious tended to be liberal?

[dmallind]

32. Read any R/T thread referring to Christian conservative beliefs

You will frind claim after claim that fundamentalists and conservative beliefs are a minority and the fringe. Also refer to numerous threads claiming a Christian origin or motivation is the norm for progressive action or thought.

[markpkessinger]

33. Yeah, fujndamentalist evangelicals have this odd need to claim vicitim status ...

I think when they claim that ultra conservative beliefs are a "minority and the fringe," they are mostly referring to the old mainline protestant denominations (which ceased comprising a majority of Christians in the country decades ago). And by and large, relative to conservative evangelicals, the old mainliners (Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans, Disciples of Christ, United Church of Christ/Congregationalist and American (or "northern") Baptist -- are pretty liberal. Most of the mainline denominations abandoned a belief in the literal inerrancy of the Bible somewhere in the mid-19th C., and they've all long since made their peace with scientific knowledge. Most of the mainline denominations are now ordaining self-affirming gay men and lesbians to their clergy (some have officially embraced a policy of welcoming gays and lesbians, others have merely opted not to notice).

[Thats my opinion]

45. Here is one of the best researched posts we have seen nt.

[darkstar3]

46. Clearly you've skipped all of the posts that made you read more than a page.

[dmallind]

57. I think tangentially you hit on an important point

I confess my normal tendency is to dismiss the liberal Christian's claim of being in the majority of Christians as self-serving confirmation bias and a thinly veiled No True Scotsman trying to marginalize conservative/fundy/unsophisticated Christians as a small fringe away from the main group of believers rather than the large majority that the latter are. I wonder though if your title thought might not be a bigger factor than this. If the C/F/U Christians frequently claim to be a small group of oppressed victims (they do) and since they ARE so numerous, it's certainly possible this self-image has been absorbed in Christian circlers including liberal/mainline ones, who then have defaulted into the idea that if the C/F/U Xians are a small group, they themselves must be the majority of Christians.

Perhaps this delusion is more the fault of the real majority of C/F/U Xians rather than the liberal believers themselves. It would make sense, as the opinion of the majority of any group tends to color and inform the opinion of the whole group, even when it is self-servingly false.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

59. It really varies according to region and degree of urbanization

Middle-class and working-class Republicans tend to be evangelical or fundamentalist and live in the suburbs or small towns.

Urbanites who are religious tend to be liberal in both religion and politics, unless they're "old money" types who have "always been Republican."

[laconicsax]

34. Rec'd to zero.

Looks like some people don't want this more widely known.

[cbayer]

35. I know I should stay out of this, but I want to point out a couple of things.

The data you present does not include blacks, asians or hispanics.

The definition of "religious" does not specify any particular religion.

Honestly, the only conclusion that can be drawn here is that a significant number of white people who describe themselves as very religious are or lean Republican.

There may, in fact, be data to support the theory you put in your subject line, but this is certainly not it.

[laconicsax]

37. If you read the full results of the poll...

...you'll find that all non-white groups lean Democratic fairly uniformly regardless of religiosity. That said, within those fairly uniform political tendencies, the same pattern emerges with the highest Republican support coming from the most religious with the exception of "Non-Hispanic Blacks." "Hispanics" and "Asians" follow this trend while "Non-Hispanic Blacks" leaning Democratic at about the same rate regardless of religiosity. The fact is that the Republican party is the party of white people.

There's a summary of all Americans at the end: The "very religious" lean Republican 49%-36% and a majority of the "nonreligious" lean Democratic 52%-30%.

The largest exception to this trend seems to be those who identify as "moderately religious," a plurality of whom lean Democratic (44%-38%).

The real positive is that a plurality of all Americans is Democratic.

[cbayer]

39. I did read it and that is why I objected to the use of the data to support

a conclusion that it really doesn't support at all.

Bottom line:



This says absolutely nothing about what the OP intends to prove.

[trotsky]

40. Is it your assertion that a majority of U.S. Christians, regardless of race...

are Democrats/liberals?

[cbayer]

41. I have no clue, nor do I wish to debate it. My only point is that

the argument being made here is fallacious.

I have this thing about data and it's use, that's all.

[laconicsax]

43. You have no desire to debate, yet here you are, debating. n/t

[laconicsax]

42. It says volumes about both what the OP intends to prove AND what you want to pretend isn't true.

The acorn doesn't fall far from the tree, it seems.

[Behind the Aegis]

50. You got it correct.

"Honestly, the only conclusion that can be drawn here is that a significant number of white people who describe themselves as very religious are or lean Republican."

[darkstar3]

47. Clean, do you know the single most accurate truth about polls?

Very few people trust numbers unless those numbers agree with them.

(Personally, I agree with you, but in a forum where people question science and fact every single day, statistics are DOA.)

[cleanhippie]

54. Oh, I know.

The cognitive dissonance in here is fascinating to see.