Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Low turnout--evangelicals sat it out?
Powerline ^ | Nov. 8, 2012 | Steven Hayward

Posted on 11/08/2012 11:29:45 AM PST by fifedom

Romney may underperform (or barely match) in turnout the listless McCain in 2008. According to exit polls Romney won white evangelicals by a four-to-one margin—as high or higher than George W. Bush in 2004. Could it have been that many evangelicals couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon, and simply stayed home?

(Excerpt) Read more at powerlineblog.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; 2012analysis; 2012analysisreligion; 2012electionanalysis; election; mormons; president
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-94 next last
A Disquieting Thought

Wait, the turnout was what?! As the numbers continue to come into focus (and the final vote tally is still days or weeks away), the fact that Romney may underperform (or barely match) the listless McCain in 2008 is the real shocker of the election. Maybe we should have just run McCain/Palin again. Obama’s vote total will be down something like six to eight million from his 2008 total; it is unprecedented for a president to be re-elected without adding to his vote total from the first election. Hardly a vote of confidence.

The white vote, it turns out, was tepid. If the white vote had turned out to its potential, Romney wins and we wouldn’t need to go through the current hand-wringing about whether the GOP needs to seek amnesty from Latinos. What’s going on here? Keep two factoids in mind. First, according to exit polls Romney won white evangelicals by a four-to-one margin—as high or higher than George W. Bush in 2004. But second, recall Karl Rove’s theory after the 2000 election that Bush’s missing majority in that train-wreck election was the 3 million or so evangelicals who stayed home and didn’t vote, possibly because they were put off by the late DUI news about Bush. Finding and (successfully) turning out those voters became the key to Bush’s increased margin of victory in 2004.

It’s going to be a while before we know better whether the total potential evangelical vote didn’t turn out for Romney, and if not, why. Could it have been that many evangelicals couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon, and simply stayed home? I distinctly recall polling data from back in 2008 that found as many as 20 percent of voters said they wouldn’t vote for a Mormon (versus only about 1 or 2 percent for a black or a Jew), and I wondered whether those 20 percent were un- or anti-religious liberals who wouldn’t vote for a Republican in any case, or whether they were theologically conservative evangelicals who are uncomfortable with heterodox Mormon doctrine? I’ve had numerous conversations with serious evangelical friends over the last couple of years who all said of course I’ll vote for Romney because I can’t stand Obama, but they admitted having doubts about it. My self-selecting sample are mostly intellectual and politically-engaged evangelicals; what about the kind of evangelical that doesn’t like or follow politics closely? Keep in mind that a lot of evangelicals eschew politics as a this-worldly dominion best left alone: the City of Man versus City of God.

Sean Trende doesn’t think so. He thinks rural whites in Ohio just didn’t turn out. Neither does AllahPundit, who offers some exit poll numbers. But Charlie Martin thinks maybe so. And see David Mason in the Washington Post today:

Evangelical America has been flogging Mormonism as Satan’s own retail outlet for decades. But the suddenly ubiquitous appearances of the word cult on the eleven o’clock news and in ostensibly serious political conversations in the early primary days gave legitimacy on the national stage to the characterization of me as a glassy-eyed, reclusive loon from whom the neighborhood alley cats run in fear.

One thing for sure: the major media and establishment political analysts won’t touch this with a ten-foot pole.

1 posted on 11/08/2012 11:29:58 AM PST by fifedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Could it have been that many evangelicals couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon,

I am so sick and tired of this question....This is the correct question.......COULD IT HAVE BEEN THAT MANY EVANGELICALS COULDN’T BRING THEMSELVES TO VOTE FOR A LYING SACK OF CRAP LIBERAL ROMNEY?????? It had nothing to do with Mormonism. I am neither Mormon or Evangelical.


2 posted on 11/08/2012 11:43:29 AM PST by napscoordinator (GOP Candidate 2020 - "Bloomberg 2020 - We vote for whatever crap the GOP puts in front of us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

That Obama did so poorly compared to 2008 is what makes this loss so much more depressing. Victory was clearly there for the taking, yet our side didn’t turn out to it’s potential, and we didn’t turn enough of Obama’s white voters who did actually vote.


3 posted on 11/08/2012 11:43:29 AM PST by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fifedom
I believe that was the case with the missing Republican votes.

Strangely I have talked to a number of religious black people who said they were not going to vote for president this time because they did not like either candidate. I'm not sure if there was a missing number of black voters or if they were just blowing smoke.

Did the presidential vote numbers come out the same as the other races?

4 posted on 11/08/2012 11:44:33 AM PST by oldbrowser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I just read things indicating the Evangelical turnout was as high as ever, now it is being doubted again? Does anyone actually KNOW or is this based on “exit polls” again or what?

Maybe we all need to let this simmer for awhile until some real number crunching can go on. It seems the GOP/Conservative numbers crunchers are getting their AZ!Z kicked by Lib numbers crunchers....so let’s give it a while to figure things out.


5 posted on 11/08/2012 11:46:46 AM PST by Crimson Elephant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

If voting against Obama isn’t enough to get Evangelicals off their asses and to the polls, what is?

I say screw ‘em as a voting bloc.


6 posted on 11/08/2012 11:54:16 AM PST by Retired Greyhound (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
..COULD IT HAVE BEEN THAT MANY EVANGELICALS COULDN’T BRING THEMSELVES TO VOTE FOR A LYING SACK OF CRAP LIBERAL ROMNEY??????

In '08, the G.O.P.e. handed us a s### sandwich and said, " here's a very nice sandwich, go ahead, eat it, you'll like it".

So in 2012, they hand us another s### sandwich and tell us, "you'll like this one much better, for you see, this time, it's on toast"!

7 posted on 11/08/2012 12:03:35 PM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Crimson Elephant
No they don’t know, they said this crud after McCain lost and it turned out to not be the case. I’m seeing this malarkey so much here today, I wonder if there’s not a little “agent provocateuring” going on.
8 posted on 11/08/2012 12:04:47 PM PST by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P

It’s most likely not even true, just as it wasn’t after McCain. I notice that the people who plainly said they wouldn’t vote for Romney-the libertarian types-aren’t being mentioned.


9 posted on 11/08/2012 12:06:21 PM PST by mrsmel (One Who Can See)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Holly_P

I guess next time they’ll skip the bread and just feed us the s###.


10 posted on 11/08/2012 12:09:21 PM PST by The Bard (http://www.myfbc.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Retired Greyhound
Unwad them knickers. Evangelicals turned out 80 percent for Mitt. More than any other demographic. Even more then Mormons!

 

11 posted on 11/08/2012 12:09:46 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fifedom
Could it have been that many evangelicals couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon, and simply stayed home?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nope. Not at all......

Linkie.

12 posted on 11/08/2012 12:14:04 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Your table only shows the percentages among people who voted. It does not say what fraction of each group actually turned out to vote. The original article makes it clear that Romney did well among evangelicals who actually did vote.


13 posted on 11/08/2012 12:19:56 PM PST by fifedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Evangelicals were a slightly larger part of the 2012 electorate than in 2008. The raw numbers were down, but that was true across the board in pretty much all subgroups.


14 posted on 11/08/2012 12:21:34 PM PST by kevkrom (If a wise man has an argument with a foolish man, the fool only rages or laughs...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Basically, the republicans said to conservatives, “Screw you. We don’t need your input. We don’t support your values. You embarrass us. Go away. We don’t need you to win.”

Since the republicans chose to run Romney, they have no one but themselves to blame for the loss.

Message to republicans, if you want conservative support, run a real conservative!


15 posted on 11/08/2012 12:24:40 PM PST by Jemian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Unwad them knickers. Evangelicals turned out 80 percent for Mitt. More than any other demographic. Even more then Mormons!

Did fewer numbers of Evangelicals over all turn out to vote? 80% of those Evangelicals who voted on the presidential race does not take into account Evangelicals who stayed home or only voted down ticket, the latter numbers are the relevant numbers.

16 posted on 11/08/2012 12:25:36 PM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I should have read the rest of the replies, before replying.


17 posted on 11/08/2012 12:28:02 PM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
I followed the links to the original article. The source is hardly un-biased. It comes from a survey by Ralph reed's organization, who have a vested interest in making themselves look successful.

If Reed is correct, how do you explain that the latest numbers indicate Romney got fewer votes than McCain?
18 posted on 11/08/2012 12:28:49 PM PST by fifedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Retired Greyhound
I say screw ‘em as a voting bloc.

Already been said by the republican party. This "battered wife" just left the abuser and said, "screw someone else."

19 posted on 11/08/2012 12:28:49 PM PST by Jemian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fifedom
The original article makes it clear that Romney did well among evangelicals who actually did vote.
 

Really? With a question like this "Could it have been that many evangelicals couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon, and simply stayed home?" it looked like another "Blame Christians First" article.

Is your post # 1 part of the article? Naturally I didn't click the link. And since you posted such a short incomplete excerpt, I figured there wasn't anything to read anyway.

20 posted on 11/08/2012 12:29:45 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Unwad them knickers. Evangelicals turned out 80 percent for Mitt. More than any other demographic. Even more then Mormons!

I followed the links to the original article. The source is hardly un-biased. It comes from a survey by Ralph reed's organization, who have a vested interest in making themselves look successful.

If Reed is correct, how do you explain that the latest numbers indicate Romney got fewer votes than McCain?
21 posted on 11/08/2012 12:29:54 PM PST by fifedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

What difference does it make? Are YOU assuming Christians are responsible for Romney getting fewer votes than McCain? And if you care to notice - the chart is a Pew Research Groups chart. And if was Ralph Reed’s? Should we just throuw it out, because - after all - he’s one of them evangelicals?

And how do YOU explain that the latest numbers indicate Obama (2012) got fewer (8 million fewer) votes than Obama (2008)?

I credit Evangelicals. If only there were more of us. If only the GOP didn’t kick us to the curb.


22 posted on 11/08/2012 12:35:58 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Is your post # 1 part of the article?

Yes the first post is the article.

You can call it bashing evangelicals but the question remains why is the vote total lower? I do to think it is bashing anyone to ask the question whether it was due to lower turnout among a group. If they did not turn out and they did vote in previous elections, then what is the reason?

It may be as you have stated that Romney was too liberal for them, but do you think Romney is more liberal than McCain?
23 posted on 11/08/2012 12:38:42 PM PST by fifedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Could it be that the Romney’s strategy of ignoring conservatives by chasing
moderates and independents on both sides was a failed strategy?

Me thinks so.


24 posted on 11/08/2012 12:39:33 PM PST by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Are YOU assuming Christians are responsible for Romney getting fewer votes than McCain?

I do not know and neither does the article state that is true.

And if you care to notice - the chart is a Pew Research Groups chart. And if was Ralph Reed’s? Should we just throuw it out, because - after all - he’s one of them evangelicals?

I was referring to the article in The Christian Post that I found by follwing your link twice removed. Don't get YOUR knickers in a wad. I am not bashing evamgelicals. I am asking a question.

If the lower turnout was due to some other reason, then that is also important. Perhaps as has been suggested in this thread it was because Romney is too moderate. But more moderate than McCain??
25 posted on 11/08/2012 12:47:29 PM PST by fifedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

This is all in this Rino’s imagination. He does not even offer evangelical voting stats to base this rant upon.

When you run a progressive liberal against a progressive liberal, it might turn some people off. The GOP knew that when they ran Mittens. They knew Obamacare was based on Romneycare andthat Americans rejected Obamacare (a big economic issue).

It’s over for the two party system now. We have a socialist health care system that has total control over life and death. We have a police state/KGB rapidly coming of age and naming Americans their enemy. We have an open system of liberal racism. From the looks of Europe, political competitions are based on teams of disgusting elitists fighting to eat the white corpse of the West they slayed.


26 posted on 11/08/2012 1:01:06 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Is Romney more liberal than McCain? That is a darn good question. I’m late for an appointment, but when I get a chance, I’ll put some thought into that and get back to you.


27 posted on 11/08/2012 1:12:43 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Well, it’s clear that when the evangelicals do vote, they vote strongly for conservatives. I realize that Free Republic is a conservative Catholic site, but maybe the bigger question is “What are the numbers for Catholic voters?”


28 posted on 11/08/2012 1:13:09 PM PST by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crimson Elephant; fifedom; Responsibility2nd; SaraJohnson; Holly_P; Retired Greyhound; ...
I just read things indicating the Evangelical turnout was as high as ever, now it is being doubted again? Does anyone actually KNOW or is this based on “exit polls” again or what? [Crimson Elephant]

Well, thus far the best source I've found that at least provides indicators as to how many Evangelicals voted is Pew Forum's exit polls: How the Faithful Voted: 2012 Preliminary Analysis

Per Pew Forum's exit polls, were white Evangelicals a greater part of the 2012 voting block vs. 2008 and 2004? Or less?

Answer? Well, I just crunched the rough #s based upon Pew Forum's exit polls...and more -- not less -- white Evangelicals voted in 2012...than either in 2008 or 2004.

It looks like almost 31 million white Evangelicals voted in 2012; compared to about 30 million in 2008, and compared to about 26 & 1/4 million in 2004.

How did white Evangelicals compare to other voter segments...in staying home or not?

Answer: They were 24% of the voting block in 2012; 23% in 2008; 21% in 2004.

Which religious voter groups turned out significantly less in 2012? (a) OTHER white Protestants -- not Evangelicals; (b) white Catholics

Per Pew Forum white Protestants dropped from 42% of the pie in 2008 to 39% in 2012...keep in mind, tho, that the mainline denominations are "aging" & unless a Dem "resurrects" a dead voter, they don't vote from the grave...

Still, 42% of about 132,654 (2008) vs. 39% of about 128 million is a drop-off of over 4 million voters!

Also, white Catholics dropped from 19% in 2008 to 18% in 2012...Because the voter pool was smaller in 2012, that's about 2 million LESS white Catholics turning out...(I estimate a drop from just over 25 million to just over 23 million)...obviously some of them died and weren't replaced by younger Catholic voters.

Note also that Pew Forum's exit polling showed that more white Evangelicals, %-wise, voted for Romney than even Mormons! Pew Forum says the breakdowns were 79-20% by white Evangelicals; and 78-21% by Lds!

CNN exit polls for votes by white Evangelicals were similar (78-21% Romney)

White Catholics voted Romney 59-40%...but because of Latino Catholics, the overall Catholic vote went to Obama (50-48%)

29 posted on 11/08/2012 1:13:09 PM PST by Colofornian (Some say "we're not voting 4 'pastor-in-chief'" --as if "gods-in-embryo" were divine only on Sundays)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: fifedom
As it turns out... running the inventor of Romney-Care against the inventor of Obama-Care for President was not too good of an idea..

ONLY one word can be used to express this situation..
DUUUUUUUUUUUGGH!.. (you buy them books they eat the pages)..

**note; I'm joining a party that don't have morons in charge of it..

30 posted on 11/08/2012 1:13:47 PM PST by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Most of the Evangelicals are in states Romney won. Many voted for him.

Ohio vote total right here.

Democratic

Barack Obama

Joe Biden

2,691,861

50.18%

18

Republican

Mitt Romney

Paul Ryan

2,584,620

48.18%

0

Libertarian

Gary Johnson

Jim Gray

47,191

0.88%

0

Green

Jill Stein

Cheri Honkala

17,814

0.33%

0

Independent

Richard Duncan

12,099

0.23%

0

Totals

5,364,324

100.00%

18

Romney didn’t lose by much, so I doubt evangelicals were the real reason. Romney only lost by a little over 107,000 votes. Gary Johnson peeled off 47,000. Some more were peeled off with fraud.


31 posted on 11/08/2012 1:14:28 PM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueunicorn6; All
...maybe the bigger question is “What are the numbers for Catholic voters?”

See post #29...

Because of the Hispanic vote for Obama (71-27%), latino Catholics shifted the overall Catholic vote...White Catholics voted Romney 59-40%...overall Catholic vote was 50-48% Obama...

But it appears white Catholics dropped their turnout by about 2 million voters...

32 posted on 11/08/2012 1:15:46 PM PST by Colofornian (Some say "we're not voting 4 'pastor-in-chief'" --as if "gods-in-embryo" were divine only on Sundays)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: dforest
Romney didn’t lose by much, so I doubt evangelicals were the real reason

I've seen one U.S. map from yesterday that had interesting red and blue dots by regional areas...was posted by a Mormon...

The only place it appeared where an Evangelical drop-off occurred that allowed a sudden swath of blue to appear was the Deep South.

That blue swath runs from Louisiana to North Carolina...and seemed to be most prominent in Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina.

Now, those are states where voters knew that Romney would win quite handily...so they didn't see their votes as "key." And...it didn't effect a single electoral vote ... IOW I didn't see that same blue swath show up in Florida...except for a few dots toward the inland swamps in furthest south Florida...(NW of Miami)

33 posted on 11/08/2012 1:20:57 PM PST by Colofornian (Some say "we're not voting 4 'pastor-in-chief'" --as if "gods-in-embryo" were divine only on Sundays)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Could it have been that many evangelicals couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon,

I am so sick and tired of this question....This is the correct question.......COULD IT HAVE BEEN THAT MANY EVANGELICALS COULDN’T BRING THEMSELVES TO VOTE FOR A LYING SACK OF CRAP LIBERAL ROMNEY??????

Bravo


34 posted on 11/08/2012 1:35:40 PM PST by svcw (Why is one cell on another planet considered life, and in the womb it is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fifedom
Could it have been that many evangelicals couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon, and simply stayed home?

I know someone who attends "The Cowboy Church" (a subsidiary of the Southern Baptist Convention, IIRC)..

That person voted for Gary Johnson..
I was incredulous..A Baptist voting for legalized drugs and prostitution, pro choice..

35 posted on 11/08/2012 1:44:57 PM PST by sockmonkey (Of Course I didn't read the article. After all, this is FreeRepublic..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Romney won white evangelicals by a four-to-one margin—
_____________________________________________

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Mormons voted for Willard by the same margin...about 4 to 1...

Those extra Mormons who didnt vote for Willard are obviously BIGOTS...


36 posted on 11/08/2012 1:46:35 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Thanks. I suspected it was an anti-Christian rino kook rant. I’ve seen a few of them since the election.

When the rinos lose, it’s time for the pin the tail on the evangelical Christian game. They had Palin to blame last time.

They are also blaming the only successful aspect of politics that have enpowered the GOP - the Tea Party.


37 posted on 11/08/2012 1:47:05 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Could it be voter fraud, tampering with electronic voting machines, lost ballots?

Nooooooo.......

It’s got to be anti-Mormon bigotry.

What a bunch of whiney, cry baby martyrs.

Too bad, so sad. The martyr complex does not wear well on Mormons with THEIR history.

And I don’t know of a person who objected to Mitt’s religion as much as his pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage, Romneycare, big government past policies, and who believe for a minute he really changed his position.


38 posted on 11/08/2012 1:48:04 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
I am so sick and tired of this question....This is the correct question.......COULD IT HAVE BEEN THAT MANY EVANGELICALS COULDN’T BRING THEMSELVES TO VOTE FOR A LYING SACK OF CRAP LIBERAL ROMNEY?????? It had nothing to do with Mormonism. I am neither Mormon or Evangelical.

Well, I am an Evangelical, and you are exactly right. It wasn't his Mormonism.

39 posted on 11/08/2012 1:48:59 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Hevk if even the Mormonbs think Willard is stinko...

why are you complaining about other religions ???

This Christian didnt vote for Willard either...

Me and the Mormons agree...

stranger things have happened...


40 posted on 11/08/2012 1:49:24 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
With a question like this "Could it have been that many evangelicals couldn’t bring themselves to vote for a Mormon, and simply stayed home?" it looked like another "Blame Christians First" article.

Christians got fed to the lions in Nero's day and it looks like nothing has changed in 2,000 years.

Only now they call it *throwing them under the bus*.

41 posted on 11/08/2012 2:05:57 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: blueunicorn6; Jim Robinson
I realize that Free Republic is a conservative Catholic site, but maybe the bigger question is “What are the numbers for Catholic voters?”

I don't believe that FR is a conservative Catholic site. I don't recall that any denominational affiliation has ever been given. Intentionally so, if my guess is right.

Pinging JR just to clear it up.

42 posted on 11/08/2012 2:10:29 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Actually if you've been reading FR post-election comments there are many who refused to vote for the "worshiper of a false prophet."

That's right, Freepers would rather not vote for Romney over his Mormon faith than stop a man who advocates infanticide and the fundamental transformation of America.

Traitorous cowards every one of them. If you didn't vote Romney, I put you in the same group.

43 posted on 11/08/2012 2:16:10 PM PST by newzjunkey (Obama thanks Pontius Pilate Freepers for giving him four more years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Check out the religious section of FR. Look at the thread titles. If a non-Catholic should post to one of the rare non-Catholic threads, the “all you non-Catholic Christians bow down to the Pope and Mary,” and “the RCC is the only true church,” etc., comes barging in.


44 posted on 11/08/2012 2:36:44 PM PST by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: fifedom
Is your post # 1 part of the article?

Yes the first post is the article.

If it's an "excerpt only" source, it's against F.R. posting rules to post the entire article in a reply, you're flirting with an infringement law suit against F.R. to do so.

If it's not an "excerpt only" source, why not post the entire article where it belongs?

45 posted on 11/08/2012 2:37:02 PM PST by Holly_P
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sasportas; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; caww; ...

Oh boy do I know that. Been there, done that.

I understand where you’re coming from. I just don’t think it’s an official position.


46 posted on 11/08/2012 3:22:01 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey; aimhigh; AmericanArchConservative; aMorePerfectUnion; R; annieokie; AnTiw1; ...
That's right, Freepers would rather not vote for Romney over his Mormon faith than stop a man who advocates infanticide and the fundamental transformation of America.

Romney advocates infanticide and the fundamental transformation of America, himself.

obama and Romney are two peas in a pod ideologically and politically. The only difference is in the implementation of their plans. Romney is willing to go slower and pander to the conservatives in the meantime to get their support.

47 posted on 11/08/2012 3:26:42 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey; aimhigh; AmericanArchConservative; aMorePerfectUnion; R; annieokie; AnTiw1; ...
That's right, Freepers would rather not vote for Romney over his Mormon faith than stop a man who advocates infanticide and the fundamental transformation of America.

And I can't believe what I am about to do here, because I never thought in a million years that I'd find anything even remotely positive sounding to say about obama, but to his credit, at least he's been up front and honest to some degree about what he plans to do.

Romney lies.

48 posted on 11/08/2012 3:28:37 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd; fifedom

OK, I’m back. And (drumroll, please)

I think Mitt Romney is more liberal than John McCain.

Romney’s record in Massachussetts was pro-gay, pro-abortion. But he did balance their budget and I believe has better conservative values than McCain.

McCain collaborated with too many libs in the Senate. He is famous for “reaching accross the aisle”. Yet his experience would have done the country a world of good.

Either way, Mitt or McCain would have been a million times better for our Country than Obozo is. Even Hillary would have done far less damage than B. Hussein.


49 posted on 11/08/2012 3:29:06 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey; metmom; All
That's right, Freepers would rather not vote for Romney over his Mormon faith than stop a man who advocates infanticide and the fundamental transformation of America.

(As if Romney was "anti-infanticide"...he told CBS News Aug. 27, 2012 that he favored dismembering pre-borns whose mom either have a life OR HEALTH matter..."health" being the exact same huge loophole Roe vs. Wade used in 1973)

Dec of 2007 Romney told Katie Couric that parents could either give up their embryos for adoption -- or for "research."

Now you may disgrace yourself and call such embryos as "unliving" or something, but remember, Jesus was once one...

Hence, you -- and almost 60 million others -- are now officially in the "pro-abort" camp...'cause you voted for one!!!

50 posted on 11/08/2012 3:33:17 PM PST by Colofornian (Some say "we're not voting 4 'pastor-in-chief'" --as if "gods-in-embryo" were divine only on Sundays)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-94 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson