So you’re saying that of the percentage of evangelicals who voted, more voted for Romney than Obama. Alright. How about in numbers of evangelical voters compared to George Bush in 2000 and 2004? Even if 100 percent of the evangelicals voted for Romney, it would do him no good if only a few of them came out to vote.
Percentage means much less when fewer people turn out to vote. The truth is that with the exception of Mormons, Romney did not light a fire under any group. Liberals, who run as republicans, tend to have that problem.
See post #33 for turnout numbers. They were massive.
All states have certified vote totals except for New York and Hawaii (astoundingly, New York may not be done for weeks more.)
Accounting for population growth, Romney got 96.8% of the votes that Bush did in 2004 in the Bible Belt states other than Texas (for obvious reasons Texas skews the results); these include Oklahoma, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina.
In all the states OUTSIDE the Bible Belt, Romney only got 88.4% compared to Bush.
It's pretty clear that Romney got MORE support from evangelicals and the "base" than he did from moderates and independents, and the cause for the loss was not getting enough moderate and independent votes.