He also would have lost if the Boomers had voted 53-42 for McCain.
That’s not a big shift. That’s the point I’m making. A 5 point shift in the boomers changes the whole election.
You are right that Catholics have traditionally been a democrat voting block, but the fact that the two elections in which they have voted republican were in 2000 and 2004, suggests that Catholics are becoming, more not less republican over time.
The opposite is true of the baby boomers. Hence my concern. You forget that the majority of the problems in the Catholic church come from the Ted Kennedy, Vatican II bunch which includes the boomers. They are the Catholics who voted lockstep for the Kennedys, etc.
“Your constant defense of that 66% Obama vote and your seeming hopes for its continued growth in the future is astounding, you actually look forward to that Obama youth vote taking over.”
I do, yes, look forward to the young people taking over. They certainly can’t do worse than the Boomers like Obama and co. I’d be thrilled if another boomer president was never elected, but we shall see. We have to take what we can get. I like Cain. He’s a boomer, but he gets it.
So does Bachmann. Palin would be awesome because she’s not a boomer and would do a great job running the country. Perry too. There’s lots of good boomer candidates out there.
Now we just have to hope the Boomers can vote in one of their own.
I just told you that Catholics voted against Bush in 2000, and that polls are in dispute for whether they voted for him in 2004, Gallup and the National Election Studies say they didn’t.
Ted Kennedy was not a boomer, nor was any human involved in Vatican II. No boomer ever voted for JFK, Herman Cain is not a boomer, Sarah Palin is a boomer.