Replies

Interesting. For historical reasons (from the Know-nothing days), the Catholic vote went to the party which supposedly "cared for them" -- the Democrats. I use the term "supposedly" because the Dims did a good job of pretending to do so.

CATHOLICS WERE NOT a notable presence on the U.S. political scene until the 1830s and 1840s, when the Germans and Irish began arriving in large numbers. These immigrants faced strong opposition from the Know-Nothings and other nativist groups who feared that the immigrant hordes represented a papist invasion. Catholics opted to join the Democratic Party because it was friendlier to minority groups than the Protestant-dominated Whigs and the Republicans, who were seen as too accommodating to nativists.

The partnership between Catholics and Democrats was not always amiable. At the turn of the century, divisions erupted in the party between Catholics and party leaders in the South and West. Among the forces that drove them apart was the candidacy of William Jennings Bryan in 1896. Bryan supported Prohibition and opposed parochial schools, which did not sit well with Irish Catholics. Irish Americans were also upset when, 20 years later, Democrat Woodrow Wilson decided to enter the Great War on the side of the hated British.

Catholic support for the Democrats continued strong throughout World War II and afterward. Many Catholics switched parties in 1952 to support the moderate Republican Dwight Eisenhower, and a majority voted for his re-election in 1956. But Catholics returned in force to support Kennedy, who would be the first Catholic to win the presidency. Close to 80 percent of Catholics cast their votes for Kennedy, an unprecedented show of support that would not be repeated.

The election of 1972 proved to be crucial in the Catholic-Democratic partnership. Dissatisfied by the liberal social views of George McGovern, a majority of Catholics voted for Nixon. That year also saw a change in Democratic strategic alliances that would have long-term effects on the influence of Catholics within the party. The primary architect of the new strategy was Fred Dutton, who argued in a 1971 book Changing Sources of Power: American Politics in the 1970s that the Democrats should break with Catholics

The fallout from these changes was evident eight years later, when Ronald Reagan handily won the Catholic vote. During both terms of the Reagan presidency, there was much hand-wringing about the “Reagan Catholics” and why they had been won over by the Republican Party.

Clinton used language that appealed to Catholics who wanted to vote Democrat but had qualms about what they perceived to be the party’s lax attitude on moral issues. Clinton’s pledge to make abortion “safe, legal, and rare” won the support of many Catholics, who felt that was a good compromise in a country where a complete prohibition was unlikely. Clinton’s endorsement of traditionally conservative issues—such as school uniforms for children in public school and the “V-chip”—also appealed to many Catholics.

George W Bush also did very well with Catholics. He hired a special adviser on Catholic issues, and his endorsement of faith-based initiatives and school vouchers won him points among the Catholic electorate. Bush won 47 percent of the Catholic vote in 2000, and then 52 percent in 2004. Conservative pundits have pointed out that he did even better among Catholics who attend Mass at least once a week.

Today, it is often said that Catholics are politically homeless—driven away from the Democratic Party by the polarizing issue of abortion, yet uncomfortable with Republican stances on the free market and the death penalty. no political party has a platform in line with Catholic social teaching.

George W Bush made significant inroads among Catholic voters because he used language—and chosen issues—that appeal to Catholics. “Compassionate conservative,” after all, is a term that could describe many Catholics, who are conservative on social issues yet favor government programs for the poor.

Why did 48% not vote Democrat at the last election? I think they were the church-going ones and were the ones who actually THOUGHT and didn't get caught up in the entire "CHANGE" chants.

The thing is that in most elections there are multiple variables -- as a good Catholic, I cannot vote for anyone who supports abortion, but then that limits the pool and I may have to choose someone who supports other things that I find intolerable -- this is more the case in Europe than America, I agree, but I'm just giving an example.

Secondly, I would like to see the numbers of below 30 and above 30s who voted for Ohbummer and the number of those who attended service/mass at least once a week versus those who didn't

I feel sure that the majority of those who went for a Protestant service or a Catholic/Orthodox mass at least once a week did NOT vote for ohbummer. I also feel sure (and I think I read it somewhere after the Pres election) that the majority of the +30 (or was it +40) year olds did NOT vote for Ohbummer.