I don’t understand your thought process in translating female votes into Catholic votes.
Huckabee got a lot of women, but Rush was just dissecting the vote, and Huckabee’s largest voting block was rural, evangelical women. That does not describe very many Catholics.
Catholics are going to be naturally suspicious of a former Baptist pastor, especially one who called the best known Catholic bigot in the country “one of the greatest Christian leaders in America.”
Don’t forget that Catholics, as a whole, usually vote Dem anyway. Only in 1984 and 2004 did the majority of Catholics vote for the Republican. And in critical states, like Florida and Ohio, Catholics are the largest single religion, which is one of the reasons they are swing states. In a choice between Obama and Huckabee with Bloomburg thrown in just to make things interesting, Obama will take a plurality of the Catholic vote.
And, if you’d asked me before the vote if Huckabee would get a lot of women, I’d have said yes, since women tend to vote more with their emotions than their intellect. And I’ll make another prediction: “moderate” women, given a choice between Obama and Huckabee, will choose Obama.
My analogy was a general one...namely that assumptions don't translate into reality.
Catholics are going to be naturally suspicious of a former Baptist pastor, especially one who called the best known Catholic bigot in the country “one of the greatest Christian leaders in America.”
Was the above true of Romney as well? Were Catholics naturally suspicious of a former LDS bishop, especially one who whose ancestor called the entire Catholic church "the whore of Babylon" & who believes that ALL Catholics--Pope and all--are apostates of the faith?