GOP makes gains with White Catholics in 2014

[Miles]

Article.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not this white Catholic!

As frustrating as it is disappointing, IMO. White Catholics are ignoring the Pope's warnings against neoliberalism and voting GOP because they're supposed to be against the ACA, which is one of the most pro-life bills ever passed.

[King]

There's no such thing as making gains in a record low 36% turnout election. They simply made fewer losses with White Catholics than the Democrats did.

[CatoMinor]

Those pesky neo-liebruls

[Mr. Illini]

This white Catholic voted the Democratic ticket.

This demographic will come back around. Obama is no longer well liked among Catholics because of the issue with Catholic hospitals and abortion coverage in the ACA. I don't think it is a long-term shift.

[IceSpear]

There's no such thing as making gains in a record low 36% turnout election. They simply made fewer losses with White Catholics than the Democrats did.

[Keystone Phil]

Congratetum Filipus!

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, except for the fact that it includes abortion. Apparently you forgot that the Stupak amendment failed.

Any party that treats Abortion like a sacrament and supports gay marriage is going to get demolished by White Catholics.

Like myself.

[GaussLaw]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, except for the fact that it includes abortion. Apparently you forgot that the Stupak amendment failed.

Any party that treats Abortion like a sacrament and supports gay marriage is going to get demolished by White Catholics.

Like myself.

Honestly, the truth is somewhere in the middle with the ACA.........it may reduce total # of abortions but it also does have some indirect ties with funding abortion.  I'm an Evangelical (but like Catholicism) and for me, the biggest thing is those Supreme Court nominations.  I don't want to vote for Senators who will vote to confirm pro-choice judges(and especially reject pro-life judges), especially on the Supreme Court.

[Miles]

^ I'm pro-life, but I'm not gonna vote for a party thats bent on screwing the poor.

This is really why we need some sort of Christian democratic movement in the USA. Maybe then less religious groups would be in bed with the Republicans.

[windjammer]

^ I'm pro-life, but I'm not gonna vote for a party thats bent on screwing the poor.

This is really why we need some sort of Christian democratic movement in the USA. Maybe then less religious groups would be in bed with the Republicans.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Can we get randian supporting poor hating Catholics who vote GOP to be excommunicated ?

[All Along The Watchtower]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, except for the fact that it includes abortion. Apparently you forgot that the Stupak amendment failed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.opm.gov/retirement-services/publications-forms/benefits-administration-letters/2013/13-207.pdf

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/mar/21/blog-posting/does-barack-obamas-health-care-bill-include-1-abor/

[Person Man]

What will happen to progressive-leaning pro-life catholics, fundamentalists, evangelicals and other pro-life pro-new deal people when Roe is overturned??

[Skill and Chance]

What will happen to progressive-leaning pro-life catholics, fundamentalists, evangelicals and other pro-life pro-new deal people when Roe is overturned??

A lot of that would depend on what happens with other social issues.  Does the Supreme Court just rule against abortion, or does it rule for the right on the entire basket of modern social issues over a few years.  Was it a 5/4 decision authored by a 90-year-old Scalia or was it 7/2?  The left certainly knows what a nightmare ensued in the 1880's when they gave up on that era's social issues.  So I think the most likely outcome would be all social issues, all the time for 12-24 years afterward until a more moderate consensus is restored, particularly if it isn't just abortion but regression on other issues where the moderately religious lean progressive.

[TJ in Oregon]

I'm one of those who supported the Democrats' congressional candidate last time but the Republicans' this time

Though it has a lot more to do with me voting in a different state than anything else. I actually voted straight-ticket Republican this year for the first time in my life. As long as I'm in Madison it will probably continue.

As for the topic if the thread, I would have been shocked if the result was anything else. White Catholics on the whole vote as a somewhat swing demographic with a slight populist lean and slight Republican lean. Given the overall result, it's no surprise white Catholics voted as we did. I wouldn't read much into it.

[TJ in Oregon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, except for the fact that it includes abortion. Apparently you forgot that the Stupak amendment failed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.opm.gov/retirement-services/publications-forms/benefits-administration-letters/2013/13-207.pdf

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/mar/21/blog-posting/does-barack-obamas-health-care-bill-include-1-abor/

It still does fund abortion to whatever extent money is fungible: plans covering abortion must set up two separate accounts one paying for abortions and one for everything else with the stipulation that federal money cannot be put into the abortion account except in case of rape or incest. So instead the federal money can be put into the other account and private funds shifted to the abortion account as needed (unless the abortion account was more than the private funds, but that would never happen anyway). The net result being that while the federal funds are prohibited from going directly into the abortion account, the fungibility of money means that they are effectively still subsidizing abortion coverage. The federal government can recite whatever talking points it wants, the fact that the government is subsidizing abortion through the account for the other services in the plans remains.

The Stupak Amendment would have closed this loophole by requiring plans covering abortion to charge a rider fee to pay specifically for the abortion coverage. As Ben Kenobi notes, it failed.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

White Catholics = olds

And there you have it. The reason for this and the whole election summed up.

[Franzl]

American Catholicism is strange.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nothing indirect about the abortion funding for Obamacare. It's why the Stupak Amendment to removed abortion funding failed. Abortion is considered a core part of the program.

It's also why no Catholic in good standing can support Obamacare.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah. So killing the poor is more merciful than letting them live. Life comes first. You can't help the poor if they are dead.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which explains this:

http://www.catholic.org/news/national/story.php?id=53796

I'm not sure how the Obama administration suing the little sisters of the poor is helping the poor.

[Dixie Reborn]

I am a white Catholic who would have voted for the straight Republican ticket if I weren't 16. Btw, this whole trend with white Catholics follows an overall trend of whites in general becoming more heavily Republican each cycle since 1976. I hope that soon the GOP will be winning >80% of the white vote.

[GaussLaw]

I am a white Catholic who would have voted for the straight Republican ticket if I weren't 16. Btw, this whole trend with white Catholics follows an overall trend of whites in general becoming more heavily Republican each cycle since 1976. I hope that soon the GOP will be winning >80% of the white vote.

No.  The last thing this country needs is more racial polarization.

[Mr. Illini]

American Catholicism is strange.

More liberal than European Catholicism? I'm intrigued.

[DC Al Fine]

This is really why we need some sort of Christian democratic movement in the USA. Maybe then less religious groups would be in bed with the Republicans.

Alas, that won't happen without proportional representation. Then we could actually vote in American elections without holding our noses