Pat Dollard | Young Americans

The Swamp:

by Mike Dorning

The God Gap may be turning against Barack Obama in the Democratic primaries.

Buried within the exit polls from Pennsylvania are some signs that Obama’s appeal may be worsening with culturally conservative regular churchgoers.

That may not be too surprising given the controversies Obama encountered in the six-week run-up to the primary. Despite Obama’s later explanations, his comments at a San Francisco fundraiser that “bitter” small-town Americans “cling to” guns and religion are hardly likely to have endeared him to small-town churchgoers.

That followed circulation of a well-publicized video highlights reel of his former pastor’s incendiary sermons, including one in which the Rev. Jeremiah Wright declares blacks should sing “God Damn America” instead of “God Bless America.” Not only Wright’s comments but the African-style garb that the pastor is shown wearing every time the video clip is rerun no doubt feeds a suspicion that Obama’s outlook on life is far removed from the moral certitudes of religious traditionalists.

But it is easy to forget that at the beginning of his presidential campaign Obama was celebrated as a political figure who could reach out to the faithful. His candidacy held out the possibility of at least blunting among political moderates the enormous advantage the Republican party has amassed over Democrats among religiously observant voters.

Shortly after his election to the U.S. Senate, he delivered a well-received address arguing faith should have a greater role in public discourse. He has courted high-profile moderate evangelical leaders, including the Rev. Rick Warren, author of “The Purpose Driven Life.” Warren hosted Obama at a well-publicized appearance at his Saddleback Church in Orange County, California, shortly before Obama announced his presidential bid.

The memoir that essentially launched Obama’s presidential campaign took its title, “The Audacity of Hope” from a sermon, albeit one delivered by the now-infamous Wright. And the book featured an account of his conversion from a secular life to Christian faith.

On the trail, Obama often weaves the language of faith into speeches and his campaign has devoted considerable effort to an outreach program directed at religious voters.

Early in the campaign, that appeared to pay dividends.

Back in the nation’s first primary, in virtually all-white New Hampshire, Obama actually was the leading candidate among the most religious voters. Hillary Clinton may have won the New Hampshire primary, but Obama picked up the most votes from people who attend church once a week, winning 37 percent of them against 32 percent for Clinton and 21 percent for Edwards, according to exit polls.

By contrast in Pennsylvania, which Obama lost last week by 9 percentage points, his margin of defeat was doubled among regular churchgoers, who voted 59 percent for Clinton against 41 percent for Obama, according to exit polls. And that is in a primary which included a sizable number of African-Americans, who as a group are much more likely to be regular churchgoers. Blacks overwhelmingly support Obama.

As recently as seven weeks ago, in neighboring Ohio, a state with many similarities and a Democratic electorate with only slightly more African-Americans, regular churchgoers did not contribute disproportionately to Clinton’s 10-percentage point win. Her margin was actually tighter among them, though not significantly so: weekly churchgoers voted 51percent for Clinton against 47 percent for Obama.

Of course, Catholic voters have always been more disposed toward Clinton than Obama, and there are lots of Catholic voters in Pennsylvania.

But back in the nation’s first primary, even though New Hampshire Catholics as a group favored Clinton, religious devotion worked against Clinton among Catholics and did not work against Obama.

In New Hampshire, Clinton did best with Catholics who do not attend church regularly, winning them 47 percent against 26 percent for Obama and 22 percent for Edwards. Among Catholics who attend Mass weekly, Clinton was supported by a much-lower 36 percent against 28 percent for Obama and 29 percent for Edwards.

Well, suggested one Obama campaign aide, New Hampshire Catholics are culturally different in significant ways from the white ethnic Catholics of lower New England and the Mid-Atlantic states.

In other Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states with large white ethnic Catholic populations that previously have held primaries–Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland– Catholic voters all did favor Clinton. However, church attendance did not make them more likely to do so.

In each case, exit polls found regular Mass-goers registering within a few percentage points of Catholics who do not attend church regularly. In most of the primaries, Mass-goers were slightly more likely to vote for Obama–though not by a statistically significant margin. The same was true in the March primary in Ohio, a neighboring industrial Midwestern state that is much like Western Pennsylvania.

But that was not the case in Pennsylvania last week. Catholics who attend church weekly turned against Obama in much greater numbers than less observant Catholics. Catholics who attend church weekly voted 74 percent for Clinton and 26 percent for Obama; Catholic who do not attend church weekly voted 65 percent for Clinton and 35 percent for Obama. That’s a 48-point margin for Clinton among observant Catholics versus a 30-point margin among Cahtolics who are not regular churchgoers.

And that despite the anti-abortion, socially conservative Catholic Sen. Bob Casey Jr (D-Pa.) at Obama’s side throughout most of the Pennsylvania campaign.

Church-going among whites–and in Pennsylvania Catholics are mostly white–can be can be a marker for other traits. Older whites go to church more often than do younger whites. And whites without college degrees go to church in greater numbers than those with degrees. Both those groups are more supportive of Clinton.

Still, there is some reason to suspect that may not be the full explanation. Exit polls suggest Obama improved his showing with elderly voters in Pennsylvania compared to March. His performance among non-college graduates was about the same as in the Ohio primary in March.

It’s always possible that the Pennsylvania primary was simply an anomaly. And it’s also possible that the specific controversies leading up to the primary had a uniquely intense effect there, since voters facing an imminent election tend to be more engaged in a campaign and are exposed to much greater media coverage of the presidential contest.

Frank Newport, editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll, said that nationally divisions over the Democratic candidates among churchgoers have been pretty well set at least since mid-February and he has not detected a significant shift since then.

Newport looks at the views of non-Latino white Democrats, in order to avoid the impact of the heavy support for Obama among African-Americans and the heavy support for Clinton among Latinos, both groups that attend church in disproportionately large number.

Among non-Latino white churchgoers, Clinton has been consistently the favored candidate since at least Feb. 15, which is when Gallup first added a question on how often voters attend religious services to its daily presidential tracking poll, Newport said. That is well after most of the Mid-Atlantic and lower New England states voted in the Feb. 5 “Super Tuesday” primary.

Nationally, at least, the “God Gap” between the Democratic candidates has been both durable and sizable.

Among weekly non-Latino white Democrat weekly churchgoers, 55 percent favored Clinton against 32 percent for Obama in responses Feb. 15 through Feb. 29; 56 percent favored Clinton against 32 percent for Obama in March; and 53 percent favored Clinton against 36 percent Obama April 1 through April 20.

But, for Obama, the Pennsylvania primary results may be a warning of more trouble ahead in the church pews.