Yes, according to Tiffany Stanley’s recent article in The New Republic.
Between 2004 and 2007, when Obama announced his candidacy for president, he became possibly the most prominent Democratic politician who was comfortable speaking about religion—a liberal who gave the impression that his religiosity was heartfelt, genuine, and important to his politics. He spoke with ease about his conversion; of the influence of Reinhold Niebuhr and Martin Luther King, Jr.; and, in a key speech before the Call to Renewal conference in 2006, of the importance of “religion in the public square.” In the 2008 presidential election, Obama’s message seemed to resonate with religious people who had not, in recent years, gravitated toward the Democratic Party. He won more churchgoers than any Democratic presidential candidate since Bill Clinton.
But, in just two short years, the left has become sluggish in its courtship of religious voters, significantly scaling back its faith-outreach programs. While many factors—primarily the economy—doomed the Democrats this fall, the consequences of this abdication nevertheless seem to be severe. In the recent midterm elections, House Democrats lost white evangelical voters in greater numbers than they did in 2004, when “values voters” flocked to George W. Bush. Reversing their Democratic allegiance from the past two elections, Catholics—nearly a quarter of all voters—favored the GOP 54 to 44 percent. Compared to 2008, the drop-offs were steep: a 20-point decline with Catholics, a 14-point decline with white evangelicals, and a 10-point decline with white Protestants. How and why did this happen?
So here is the question: Did the Democrat’s failure to attract religious votes in the 2010 midterm election happen because:
a). Democrats, as Stanley argues in her piece, stopped speaking religious language and appealing to religious voters.
b). Americans did not like how much money Obama was spending and it just so happens that people who do not like such government spending are also religious.
Which leads to another question: If Obama’s spending on health care, the bailout, etc… would have been somehow couched in religious language, would Democrats have fared better among religious voters?
By avoiding any mention whatsoever of abortion, she's shed very little light on the subject. Ask most Catholics why they voted for Bush over Kerry and they won't say it was because Kerry “felt uncomfortable” talking about his faith.
سما احمد says
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.