Poll: Catholic voters tilting toward Romney

But will that hold? 

Details:

Despite a battle over birth-control policy between the White House and Roman Catholic leaders, Catholics’ political views differ little from those of non-Catholic voters, according to Reuters/Ipsos poll results released on Monday.

About four in 10, or 37 percent, of Catholic voters approve of Democratic President Barack Obama’s performance, and 48 percent disapprove, according to the online survey of registered voters conducted February 6-13.

The numbers are nearly identical for non-Catholic, with 37 percent approving and 50 percent disapproving, the online poll found.

Twenty-five percent of Catholic voters feel the country is headed in the right direction, and 61 percent believe it is not, the survey said, compared with 24 percent and 63 percent for non-Catholics.

Results for Catholics and non-Catholics also both show a statistical dead heat if Republican Mitt Romney were his party’s nominee and the 2012 presidential election were held today, although Catholic voters favor Romney slightly over Obama.

The online poll found that 42 percent of non-Catholic registered voters would back Obama, versus 39 percent for Romney. Among Catholics, 42 percent would pick Obama, but the number was higher – 44 percent – for Romney.

“It certainly suggests that Catholics are a little more Romney-favorable than not,” said Chris Jackson, research director for Ipsos Public Affairs.

Read more.

  • Mark

    No surprise. I first took major notice of Romney in early December 2007 with his “Faith in America” speech which expressed a nuanced understanding of religious tolerance and inter-religous understanding.

    It’s impressive, too, that Romney has been endorsed by FIVE (5) former US Ambassadors to the Vatican. The group includes a Democrat appointed by Clinton (former Boston Mayor Ray Flynn) as well as Harvard law professor Mary Ann Glendon.

  • pagansister

    Long time before November. Nothing is settled yet.

  • Joe

    When the main stream media treats Santorum as a commercial break from Mitt and Newt, I’ll take Rick anyday.

  • Henry Karlson

    Wait, isn’t this the same Romney who also promotes contraceptives in health care?

  • Steve P

    It’s clearly getting to the point where there is no real story in reporting on what “Catholics” think in polls, voting, etc. When is the last time there was a really substantial difference between how Catholics voted and how the general electorate did? Catholics are so mainstream, culturally and politically, that there’s little evidence that matters of faith are really informing their votes. We’re tending to vote on the basis of pocketbook issues, or the latest ads with which we’ve been bombarded, or what the guy at work said.

    Can anybody prove this assertion wrong? Even with the flap over HHS, I’m just not seeing evidence to the contrary.

  • Scout

    I think it’s obvious from the way this blog is tilting, the Catholic media that I read/listen to, and the Bishops, that it’s time I become Republican. It’s apparently the only way to be a good American Catholic today. I just wish the Bishop’s, led By Archbishops Dolan and Chaput, would have the courage to come out and say so. It’s all about “religious liberty”, contraception, gay marriage, and abortion. Obama hates Catholics and wants to take away my freedom to worship…time to get that bum out of there. (Besides, he’s probably Muslim and more than likely was born outside the US.) I’ll put aside my concerns with other political issues like immigration, poverty, women’s and minority rights, climate change, and universal affordable health care. I’ll back prayer in school, gun rights, creationism, and will fight to the utmost all forms of big government and taxation. Life will be much more black and white and much simpler. I’ll vote for Santorum, even if I feel on many issues he’s an uneducated, sexist Neanderthal who plays the lobbying game with the best of them, because he’s a “good” Catholic and family man. Or I’ll vote for Romney, because he’s not Obama.

  • Will

    I am not Republican or Democrat. Perhaps this is part of how I was raised, but I do not see how anyone could totally agree with either party. There are good ideas, and bad ideas, on each side. Too bad there seems to be fewer people in the middle today.

  • mjl

    Good for you, Scout! Hilarious!

  • friscoeddie

    Scout .. I’ll sponsor you to my all white suburban country club anytime. .. you’re a ‘credit to your race’ as we used to say.

  • Will

    With plenty of time to go, the polls in Michigan show him losing in the February 28 primary by about ten points to Santorum.

  • Don from NH

    I wont be one of those Catholics voting for him

  • pol

    Me, either. Here are the Republican choices this year: a rich, empty suit, a nut, an egomaniac and a religious fanatic.

  • Deak Pete

    For me to “tilt toward Romney”, I would be in great danger of injuring my lower back!

  • Margaret

    And on the Dem side– a man who’s never met an abortion he didn’t like.

  • ECB

    Agreed. Polls need to segment Catholic responses based on some criteria that separates those who believe what the Church teaches and those who don’t. I think we will find we are a much smaller church.

  • http://proactivereviewshq.org Alphonse Nardozzi

    If the Repubs want to guarantee defeat in November, they’ll put up Santorum as the Repub nominee for President. When you examine his record you’ll find he’s a Big Government conservative who’ll tinker around the edges rather than spur the significant, constitutional changes needed to get things turned around. Santorum, and all of his supporters, needs to understand this: campaign talk is cheap and, in the end, you are what your voting record says you are.

  • Mark

    So let me understand Scout. As best I can tell, your concerns which you feel are not being addressed by the republican party are “immigration, poverty, women’s and minority rights, climate change, and universal affordable health care”, and all the other issues listed you object to because you feel they are not an issue and should not be for Catholics? Is that correct?

    Abortion is not a major issue which the bishops including those of the far left spectrum of the USCCB have listed as something one cannot support unless there are proportionate reasons. That of course is solid Magesterial teaching which is something all Catholics are supposed to accept. The same is true of the protection of marriage as only between one man and one woman. Same thing. Artificial birth control is the same thing, even though it has been widely ignored. The numbers in error do not change the truth. God seems to have established the fact that there are different levels of sin with some being grave and others venial. This has always been a teaching of the Church. these are grave ones.

    Then you mix in issues which are related to the US Constitution which I would all Americans would think are important and in fact everyone in office takes an oath to uphold. These include things like religious freedom along with freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

    On big government, when you have 15 trillion in debt, the only way you can possible dig your way out is to stop spending. Big government has exploded and with the huge cost, comes ever more regulations which have had a huge impact on jobs in this country. If I can open a company here with hundreds of regulations which impact my cost, I have to trim elsewhere or face not being competitive in the world marketplace we have today. Scout, when you shop and see the same product at half the price, which one do you purchase? There are few products or services that do not have big government all over them and many of these regulations were never measured to determine if the regulations killed the ability to compete and often were made with bad information that would have minimal if any real impact. In the 1970′s, under Carter, the federal government thought there was too much radiation being emited to patients and set up a massive overhaul of about every piece of xray equipment made. The manufacturers were constantly looking for effective ways to use less radiation prior to that but were never asked by the Washington agency nitwits. They sent information in pointing to the total lack of guidlines or established training for those using the equipment and this was were the most benefit could be found. Instead the industry went through massive changes which in many cases tripled the overall costs and in the end, minimal changes (Less than 1%) were seen in overall dose. 10 years later under Reagan, they put in place set minimal requirements for users and the overall dosage dropped by 30% in a year. You can go to almost any industry and hear the same issues.

    So how about your issues immigration, poverty, women’s and minority rights, climate change, and universal affordable health care. How did Obama do on them? Immigration comes in two forms, legal and illegal. No one is in major disagreement over legal immigration. On illegal immigration, nothing has been done by Obama except to tell our federal law enforcement people to stop obeying the laws. If you think it is good to have a president disobey the laws of the land, then you are treading on very dangerous grounds. It means we are saying that he is above the law and others will decide to break other laws. It is not our form of government in a democracy. You make the case for changes to the law, and then you get them passed. If the laws are not constitutional, you take them to the courts. But both parties want legal immigration and full support of those coming here legally. This also matches Church teaching where it clearly says the governments have the right to protect their borders. If poverty is an issue, then you must be wanting to abandon Obama and his party at this point. The poverty rate since his election has skyrocketed and in certain sectors it is over 25%. More people are on unemployment and food stamps than at any time in history. His promise with the passage of his stimulus program was to prevent unemployment from reaching 8% and to show a rapid decline. He said if he did not fix this and cut the deficiet in half, he did not deserve to be reelected. Yeah, I know, it is all Bushes fault. He has had pretty much free reign during his first two years with large majorites of his party in both houses. If spending gave us jobs and got us out of this mess, we should not be surging since he spent like a drunken sailor. It is time for new ideas and change and that change is to reign in government regulations and spending and to provide real business driven incentives to make this work. In this area, I think Romney is what we need right now. Not sure where either party has done anything negative to minority rights. As to womens rights, if one is Catholic and believes that this means birth control and abortion, then you are starting with a weak point and against her Magesterial teaching.

    As to the bishops political party choice, Last time I looked, the USCCB were supporting Obama move to universal health, but wanted to make sure that they were not setting up anything that would violate religious liberty in our constitution. They Bishops have been pushing for universal health for people since 1919, long before Obama was born. However, it is a desire to see some good program that meets constitutional requirments, not what we ended up seeing voted into law. I think because of the heavy hand and back door negotiations, that you will see the Supreme Court rule it unconsititutional and if it makes it that far, the move to violate religious liberty will also be found to be unconsitutional. Did we have to have this problem. NO, the republicans offered to work with the democrats in fixing a huge number of issues and the democrats said no on every one of them. We would have been better off if we had gotten a bipartisan fix to healthcare and left what was working well alone.

  • http://bloodandglorynr.org/ Pamela Mostowy

    Ron Paul is the only one with a shot at beating obama. The other 3 would never have a chance in beating obama. Sanatorums too conservative, gingrich is not going to be able to pick up women voters, and Romney can’t do as much as put the race away.

  • Pingback: Anonymous

  • Pingback: Anonymous


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X