The Demographic that Should Keep Rove Awake at Night Imagine a demographic that has doubled its share of the population over the past two decades, is up by 25 percent over the past four years, and now accounts for as many as one in five Americans. Imagine that this demographic votes disproportionately for one political partyâto the tune of 70 percentfor Obama versus 26 percent for Romney in the 2012 election. Sounds like a demographic that ought to be of interest to politicians, journalists, and activists, right? That demographic consists of people who describe themselves as atheist, agnostic, or religiously unaffiliatedâthe ânones,â as theyâre sometimes called. And it hasnât attracted anywhere near the attention it deserves in the postgame analysis of the 2012 election. A quick Google search turns up 64,000 results concerning the GOPâs âLatino problemâ that became evident in exit poll data on Election Day. Latinos represented around 10 percent of the electorate in 2011, up from nine percent in 2008, and they voted for Obama at a rate of 71 percent. But itâs the nones that should be keeping Karl Rove up at night. Pew put them at 12 percent of the electorate in its exit poll data, and at 19.6 percent in its earlier general survey. (The difference appears to have more to do with polling methodology than with voting habits.) The Public Religion Research Institute, in a studypublished on November 15, pegs the religiously unaffiliated at 16 percent of the electorateâand they figure that 78 percent of the category went for Obama. Crucially, like Latinos, the nones are young. One in three Americans under 30 are religiously unaffiliatedâfour times the rate for the over-65 cohort that keeps Rove in business. This isnât a trickle, itâs a tsunami. http://www.religiondispatches.org/a...graphic_that_should_keep_rove_awake_at_night/
Too f'ing funny. About an hour ago, I thought to myself, "I bet Free Thinker started another religious thread this morning". Like clockwork, the crazed atheist just cannot go a day without scouring the web for some other religious bashing article. The craziest part is the guy really believes that he is "above it all"; that he is some completely evolved, elder source of infinite wisdom.
Is there a reason why you can never criticize a member of your own "team". You don't find it odd that the proclaimed atheist spends a considerable amount of time each day looking for "cut and paste" religion bashing articles to support his "crusade"? After all, he is an atheist...why would he concern (er, obsess) over religion every single day of his life?
Are you such a coward that you won't even criticize a member of your own team? I guess that your whole "Ed McMahon" bit of showing up drunk and playing the sidekick is too good a gig to risk losing?
I do criticize members of '' my own team '' as you put it , in private, just ask them. I don't publicly throw them under the bus like Republicans are now doing to Romney and Ryan. I can understand if you've invested money in Romney's bid for the Presidency and lost , but if your people paid attention to constructive criticism, then just maybe you would be better prepared, in 2028.