<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The evangelical vote</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/02/12/the-evangelical-vote/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/02/12/the-evangelical-vote/</link>
	<description>Secularism, religion, and the public sphere</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 03:48:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ruth Braunstein</title>
		<link>http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/02/12/the-evangelical-vote/#comment-1184</link>
		<dc:creator>Ruth Braunstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 03:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ssrc.org/blogs/immanent_frame/2008/02/12/the-evangelical-vote/#comment-1184</guid>
		<description>Michael Hout poses the question: "Who are evangelical voters supporting in the 2008 primary season?" For those observers, like Hout, who suspect that Republicans do not enjoy the evangelical monopoly that is often portrayed in the press, there is a perplexing shortage of information on certain aspects of the religious commitments of Democratic voters. As Hout laments, "the data are nearly silent" on the issue of whether or not Democratic voters identify as evangelicals. He continues,

&lt;blockquote&gt;"Somebody at polling HQ has decided either that Democratic evangelicals are not of interest or do not exist. We will see when the academic surveys become available in a year from now, but enough specimens of this exotic species were spotted in 2004 to make most of us think that the evangelical Democrat is far from extinct. Too bad no news organizations are identifying them or tracking their preferences."&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Well it looks as though Hout's prayers just may have been answered. According to a report on &lt;a href="http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2008/02/survey_evangeli.html" title="Survey: Evangelical Democrats Favored Hillary in Mo., Tenn." target="_blank" rel="nofollow"&gt;Christianity Today Liveblog&lt;/a&gt;, Faith in Public Life and the Center for American Progress Action Fund have commissioned a Zogby International poll among voters in Missouri and Tennessee that poses the elusive "evangelical" question to both Democratic and Republican voters. Although the scope of the survey is limited to only two states so far, its findings call into question a number of prevailing assumptions about evangelicals as a monolithic Republican voting bloc.  Jeff Sharlet at &lt;a href="http://www.therevealer.org/archives/main_story_002945.php" title="Survey Says: Evangelical Democrats!" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"&gt;The Revealer&lt;/a&gt; reports, "In Missouri and Tennessee, one-third of white evangelical voters voted in Democratic primaries. And, more surprising, in both states they favored Hillary over Obama by overwhelming margins."

To access the survey and the audio recording of the press conference announcing its release, visit &lt;a href="http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/content/feature/_new_postelection_poll_demonst.html" title="New Post-Election Poll Demonstrates Political Diversity of Evangelical Christians" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"&gt;Faith in Public Life&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michael Hout poses the question: &#8220;Who are evangelical voters supporting in the 2008 primary season?&#8221; For those observers, like Hout, who suspect that Republicans do not enjoy the evangelical monopoly that is often portrayed in the press, there is a perplexing shortage of information on certain aspects of the religious commitments of Democratic voters. As Hout laments, &#8220;the data are nearly silent&#8221; on the issue of whether or not Democratic voters identify as evangelicals. He continues,</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Somebody at polling HQ has decided either that Democratic evangelicals are not of interest or do not exist. We will see when the academic surveys become available in a year from now, but enough specimens of this exotic species were spotted in 2004 to make most of us think that the evangelical Democrat is far from extinct. Too bad no news organizations are identifying them or tracking their preferences.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Well it looks as though Hout&#8217;s prayers just may have been answered. According to a report on <a href="http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2008/02/survey_evangeli.html" title="Survey: Evangelical Democrats Favored Hillary in Mo., Tenn." target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Christianity Today Liveblog</a>, Faith in Public Life and the Center for American Progress Action Fund have commissioned a Zogby International poll among voters in Missouri and Tennessee that poses the elusive &#8220;evangelical&#8221; question to both Democratic and Republican voters. Although the scope of the survey is limited to only two states so far, its findings call into question a number of prevailing assumptions about evangelicals as a monolithic Republican voting bloc.  Jeff Sharlet at <a href="http://www.therevealer.org/archives/main_story_002945.php" title="Survey Says: Evangelical Democrats!" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">The Revealer</a> reports, &#8220;In Missouri and Tennessee, one-third of white evangelical voters voted in Democratic primaries. And, more surprising, in both states they favored Hillary over Obama by overwhelming margins.&#8221;</p>
<p>To access the survey and the audio recording of the press conference announcing its release, visit <a href="http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/content/feature/_new_postelection_poll_demonst.html" title="New Post-Election Poll Demonstrates Political Diversity of Evangelical Christians" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Faith in Public Life</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
