Here is a chart from Ryan Burge:
The most interesting part of this is that every single white Christian group feels closer to Republicans than Democrats. That includes not just white evangelicals, but white mainstream Protestants and white Catholics. It's only the white atheists and non-Christians who feel closer to Democrats.
Also interesting: Every white Christian group places Democrats farther to the left than they place Republicans to the right. Even the non-white groups score it as a tie. This include Black Protestants (which is most of them) who have a different view: They don't think Dems are all that far left, but they also don't think Republicans are all that far right. They prefer Dems because they view themselves as left of center.
Also of note: No one views Donald Trump as more conservative than the Republican Party—not by more than a hair, anyway. They correctly view him as basically just a standard issue Republican conservative these days. The era of Trump being a supposed rogue within the party are long gone.
Yes, those conservative white Christians identify nearly totally with a lying, narcissistic, authoritarian turd. Hypocrisy is their middle name. Go to church on Sunday to forgive the sins of the rest of the week. May they rot in hell. Shame on all of you. You have lowered the sanctity of your religion to the level of scum. You sleep with the devil, you get the worst form of Herpes.
Couldn't agree more ************
Reminds me: still need to read the Jerry Falwell, Jr., hagiography in the latest Vanity Fair.
Even with Jeffrey Epstein homie Graydon Carter no longer around, VF still apologizing for serial deviants.
*sexual, NOT cereal deviants
Sugar Smacks, what were they thinking?
Also, not herpes, but I hear Ted Haggard's anal warts are huge.
There is nobody in the world who remembers Ted Haggard's anal warts.
Conservative Christians assume JC's teachings only apply to other Christians. They completely miss the point that when JC told a parable, it more often than not featured a whore, a Samaritan, a tax collector, a Roman, or some other kind of nonbeliever.
They go on and on about LBGTQ issues, but JC preached about a lot of things and there is no written record that he ever regarded LBGTQ issues as important enough to comment on.
Exactly. Christians follow Christ's example. Christ was silent about homosexuality.
Willful cluelessness?
Trump has changed the Republican Party.
It used to be more of a free market policy and more in favor of legal immigration.
Trump doesn't understand what a free market is. He doesn't understand what a trade deficit is.
The Trump Doctrine is "We're America, Bitch!"
I don't think that was the view of Romney, McCain, Bush, Dole, Bush, Reagan, Ford, Nixon, Goldwater ....
The seeds of Trumpism were lain with Goldwater-Miller, & the imposition of Roberttaftian paleocon Fortress America policy ebbed & flowed for about thirty years, but the 1992 Pat Buchanan primary challenge & convention Nuremburg rally, then Prop 187 in California two years later to fuel Pete Wilson's gubernatorial reelect*, cemented the victory of Taft over Eisenhower.
*A strategy reused in 2008 with Prop 8, but alas Bush-43 sinking the economy meant even keeping sodomites from matrimony was not enough to keep Obummer from winning the Golden State or the country.
Nope. Republicans like Buchanan poured illegal immigrants over the border. He is also a homosexual. Understand the con. Stop believing them.
Nope. They are globalist con men. You still don't get it. Plutocracy and one world government is Trumpism's endgame.
It's only white evangelicals and Mormons who identify completely or almost with Trump and Republicans - or so the other groups say. Is this true? And if so how did white evangelicals get so much power?
The Republican party turned itself into the White Christianist party. White Christians are not a religious group, they are a political group. Their actions in no way follow the teachings of Jesus.
Some Mormons are Chaos-Agents, like ex-SLC mayor Rocky Anderson, the LDS Jill Stein.
Muslims seems to be experiencing some agitation.
Aside from that no one's views are much tempered over time.
Conservatives think they're the good guys until Thanos appears, then suddenly they think he's the good guy, then Thanos loses and, just as abruptly, they think they were against him all along, and in fact they were personally responsible for the victory.
Unitless charts? Really?
!
What would be the unit?
Eight different slices of "Christian" and only one of "Jewish." Is Judaism really that uniform? For that matter, is Islam? Or Hinduism or Buddhism?
Possibly none of those subdivisions have populations large enough to be meaningful in the US.
One bit of web searching suggests something like 7 million people in the US identify as Jewish. I’d think that would be enough to enable distinction between Orthodox, Conservative,and Reform (assuming I got the three names correct).
Something like three to four million Muslims.
Two and a half million Hindus.
That’s a lot of people to be sweeping into a generalization.
Not if they were coming over for dinner, but, I don't have the strength to google it, are those numbers really in the ballpark for any of the other categories, and are statistics separating the Shiites from the Sunnis really available? Or for the subdivisions of Mormons? I think we can guess the Orthodox Jews will all be Republicans, but are they a lot, relatively?
Depends on your definition of "a lot" I suppose: https://www.pewforum.org/2021/05/11/jewish-identity-and-belief/
Elsewhere:
There are plenty of varieties of evangelical Christians too (Arminian vs. Calvinist, pedobaptist vs. credobaptist, etc.) But a nationwide sample definitely won't pick up enough Jews or Hindus to enable statistically valid statements about tiny subgroups like those.
Well, some of these groups are not that tiny, but most aren’t either randomly distributed around the country; pollsters would have to search them out. Which brings up another point: religious affiliation is confounded with other variables, including region of residence, rural vs. urban, ethnicity, etc. Some of those factors undoubtedly also influence political alignment.
So, the sample has already been sliced into pieces that are 1% to 2% of the total, and you want to slice it up further?
One bit of web searching suggests something like 7 million people in the US identify as Jewish. I’d think that would be enough to enable distinction between Orthodox, Conservative,and Reform (assuming I got the three names correct).
There are 7 million Jews in a country of 330m or so, approx 2% of the population. So if you give a survey to 5000 respondents, which is a lot of a survey, only about 100 are going to be Jews. And you’re saying now that you want to distinguish between the various subgroups in Judaism? So you’d maybe have 33-34 respondents from Orthodox, Conservative and Reform, assuming each subgroup has equal shares in the overarching Jewish population (which of course isn’t true). And then you’re going to take the responses of just 33-34 respondents and try to generalize up to the 2m or so individual Jewish subgroups?
Yeah that’s not how statistics works. Sometimes subgroups are too small to represent in stats. It’d be nice to differentiate between Cubans vs Puerto Ricans in a lot of political surveys too, but a lot of times both subgroups (that everyone agrees are very different politically) have to be lumped into “Latinos” in survey results, because the sample size simply doesn’t contain enough of them to generalize upwards to their entire populations.
Trading their birth rights for a mess of pottage.
(A choice that often seems correct at the time, but...)
What is the difference between 'Nothing in Particular' and 'Unclassified'?
Just me or do those graphs look like some new category on PornHub?
Do you want Rod Dreher coming into the comments to harangue about western decadence?
Because this is how you get Rod Dreher in the comments haranguing about western decadence.
He's too busy trying to walk a fine line between anti-gay anti-Western Viktor Orban and anti-gay anti-Western Vladimir Putin, since he's spent the last couple of years slobbering over the boots of both.
Now we can finally see the vast gulf separating atheists and agnostics. Atheists consider themselves to the left of Democrats, agnostics to the right.
+1 deathbed conversion of Christopher Hitchens (& eventually Bill Maher)
How strange. If you teach people that belief in authority is more important than rational logic, you get strange belief systems. Who would have thought?
"No one views Donald Trump as more conservative than the Republican Party"--Trump is mostly to the left of the traditional Republican positions: opposed to any cutbacks in Social Security or Medicare, hostile to foreign military ventures (he had fewer than any recent president), not interested in resurrecting the anti-Russia foreign policy of the 1980s, skeptical about free trade, etc. Of course, once Trump took those positions, many liberals became rabid supporters of free trade and opponents of Russia, but the mass of voters aren't as volatile as the chattering classes.
"opposed to any cutbacks in Social Security or Medicare,"
Well, he said he was on the campaign trail; subsequent actions when elected
president showed that he was lying.
"hostile to foreign military ventures (he had fewer than any recent president)"
Give him that; he was very isolationist.
"not interested in resurrecting the anti-Russia foreign policy of the 1980s"
Given that he was not facing the Soviet Union of the 1980s; however he was abjectly subservient to "genius" Putin.
"skeptical about free trade"
Yep, skeptical about any deal that didn't benefit him personally or the oligarches of American business- support for ordinary workers, not so much.
What's up, Michael?
Still battling postconcussion issues since the beatdown Maxine Waters laud on you?
Love is blind, I guess.
Obviously there is variation around each datapoint, which I presume is some measure of central tendency. Would be nice to see that represented (similar to ‘error bars’ except that the marks would represent actual diversity of opinion, not error in measurement’)