OR-KY by Religion

Print More

In Kentucky, religious differences of any kind simply didn’t amount to much. Those who said they never attend religious services were a bit less likely to vote for Clinton than those in other attendance categories. Clinton won two-thirds of Protestants, Catholics, and Other Christians. Obama did a tad better among Catholics than he did among the others. There was a small though not insignificant difference between white Catholics and Protestants, the latter going for Hillary by 74-21, the former by 69-27. No other categories (Jews, those of no religion, non-Judeo-Christians) registered high enough to merit a number in the Bluegrass State.
In Oregon, the picture was more interesting. Both Protestants and Catholics split their votes, pretty evenly, going to Obama by narrow margins. Among the Other Christians, Obama did substantially better (63-36), and even better among the non-Judeo-Christians (71-28). Obama did somewhat worse among white Catholics (48-51) than white Protestants/Other Christians (53-46). That he ended up capturing the Catholic vote 51-49 says that there were enough Latino, Asian (Filipino and Vietnamese), black, and “other race” Catholics for Obama to reverse the result. Oregon is the least religiously identified state in the nation, and of the 28 percent of Democratic primary voters in that “none” category, Obama prevailed by 61-39–just a few points better than his numbers in the state as a whole. This is yet another indication of the degree to which no-religion is the norm in the Beaver State.

  • Dan

    Thanks for the roundup, what do you make of Obama’s success among Oregonians who identify as “other” religion. Is he rocking the Buddhist vote or something?

  • Mark Silk

    Everywhere, Obama has done particularly well with “other religion.” In some places, it’s Muslims. But Buddhists (and “Eastern Religions”) too–who are often white liberals.