So Ms. Vanderslice's candidates did 10% better than Dems nationally did they? So what does that mean in round numbers. It means that they won about 38% of the white evangelical vote, as Dems nationally did about 28% with white evangelicals. Nationally Dems won 38% of folks who attend church more than once a week and 46% of those who attend at least once a week. Nationally, Dems captured 50% of white Catholic voters. It is hard to er, slice and dice what Vanderslice is supposed to have done. But I will look at one race in Ohio involving a so called Vanderslice candidate - Sherrod Brown, and see if Vanderslice actually did something worthy of an article. Here is Brown's performance in the same segments:
VOTE BY RELIGION
TOTAL DeWine Brown
Protestant (59%)48% 52%
Catholic (25%) 46% 54%
Jewish (3%) 22% 78%
Other (4%) 20% 80%
None (9%) 18% 82%
VOTE BY RELIGION AMONG WHITES
TOTAL DeWine Brown
White Protestants (48%) 54% 46%
White Catholics (22%) 47% 53%
White Jewish Voters (3%) 22% 78%
Whites - Other (3%) 27% 73%
White - No Religion (7%) 19% 81%
Non-White Voters (17%) 23% 77%
VOTE BY CHURCH ATTENDANCE
TOTAL DeWine Brown
More Than Weekly (16%) 62% 38Weekly (30) 52% 48Monthly (13) 41% 59%
A Few Times a Year (27%)31% 69%
Never (13%) 26% 74%
VOTE BY CHURCH ATTENDANCE
TOTAL DeWine Brown
Weekly (45%) 56% 44%
Occasionally (39%) 34% 66%
Never (13%) 26% 74%
Hmmm. It looks like Sherrod Brown outperformed Dems nationally as well, and by about 10 percentage points it looks like on the frequent church goers line. Did Vanderslice work that one? Why yes she did.
So let me get this straight, Mara Vanderslice is the reason why Sherrod Brown did that well? Are you shitting me? Sherrod Brown was preaching the gospel is the storyline now? My gawd, for a person of faith, this Vanderslice person is quite the liar. Who else did she work for?
* Bob Casey for U.S. Senate
* Ted Strickland for Governor
* Sherrod Brown for U.S. Senate
* Michigan Democratic Party
* Jennifer Granholm for Governor
* Kansas Democratic Party
* Kathleen Sebelius for Governor
* Democratic Party of Oregon
* Heath Shuler for U.S. Congress
Now we have something to compare. She worked for Granholm but not for Stabenow apparently. Let's see what a difference maker Vanderslice was in Michigan:
VOTE BY RELIGION
TOTAL Stabenow Bouchard
Protestant (54%) 52% 46%
Catholic (27%) 55% 43%
Jewish (1%) * *
Other (7%) 73% 27%
None (12%) 70% 21%
BORN-AGAIN OR EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN?
TOTAL Stabenow Bouchard
Yes (33%) 45% 53%
No (67%) 63% 34%
VOTE BY RELIGION AMONG WHITES
TOTAL Stabenow Bouchard
White Protestants (43%) 45% 53%
White Catholics (24%) 53% 44%
White Jewish Voters (1%) * *
Whites - Other (4%) 73% 27%
White - No Religion (9%) 66% 24%
Non-White Voters (18%) 81% 18%
WHITE EVANGELICAL/BORN-AGAIN?
TOTAL Stabenow Bouchard
Yes (23%) 33% 65%
No (77%) 65% 33%
VOTE BY CHURCH ATTENDANCE
TOTAL Stabenow Bouchard
More Than Weekly (14%) 39% 61%
Weekly (29%) 46% 51%
Monthly (13%) 68% 31%
A Few Times a Year (25%) 67% 30%
Never (14%) 69% 26%
VOTE BY CHURCH ATTENDANCE
TOTAL Stabenow Bouchard
Weekly (44%) 44% 54%
Occasionally (38%) 67% 31%
Never (14%) 69% 26%
How did Granholm, Vanderslice's candidate, do?
VOTE BY RELIGION
TOTAL Granholm DeVos
Protestant (54%) 53% 47%
Catholic (26%) 56% 43%
Jewish (1%) * *
Other (7%) 71% 28%
None (12%) 72% 24%
BORN-AGAIN OR EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN?
TOTAL Granholm DeVos
Yes (33%) 47% 53%
No (67%) 63% 35%
VOTE BY RELIGION AMONG WHITES
TOTAL Granholm DeVos
White Protestants (43%) 46% 54%
White Catholics (24%) 55% 44%
White Jewish Voters (1%) * *
Whites - Other (4%) 68% 32%
White - No Religion (9%) 68% 26%
Non-White Voters (19%) 80% 19%
WHITE EVANGELICAL/BORN-AGAIN?
TOTAL Granholm DeVos
Yes (23%) 35% 65%
No (77%) 65% 34%
VOTE BY CHURCH ATTENDANCE
TOTAL Granholm DeVos
More Than Weekly (14%) 37% 63%
Weekly (29%) 51% 48%
Monthly (13%) 64% 36%
A Few Times a Year (25%) 65% 33%
Never (14%) 72% 27%
VOTE BY CHURCH ATTENDANCE
TOTAL Granholm DeVos
Weekly (43%) 46% 53%
Occasionally (38%) 64% 34%
Never (14%) 72% 27%
Wow!!!!!!!! What a brilliant strategist that Vanderslice must be. She got ONE WHOLE POINT more for Granholm among white evangelicals!!!! A genius is born!!! Sheesh.
But wait, the story is not over. Were there any losses resulting from the Vanderslice genius for Granholm. I am afraid there were:
VOTE BY PARTY ID
TOTAL Stabenow Bouchard
Democrat (40%) 94% 5%
Republican (33%) 11% 89%
Independent (27%) 57% 36%
VOTE BY IDEOLOGY
TOTAL Stabenow Bouchard
Liberal (21%) 85% 13%
Moderate (47%) 64% 34%
Conservative (31%) 24% 74%
Compare to Granholm:
VOTE BY PARTY ID
TOTAL Granholm DeVos
Democrat (40%) 93% 7%
Republican (33%) 13% 86%
Independent (27%) 57% 40%
VOTE BY IDEOLOGY
TOTAL Granholm DeVos
Liberal (21%) 85% 14%
Moderate (47%) 66% 33%
Conservative (31%) 23% 76%
Stabenow did 3 points better among Democrats than Granholm. So maybe that one point squeezed out from white evangelicals cost Granholm 3 points from 40% of the electorate. MAYBE not good political strategy.
Let us be serious for a moment. My microanalysis is facetious. I have no idea why there are slight variations in the results of Granholm and Stabenow. But the New York Times pretends they do. The idiot Mike McCurry is quoted as saying:
The midterm elections were a “proof point” for arguments that Ms. Vanderslice had made two years before, said Mike McCurry, a Democratic consultant and former spokesman for President Bill Clinton who worked with Ms. Vanderslice on the Kerry campaign. For the Democrats, Mr. McCurry said, Ms. Vanderslice and her company “were the only ones taking systematic, methodical steps to build a religious component in the practical campaign work.”
What a load. Ms. Vanderslice had no impact and proved absolutely nothing. I hate these idiots in DC. They are just the worst.
