The data also doesn’t answer to future impact. All people have a problem accepting failure including but not limited to white evangelicals. When you ask about George W. Bush, the group that has the most ownership for his presidency might be reluctant to say they were wrong about him while at the same time being sadder and wiser going into upcoming elections. The only practically important question is what will the Bush coalition look like in 2008 and thats a different question from what they say about the last one.
In their shoes (and in some ways I am,) I can imagine looking for a new way forward without wanting to admit that the Democrats were right in 2004.

I would suspect that same thing is happening among Catholics. Money is way down, the pews are empty in many churches. Could it have something to do with the idea that finally ultra conservative leaders have gone over the lines of decency and morality in such a way that people are staying home. Feel better not going to church than going and hearing the cognitive dissonance that is there. The Gospel is not preached in a manner that we recognize it in some churches. On the good side of things – people that I know are more active in working for the poor, caring for the planet, demanding that all humans have dignity, believing that war is not about God but about us.. These are Gospel values and many are fed up with the silliness around gay marriage, stem cell, and even – sometimes abortion. Abortion is an issue that must be addressed by human hearts rather than coersion. It will never be settled by law because a new set of victims will be created. No matter how I feel about it – I recognize that desperation will often win on that issue. We’ll see what happens, but I suspect the hot button issues will work another way this time.

Maybe fewer people want to admit to being Republican while fewer people also feel impelled to exaggerate about the regularity of their church attendance.
I doubt that faith in Bush much affects faith in God. But who knows? God spoke from a Burning Bush once upon a time so maybe there’s a connection.

Did anyone else try and add these percentages?

Yes, Kevin. I was trying to figure out what I didn’t get about the question. The best I can figure is that in 2004, 8% of us didn’t go three times per week, on average.

The percentages won’t add to 100% … because…
The chart is giving this data:
OF those who attend church weekly (a %age unnamed)44% identified as Republicans in 2007…OF those who attend church nearly weekly (a %age unnamed of total population)36% identified as Republicans in 2007…OF those who attend church seldom (a %age unnamed)22% identified as Republicans in 2007…
So adding the percentages for a given year is a meaningless exercise.
What should add to 100% are the “unnamed percentages” of weekly, almost weekly and seldon church attenders. But we arew not given that data

gee, maybe they are following Bush and Reagan’s lead .. neither of them attend church either.

Thank you, Skipchurch. Now I get it.

I believe the Democratic post-election analyses (iirc the one by Democracy Corps) late last year showed that Democrats gained substantially in vote percentages among the once a week or so and seldom/never church attenders. But almost no change among the frequent churchgoers.
So the approval for Bush is sinking among all varieties of churchgoers/nonattenders. It doesn’t translate to change in votes among the frequent churchgoers, though- they vote for Republicans (or, against Democrats) in the same numbers as before.
The Democratic pollsters I read thought, iirc, that the anecdotal difference between generally younger, more passive, moderate, less involved churchgoers and generally older, more church-involved and politically conservative ones, is starting to appear a little bit in their numbers. There is no dramatic “crackup” in the numbers they had and they said as much. But if the trend continues for five or ten years, that would be quite a different story. (No doubt that would lead to a lot of churches breaking up. Or breaking down.)
I think Kirkpatrick’s title or idea for the NYT Magazine was excessive. However, he illustrates that many relatively militant conservative church leaders put themselves in precarious, unwise, positions where they couldn’t survive political reverses in the past few years.

“I believe the Democratic post-election analyses (iirc the one by Democracy Corps) late last year showed that Democrats gained substantially in vote percentages among the once a week or so and seldom/never church attenders. But almost no change among the frequent churchgoers.”
A sure sign that the Democrats will never be a “moral” majority. Un-repentant, hedonistic and beer swiiling loudmouths hardly make for a solid foundation for anything except the NFL and the NBA.

But the ruthless, where the rubber hits the road truth is that America IS becoming more secular, less Christian, and even more atheist. It’s not just this survey. (After all, SOMEONE is buying all those Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens screeds …)
Me, it may not be possible for an atheist to get to heaven. But it is possible for them to be moral. And it is certainly possible for them to feel abandoned by a Republican Party that embraces a vision that explicitly excludes them.

SkipChurch has it right: The premise of David’s comment that fewer people are attending church is simply wrong. The poll apparently didn’t measure that, and the data don’t show that.
What the data shows is that AMONG those who do attend church regularly, support for GW Bush and GOP has declined at the same rate as it has among those who do not regularly attend church. Churchgoers remain more likely than non-churchgoers to affiliate with the Republicans and Bush, but the trends are the same regardless of religiosity.
Bottom line: The data generally contradicts the anecdotal claims of an “Evangelical Crack-Up.” And no data supports any large scale defection from church attendance, evangelical, Catholic or otherwise.

Oh now we’re also “beer swilling”. Donny, you are TOO MUCH.
Please add “beer swilling” to the hedonistic, libertine, Marxist pederast list.
How about Camembert cheese nibbling? Or even “Effete Camembert cheese nibbling”.
You can have that one for free.
Take that you beer swilling, effete Camembert cheese nibbling, hedonistic, unrestrained libertine Marxist pederasts!
Oh, some ears in Bel Air are burning!

is effeminate cheese the same as feta cheese?

SkipChurch – thanks for straightening me out!!

Please note that this Gallup report implies the evangelical population is synonymous with the portion of white Americans who attend church regularly.
Although a characteristic of evangelicals is that they are more likely to attend church regularly than mainline Protestants or Roman Catholics, I think it is a mistake to lump all white churchgoers into the category of “evangelical.”
By any other measurement method, there are many evangelicals who do not attend regularly and many people who do attend regularly who would not describe themselves or be described by scholars as evangelical.