Nevada Caucuses; Mormons Aplenty
Email
Emanuel Duand / AFP / Getty Images
Entrance poll results indicate that Mormons account for about a quarter of caucus participants in Nevada today, about the same as their share in 2008 and far more than in previous contests this year – a natural affinity group for Mitt Romney. Evangelical Christians, by contrast, are far less numerous than they were in most previous GOP 2012 events.
The entrance poll, analyzed for ABC by Langer Research Associates, shows Romney won 95 percent of Mormons in the 2008 caucuses. But he also won broadly in other faith groups in Nevada four years ago, including by 17 points among evangelicals, a group in which he’s struggled elsewhere. Entrance poll results indicate that evangelicals account for about a quarter of caucus participants in Nevada today, compared with 65, 57, and 47 percent, respectively, in South Carolina, Iowa and Florida. (They were less numerous in New Hampshire.)
Nevada, at the same time, is rich in “very” conservative voters, accounting for nearly half of caucus-goers. That’s about the same as in Iowa, and substantially more than in New Hampshire, South Carolina or Florida alike. Again, though, while Romney has struggled among very conservative voters this year, losing them in all but New Hampshire, he won very conservatives by a vast margin in Nevada in 2008, on his way to a romp there. Romney won the caucuses four years ago with 51 percent of the vote, nearly 40 points ahead of his closest competitors.
Ron Paul, who pushed to do well in Nevada this year, may suffer from a deficit of self-identified independent voters, a group in which he’s tended to do better. They account for just about two in 10 caucus-goers in Nevada today, better than their share in 2008, but still heavily outnumbered by mainline Republicans. Paul’s also done well among young voters; today the entrance poll indicates that they make up barely one in 10 caucus-goers.
On candidate attributes, as elsewhere, Nevada caucus-goers are focused on the candidate who’s best able to defeat Barack Obama – more than four in 10 say it’s the top item in their vote, more than double the number who chose any other option (moral character, “true conservative,” having the right experience). On issues, the economy again dominates.
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
This article is highly offensive and has no facts to match the intended inflammatory headline. Has anyone at abc analyzed the number of Harry Reid Mormon’s that favor Romney v Obama? What is the relevance of using a religious name “Mormon” in the headline other than to create a furor over religion. I’m not Mormon. I support Mitt Romney. Reading your article would lead one to believe that 95% of Nevada Mormon’s support Romney. I know that Harry Reid is not running for president. But your numbers and article are grotesquely misleading. What ilk!!!!
Posted by: sherman | February 4, 2012, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm
I guess it’s like saying “large black turnout for Obama” or “large union turnout for Obama”. Is it really necessary?
Posted by: s | February 4, 2012, 7:27 pm 7:27 pm
I have to agree with the other comments, this article is highly offensive. Since when has the presidency become a battle of religions?
Posted by: Louis | February 4, 2012, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm
Since citizens and politicians forgot that our Founding Fathers intended for American politics to not be ruled by religion. If the Christians didn’t put so much effort trying to rewrite history by perpetuating the lie that America was founded by Chirisians, perhaps religion wouldn’t play such a big role in elections.
Posted by: AmericaThePitiful | February 4, 2012, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm
7.1% of Nevada is LDS and they TURNED OUT. This article is a lie and misleading at best.
Posted by: Oren | February 4, 2012, 7:58 pm 7:58 pm
Just like saying ” the food stamps recipients heavily turned out for the Food Stamp President”
Posted by: hopeforchange | February 4, 2012, 8:08 pm 8:08 pm
Evangelical Christians, by contrast, are far less numerous than they were in most previous GOP 2012 events. ~~~ Perhaps there are just far less (in general) that want to be categorized that way!
Posted by: Brave Brick | February 4, 2012, 8:36 pm 8:36 pm
I am a Latter-Day-Saint and would appreciate it if abc and other news media would quit making religion an issue. So there are this many LDS in Nevada and that many LDS in California, and so on and so on. So what? It is grossly insulting to insinuate that we all vote alike as if we are a collective and all hop to the same music. Give me a break. We are individuals who can and do think for ourselves. I vote for the person who I think is the most qualified and can do the best job. Most of the candidates I have voted for I don’t even know what their religion is. The media in this country is guilty of promoting and perpetuating religious bigotry and it has to stop. Did you ever think that nobody really cares anymore? Quit being a dinosaur and focus on what really matters in our country and the people who are suffering because of lack of leadership and corruption at all levels. For Pete’s sakes call us Latter-Day-Saints.
Posted by: Doc | February 4, 2012, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
My gosh, the next thing you know a Black man or a Catholic will be trying to get elected President. We need to stop this evil Mormon right now before the idea anyone can be POTUS who can get elected.
Posted by: Fred Ball | February 4, 2012, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm
Point is made that the mormons and other religious voted for this guy simply because he is religious……..completely ignoring he is crook. It says religion is blinding leading to prejudice decisions completely absent of common sense. Much like Obama’s blind supporters vote for him often illegally. With idiots like this on both sides, our country is doomed as we seeing its decline coming. Thanks to idiots on both sides.
Posted by: Beensaidsaid | February 5, 2012, 9:08 am 9:08 am
A total of 97 delegate votes out of 1144? Is this news? I thought Bill Maher unbaptizing Mitt’s father was far more entertaining.
Posted by: Angelgroove | February 5, 2012, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm
Louis: “Since when has the presidency become a battle of religions?”
Since about 1980 when the Reagan campaign MADE it one by sending out the largest ever mass mailing targeting Evangelical Christians and packaging the Republican platform as the “Christian” one.
I was in a Southern Baptist school at the time and witnessed the campaigning from the pulpit and the DONATIONS being taken up in church. They even took us on a field trip to see Reagan when he came to town.
Prior to this time, Christian voters were about as likely to be Democrats as Republicans; ever since, the vast majority have identified as Republicans/Right-wingers.
And it IS relevent, since many of these religious voters are dedicated to electing leaders who will legislate based on religious beliefs, even to the point of favoring a Christian Theocracy in the U.S.
Posted by: RAVEN | February 5, 2012, 1:01 pm 1:01 pm
BEENSAIDSAID: “Much like Obama’s blind supporters vote for him often illegally.”
Cite? Do you have evidence of widespread illegal voting favoring Obama? Bearing in mind that Acorn simply REGISTERING eligible people to vote is NOT illegal?
The reality is, this is simply not an issue wrt Obama’s election…the last major voter fraud that occurred in this country was in 2004, when voting machines in key states (manufactured by Diebold, whose CEO was on record as saying he would do “everything in his power to ensure the re-election of George W. Bush”) “malfunctioned” and gave hundreds or thousands of votes to Bush in “error”. (Makes one wonder how many instances of these “malfunctions” WEREN’T caught and corrected.)
Last time before that was in 2000 in Florida, when thousands of eligible (likely Democrat) voters were purged from the rolls and the re-count was STOPPED and Bush won the electoral college despite losing the popular vote nationwide.
Posted by: RAVEN | February 5, 2012, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm
rah, rah; support the ‘rise of social-fascism’ in America until it replaces democracy.
Posted by: argot rigolo | February 6, 2012, 1:00 am 1:00 am