And the numbers are in

The figures are in, and they say, er, something.

Here's looking at them, kids, from RNN:

In 2010, Protestants voted Republican 59 percent to 38 percent, this time it was 60-38. (White Protestants went from 69-28 to 71-27.) As for Catholics, it was 54-44 Republican in 2010, 53-45 this year, with white Catholics staying at exactly 59-39. For the Nones, it was 68-30 Democratic in 2010 and 69-29 this year. The only significant difference from 2012 came among Catholics, who that year voted narrowly Democratic, 50-48. At 57-42, Protestants were only marginally less Republican.

The one group that appears to have shifted significantly compared to the last midterm were members of “other religions” — Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, etc. In 2010, three out of four voted Democratic, while this time around it was two out of three. And given that their proportion of the vote increased from 8 percent to 11 percent, that was not a trivial number of votes.

You’re wrong, however, if you think that this shift came from Jewish voters disillusioned with the Democratic Party. Jews voted Democratic by 65-33 yesterday, as compared to 66-31 in 2010. Its the other Others who shifted.

Other than that modest increase in the Others, nothing much changed in terms of the religious proportions of the electorate compared to 2010. Protestants dipped a bit, from 55 percent to 52 percent. Despite reports of their decline, white evangelicals increased one point, from 25 percent to 26 percent. Catholics increased their share by a point as well, to 24. And the Nones, despite evidence of their rise, continue to punch below their demographic weight, remaining at 12 percent. (The latest numbers show them at 20 percent of the adult American population.)

Finally, what about the key factor of worship attendance? Those who said they attended once a week or more voted 58-40 Republican in 2010, 59-39 Republican in 2012, and 58-41 this year. For the non-weekly attenders, the comparison is harder to make, because the 2010 exit polls did not separate occasional attenders from those who said they never darkened a worship space.

I present this without particular comment, for I'm not actually sure what it means, if anything. It appears that Republicans are much more likely to come from worship attending Evangelicals, but to simply say that would be a presumption that no one should make. One can certainly be an Evangelical who votes for Democrats.

I would simply say that each candidate should, in the future, do something historically significant. I would love if each candidate would begin to actually talk about how they are going to do all those darn things they say they will and leave the negative mess behind. Forget what is the base and expected camps and begin to reach out to those who are not in their back pocket when the race begins.

In other words, candidates must begin to do what the church must begin to do, which is to reach out to persons who are not necessarily like those persons already going to church. The nones out there are the ones we must all reach and without changing the way we do things, this is simply not going to happen. That leaves persons out. That leaves voters out. That leaves potential church-goers out.

And no one wins when we do that.