• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A Record 60% of Americans Say They Could Vote for an Atheist President

Skwim

Veteran Member
.

"Every few years, Gallup asks Americans a version of this question: “If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be _____, would you vote for that person?”

Just about every time they’ve asked that question, “atheist” has been at the bottom of the list. (Atheists are unelectable! the headlines always say.)

In 2012, there was cause for celebration simply because more than half of those surveyed said they wouldn’t hold atheism against a politician. Then, in 2015, for the first time ever, “atheist” wasn’t the worst trait in a presidential candidate. A “Socialist” performed slightly worse. (Thanks, Bernie Sanders!)

In a poll released today, there’s been no change in the unpopularity of “Socialist” — only 47% of Americans would support that candidate — but “atheist” received another tiny jump. A record 60% of Americans say they would now consider voting for an atheist. It’s still next to last on the list. But it’s clearly becoming less of a stigma.


GallupAtheist2019Sq.png


While just about every category Gallup asked about saw an increase in support — suggesting Americans are becoming comfortable with a more diverse group of candidates — “atheist” saw the smallest increase, an uptick of only 2%. But that may be because we just don’t hear that conversation discussed very much in the media. Without an atheist candidate to talk about, there’s no reason to bring it up.


Eighty percent of U.S. adults would vote for an evangelical Christian for president — up from 73% in 2015. Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans who would vote for a Muslim has grown from 58% in 2012 to 66% today.

Atheist presidential candidates would face more resistance from voters than candidates of other religious backgrounds. But Americans have warmed to the idea of an atheist candidate over the past several decades. The current 60% who would vote for an atheist is more than three times the 18% Gallup recorded in its first measure on atheist candidates in 1958.

But what I find particularly interesting are the strides atheism has made since 1959: A 230% increase in willingness.


GallupAtheist2019Trend.png

source

.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
It seems odd that both Atheists and Evangelical Christians are trending upward since they are at opposite ends of the belief spectrum. I guess that means that people are more accepting of other people's beliefs no matter what they are. That's a hopeful sign.
 

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
I'm rooting for an atheist MEP for SW England. Carl Benjamin 2020!

It's about policies not beliefs.

So long as they do not wish to abolish religion, or interfere with freedom of religon/civil rights. All that matters to me is good policy.
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Any openly atheistic person will never become the POTUS within this or the next century. Trump might be secretly irreligious, but he's politically savvy enough not to admit there's zero evidence of any being who is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, highly benevolent theistic supernatural deity.

 
Last edited:

FragrantGrace

If winning isn't everything why do they keep score
Gallup must have been busy for years to garner the data so as to arrive at that 60% conclusion.And after having polled 328,848,479 Americans .
I was never called and asked the question. Anyone here get the call from Gallup?
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Any openly atheistic person will never become the POTUS within this or the next century. Trump might be secretly irreligious, but he's politically savvy enough not to admit there's zero evidence of any being who is an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, highly benevolent theistic supernatural deity.


Trump has proved that no matter how unrepentant and degenerate of a lifestyle you live, evangelists will still accept you with open arms as long as you pay lip service to their sentiments and agendas (anti-choice, anti-lgbt, anti-science, etc.)
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Gallup must have been busy for years to garner the data so as to arrive at that 60% conclusion.And after having polled 328,848,479 Americans .
I was never called and asked the question. Anyone here get the call from Gallup?
Ah, so you know nothing about how polling works, and how, if those polled are sufficiently random, a small sample can reasonably accurately (to within a "margin of error" as always mentioned) be representative of the larger community.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Trump has proved that no matter how unrepentant and degenerate of a lifestyle you live, evangelists will still accept you with open arms as long as you pay lip service to their sentiments and agendas (anti-choice, anti-lgbt, anti-science, etc.)
Yeah! They've even accepted those who claim to be anti-lgbt, anti-drug etc. who are out there actively boffing same-sex partners, doing drugs and all manner of things. All you need is the claim...you need to actually be it.

That's pretty tawdry, in my view.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Trump has proved that no matter how unrepentant and degenerate of a lifestyle you live, evangelists will still accept you with open arms as long as you pay lip service to their sentiments and agendas (anti-choice, anti-lgbt, anti-science, etc.)
Yeah! They've even accepted those who claim to be anti-lgbt, anti-drug etc. who are out there actively boffing same-sex partners, doing drugs and all manner of things. All you need is the claim...you don't need to actually be it.

That's pretty tawdry, in my view.
 
.

"Every few years, Gallup asks Americans a version of this question: “If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be _____, would you vote for that person?”

Just about every time they’ve asked that question, “atheist” has been at the bottom of the list. (Atheists are unelectable! the headlines always say.)

In 2012, there was cause for celebration simply because more than half of those surveyed said they wouldn’t hold atheism against a politician. Then, in 2015, for the first time ever, “atheist” wasn’t the worst trait in a presidential candidate. A “Socialist” performed slightly worse. (Thanks, Bernie Sanders!)

In a poll released today, there’s been no change in the unpopularity of “Socialist” — only 47% of Americans would support that candidate — but “atheist” received another tiny jump. A record 60% of Americans say they would now consider voting for an atheist. It’s still next to last on the list. But it’s clearly becoming less of a stigma.


GallupAtheist2019Sq.png
While just about every category Gallup asked about saw an increase in support — suggesting Americans are becoming comfortable with a more diverse group of candidates — “atheist” saw the smallest increase, an uptick of only 2%. But that may be because we just don’t hear that conversation discussed very much in the media. Without an atheist candidate to talk about, there’s no reason to bring it up.


Eighty percent of U.S. adults would vote for an evangelical Christian for president — up from 73% in 2015. Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans who would vote for a Muslim has grown from 58% in 2012 to 66% today.

Atheist presidential candidates would face more resistance from voters than candidates of other religious backgrounds. But Americans have warmed to the idea of an atheist candidate over the past several decades. The current 60% who would vote for an atheist is more than three times the 18% Gallup recorded in its first measure on atheist candidates in 1958.

But what I find particularly interesting are the strides atheism has made since 1959: A 230% increase in willingness.


GallupAtheist2019Trend.png

source

.

An atheist should not be a President because if he made that wrong conclusion, then its very possible hed make other wrong conclusions in intelligent policy.

But, mayby hed gett it right.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Atheists really think for themselves? You could have fooled me.
Since you've decided to be needlessly rude, I shall follow suit.

Perhaps you are easily fooled.

Who, in your fevered imagination, do you think is doing my thinking for me? Unlike most believers, I was not taught the things that I seriously believe, but learned them myself. Unlike those who were indoctrinated from childhood, along with the usual threats of hell and damnation.

Yes, I rather think you may be easily fooled, if you can say what you did.
 
Since you've decided to be needlessly rude, I shall follow suit.

Perhaps you are easily fooled.

Who, in your fevered imagination, do you think is doing my thinking for me? Unlike most believers, I was not taught the things that I seriously believe, but learned them myself. Unlike those who were indoctrinated from childhood, along with the usual threats of hell and damnation.

Yes, I rather think you may be easily fooled, if you can say what you did.

Learned them from your own mind or learned them from other sources?
 

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
Trump has proved that no matter how unrepentant and degenerate of a lifestyle you live, evangelists will still accept you with open arms as long as you pay lip service to their sentiments and agendas (anti-choice, anti-lgbt, anti-science, etc.)

As a Trump supporter who is hardly religious, I'm glad the Evangelical Christians are so easily fooled and duped into giving us their political support for our POTUS.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Learned them from your own mind or learned them from other sources?
Nobody ever learns anything "from their own mind." But one can use one's own mind to examine all that one is fed from all sorts of sources, and try to intelligently choose between them.

I went to Sunday school. I was taught every child's rudimentary Christianity. And on my own, using my own intelligence to examine what I was taught against what I observed, I concluded it was rubbish.

I was taught, like every child in my place and time was, that God loves and protects. And then I was beaten and nearly killed, more than once. God, mysteriously, didn't bother to show up. And the guilty parties went unpunished. And I was cut adrift from family and every other connection.

And do you think I would credit of that "God sees the little sparrow fall" bullcrap? Of course I wouldn't. If all God is doing is watching the sparrow fall (or me be nearly killed) and doing squat nothing about it, then what do I care if he thinks he's god. He's just a voyeur, a fraud, perhaps even a pervert. If he exists, I'll let you worship him. I never would.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Yeah! They've even accepted those who claim to be anti-lgbt, anti-drug etc. who are out there actively boffing same-sex partners, doing drugs and all manner of things. All you need is the claim...you need to actually be it.

That's pretty tawdry, in my view.

It's quite pathetic how they say openly and with a strait face that someone whose so blatantly dishonest, greedy, prideful, lecherous, adulterous, etc. is a man of God. It serves to expose the fact that they've been full of **** all along.
 
Top