Leading the Way
with higher levels of education and income, later generation immigrants (children or
grandchildren of immigrants), older voters, men, and Cuban Americans are more likely
than their counterparts to be interested in the race. Again, religious cleaves are muted in
explaining levels of interest in the 2004 presidential race.
[Table 7 about here]
As Table 7 illustrates, Latino evangelicals are not more likely than Catholics to be
mobilized to participate in the election. There is no statistically significant difference
among religious groups in terms of their chances of being contacted to register and vote
in the 2004 presidential election. Table 7 reports that Latino Democrats are more likely
than Latino Republicans to be contacted. Later generation immigrants and younger
voters are also more likely to be mobilized to participate in the election.
Taken together, Tables 5, 6, and 7 do not provide evidence suggesting that Latino
evangelicals would turn out en masse to support the Republican candidate in the 2004
election. Latino evangelicals are not more likely than Catholics to be certain about their
voting preference, interested in the presidential race, and contacted to participate in the
election.
Conclusion
We have observed that there is a religion-based cleavage in the Latino electorate.
Evangelicals are indeed different from the Catholic majority in their voting preferences.
Unlike solidly Democratic Catholics, they prefer the Republican candidate over his
opponent. This is another testimony to the view that Latinos are not a monolithic voting
bloc.
We do not have strong evidence indicating that the religion gap would transform
Latino voters to a swing constituency. For one, unlike their Anglo brethren, Latino
17
Convention