Election analysis through the looking glass: political ideology is more important than religion when it comes to voting.

DEMOCRATS POISED TO TAKE control of Congress in January heard claims by religious progressives that the 2006 elections had been strongly influenced by religious organizing on the center-left. They would be wise to examine such claims carefully. Writing a post-election analysis is like having a magic looking glass: It allows you to see whatever conclusion you desire in the results.

These progressive religionists who gaze into the looking glass and see moral shifts are using an "exit poll" by John Zogby as proof that many evangelicals, Catholics and frequent churchgoers have replaced abortion and gay rights with Iraq, the economy and economic justice on their moral agendas. Ah, if it were really that simple.

This interpretation is an excellent example of the danger of election analysts' claims to know what impact "morals" have on the electorate. Morals vary depending on the person. You do not really know what someone considers a moral issue and what is simply a priority for government to address unless you ask. Zogby's poll never asked. He gave voters a list of issues he had conveniently labeled as moral, such as the war in Iraq, abortion, stem cell research and same-sex marriage, and asked people to choose the most important from among them. How can we--or Zogby--know that these are the most important moral issues to voters?

The Zogby "exit poll," conducted for the group Faith in Public Life, was in fact not an exit poll. Instead, it was a post-election survey of self-selected Zogby Interactive panel members. The voters were not randomly selected, and none of the participants were interviewed as they left the polls. The poll is representative only of those who have Internet access, signed up for Zogby's panel, claim to have voted and chose to take the survey.

Instead of using bad data to justify a hoped-for outcome, progressive religious people should take a clear-eyed look at the election and keep a few points in mind.

First, not everything is a moral issue. Calling an issue moral makes it a loaded term, carrying different meanings, depending on the audience. For some, moral issues mean abortion and gay rights; others think of jobs and affordable health care. For some, being moral is simply being a fundamentalist Christian; for others, it is following the Constitution. Beware of claims about what issues are moral.

Second, pay close attention to the Catholic vote. In every presidential election in the last 30 years, the candidate that won the Catholic vote also won the popular vote. Exit polls document that Catholics voted mostly for Nixon, Carter, Reagan twice, George H. W. Bush, and Clinton twice. In 2000, Democrat Al Gore, who narrowly won the popular vote, also eked out a victory among Catholics, and in 2004, the Catholic vote preferred Republican president George W. Bush. In 2006, the Catholic vote (55% for Democrats, 44% for Republicans) once again shadowed the vote overall (53% for Democrats, 45% for Republicans). This makes the Catholic vote one of the few reliable swing voting blocs in the country over the last three decades.

The Catholic vote in 2006 was generally a microcosm of the nation on issues. In the National Election Pool exit poll, conducted by Edison/Mitofsky, the priorities of Catholic voters matched the issue priorities of the nation as a whole: Iraq, the economy and terrorism at the top, with "moral" issues such as abortion and marriage of gay couples farther down the list. Although Catholics mirror the nation on these priorities, they stand out from Protestants and other Christians, who place a much higher importance on abortion and marriage of gays than do Catholics. Issues of economic security are much more important to Catholics.

Third, religion, although important in our lives, is less predictive of how a person will vote than is political ideology. Conservative Catholics have more in common politically with conservative evangelicals and other conservative non-Catholics than with Catholic liberals, just as Catholic liberals hold shared views with other liberals. Surveys of Catholic voters by Belden Russonello & Stewart for Catholics for a Free Choice, taken over many years, have revealed this important distinction. Moderate political ideology is a hallmark of Catholics' bellwether political behavior; more than half of Catholics voting in the 2006 midterm elections (55%) classified themselves as "moderate," compared to 46 percent of the electorate as a whole and only 43 percent of non-Catholic Christians.

Americans are not shifting their values or their morals; they are just saying no to the priorities and behavior of the current administration in Washington. I can live with that.

JOHN RUSSONELLO is a partner and JENNIFER AGIESTA a research analyst at the survey and consultancy group Belden Russonello & Stewart, www.brspoll.com.