Despite his deep faith and frequent use of religious language, Obama is the clear favorite in New Hampshire among the non-religious. According to the exit polls, among the 22% of NH Democratic primary voters who identified as having no religious affiliation, nearly half (46%) voted for Obama compared to just 29% for Clinton.
So, about 24% for Edwards and 1% for Richardson?
For religious people, the faith of the candidate is important. For non-religious people, the questions is not on their mind at all (unless the candidate is pushing some kind of theocratic agenda) as there are more important issues to think about.
I'll have to disagree with Coturnix. If a candidate has faith in e.g. creationism, she obviously possesses severely limited cognitive abilities and should not be entrusted with power over millions of people and the most powerful military on earth.
Which means you agree with what I wrote (in parentheses).
Seems odd since Clinton has taken a stronger stance for science than Obama.
Not that I can vote in your elections or anything, but the religious thing is precisely what puts me off so much about Obama. He seems more like he's running for a church elder position than President. I'm finding the whole "pseudopreacher" thing he's doing rather unsettling.