| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 08/03/2007 6:34:01 AM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Poor behavior |
Posted on 07/26/2007 5:03:33 PM PDT by tantiboh
Democratic political consultant Mark Mellman has a very good piece up today at The Hill on the baffling and illegitimate opposition among voters to Mitt Romney due to his religion. I liked his closing paragraphs:
In July of 1958, 24 percent of respondents told Gallup they would not vote for a Catholic for president, almost identical to Gallup’s reading on Mormons today. Two years later, John F. Kennedy became the first Catholic to assume the oath of office. Within eight months, the number refusing to vote for a Catholic was cut almost in half.
[snip]
Mellman also discusses an interesting poll he helped construct, in which the pollsters asked half of their respondents whether they would support a candidate with certain characteristics, and asked the other half about another candidate with the exact same characteristics, with one difference. The first candidate was Baptist, the second candidate was Mormon. The Baptist had a huge advantage over the Mormon candidate, by about 20 points.
[snip]
However, more recent polls have attempted to fix the anonymity problem. A recent Time Magazine poll (read the original report here), for example, got to the heart of the question by asking respondents if they are less likely to vote for Mitt Romney specifically because he is a Mormon. The result is not as bad as some reporting on the poll has suggested. For example, while 30% of Republicans say they are less likely to vote for Romney because of his religion, fully 15% of other Republicans say that characteristic makes them more likely to vote for him. And while many have reported the finding that 23% of Republicans are “worried” by Romney’s Mormonism, the more important (but less-reported) number is that 73% say they hold no such reservations...
(Excerpt) Read more at romneyexperience.com ...
It could be it is a very busy temple?
Is it not true you do not believe what we tell you?
For days all we get are folks telling us what we believe you included.
No matter what we say it is the opposite of what the LDS believe as though in your mind 13 million people have been mislead!
sd,
The basic idea was that the mere presence of non-mormons
inside the temple defiled it. Even though it was brand
new, after the open house, it was closed and gutted and
redone. Now, I do not know if that is true.
ampu
That is not true. Anyone is welcome at a temple open house and there is nothing done to the temple between the open house and its dedication.
~”but AFTER the dedication you are outta luck.”~
If you’re not a worthy member of the LDS Church, Elsie, you’d better believe it. You see, we’re trying to keep the Lord’s house -clean.- I’m not speaking in terms of dust and grime.
You should see how efficient the crew are that come in and install the sacrifice and sacred rite chambers after the dedication.
I’ve never heard of any such incident, either. Frankly, I can’t envision any way it would happen, short of some kind of tragedy such as murder taking place inside. If uninvited people were to barge in, they would be escorted out by the elderly ushers and business would resume as normal.
Without more info, though, I can’t give you any specific answer either.
Aw, c'mon Tant....I'd like to see how you can "Prove" someone more effective against someone who hasn't even entered the race!..How considerate of you to give Fred the 25%. Let's revisit this post again in late November, shall we?
Tant,
back to the thread topic for a moment...
Were you surprised to read the details of the
poll I linked to as to the percentages of
Americans who say they wouldn’t vote for
a mormon?
It went by demographic group, the lowest
number who said they wouldn’t vote for a
mormon were 31% and the highest 60%
Mitt will HAVE to give The Mormon Speech
eventually.
I was surprised most that across the board,
no matter what demographic you examine,
30% or more say they wouldn’t vote for a
mormon. Not just evangelicals. Every age
block. Male and female. Catholic. Protestant,
Candlestick makers. Butchers. Auto workers.
Every one. That is what surprised me. I knew
Evangelicals that recognize mormonism as a
cult would have a tough time, but there is
a solid core of 30% or greater in every
demographic group! Shazaam!
THAT is why Mitt may win the primary by
mouthing the right words and raising
money, but lose the general election by
a landslide.
best,
ampu
Embracing it is a character flaw.
A little over the top, Tantiboh, comparing yourself to Christ, or even JFK. Grandiosity is a character flaw, also. I remind you of the dozens of instances of name-calling you apologists have done. "Let he who is without sin....."
As incensed as you are at a few FReepers whose post may be read by dozens, get ready for the same things to be said by the clinton/media machine and heard by millions if Romney should win the nomination. You are all whistling in the dark when you cry, "backlash" "backlash".
Speaking of Mormon Temples, here is a video of
Mormon Temple Rituals to bring everyone up to
speed...
Mormon Temple Rituals http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K6n1PlTKQQ&mode=related&search=
Ironically, millions of mormons have never seen these
rituals in person.
ampu
~”Aw, c’mon Tant....I’d like to see how you can “Prove” someone more effective against someone who hasn’t even entered the race!”~
I can’t prove anything. We’re talking opinion here, remember?
But here’s how I come to the conclusion that Romney is more effective as a candidate than Thompson.
1. Executive experience. Romney is a rock star as a manager. What is a campaign other than an organization that needs managing? Thompson’s executive experience is limited to his time as a senator. Fine and dandy - but there’s a very good reason we so rarely elect senators to the Presidency. Senators are bureaucrats. They hire all kinds of advisers and staff and overload their organizations with dead weight. The organization becomes lethargic and slow to respond. We’ve seen it time and time and time again. Executives such as former governors, on the other hand, tend to keep a lean, efficient, well-run, nimble campaign and concentrate their resources on the highest priorities.
2. Charisma. Romney has it. It’s infectious. He draws people into his speeches. Thompson, for all the clever, well-scripted repartee he’s delivered so far (I loved his Michael Moore response), has not yet proven himself to be someone who is a magnetic leader. Could this change? Sure. Get him out on the stump, where he’s got to ad lib and defend himself, and we’ll see how he does. The jury’s still out.
3. Fire in the belly. Romney is a voracious campaigner; he seems tireless. Thompson, on the other hand, keeps pushing back his date. This may be clever strategy on his part, but I interpret it as a good excuse to keep away from the 80-hour work weeks the campaign requires. Am I right? Time will tell.
4. Organization. Romney has grassroots organizations in the key states that the other candidates would die for. He’s built a strong foundation where it matters most, and he knows how to use it. He has the backing of key politicians, and therefore their organizational strength. Thompson has none of this. He’ll have 4-5 months to accomplish what Romney has done in 18. Can he do it? I don’t think so. The buzz will give him a jump on it; but I don’t think it’ll be the jump that he’ll need.
5. Oh yeah, and Mitt’s a hottie! (just for you, AMPU)
Now, you may respond, “But Thompson’s the real conservative here! The base is going to flock to him in droves!” Well, so far, this is true. But I promise you, that perception is going to disappear. There’s just as much in Thompson’s record that will concern true-blue conservatives as there is in Romney’s record. Don’t get me wrong, I like Thompson. But he’s no more a conservative than Romney. Pity about Duncan Hunter, et al.
~”How considerate of you to give Fred the 25%.”~
I try to be generous. I may have to revise that downward if he keeps making me mad by teasing me. Watch out, Fred, here I come! After Labor Day? Fine! You only get 20%!
~”Let’s revisit this post again in late November, shall we?”~
Fine. I revise my opinions for consistency with new data all the time. In a few months, I may very well agree with you. I give that a 12.38% chance.
I have no clue what you are talking about I don't recall seeing you on the regular thread defending common decency!
What ever you are selling don't fit in with my talk!
LOL!
I'm very sorry...bless your heart. I've read this post 18 times....and I would love to respond..but I'm not sure exactly..what you are attempting to communicate.
I would suggest that you and I don't post to each other....What do you say?
Some are so narrow in their thinking.
That is not comparing oneself to the Lord, he is talking about mounting forces!
“Come Thou Fount” Mormon Tabernacle Choir
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uslytyVrWFw&mode=related&search=
~”Mitt will HAVE to give The Mormon Speech
eventually.”~
I agree with that.
~”I knew
Evangelicals that recognize mormonism as a
cult would have a tough time, but there is
a solid core of 30% or greater in every
demographic group! Shazaam!”~
One point made in the original article is that the number goes way down when you move from the generic “Mormon” to the specific “Romney.” Same phenomenon happens when pollsters ask the “Hillary vs. Generic Republican” question. Hillary winds every time - until you start inserting an actual name into “Generic Republican.”
We’ll see if the poll bears out the truth. I can’t quite tell you why yet, but my gut tells me there’s reason to be more optimistic. I just don’t live in a society where 3 out of 10 of the people I know outside my faith consider Mormons political pariahs due to our religious beliefs. In my experience, it’s closer to one in fifty.
As has been pointed out on this thread, too, it cannot be denied that the greatest impact of the “Mormon” question will be in the South. I’d like to see Clinton capture any of those states. That factor greatly ameliorates the impact of the question.
Besides, I’d never vote for a “Morman” either. I have a tough time finding faith in the methodology of a pollster that makes such a basic error.
I will tell you, though, if Romney wins the nomination then loses in the general because too many southern states go blue with low turnout, I’m prepared to wash my hands of the Republican party. I cannot take part in a party that takes me for granted as a supporter then refuses to support a candidate for president simply because he professes the same faith as me. It would be a repudiation of every good principle upon which this country was founded, and the fact that it would come from so-called conservatives would alienate me, perhaps irreparably.
You've done a good bob and weave though...Congrats.
It appears that's a common mode of operation here.........
you've addressed nothing here.
You've done a good bob and weave though...Congrats.
It appears that's a common mode of operation here.........
What more can I say to this reply....
No soup for you!:)
“I just don’t live in a society where 3 out of 10 of the people I know outside my faith consider Mormons political pariahs due to our religious beliefs. In my experience, it’s closer to one in fifty.”
Perhaps you do not understand how the public perceives
mormonism?
“I’d like to see Clinton capture any of those states.”
You do not understand the cunning of the Hildabeast. After
she cleans up the primary, she will be carrying a Bible,
quoting scripture, and convincing all who hear her that she
is the real deal. The American public is that gullible.
“I will tell you, though, if Romney wins the nomination then loses in the general because too many southern states go blue with low turnout, I’m prepared to wash my hands of the Republican party. I cannot take part in a party that takes me for granted as a supporter then refuses to support a candidate for president simply because he professes the same faith as me. It would be a repudiation of every good principle upon which this country was founded”
1. It won’t be the party that outright repudiates mormons. It
will be the American voter who makes the decision in the
general election.
2. That a voter goes into the privacy of the voting booth
and votes his conscience, feelings, hopes, fears, etc. IS
the principle our country was founded on. The power is
vested in the people.
Have you considered that your perception is colored by
your own experience and culture - and that it differs
from a large portion of America?
I have dear friends who are in mormonism. I truly like them.
I’d do anything for them as friends. That doesn’t mean
I have a good view of moromonism (it’s a cult) or would
vote for a mormon who ran for POTUS. Lower offices, maybe.
POTUS? No.
Still, what amazed me most was the consistency of the 30%
and up who said they wouldn’t vote for a mormon. Across
the board. Clean sweep. If that is actually a reflection
of reality, it has far reaching consequences for Mitt.
ampu
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.