I always say it with a smile, as I pointed out in #28. *hug* U.S. Army Retired |
Posted on 01/19/2008 12:27:37 PM PST by Reaganesque
Bias against Mitt Romney’s religion is one of the reasons that the tag “flip-flopper” sticks with the former Massachusetts governor but not his Republican opponents, according to Vanderbilt political scientist John Geer. “There is no question that Romney has changed his positions on some issues, but so have some of the other candidates,” Geer said. “Why does the label stick to Romney but not his opponents? At least some of the answer lies in Romney’s Mormon beliefs.”
Geer and colleagues Brett Benson of Vanderbilt and Jennifer Merolla of Claremont Graduate University designed an Internet survey to assess bias against Mormons, how best to combat it and its potential impact on the nomination process and general election campaign.
“We find that of those who accuse Romney of flip-flopping, many admit it is Romney’s Mormonism and not his flip-flopping that is the real issue,” Benson said. “Our survey shows that 26 percent of those who accuse Romney of flip-flopping also indicate that Mormonism, not flip-flopping, is their problem with Romney.” Benson noted that the pattern is especially strong for conservative Evangelicals. According to the poll, 57 percent of them have a bias against Mormons.
The poll, which was conducted by Polimetrix, included an oversample of Southern Evangelicals that Geer said measured bias with far more precision than previous efforts. The survey shows that 50 percent of conservative Evangelicals evaluate a moderate Christian candidate more positively than a conservative Mormon candidate.
The study’s findings suggest that criticizing Romney for flip-flopping is an effective campaign strategy because it sticks with two different groups: those who are genuinely concerned about Romney’s shifts on certain issues and those who use the label as cover for the fact that they do not want to vote for a Mormon for president.
“As the campaign continues to unfold, these data become increasingly relevant as the Republicans choose a presidential nominee,” Geer said.
| I always say it with a smile, as I pointed out in #28. *hug* U.S. Army Retired |
I worked for a company (and laid off) by a company that Bain took over in Salt Lake in the 80s. I saw alot of the Bain guys coming in as VPs. Nothing against Romney, but he fits the mold of the guys I saw there.
I’m sure Romney did fine in his job, but this kind of Bain culture was not something I have fond memories of.
That could be part of the answer. The other problem, I think, is that Romney usually takes a position unequivocally, so when he changes it, the change is easy to spot. Thompson, on the other hand, at least in the past, tended to use equivocal and weasly language when talking about, say, abortion, so his flip-flop becomes much less apparent.
If you want to see parsing, check out the way Thompson was talking about abortion during his 1994 Senate campaign.
surprise, surprise!
What I read stated that 26% of those who accused Romney of FF also cited his religion as a point of opposition. If one applied that to Freepers, one could say that 1/4 of the 80% of Freepers who oppose Romney, or about 20%, might have an issue with his religion. I think that sounds too high. I am not a Mormon. Objectively however, it appears to me as if more than a few Republicans really are anti Mormon. This has surprised me.
Tsk, Tsk....however, THIS is just fine, isn't it?
John Podhoretz, noting that Romney appears to have won 94 percent of Mormons in Nevada, comments: "(Forget Mike Huckabee’s claim on evangelicals; a number like that suggests Romney is this year’s unqualified king of identity politics.)"
Just a coincidence, isn't it?
I have been stating for monthst that Mitt's religion is a factor in the race. Just wait until the general rolls around and the Clinton machine and MSM get REALLY started, if we are unlucky enough that Mitt gets the nomination...say hello to President Hillary.
Ok, you as a hindu person you may not have been reading the posts here on MH flip flops.
He’s always said “I’m against it personally,
No, he has not.
LOL.... Best line of the Day.
Incidentally since the above graphic seems to have generated some buzz I thought I'd point out that the painter of the orignal artwork used his wife's face for each of the angels sounding the trumpets. Look closely the angels are all the same. Now that's a classy artist. Paints a picture of devotion to his Lord and his beloved spouse.
If we had a Republican controlled House and Seante, I could live with a Rodham-rodent in teh White HOuse. But if Mitt accomplishes the nomination the chilling effect the media exposure of the heresies in Mormonism will have on Conservative Christians will insure democrat’s control over all three, WH, Senate, and House.
Romney and every other candidate’s religion is open to discussion here and in the media and the media will not give Romney a pass if he’s the nominee.
Remember Carter? He was ripped by the anti Christian media for proclaiming himself a born again Christian. He won antway and was a dismal failure as a president. The media will have a lot more ammo with Romney because whether anybody likes it or not his religion is very much a factor.
I'm bigoted against peepstone false prophets pretending they're getting messages from Jesus and God The Father Almighty (Mormons separate these as separate Gods in a 'godhead'), pretending they are receiving scriptures via a peep stone in a hat, and declaring that God has ordered people to do that which He expressly declared an abomination before Him ... polygamy.
Yes, I'm very bigoted against lying adulterous fakers practicing divination scams to dupe humble people in the nineteenth century and now the twenty-first century. Of course, that means I'm also bigoted against the demon who runs the religion of Mormonism which seeks to 'restore' that which was never lost because of the Promise of Jesus to never leave us who trust in Him.
Goes without saying that I am bigoted against Satan tricking people into Hell on the pretext of getting salvation after all that they can do to earn Grace.
Lest we miss it, I'm extremely bigoted against faked scriptures fabricated from Egyptian papyri declaring the Egyptian Book of the Dead to be the book of Abraham, again 'translated' via a peep stone in a hat, the way nineteenth century cons were accomplished.
And if there is yet any misunderstanding, I'm militantly bigoted against a religion claiming to be restored Christianity and teaching baptism for the dead of the past seventeen centuries, on the pretext of one scripture passage misapplied from Paul's teaching to the Corinthian believers.
Finally, I'm angrily bigoted against a religion whose founder 're-translated' the King James Bible back into King James English while adding thousands of words and fabricated prophesies of his 'coming in these latter days' to fulfill these Smithian fabricated prophesies.
Yes, I'm a simple Christian bigot, standing up to declare the demonic religion of Mormonism to be a portion of the broad road leading to the wide gate which Satan has stationed a glowing imp to greet self-sufficient humans through ... into the eternal pit of Hell. Shouldn't more simple Christians be likewise bigoted against demonic lies? The mainstream liberal media will be educating folks to the lies and heresies of Mormonism just as soon as Mitt Romney manipulates his way into the nomination on cries of bigotry. Congratulations on your lack of discernment as to the goal of the liberal spittlegeist.
“As a Mormon with no bias.. “
I about fell off my chair when I read that. LOL! Glad to see a Mormon without a bias here. I knew there had to be one around somewhere. : )
I actually like Thompson better but he just can’t energize anybody. He (Thompson) is pretty sound actually. But, Mitt has the energy and is at least 3 times smarter than McCain, but we live in interesting times when the guy that has been stabbing the party and it’s principles in the back for years wins in SC. These voters are not people I understand very well. I am actually beginning to hope Guiliani wins in Florida although Mitt could figure out how to make us globally competitive again. Guiliani brings his social nonsense to the table which will gag a lot of people. I am beginning to think Hillary will just hide in the general away from Mitt or Guiliani. McCain would have no chance (if the base is still actually there and stays home) and Huckleberry would also gag most people. We don’t have perfect candidates and the people appear pretty stupid.
It's primarily his waffling back & forth that bothers me--along with how in '07 he was characterizing his previous positions...(read those below)...the latter comments which therefore has nothing to do with what else he was to say?
I agree! I add one more word: it must be pretty thin-picking nit-pickings on the flip-flopping front. [jonrick46]
Mitt takes over a dozen positions on general pro-life stances all over the map...Pro-abortion 1970 on....I mean he even starts waffling away from wanting to be called "pro-choice" in 2001 when he tried to briefly side-step/elevate his pro-abortion rep in Utah...then back to more pro-abortion rhetoric before coming out as hardline pro-abortion as possible in 2002 & beyond...only to undergo a pro-life "conversion" in late '04 yet still spout even more pro-abortion rhetoric sandwiched in between 2 pro-life statements/new commitments in 2005...pro-abortion actions in 2006 (which he later defines as "pro-life")...2007 says he was effectively pro-choice over previous years but was never pro-choice...has always been pro-life.
Let's analogize this for a moment by comparing Romney's covenant with the pre-born to his covenant with his wife:
It would be as if he was married...
...then divorced at his initiation for 31 years, yet claim in the 31st year, "Oh, I'm not divorced," yet remain divorced for 3 additional years...
...then get remarried to his wife for over a year--with one time in the midst of that proclaiming, "I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain divorced."...
...Then as an attorney he would make it easier for couples to divorce and put the leading proponents of divorce in a position to monitor pro-divorce legislation...
...But then later he would claim that these actions were "pro-marriage"...
Then this year, he would concede that “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-divorce" and then a week later say "I was always married" and 7 months later say, "I never considered myself divorced. I never allowed myself to call myself divorced because I never felt like I was."
Again, the above was only an analogy...see below for seeing how Romney has waffled back & forth on abortion & protecting the pre-born:
THE FLiP & FLoP SIDE OF MITT
THE PRO-'LIFE'& PRO-ABORTION REVELATION OF MITT ROMNEY
"Verse 1": He said he was “pro-choice” in 1994 & had been since 1970:
"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice." (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy)
"Verse 2": And it came to pass that he said he “didn’t wish to be labeled pro-choice” in a July 12, 2001 letter to a Salt Lake City newspaper.
"Verse 3": And it came to pass that he campaigned hard on being “pro-choice” in 2002:
“I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose, and have devoted and am dedicated to honoring my word in that regard… (Nov. 2, 2002)
"Verse 4": And it came to pass that he said he had a pro-life “conversion” after a Nov. 8, 2004 meeting. By May 27, 2005, he’s back to:
"I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice." (press conference comment) (So that’s “pro-life?”)
"Verse 5": And it came to pass that he said that he said later in 2005 in a Boston Globe op-ed that’s he’s “pro-life” and the 2 actions he took that year are pro-life—one action taken in February before he told us in May that he was “absolutely committed…regards to laws relating to abortion and choice”—and one after.
"Verse 6": And it came to pass that he said that this “pro-life” governor in April of 2006 signs his "Commonwealth Care" into existence, thereby expanding abortion access for poor women--$50 abortions on sale today via MittCare. He doesn’t veto placing a Planned Parenthood rep on the board oversight of MittCare.
"Verse 7": And it came to pass that he said within two weeks of campaigning in South Carolina in late Jan & early Feb, he makes the following 2 statements—both of which can’t be simultaneously true: Jan. 28, 2007:
“Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice." (Bruce Smith, "Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint," The Associated Press, 1/29/07) (OK how could his even later claim that "every action I've taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life..." AND this statement BOTH be true?) Feb. 8, 2007: "I am firmly pro-life… I was always for life." (Jim Davenport, "Romney Affirms Opposition to Abortion," The Associated Press, 2/9/2007)
"Verse 8": And it came to pass that he was asked to size up his changes through the years as an August 2007 interview with Chris Wallace of Fox:
"I never called myself pro-choice. I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice, and so..."
OK, just even from his own lips, how can he say he...
...“sustains” Roe v. Wade in 1994 (“sustains” is the strongest word possible for a Mormon—see very last lengthy paragraph below—as LDS are asked to sustain ALL their leaders from the LDS “prophet” on down);
...says he is “devoted and…dedicated” to “honoring” his ”word” to “sustain and support” Roe vs. Wade in 2002;
...continue to remain ”committed to my promise” in May of ’05;
...expand abortion services in RomneyCare in ’06 & make Planned Parenthood part of the healthcare “concrete”@ that time…???...
...While simultaneously...
...eschewing the “pro-choice” label in 2001;
...claim that “every action I’ve taken as the governor relates to the sanctity of human life” and looking backward from February, 2007, “I was always for life.”???
What if someone really is against Romney because of his flip-flopping?
What words are we supposed to say so that everyone knows it’s the flip-flopping that’s the major issue with us?
In that case, the Romney platoon will tell you you’re too stupid or ill informed to be correct. The demigod Mitt cannot be a flip flopper because his campaign has declared he is not ... [cuing Yul Brenner] ‘So it is said, so it shall be written’ don’tchaknow.
Sorry about that. However, if you really believe, and accept Him into your heart, all will be forgiven.
/sarc/
The problem is you! You are not TRYING hard enough! You do not accept this readily - and YOU need help doing it. We will help you.
Your cult does not have me.
"Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and, 'The time is near.' Do not follow them."
Luke 21:8
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.