jwhitlock Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Is there more or less anti-Mormon sentiment manifest against the Romney campaign now than there was in 2008? Or has it just become more subtle? My general sense is that certain people are less willing now to make it an issue than they were before; how much is that anti-Mormon sentiment dampened by the perceived need to get the best most electable candidate out there to beat Obama?Given the nature of all the other candidates (Santorum, Gingrich, and Obama), who all are much further to the left or right than Romney, does Romney's reputation as more of a moderate give him a better chance of election, even as a Mormon, than any of the others?And are the polling results from the last election, where an uncomfortably high percentage (34%?) of people indicated they would never vote for a Mormon, still a valid indicator?This is actually warming up to be rather interesting; if you put aside any expectation that the next President is going to be able to turn anything around, it's really quite fascinating to see what's coming out of the woodwork. Who would've thunk that ultra-conservative Iowa home-schooling Christians would have been so adamantly vocal about Romney being evil incarnate? It must have driven them around the bend that Romney and Santorum ended up so close in that state.
jwhitlock Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Southerners will vote for social conservatives. This makes Ginrich and Santorum more attractive than Romney who has stayed a relatively moderate course.I'm living in Georgia and ran the primary election in my district and I didn't catch near a whiff of anti-Mormonism.In fact I get more anti-mormonism from New Yorkers, Michiganders and Utahins on these boards in one day than I experience in a year of being a Southerner.I have to ask if your district was an Atlanta area district, or if it was elsewhere in the state. That would generally make a difference.
KevinG Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 I have to ask if your district was an Atlanta area district, or if it was elsewhere in the state. That would generally make a difference.North Georgia - big time red state Newt country. Mitt still came in second after the favorite son. He's nearly split the delegates in the states he's "lost".I think the press is running up the Southerners vs. Mormons story because it makes for good headlines. It also allows them to portray Southerners as ignorant bigots. While we have them here they are no more numerous here than they are in Illinois, Utah or any other state I've lived.
jwhitlock Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 North Georgia - big time red state Newt country. Mitt still came in second after the favorite son. He's nearly split the delegates in the states he's "lost".I think the press is running up the Southerners vs. Mormons story because it makes for good headlines. It also allows them to portray Southerners as ignorant bigots. While we have them here they are no more numerous here than they are in Illinois, Utah or any other state I've lived.True that.Thanks for the info; interesting tidbit.
Garden Girl Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 frank,The whole dog story is pretty laughable as an "issue." If it can even be called that. I see dogs riding in the back of pickup trucks all the time. At least the Romney family pooch had a carrier.Hi Zak... I'm glad you mentioned this... I'm tired of hearing people talk about his dog as if Romney was somehow being cruel to it. The dog was a heck of a lot safer secured in a carrier than those dogs I see all the time riding in open pick ups... some tied and some not tied. Some tied with a rope that was just long enough that if the dog jumped over the side it would hang him. But let Romney secure his dog in a carrier and strap it to the top of the car and people somehow think that's cruel. GG
Avatar4321 Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Which candidate has made any negative comment about Romney's faith ,,,,,,,CFRSupporters of candidates should not count IMHO.There is a reason I said "if"
Avatar4321 Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Well if that happens guess who is going to bare the brunt of the blame?Perhaps that's God's will for us at the moment. To keep us humble.
Calm Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 But let Romney secure his dog in a carrier and strap it to the top of the car and people somehow think that's cruel. GGAlong with a wind shield, I believe.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 I've been posting on this issue at http://dcpsicetnon.blogspot.com/.Churches in the South have long been political platforms. I know from experience. I like the Church's position on this matter, I would not even attend a sacrament service where a politician was speaking (of course it would not be allowed). My Father a Baptist minister completely disapproved of such practices. I do make exceptions for the Black Church (and I say that because as a boy, other than Mormons, Catholics and Islam they were segregated) I think much of it was needed for the Civil Rights movement...however today I don't think it is appropriate. Not to mention MLK Jr, was a "master preacher". I wish we had such speakers...the only one that comes close to this type of passion is Jeffery R Holland, One of the earlier Prophets, I think George Albert Smith preached in a way that would be received with shock today. We had a member of the Stake Presidency once, "President Archer" who was killed on his way to the Nauvoo Padget (which he acted in yearly) was a pure preacher...it's was thrilling for a former Baptist to hear...it reminded me of my childhood.
Zakuska Posted March 16, 2012 Author Posted March 16, 2012 Churches in the South have long been political platforms. I know from experience. I like the Church's position on this matter, I would not even attend a sacrament service where a politician was speaking (of course it would not be allowed). My Father a Baptist minister completely disapproved of such practices. I do make exceptions for the Black Church (and I say that because as a boy, other than Mormons, Catholics and Islam they were segregated) I think much of it was needed for the Civil Rights movement...however today I don't think it is appropriate. Not to mention MLK Jr, was a "master preacher". I wish we had such speakers...the only one that comes close to this type of passion is Jeffery R Holland, One of the earlier Prophets, I think George Albert Smith preached in a way that would be received with shock today. We had a member of the Stake Presidency once, "President Archer" who was killed on his way to the Nauvoo Padget (which he acted in yearly) was a pure preacher...it's was thrilling for a former Baptist to hear...it reminded me of my childhood.My Mission President was this way too when he spoke at zone meetings. He could be very animated and inspire and energize through preaching from both the Bible and BOM.
thesometimesaint Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Blueadept:http://www.huffingto..._n_1183814.htmlhttp://news.yahoo.co...-183500425.html
KevinG Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 Churches in the South have long been political platforms. I know from experience. I like the Church's position on this matter, I would not even attend a sacrament service where a politician was speaking (of course it would not be allowed). My Father a Baptist minister completely disapproved of such practices. I do make exceptions for the Black Church (and I say that because as a boy, other than Mormons, Catholics and Islam they were segregated) I think much of it was needed for the Civil Rights movement...however today I don't think it is appropriate. Not to mention MLK Jr, was a "master preacher". I wish we had such speakers...the only one that comes close to this type of passion is Jeffery R Holland, One of the earlier Prophets, I think George Albert Smith preached in a way that would be received with shock today. We had a member of the Stake Presidency once, "President Archer" who was killed on his way to the Nauvoo Padget (which he acted in yearly) was a pure preacher...it's was thrilling for a former Baptist to hear...it reminded me of my childhood.We had the sound system go out the last time I spoke in church. I put on my "public speaking" voice that I use for professional and motivational engagements and preached to the back of the room.Several of our Baptist converts told me how fun it was to hear an "old timey" sermon.
Zakuska Posted March 16, 2012 Author Posted March 16, 2012 Blueadept:http://www.huffingto..._n_1183814.htmlhttp://news.yahoo.co...-183500425.htmlAnd lets not forget candidates who have bowed outPerry defends pastor's "Mormonism cult" commentshttp://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7385186n
Zakuska Posted March 16, 2012 Author Posted March 16, 2012 http://www.washingto...BfTCS_blog.html5. The Mormon issue: Romney’s Mormonism has been a back burner topic throughout the race. (Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley said before the primary vote this week that “I think that’s a very subtle issue that probably may be a problem in many states – not just in Alabama.”). But, Romney lost voters who said it was very important for a candidate to share their religious beliefs by wide margins. Santorum took 48 percent to Romney’s 16 percent among those voters in Alabama and 43 percent to 26 percent among them in Mississippi. While Santorum is a Catholic and most voters in Alabama and Mississippi are southern Baptists, they clearly identify themselves more closely with Santorum’s religion that Romney’s religion. (It’s no secret that among some evangelical Christians, Mormonism is viewed very skeptically.) Romney’s positioning as the moderate in the field clearly hurt his chances in Mississippi and Alabama but his Mormon faith didn’t help matters either.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 My Mission President was this way too when he spoke at zone meetings. He could be very animated and inspire and energize through preaching from both the Bible and BOM.Begs the question...have we lost passion, or the ability to accept people who are different. I usually lean on the pulpit and just teach...I don't make an attempt be to a great orator. Teaching is what I know, so I treat sacrament talks like Sunday School classes.
Saints Alive Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 My favorite and subtitle example of bigotry comes in a Newt Gingrich ad, the voice says, Romney isn't "one of us"
Zakuska Posted March 16, 2012 Author Posted March 16, 2012 Hi Zak... I'm glad you mentioned this... I'm tired of hearing people talk about his dog as if Romney was somehow being cruel to it. The dog was a heck of a lot safer secured in a carrier than those dogs I see all the time riding in open pick ups... some tied and some not tied. Some tied with a rope that was just long enough that if the dog jumped over the side it would hang him. But let Romney secure his dog in a carrier and strap it to the top of the car and people somehow think that's cruel. GGStill alive and well...http://www.washingto...d2YES_blog.htmlTo some animal lovers, the story is an example of cruelty.“It really says this guy is not like us and is mean,” said Scott Crider, an Alabama marketing guru who founded Dogs Against Romney.Idaho Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter, a Romney supporter, said he did not know the story about Seamus but did not see any harm in an open-air ride.“We carry our dogs around in the back of our pickup all the time,” Otter said. “I’ve got two dogs, and I just say, ‘Get in,’ and they jump in the back.”Romney’s political opponents sense an opportunity. Former House speaker Newt Gingrich raised the incident a few months ago with a campaign video attacking Romney.http://www.washingto...ry.html?hpid=z2
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted March 16, 2012 Posted March 16, 2012 My favorite and subtitle example of bigotry comes in a Newt Gingrich ad, the voice says, Romney isn't "one of us"In that case it had a 'dual meaning". But the tread is about bigotry, not politics. The point is...living in South, we are despised by many.
thesometimesaint Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 I've seen dogs riding in the back of pickup trucks even here is Califonia. It is unsafe for the dog. I also doubt they ride that way for 12 hrs. Dogs when frightened will poop all over themselves. This animal was frightened enough to poop all over himself, was hosed down, and then made to ride longer on top of the car. I've traveled across the country many times with cats and dogs. We always secured them inside the vehicle, or we left them at home in the care of a friend the animals knew and were comfortable around.Antimormonism isn't just a Southern problem, but it is worse in the South.
Calm Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 This animal was frightened enough to poop all over himself, was hosed down, and then made to ride longer on top of the car.I believe that it was explained the dog was sick, it may have been fright or it may have just been carsickness as that has happened with our dogs, but it is obvious to me when a dog is frightened as opposed to sick and while Romney may be lying about it, I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt. My dad's dog got carsick every time we took him somewhere even just 15 minutes in the car, would have loved to have been out in the air, knowing him, but hated his carrier so not sure how to make it work safely. My dog would prefer to be on top of the car, tries to climb up as high as she can anywhere she is and look around, hates being cooped up on the floor of the car. I wouldn't put her up there just as I would never allow her to be in the back of a pickup or even sticking her head out the window, too paranoid myself, I have to have my eyes on her at all times.We did put our dog carrier on the top of our car once due to lack of room inside, the only dog inside was a stuffed one though. I thought it would be fun for the kids in other cars to see.The dog issue is pure politics and has nothing to do with Mormonism so I don't think I'll continue this conversation due to the rules.Will add this one link, apparently the dog was unharmed by the experience and Romney's sister said he would have made it known if he didn't like it:http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2007/07/introducing_sea.html
cdowis Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 Romney loss MS and AL last Tues whose delegates were split between the 3 candidates. He had fewer delegates from these two states.You are mistaken. Are you familiar with the "super-delegate"?He won all the super-delegates which put him above the other candidates in total delegates. He is following Obama's strategy when he beat Clinton. He may be a Mormon, running in the Southern states, but he's smart.You don't hear much about this because it smacks of backroom deal-making, and a Mormon would never be guilty of that.
blueadept Posted March 17, 2012 Posted March 17, 2012 You are mistaken. Are you familiar with the "super-delegate"?.......You don't hear much about this because it smacks of backroom deal-making, and a Mormon would never be guilty of that.It's sad that you don't hear more about this and it has nothing to do with Romney's religion.That shouldn't give the typical American public confidence in our election system. I don't mind explaining the the electoral college versus the popular vote for those that ask. I wouldn't want to explain how Santorum lost the south due to 'super delegates.' That simply sounds corrupt to the average person.
cdowis Posted March 18, 2012 Posted March 18, 2012 "super-delegates"This is not a democracy, but a democratic republic. The founders foresaw the hysterical influence of emotional issues, such as antimormonism and bigotry. So they did not completely trust the masses to make the final decision, but the reasoned deliberation of wise men who would look beyond such bigotry to do the right thing.The antimormons were blocked by protections instituted in the constitution. If you do not trust the election process, then trust the Constitution.
Jeff K. Posted March 18, 2012 Posted March 18, 2012 The Constitution does not mention political parties or how those parties choose their representatives. That is something that grew out of the government and parties, not the US Constitution. Just as a clarification. While superdelegates can indeed be leaven in the mixture of political parties, it can also be used to freeze people out who might be well qualified but not connected. As such it is a neutral issue as far as whether or not its good or bad.Just a side comment.
thesometimesaint Posted March 18, 2012 Posted March 18, 2012 Cdowis:It wasn't until the 21th Century that the Bill of Rights was interpreted to apply to individuals. For instance the First Amendment is a direction to Congress not the States.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.