Jump to content

Mitt Romney'S Evangelical Problem


Zakuska

Recommended Posts

Some very telling statistics:

After a year of carnival-like fun, the Republican race has suddenly become boring and predictable. Voting in state after state has just revealed the same basic demographic divide at work. There’s been a great deal of discussion about how Romney and Santorum voters are split by income, education, and ideology, but only one indicator really seems to matter: if you look closely at the exit polls, the single best predictor of whether Romney loses a state is the percentage of voters who describe themselves as evangelical or born-again. Of the seventeen states where exit polls have been conducted, Romney has lost each one where evangelical voters make up a majority of the electorate, and he’s won each one where their share of the vote was forty-nine per cent or less. Here’s what it looks like when charted, courtesy of a great exit-poll feature over at the Washington Post:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/03/mitt-romney-and-evangelical-voters.html

Link to comment

This is Santorum's calculus and why he'll stay in unless these evangelical rules of thumb don't hold. If Romney wins, the question is if distaste for Mormonism keeps EV's home or will their traditional stances on the issues bring them out to vote for him.

Link to comment

For those interested, but not enough to read the whole column, here's the chart.

Screen%20Shot%202012-03-21%20at%202.16.52%20PM.png

and here's the last 'graf:

Finally, we all know that the nomination is not secured by winning states but by accumulating 1,144 delegates. The delegate rules are quite complicated, but I’ll dive into the details in an upcoming post and tease out what the almost even split of states between Romney and Santorum states means for Romney’s ability to hit 1,144 after the last contest in Utah, on June 26th. (Spoiler: it’s going to be close.)

Enjoy,

Lehi

Link to comment

Santorum believes that if he can hold out to the convention his base will somehow defeat Romney. I'll make a prediction that it ain't gonna happen. It looks likely that Romney will be within 50 votes of required number to avoid a floor fight. There is no way, if the current trend continues, that Santorum or anyone else will change enough minds to exclude Romney.

Link to comment

From what I've seen today Santorum and Gingrich would rather play with childrens toys than focus on the real issues like the economy and Barak Obamas failed Policies?!

They have seen they cannot get Romney on religion because they get labeled bigots so now they have to start attacking him some where else.

Link to comment

Zakuska:

All we need is a huge Etch-A-Sketch.

I just posted this else where on the web.

____,

You are missing something... Romney is first a smart business entrepreneurr.

His campaign just tripled Ohio Art co. (OART, the makers of the etch-a-sketch) stock over night! Follow the money and you'll see that the Owner of that business has contributed strongly to various republican campaigns over the years.

Democrats, Media Outlets, and even fellow contenders eager to jump on the "crucify Romney at all costs" band wagon are helping to fund Romney's campaign without even knowing it.

Talk about a savey business move!

But lets not take this political and get it closed.

Link to comment

I'm just saying what one of his main advisors said. What toy is next Mr. Potatohead.

Sure I can triple my profits by firing workers here that make a whopping $9/hr., and sending my product to be made in the workers paradise of Communist China for 25 cents an hour. After all he is a "savey" business man who likes to fire people. Improves the bottom line ya know.

Ps. Nothing political about holding people accountable for what they do and say.

You are thread banned for adding politics.

Link to comment

I'm just saying what one of his main advisors said. What toy is next Mr. Potatohead.

Sure I can triple my profits by firing workers here that make a whopping $9/hr., and sending my product to be made in the workers paradise of Communist China for 25 cents an hour. After all he is a "savey" business man who likes to fire people. Improves the bottom line ya know.

Ps. Nothing political about holding people accountable for what they do and say.

You are thread banned for adding politics.

Risking my own thread ban here. But this is economics, not politics.

You don't increase profits by letting workers go who contribute to the bottom line, but if you're business is faltering, and letting some workers go would save the business -- then you must let them go, else risk losing the jobs of everyone in the company when it goes under. If you refused to cut back when necessary, and went out of business, would all your company's workers praise you? Nope. They would shake their heads and say to their friends: "He was a bad manager and lost the company." Of course, the ones you let go to save the company would probably still call you a cruel man with no feelings of compassion -- and if you ran for President they would castigate you -- proving that no good deed goes unpunished.

We fought a Civil War to free the slaves -- but what if Lincoln knew that the conflict would eventually cost the lives of 600,000 people on both sides before it was resolved? Would he still have attempted to save the union and free the slaves? Or would he have been wiser to say, "Well, slavery isn't so bad after all!"

I write this and yet you cannot respond. But I doubt you would see my point, anyway.

Link to comment

How does romney fair in places with high LDS populations? What is that comparison to other places?

Is it wrong for a free citizen to consider a candidates religious tenants, when deciding who to cast a ballot for.

It is my impression that EV have hardline stances on some issues, for instance abortion, the LDS do not have a hardline stance. Or consider the SLC ordinance that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation - which the LDS Church Officially supported.

So what is wrong about considering a candidates religious beliefs? We Americans are free to vote how we see fit...I find it very concerning that a few LDS Americans on this board border on advocating "thought policing" voting.

Link to comment

How does romney fair in places with high LDS populations? What is that comparison to other places?

Is it wrong for a free citizen to consider a candidates religious tenants, when deciding who to cast a ballot for.

It is my impression that EV have hardline stances on some issue. Co sided abortion, the LDS do bot have a hardline stance. Or consider the SLC ordinance that prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation - which the LDS Church Officially supported.

So what is wrong about considering a candidates religious beliefs? We Americans are free to vote how we see fit...I find it very concerning that a few LDS Americans on this board border on advocating "thought policing" voting.

I would say a consideration of a candidates religious belief or lack thereof is reasonable provided that each and every candidate receive equal vetting.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...