Jump to content

Attacking Mitt Romney'S Mormonism Would Be Political Idiocy


blueadept

Recommended Posts

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-attacking-mormonism-20120425,0,5614140.story

While this is a political opinion piece, it's a breath of fresh air that a liberal newspaper like the LA Times believes it's the president's best interest to not make religion an issue in the upcoming election

It is not going to happen. The Obama campaign gurus are wise enough to know there is nothing to gain by opening up the can of very fat worms that is religion.

Do you believe Mormonism will not be an issue for the majority of voters?

Link to comment

I think religion will be an issue for voters, but it's a bad move for the president to go after him for it.

Link to comment

Given that they've already tried accusing Romney of everything except pederasty, Romney's Mormon faith WILL be used in an attack ad.

They tried the silver spoon angle. It flopped.

They tried the chicken hawk attack. Both sides of the aisle (with SEAL backup) dropped that one deader than Osama.

They tried the animal cruelty charge. It flopped.

They tried the "he destroys jobs" accusation. Americans were unimpressed after they looked at Obama's unemployment numbers.

They tried the "War on Women" schtick- which backfired when Obama's own treatment of women- and their job losses became public.

They flailed with the "he's exploiting his sick wife just like John Edwards" meme, and it fell flat

Obama cannot run on his record. He cannot run on his accomplishments. He cannot run on his popularity.

His only hope for reelection is either a massive external attack or to destroy Romney.

With the possible exception of his first Presidential run, Obama has won each of his elections by either using dirty tricks to disqualify his opponents or using the media to destroy them (Hillary and Edwards may suggest he did the same in his Presidential run).

His first (and only) recourse when faced with serious, thoughtful criticism is to try to hide behind the color of his skin.

As everything else fails, Obama will fall back on what he knows- and try to smear Romney out of contention.

Unless Romney is caught live on television in a serious act of moral decrepitude, the only line of attack left

is his religion- specifically that Mitt (by virtue of being Mormon) is racist.

Yes- Obama would be a fool to make Mormonism the issue of his campaign.

But desperate and unethical people will do stupid things to hold onto their power.

Link to comment

Given that they've already tried accusing Romney of everything except pederasty, Romney's Mormon faith WILL be used in an attack ad.

They tried the silver spoon angle. It flopped....

Romney tried flipping. Then flopped.

Romney has been running as a "severe conservative." While the raw-meat right-wing love that, few swing voters are interested in voting for somebody so extreme. So Romney's best option is to hit the reset button like an etch-a-sketch and remake himself into a moderate.

Link to comment

The last line of the article sums it up nicely:

Those on the left are already in President Obama’s camp, so there would be no advantage in placating them with attacks on Romney’s faith. Those on the right? Well, they will hold their nose and vote for the Republican candidate because, for them, having a Mormon in the White House is not nearly as bad as giving that Muslim guy four more years to ruin the country.
Link to comment

Obama cannot run on his record. He cannot run on his accomplishments. He cannot run on his popularity.

His only hope for reelection is either a massive external attack or to destroy Romney.

I think you seriously underestimate his chances. It is very easy (and in many cases fair) to blame the current economic problems on the Republican Congress. The Tea Party has alienated the more moderate elements of the Republican party and I don't think Romney can swing back from the radical fringe votes he's been courting to win the primary considering how public this Primary has been. I'm seriously considering jumping the fence and becoming a Southern Democrat until the old guard of the Republican party can win back control and the party starts ignoring their crazy supporters like the Democrats do instead of fighting each other tooth and nail to impress them.

Link to comment

Jon Stewart said something interesting about Romney and his religion,

"You can't cherry-pick the worst aspects of a religion and then hold every member of that religion solely responsible for it," he said. "It's not like Mitt Romney will pursue policies that are unfair to black people because he's a Mormon. He'll do that because he's a Republican."

I understand that he has an lds female intern one of whose job is to block the F bombs. I hope Jon does the same with LDS that he does with his Moslem comedian.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/03/jon-stewart-romney-mormon-msnbc_n_1473910.html?ref=topbar

Link to comment

I think you seriously underestimate his chances. It is very easy (and in many cases fair) to blame the current economic problems on the Republican Congress.

True, one should not count the President out until the vote is counted, but how is it fair to blame the economic problems on the Republican Congress, especially since the President had both House and Senate on his side for his first two years, the same way that Bush did not have either House and Senate in his last years. I don't doubt that some people will blame the Republicans even if they aren't in power and cannot impose their will in any way. But how is that fair? Unless your definition of "fair" differs from most folks'.

I know a man whose wife keeps the family credit cards maxed out and applies for new ones whenever she can, maxxing them out as soon as possible -- all buying things that aren't truly needed. I suppose she could blame him that their family debt is out of control (and she does, actually), but it hardly seems fair. I suppose he could get a better job -- but he's 100% disabled due to a bad accident, and finding work isn't easy, or at least work he is physically able to perform.

Link to comment

True, one should not count the President out until the vote is counted, but how is it fair to blame the economic problems on the Republican Congress, especially since the President had both House and Senate on his side for his first two years, the same way that Bush did not have either House and Senate in his last years. I don't doubt that some people will blame the Republicans even if they aren't in power and cannot impose their will in any way. But how is that fair? Unless your definition of "fair" differs from most folks'.

I know a man whose wife keeps the family credit cards maxed out and applies for new ones whenever she can, maxxing them out as soon as possible -- all buying things that aren't truly needed. I suppose she could blame him that their family debt is out of control (and she does, actually), but it hardly seems fair. I suppose he could get a better job -- but he's 100% disabled due to a bad accident, and finding work isn't easy, or at least work he is physically able to perform.

I'm not blaming the Republican Congress. I'm blaming both parties for their insane spending. Booms are times for government austerity and recessions are time for spending. We spent and spent during our boom and now we are going to suffer for it. The current administration (and the previous ones) have reaped what they did not sow and are tackling problems they do not have the tools to mend. Economic prosperity or depression generally has very little to do with what the current administration did, a little more to do with previous administrations, and a lot more to do with what the people of the nation demand. Neither party in the last few decades have been fiscally conservative (though the Republicans have paid lip service to the ideal) so trying to make it a partisan split is ridiculous.

The quickest way out of a recession is usually government spending but we are so far in debt that we can't take that action as we can't expect the rest of the world to float expanding debt indefinitely. I hope I'm wrong but I think the worst is yet to come. The only consolation is that I think the United States will bear it better then most of the rest of the world.

Link to comment

Interesting to watch the publics reaction to austerity measures in both Greece and France. For some reason I am remembering the attitudes of the factions of the Jaredites when they were well on the road to self destruction. The rise of totalitarian power often comes on the back of economic ruin.Oh,I must stop these depressing posts.

Link to comment

Blackstrap:

Don't give up hope yet. While there were some painfull spots both Greece and France peacefully changed governmental leaders. They're not out of the tunnel yet. Still there is a light there. Hopefully its not a freight train coming the other way. Only time will tell. Keep an eye on Spain and Portugal. That is a ticking time bomb situation there.

Link to comment

Interesting to watch the publics reaction to austerity measures in both Greece and France. For some reason I am remembering the attitudes of the factions of the Jaredites when they were well on the road to self destruction. The rise of totalitarian power often comes on the back of economic ruin.Oh,I must stop these depressing posts.

Political freedom means little to the broke and hungry. The Greek Fascist party is growing in power.

I hope we learn this lesson before we see the same thing happen.

Link to comment

The Nehor:

Let's hope we don't go down the austerity route.

I hope we don't either but we are in trouble. We can't keep up this level of spending for long. Most of US debt is in short-term instruments. China is trying to float the dollar to keep us as a viable trade partner but they won't do it forever. We need large-scale tax increases focusing on middle to high earners but everyone will feel the bite. We need to go back to Nixon-era tax rates. We've been cutting them regularly since then and it isn't sustainable.

Normally the economic solution would be to increase interest rates like Reagan did (which was gutsy; there was widespread anger over it) but we can't as it would bankrupt the government. We either need to raise taxes or default. My guess is we will end up defaulting and bring the world into a massive recession or even depression. Fortunately the US will do better then most of the world. I don't think it will be as bad as the depression but it may feel like it is worse since we will fall farther.

We had our Roaring 20's and now we get to pay for it. Let's hope it doesn't take a World War to fix.

Link to comment

The Nehor:

It's a bit of a sticky wicket. If we're in a recession then deficit spending is needed to stimulate the economy, we still need roads and bridges, basic infrastructure, but if the economy is booming we can curtail some of that immediate spending for Social Services as citizen don't need it. The poor will always be with us so we can't eliminate that spending entirely. The problem we face today is that debt doesn't go away just because we change presidents. We'll still be paying off the debts incurred from giving away trillions in tax rebates, two unfunded wars, and a prescription drug plan that was put on the national "Credit Card" for decades to come.

Foreign debt is a problem but we owe FAR FAR more to ourselves. Every "E" Bond, Treasury Note, barrowing from Social Security, must be repaid with interest.

Middle income earners are about tapped out. They pay the vast majority of taxes, when all taxes are included, and have seen their incomes declined over the last thirty + years. While high income earners has seen massive decreases in taxes along with massive increases in their incomes. While I'm far from rich, I'm comfortably middle class, I wouldn't object to a slight increase in my taxes if I saw it going to what I consider a good purpose. But don't so I won't. The Ryan/Romney budget would massively increase taxes on the poor and middle class while it gives massive decreases in taxes to the rich.

Interest rates on overnight loans from the Feds to banks are at extremely low rates. They are in reality the Feds are giving it away in the hopes that the banks will loan that money out to stimulate the economy. But the banks are just sitting on it. The Feds policy of cheap money may have worked in the past, but not now.

Reagan to his credit finally saw the damage his tax cut fever produced and increased taxes 8 times in 8 years. Even David Stockman was appalled at the destruction. I still fault him for the damage he did do, and the suffering he caused. Along with that and his deregulation of the Savings and Loans industry that cost the US hundreds of hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars, and miilions of financially ruined lives.

The US won't default, it can borrow and/or print all the money it needs to address any real default before it happens. With an economy in the hundreds of trillions of dollars we might feel a little pinch of tightened belts, but that's about it. As long as the American people can take their US dollars to the grocery store there will be no big change in lifestyle.

Were actually out of the worst depresssion since the Great Depression of the 1930's. Though it did not come as fast as I would like. We have replaced every single private sector job lost in the Great Recession. Unfortunately public sector jobs, Teachers, police, firemen, etc., etc., are continuing to lose their jobs as state governments primarily in the Red states cut back.

We paid for the Roaring 20's with the Crash of 29 and Great Depression of the 1930's. Only time will tell if we escaped the Crash of 2008 with just the Great Recession.

There won't be a WW3 that will save us. However there will be more than enough brush wars and rumors of wars to keep us interested. Chinese interested. As in that old Chinese curse that may you live in interesting times.

That is the benefit of being the Big Boy on the Block. However I believe we owe the poor of the world to help them achieve a better lifestyle for themslves and their children. We can't do it by being poor ourselves, and we won't do it by being greedy.

Link to comment

It's a bit of a sticky wicket. If we're in a recession then deficit spending is needed to stimulate the economy, we still need roads and bridges, basic infrastructure, but if the economy is booming we can curtail some of that immediate spending for Social Services as citizen don't need it. The poor will always be with us so we can't eliminate that spending entirely. The problem we face today is that debt doesn't go away just because we change presidents. We'll still be paying off the debts incurred from giving away trillions in tax rebates, two unfunded wars, and a prescription drug plan that was put on the national "Credit Card" for decades to come.

Definitely true.

Foreign debt is a problem but we owe FAR FAR more to ourselves. Every "E" Bond, Treasury Note, barrowing from Social Security, must be repaid with interest.

Middle income earners are about tapped out. They pay the vast majority of taxes, when all taxes are included, and have seen their incomes declined over the last thirty + years. While high income earners has seen massive decreases in taxes along with massive increases in their incomes. While I'm far from rich, I'm comfortably middle class, I wouldn't object to a slight increase in my taxes if I saw it going to what I consider a good purpose. But don't so I won't. The Ryan/Romney budget would massively increase taxes on the poor and middle class while it gives massive decreases in taxes to the rich.

True but I can't see the purchase of government bonds increasing enough domestically to compensate for the growing debt.

Interest rates on overnight loans from the Feds to banks are at extremely low rates. They are in reality the Feds are giving it away in the hopes that the banks will loan that money out to stimulate the economy. But the banks are just sitting on it. The Feds policy of cheap money may have worked in the past, but not now.

I'm more worried about what will happen when this money does hit the economy.

Reagan to his credit finally saw the damage his tax cut fever produced and increased taxes 8 times in 8 years. Even David Stockman was appalled at the destruction. I still fault him for the damage he did do, and the suffering he caused. Along with that and his deregulation of the Savings and Loans industry that cost the US hundreds of hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars, and miilions of financially ruined lives.

Agreed.

The US won't default, it can borrow and/or print all the money it needs to address any real default before it happens. With an economy in the hundreds of trillions of dollars we might feel a little pinch of tightened belts, but that's about it. As long as the American people can take their US dollars to the grocery store there will be no big change in lifestyle.

This carries its own cost. When the money that the Fed has been pouring into the economy hits the streets (next couple of years) we are going to see a huge increase in inflation. I wouldn't be surprised if we see 100% inflation over the next 3-4 years. This will fix the national debt problem eventually but those on the cusp of retirement could be in trouble.

Were actually out of the worst depresssion since the Great Depression of the 1930's. Though it did not come as fast as I would like. We have replaced every single private sector job lost in the Great Recession. Unfortunately public sector jobs, Teachers, police, firemen, etc., etc., are continuing to lose their jobs as state governments primarily in the Red states cut back.

We paid for the Roaring 20's with the Crash of 29 and Great Depression of the 1930's. Only time will tell if we escaped the Crash of 2008 with just the Great Recession.

I don't know if we are out of the woods. If the dollar crashes it will be bad and I can't see how it can be prevented.

There won't be a WW3 that will save us. However there will be more than enough brush wars and rumors of wars to keep us interested. Chinese interested. As in that old Chinese curse that may you live in interesting times.

I agree. The World War comment was a joke. I do think that if the dollar tanks Europe, the Middle East, and especially China will be in for rough times. It might see a new government in China.

That is the benefit of being the Big Boy on the Block. However I believe we owe the poor of the world to help them achieve a better lifestyle for themslves and their children. We can't do it by being poor ourselves, and we won't do it by being greedy.

I'm worried we may fail on both counts.

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...