Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rick Santorum (please, don't Google his last name) is the funniest not-Romney yet

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I'm SHOCKED that a group of LDS techies hasn't put together a dossier on the coordinated evangelical effort to discredit Romney. I was able to code a few simple searches that yielded some interesting stuff from blogs, message boards, etc. This would be front page NYT/WaPo news if someone formalized it...It's really disappointing to see the role of discrimination take such a prominent part of this election. Romney's Mormonism is singled out over and over again by pastors as being the reason why to back Santorum.

    I'm going to ask my atheist brother to take a look at this but sheesh, you good mormons are really going to rely on two former members to expose one of the ugliest cases of coordinated discrimination in US politics?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Viking View Post
      I'm SHOCKED that a group of LDS techies hasn't put together a dossier on the coordinated evangelical effort to discredit Romney. I was able to code a few simple searches that yielded some interesting stuff from blogs, message boards, etc. This would be front page NYT/WaPo news if someone formalized it...It's really disappointing to see the role of discrimination take such a prominent part of this election. Romney's Mormonism is singled out over and over again by pastors as being the reason why to back Santorum.

      I'm going to ask my atheist brother to take a look at this but sheesh, you good mormons are really going to rely on two former members to expose one of the ugliest cases of coordinated discrimination in US politics?

      I think that this is an interesting question Vike - I've put out a couple of feelers on it.
      Ute-ī sunt fīmī differtī

      It can't all be wedding cake.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by oxcoug View Post
        I think that this is an interesting question Vike - I've put out a couple of feelers on it.
        It isn't a compelling "discrimination" story because individual voters are not prohibited from feeling uncomfortable with or dislking a candidate's religion. And for the most part, these last two election cycles have shown us that the country is not down with Mormonism yet, at least not to the extent we assumed. Another thing to consider is that perhaps Mitt just isnt likeable to the masses. It isn't just evangelicals that are not voting for him.

        the evangelical v Mormonism angle is about as insightful and interesting as a dossier that is put together by evangelical techies exposing the truth about why most Mos are voting for Mitt this time around.
        Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

        sigpic

        Comment


        • Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post
          It isn't a compelling "discrimination" story because individual voters are not prohibited from feeling uncomfortable with or dislking a candidate's religion. And for the most part, these last two election cycles have shown us that the country is not down with Mormonism yet, at least not to the extent we assumed. Another thing to consider is that perhaps Mitt just isnt likeable to the masses. It isn't just evangelicals that are not voting for him.

          the evangelical v Mormonism angle is about as insightful and interesting as a dossier that is put together by evangelical techies exposing the truth about why most Mos are voting for Mitt this time around.
          How about a highly coordinated effort to oppose Mitt because he's Mormon? What would you call that?

          Comment


          • Even if there were a coordinated smear attack on Romney's Mormonism, how exactly does exposing it help Romney? Seems to me that ROmney should ignore it until its front page news, lest he (or his supporters) put it there themselves.
            "Sure, I fought. I had to fight all my life just to survive. They were all against me. Tried every dirty trick to cut me down, but I beat the bastards and left them in the ditch."

            - Ty Cobb

            Comment


            • Originally posted by San Juan Sun View Post
              Even if there were a coordinated smear attack on Romney's Mormonism, how exactly does exposing it help Romney? Seems to me that ROmney should ignore it until its front page news, lest he (or his supporters) put it there themselves.
              There is a "right" way and a "wrong" way of exposing this.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by San Juan Sun View Post
                Even if there were a coordinated smear attack on Romney's Mormonism, how exactly does exposing it help Romney? Seems to me that ROmney should ignore it until its front page news, lest he (or his supporters) put it there themselves.

                I'm not sure that it does help Mitt - my interest in it isn't really for that angle as much as it is to expose the extent to which this stuff still lives and breathes but largely gets ignored.

                BTW, Triple's either trolling or being silly. LDS voters trending to Romney because he's LDS isn't the equivalent of evangelical voters trending against Romney under the explicit instruction of their leaders both (a) because their leaders are actually taking these public positions discriminating against another religion and (b) because it's a prejudicial choice against in one case and an affirmative case in favor in the other.

                The equivalent story would be if President Monson or some regional rep were going around telling Mos to vote for Romney and to vote against Santorum or Perry on the basis of religion. We know very well that would blow national very quickly.
                Ute-ī sunt fīmī differtī

                It can't all be wedding cake.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Viking View Post
                  How about a highly coordinated effort to oppose Mitt because he's Mormon? What would you call that?
                  Evangelical? A voter's prerogative?

                  Ultimately a voter can cast his or her own for whatever reason. Do you think that people refrained from voting for Obama last cycle because he is black? Did people not want to vote for Hillary because she is a woman? Of course there were some that voted that way. Now what?

                  Also, what do you mean by "highly coordinated?" what sort of coordination is required and what group is coordinating? Evangelicals are inherently opposed to Mormonism. That isn't any secret and requires little to no coordination. They don't think Mormons are Christian whether they are running for office or simply moving into the neighborhood. I don't see the newsworthiness. People can reject the tenets of Mormonism just as Mormons summarily reject basically all other religions.
                  Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by oxcoug View Post
                    I'm not sure that it does help Mitt - my interest in it isn't really for that angle as much as it is to expose the extent to which this stuff still lives and breathes but largely gets ignored.

                    BTW, Triple's either trolling or being silly. LDS voters trending to Romney because he's LDS isn't the equivalent of evangelical voters trending against Romney under the explicit instruction of their leaders both (a) because their leaders are actually taking these public positions discriminating against another religion and (b) because it's a prejudicial choice against in one case and an affirmative case in favor in the other.

                    The equivalent story would be if President Monson or some regional rep were going around telling Mos to vote for Romney and to vote against Santorum or Perry on the basis of religion. We know very well that would blow national very quickly.
                    Precisely. This story is about to blow up on Santorum.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post
                      Evangelical? A voter's prerogative?

                      Ultimately a voter can cast his or her own for whatever reason. Do you think that people refrained from voting for Obama last cycle because he is black? Did people not want to vote for Hillary because she is a woman? Of course there were some that voted that way. Now what?

                      Also, what do you mean by "highly coordinated?" what sort of coordination is required and what group is coordinating? Evangelicals are inherently opposed to Mormonism. That isn't any secret and requires little to no coordination. They don't think Mormons are Christian whether they are running for office or simply moving into the neighborhood. I don't see the newsworthiness. People can reject the tenets of Mormonism just as Mormons summarily reject basically all other religions.
                      I really can't be made to debate with someone as unintelligent as you on this issue.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by San Juan Sun View Post
                        Even if there were a coordinated smear attack on Romney's Mormonism, how exactly does exposing it help Romney? Seems to me that ROmney should ignore it until its front page news, lest he (or his supporters) put it there themselves.
                        This is the correct answer. People here are getting desperate and testy while Mitt is going down in flames. "people are uncomfortable with Mormonism." wow, shocker.
                        Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • Conservative pundits trying to remind voters that Rick Santorum is Rick Santorum.

                          http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/20...-extremism.php
                          Ute-ī sunt fīmī differtī

                          It can't all be wedding cake.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Viking View Post
                            I really can't be made to debate with someone as unintelligent as you on this issue.
                            You aren't debating with me. Apparently all the newspaper outlets agree with me so there isn't much debate.

                            Good luck putting together your dossier.
                            Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • T about
                              Originally posted by TripletDaddy View Post
                              It isn't a compelling "discrimination" story because individual voters are not prohibited from feeling uncomfortable with or dislking a candidate's religion. And for the most part, these last two election cycles have shown us that the country is not down with Mormonism yet, at least not to the extent we assumed. Another thing to consider is that perhaps Mitt just isnt likeable to the masses. It isn't just evangelicals that are not voting for him.

                              the evangelical v Mormonism angle is about as insightful and interesting as a dossier that is put together by evangelical techies exposing the truth about why most Mos are voting for Mitt this time around.
                              Individuals are not prohibited from feeling uncomfortable with a candidates race either.

                              I don't disagree with your point about mormons, but this isn't a very compelling argument.
                              At least the Big Ten went after a big-time addition in Nebraska; the Pac-10 wanted a game so badly, it added Utah
                              -Berry Trammel, 12/3/10

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by oxcoug View Post
                                I'm not sure that it does help Mitt - my interest in it isn't really for that angle as much as it is to expose the extent to which this stuff still lives and breathes but largely gets ignored.

                                BTW, Triple's either trolling or being silly. LDS voters trending to Romney because he's LDS isn't the equivalent of evangelical voters trending against Romney under the explicit instruction of their leaders both (a) because their leaders are actually taking these public positions discriminating against another religion and (b) because it's a prejudicial choice against in one case and an affirmative case in favor in the other.

                                The equivalent story would be if President Monson or some regional rep were going around telling Mos to vote for Romney and to vote against Santorum or Perry on the basis of religion. We know very well that would blow national very quickly.
                                Are these religious leaders state actors? What do you mean by "discrimination?"

                                This reminds me of when you tried to talk about venture capital a month or so ago. Now you want to talk about legal discrimination. You are sleeping in Holiday Inn Express quite a bit during this primary season.
                                Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

                                sigpic

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X