60 Days Out Prez Poll

[kieefer]

Having lived in Utah and known plenty of Mormons, I have to say that Romney's faith is one of his better qualities. I may not agree with much of the theological tennants of the LDS church, but they are generally good people in my experience.

I'll take that as an endorsement.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Um. If I remember correctly, from my old Poli Sci classes, Nixon won by default. LBJ didnt run, and Robert Kennedy was assassinated. There were no other real candidates on the Democratic side.

Clinton was not supposed to win. He was running to get his name out there, for 4 years later. Remember Bush Senior, was the only President to blow his election after garnering a 97% approval rating. The Dems, at the start of the race, assumed Bush Sr would win, so all the big name Dems sat on the sideline.

In the case of this election, one can argue the same, the GOP assumed O would win reelection, so all the big name GOP candidates stayed out. So the GOP now has Romney. Unlike Clinton, Romney is not easily likeable, and reminds me (and others) much more of Senator Kerry, than Clinton. Kerry was assumed to win, becuase Bush Jr was well hated. However, he came off as wishywashy, and out of touch with the middle class. Same lables Romney has.

I think O will win. Not because he deserves another term, but because of Romney. And OS, unlike you, I cannot, in good faith, vote for a Mormon.

Johnson bowed out because of Vietnam destroying his chances. Hubert Humphrey ran against Nixon, roughly 2-1

electoral votes in favor of Nixon. Kerry had some credibility issues regarding Vietnam, something to do with a certain

type of boat. He may have been assumed to win, but he wasn't much more than Michael Dukakis, the big debater.

Clinton always ran to win. Who would the Dems put up in his place. As much as I despise him, he is still a force to

reckon with. Who were the Dems considering other than Clinton? I don't remember, really.

As far as the GOP expecting a loss this time, I've heard that, too. But who, among the big shots sat it out, this time?

It's foolish to run a losing campaign. I just don't buy into that one.

As far as Romney being likeable, I think that is more of MSM smear job. Isn't he drawing crowds at least as well

as herr fuhrer? Media complicity is getting worse each election cycle and if you don't believe he is their boy, I don't

know what to say, there. If you would, because I am curious only, why because of being a Mormon would you not

vote for him?

[mikegideon]

I'll take that as an endorsement.

Not so fast. I have him talked into voting for Dickie Weed.

[Chucktshoes]

I'll take that as an endorsement.

That just goes to show that this election cycle y'all Republicans are so hard up you take anything you can get. Just look at your candidate!

[Guest ThePunisher]

Laura Ingrham made an astute statement Monday directed toward Romney and the republicans that if Romney doesn't beat Obama this election with his record as President, the Repblican party needs to shut down and rebuild. I agree and I believe that Romney will win handily this time since the Hope and Change has fizzled out, and people have had four years of observing the failed communist policies. If Romney fails to beat Obama, I'm all for rebuilding the R party, but by then all rebuilding efforts will probably be futile since the country will be gone to hell in a hand basket.

Edited September 13, 2012 by ThePunisher

[Oh Shoot]

That just goes to show that this election cycle y'all Republicans are so hard up you take anything you can get. Just look at your candidate!

Yep. Can't disagree with that at all. But there's still a clear cut prime directive, however distasteful.

On the third hand, I still think we, and history, may be quite surprised at how well Mitt may handle things.

On the fourth hand, I no longer think he can win at this point. Only the debates will give him a chance to pull it out.

- OS

Edited September 13, 2012 by OhShoot

[Worriedman]

On the fourth hand, I no longer think he can win at this point. Only the debates will give him a chance to pull it out.

- OS

9/11/12 may adjust that, IF Romney and company can manage not to balls their reaction up too badly...

[Oh Shoot]

9/11/12 may adjust that, IF Romney and company can manage not to balls their reaction up too badly...

Well, they've already botched it so far, jumping in too quickly, and seemingly have gotten wrong who placated whom and when.

- OS

Edited September 13, 2012 by OhShoot

[Worriedman]

Well, they've already botched it so far, jumping in too quickly, and seemingly have gotten wrong who placated whom and when.

- OS

Agreed, but this is a target rich environment, with much more to come...

[TMF]

All joking aside, WTF does it matter that Romney is Morman? How is that even making its way into the decision matrix? Are we to assume that he will govern based on his faith? Bush Sr. didn't like broccoli but I don't remember that being banned when he was President. Why does anyone care that he is Mormon. How incredibly close minded and bigoted.

[Chucktshoes]

All joking aside, WTF does it matter that Romney is Morman? How is that even making its way into the decision matrix? Are we to assume that he will govern based on his faith? Bush Sr. didn't like broccoli but I don't remember that being banned when he was President. Why does anyone care that he is Mormon. How incredibly close minded and bigoted.

You forget, the American Taliban wants to govern our country by their religious codes. Mitt doesn't subscribe to the right set for them so it has to be fretted over.

[kieefer]

That just goes to show that this election cycle y'all Republicans are so hard up you take anything you can get. Just look at your candidate!

Yea baby, ABO!

This guy has got to go. Fricking WWIII is boiling up in the middle east thanks to this idiot.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Yea baby, ABO!

This guy has got to go. Fricking WWIII is boiling up in the middle east thanks to this idiot.

+1

He is totally incompetent for the job, and undeserving of the job. He pulled the wool over the sheeple's eyes, and perpetrated the biggest hoax on the country ever.

[Oh Shoot]

.... Why does anyone care that he is Mormon. How incredibly close minded and bigoted.

If he were a Muslim, would it be "bigoted" to feel that way? How about Hare Krishna? Flying Spaghetti Monster? To reject a candidate because of any belief system makes one "close minded" and a "bigot"?

Now, (although I have a few other disqualifiers ) my agnosticism alone would keep me from being elected president so far in this country. So all the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, etc that would not vote for me on that basis are also "bigots"?

I myself would prefer that magical thinking influence the POTUS as little as possible, would much prefer an admitted agnostic over all other belief systems. And I see Mormonism as the lunatic fringe, science fiction smeared on top of the existing mainstream fairy tale. All else being equal, I'd vote for the candidate espousing the least supernatural hoodoo. If that's "bigotry", I'm guilty.

That said, I'm voting for Mitt. So that makes me not really a bigot, because I overcame my personal prejudice, right?

Methinks you have been tainted by the Political Correctness Monster.

Be sure you don't vote for the first queer or lesbian that makes it onto the ticket because of their sexual preference, either. Now that would be as blatantly close-minded and bigoted as it gets. Hell, I think it's illegal.

- OS

Edited September 13, 2012 by OhShoot

[TMF]

If he were a Muslim, would it be "bigoted" to feel that way? How about Hare Krishna? Flying Spaghetti Monster? To reject a candidate because of any belief system makes one "close minded" and a "bigot"?

Now, (although I have a few other disqualifiers ) my agnosticism alone would keep me from being elected president so far in this country. So all the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, etc that would not vote for me on that basis are also "bigots"?

Yes and yes.

The only time religion should matter is when the candidate makes clear their intention to govern based on that religion. I don't care if the President is a Muslim, it would only matter if Islam is what dictated his policy.

It is for the same reason I think it's rediculous that an atheist will never be President. That should have nothing to do with the job. I have yet to see how religion can be a qualifier or disqualifier when it comes to electing someone. I don't know any other words to describe it other than closed-minded and bigoted.

Romney is a Mormon. I have my opinions on Mormonism, but I don't see that having an influence on my vote for him. If he were a raving whacko Mormon who defined his office by his religion and not his policies, then it would be different.

[Guest HvyMtl]

Nicely said, OS.

6.8AR, I suggest looking at the internal fighting between Robert Kennedy and LBJ. Those two camps fought against each other, and most likely killed the Dem's chances.

Check the official stance of your church on Mormanism. A lot here may be surprised. I bet some of your faiths will call Mormanism, at the least, not part of the Christian faith. Some will even call it a Cult. I have feelings it is a cult. And that is what is bothering me about it.

Yes, I have struggled with this, and trying to remove one's faith from the decision on how "good" of a President they are/will be, is a key issue. I think your religous beliefs do and will impact your actions, as well as, impacting those actions by Presidents. Do I intend this place to be a Christian only society, and therefore only Christians need to run for President? No.

So does a religion impact your views on Church and State? Yes. Mormanism is far more likely to not see a separation of church and state than many Christians, or other faiths, do. Look at Utah, and its government, then say whether they believe in a separation of Church and State, or not.

Oh, feel free to call me any name you like, as that name calling reflects little on me, but says a lot about who you are.

Some here still claim, and believe, Obama to be Muslim, not Christian, inspite of all that Reverand Wright stuff. Do not place me in the same boat as they.

[mikegideon]

Nicely said, OS.

6.8AR, I suggest looking at the internal fighting between Robert Kennedy and LBJ. Those two camps fought against each other, and most likely killed the Dem's chances.

Check the official stance of your church on Mormanism. A lot here may be surprised. I bet some of your faiths will call Mormanism, at the least, not part of the Christian faith. Some will even call it a Cult. I have feelings it is a cult. And that is what is bothering me about it.

Yes, I have struggled with this, and trying to remove one's faith from the decision on how "good" of a President they are/will be, is a key issue. I think your religous beliefs do and will impact your actions, as well as, impacting those actions by Presidents. Do I intend this place to be a Christian only society, and therefore only Christians need to run for President? No.

So does a religion impact your views on Church and State? Yes. Mormanism is far more likely to not see a separation of church and state than many Christians, or other faiths, do. Look at Utah, and its government, then say whether they believe in a separation of Church and State, or not.

Oh, feel free to call me any name you like, as that name calling reflects little on me, but says a lot about who you are.

Some here still claim, and believe, Obama to be Muslim, not Christian, inspite of all that Reverand Wright stuff. Do not place me in the same boat as they.

I'm not going to call any names. I worked for the same Mormons that Glen Beck worked for (when he converted). We had free coffee, and gave away more free beer than anybody in Houston. They didn't seem to let their beliefs interfere with filling the population with Coors products. Never saw any of them partake. At least those very prominant Mormons were able to seperate it quite well.

[Wingshooter]

What's the concensus on the validity of Rasmussen polls? I never seem to compare there predictions AFTER the election, so are they accurate? If so, it looks at least hopeful for the Romney camp http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/2012_electoral_college_scoreboard. If not, I found this (although this is a left-wing site) thttp://electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Maps/Aug04-noras.html

Some other electorial maps...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2012/ecalculator#?battleground

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-presidential-race

[Oh Shoot]

...The only time religion should matter is when the candidate makes clear their intention to govern based on that religion. I don't care if the President is a Muslim, it would only matter if Islam is what dictated his policy....

I don't see how one can absolutely separate a candidate from his religion, or claim that it wouldn't influence his decision making.

There are various "laws" that one is to adhere to by professing any of the world's mainstream faiths. Many of those are in conflict with existing or proposed US laws. A man will have to choose which master to best serve in many cases, not to mention his own interpretation of both the laws of man and of his god. The degree with which he's able to do that determines your above criterion.

Maybe we're not debating the correct issue. Perhaps I agree with you more than it seems. The difference being that I don't believe certain pols will, or even can, completely separate the best interests of the country from the dictates of their religion. Depends both on the pol and the religion.

It's seems to me that BHO isn't a devout anything (no, I don't believe he's a closet Muslim either), and if truth be known, is probably closer to my agnostic preference than any prez in recent history. Of course, his socialistic and rigid statist (to put it mildly) national and world view override any pluses which that might otherwise provide.

Folks like Perry, Bachmann, and Santorum made it clear that their religion influences at least some of their political policy, and by your own criteria would not be bigotry to reject them on that basis.. I feel it's safe to say that any devout religious adherent is not immune to the same. And no Mormon is other than devout; by virtue of its outre creed, it allows fewer shades of gray than most. Quite difficult to nibble at Mormonism, it's pretty much an all or none discipline. I'd posit that it approaches Islam in its rigidity of structure and purpose.

Of course, it's likely that many if not most in the USA (certainly most here on TGO) would argue that the national and religious ethos are to a great extent one and the same -- as long as the religious part is Christianity. And many don't count Mormons as Christians in the first place, so on that basis measured by your definition, I suppose "bigotry" is well represented indeed.

However, one thing's irrefutable -- discrimination on any basis at all in the voting booth is unenforceable.

- OS

[Guest 270win]

I think Obama will be re elected. Too many people these days don't want to work

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I don't see how one can absolutely separate a candidate from his religion, or claim that it wouldn't influence his decision making.

There are various "laws" that one is to adhere to by professing any of the world's mainstream faiths. Many of those are in conflict with existing or proposed US laws. A man will have to choose which master to best serve in many cases, not to mention his own interpretation of both the laws of man and of his god. The degree with which he's able to do that determines your above criterion.

Maybe we're not debating the correct issue. Perhaps I agree with you more than it seems. The difference being that I don't believe certain pols will, or even can, completely separate the best interests of the country from the dictates of their religion. Depends both on the pol and the religion.

It's seems to me that BHO isn't a devout anything (no, I don't believe he's a closet Muslim either), and if truth be known, is probably closer to my agnostic preference than any prez in recent history. Of course, his socialistic and rigid statist (to put it mildly) national and world view override any pluses which that might otherwise provide.

Folks like Perry, Bachmann, and Santorum made it clear that their religion influences at least some of their political policy, and by your own criteria would not be bigotry to reject them on that basis.. I feel it's safe to say that any devout religious adherent is not immune to the same. And no Mormon is other than devout; by virtue of its outre creed, it allows fewer shades of gray than most. Quite difficult to nibble at Mormonism, it's pretty much an all or none discipline. I'd posit that it approaches Islam in its rigidity of structure and purpose.

Of course, it's likely that many if not most in the USA (certainly most here on TGO) would argue that the national and religious ethos are to a great extent one and the same -- as long as the religious part is Christianity. And many don't count Mormons as Christians in the first place, so on that basis measured by your definition, I suppose "bigotry" is well represented indeed.

However, one thing's irrefutable -- discrimination on any basis at all in the voting booth is unenforceable.

- OS

I don't even see the need to separate the two,

whether inside or outside the polling place. Doesn't mean

anyone needs to turn it into a capital offense, either. Knowing

that kind of information allows for an understanding of the

candidates decision making process, until it is corrupted

somewhere. I realize and might as well add that it could

be corrupted those very religious beliefs.

Essentially, it is more information to use.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TMF]

Nicely said, OS.

6.8AR, I suggest looking at the internal fighting between Robert Kennedy and LBJ. Those two camps fought against each other, and most likely killed the Dem's chances.

Check the official stance of your church on Mormanism. A lot here may be surprised. I bet some of your faiths will call Mormanism, at the least, not part of the Christian faith. Some will even call it a Cult. I have feelings it is a cult. And that is what is bothering me about it.

Yes, I have struggled with this, and trying to remove one's faith from the decision on how "good" of a President they are/will be, is a key issue. I think your religous beliefs do and will impact your actions, as well as, impacting those actions by Presidents. Do I intend this place to be a Christian only society, and therefore only Christians need to run for President? No.

So does a religion impact your views on Church and State? Yes. Mormanism is far more likely to not see a separation of church and state than many Christians, or other faiths, do. Look at Utah, and its government, then say whether they believe in a separation of Church and State, or not.

Oh, feel free to call me any name you like, as that name calling reflects little on me, but says a lot about who you are.

Some here still claim, and believe, Obama to be Muslim, not Christian, inspite of all that Reverand Wright stuff. Do not place me in the same boat as they.

You can choose to look at it as name calling, but when you get down to the issue you are saying that a man is not qualified for a job based on his religious beliefs. To me there is a very simple definition for that.

You presuppose in your theory that because of his faith it will ABSOLUTELY influence policy. Is this just your assessment of Romney as a man or all Mormans? It really has to be one or the other based on your statement. If it is the former then I am all ears to hear evidence of that. Really, I would, and that is not sarcasm. When a candidate starts mentioning religion in respect to policy it is one of those things I hone in on to beat the candidate up, since that is a clear violation of the separation between church and state. If you don't have any evidence of that then I would have to assume it is the latter. If so you are presupposing that someone who is Morman lacks the ability to separate professional decisions from religion. That is a pretty ignorant line of thinking, but understandable if you don't know any Mormans. I do. Not to say that I don't have similar feelings about their religion, but I have not seen anything with the few Mormans I've known over the years that suggests their faith influenced them professionally in any way.

Edited September 14, 2012 by TMF

[TMF]

I don't see how one can absolutely separate a candidate from his religion, or claim that it wouldn't influence his decision making.

There are various "laws" that one is to adhere to by professing any of the world's mainstream faiths. Many of those are in conflict with existing or proposed US laws. A man will have to choose which master to best serve in many cases, not to mention his own interpretation of both the laws of man and of his god. The degree with which he's able to do that determines your above criterion.

I don't believe that at all. What you're saying is that anyone that believes in any religion will allow that to influence their policy. Are you saying this is an affliction that only strikes Presidents, or would you apply it to all religious folks in any profession?

Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. When I was in the Army I had a commander who was Catholic. I am not Catholic, but I always understood that there is no such thing as varying degrees of Catholics. There is the Pope. The Pope is the HFMIC as I understood. However, after years of being surrounded by Catholics I discovered that there, indeed, are varying degrees of Catholics. This commander was not one of them. He was strict to the core. Keep in mind that the military has its own set of laws, many are rules dictating ones morality that are punishable under the UCMJ. One of them is adultry. Servicemembers still have their careers ruined over charges of adultry. I've seen it happen a few times, and there was recently a very high-profile case regarding an officer charged with adultry.

So, as it happens we are deployed within the US for a few weeks and one of our married guys starts nailing some local chick. There was no attempt to hide this from the commander. The officer in question counsels the Soldier regarding the relationship and advises him that he is obligated to take action against the Soldier's offenses but does not believe that it is appropriate that the military should dictate an individuals private life or personal morality. So, he tells the Soldier to not speak of such transgressions in his presence as to not create a conflict of interest with the commander.

Did this officer believe the Soldier was morally wrong? Yes. Was this officer in a position to use the law to not only enforce his own beliefs, but the beliefs of the US Military? Yes. Did this officer put his career at risk by ignoring these offenses and going so far as to inform the Soldier to conceal further offenses? Yes.

So based on this scenario, we have a deeply religious person who has taken a professional risk to cover the immoral actions of one of his subordinates because he does not feel as if it would be appropriate to have personal life choices impact a man's career. Am I to assume that if this deeply religious officer was to run for President he would suddenly decide that all policies in the future should include consideration into his religious beliefs? Do you see why I have a hard time believing that?

Perhaps it is the exception and not the rule, but it shouldn't matter. I'm giving Romney the benefit of the doubt since I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise, and he has spoken very intelligently in regards to keeping a separation between his religious views and policy. In fact, back when I was on the Cain Train, I remember watching Romney on Poose Morgan and that exact issue was addressed. Although I did not vote for Mitt in the primary, I was very impressed with his responses and believed him.

Once again, you can believe this is political correctness run amok, but I know who I am and I know that is not what it is. I don't care if a person is Catholic, Baptist, Sunni, Shia, atheist, agnostic or prays to the flying spaghetti monster. I really don't. What matters is how much of those personal beliefs will affect their policy. I believe that an atheist who cannot separate the two could be far more dangerous to personal liberties than religious man with a little too much zeal.

[kieefer]

Feel free to fwd this to your leftist buddies.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Nicely said, OS.

6.8AR, I suggest looking at the internal fighting between Robert Kennedy and LBJ. Those two camps fought against each other, and most likely killed the Dem's chances.

Check the official stance of your church on Mormanism. A lot here may be surprised. I bet some of your faiths will call Mormanism, at the least, not part of the Christian faith. Some will even call it a Cult. I have feelings it is a cult. And that is what is bothering me about it.

Yes, I have struggled with this, and trying to remove one's faith from the decision on how "good" of a President they are/will be, is a key issue. I think your religous beliefs do and will impact your actions, as well as, impacting those actions by Presidents. Do I intend this place to be a Christian only society, and therefore only Christians need to run for President? No.

So does a religion impact your views on Church and State? Yes. Mormanism is far more likely to not see a separation of church and state than many Christians, or other faiths, do. Look at Utah, and its government, then say whether they believe in a separation of Church and State, or not.

Oh, feel free to call me any name you like, as that name calling reflects little on me, but says a lot about who you are.

Some here still claim, and believe, Obama to be Muslim, not Christian, inspite of all that Reverand Wright stuff. Do not place me in the same boat as they.

Hvy, I didn't mean to sound like I was trying to skip a part of history, to revise or anything. I was trying to add what

I remembered. I also wanted your views on Mormonism for no particular other than curiosity. I never have given much thought

for or against it, only curious.

As far as separating out religion from political thought, that's hard to do with someone having stated their religion some time in the past. Personal preference is used and sometimes not. I think it has something to do with us being individuals.

thing about Obama is , I just refer him as being communist and don't really care or do I believe he has any firm religious

beliefs.