Mormons: Political Monoliths

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

"Unconscionable?"

Now that is amusing.

I am interested in hearing why you would vote for Liebeman over McCain as a person who finds voting Democratic unconscionable.

McCain is a train wreck and at least Lieberman has stood up to the more radical elements in his own party, rendering him more of an Independent than a Democrat.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Clark Addison

Well, I think this article is a whole lot of nothing. I don't think that it provides any evidence that Mormons are or are not monolithic, or that Mormon members of congress like or dislike Mitt Romney. There are a few very good reasons for Mormon politicians to not back Romney at this time. Most importantly, in my opinion, is that LDS politicians can be in danger of being accused of letting their religion dictate their vote; that Salt Lake will dictate their stands. This isn't going to harm a Bob Bennett or Orrin Hatch (both Romney supporters), but is more likely to hurt someone like Gordon Smith.

Also, a whole lot of congressmen haven't backed anyone yet. If you wanted to present an argument that Mormons were monolithic, you could headline this article: "Only 2 of 12 LDS Republicans in Congress Oppose Romney".

And as far as this relating to the general LDS populace, I doubt it does. 25% of LDS congressmen currently back Romney. I have no idea what that percentage is among active LDS members, but would not be surprised if it were much higher than that (though it may be lower. i really don't know).

Agreed. The article is almost useless for determining if Mormons are "monolithic." First of all, it provides no actual statistics. It claims Mormons in "blue states" are more likely to vote Democratic without bothering to state what percentage of Mormons live in blue states and what percentage of those Mormons vote Democratic. It doesn't relate if the Mormons who vote Democratic in those states identify themselves as Mormons or if they are active, etc. In short, it provides almost no useful information whatsoever for resolving the issue at hand.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

McCain is a train wreck and at least Lieberman has stood up to the more radical elements in his own party, rendering him more of an Independent than a Democrat.

Is the label more important to you than the person's actual positions? Sure, Lieberman has stood up to the Democrats on the issue of Iraq (and McCain agrees with him on that issue), but I would argue that Lieberman is far more liberal than McCain is on most other issues which, to me, makes it ironic that you would "unconscionably" support him over a generally more conservative person.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Um, no. I asked you if they were more monolithic than blacks given your blanket statement that blacks are the most monolithic of any demographic (your words, not mine). I asked for evidence to support your statement, and you came up with some weak evidence that excluded groups that could quite possibly be more monolithic than blacks. I asked you to get evidence on those groups. You haven't yet.

I then pointed out that in Utah, Mormons are monolithic and yet Democrats have visited Utah (a predominantly Mormon monolithic state) several times.

In other words, it appears after multiple pages of argumentation that you still haven't taken the time to read any of my posts before responding.

I read all your posts, unfortunately.

My statement was an accurate reflection of Presidential exit polling, which for all your hot air, you've never repudiated. Your response was just being nit picky.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Is the label more important to you than the person's actual positions? Sure, Lieberman has stood up to the Democrats on the issue of Iraq (and McCain agrees with him on that issue), but I would argue that Lieberman is far more liberal than McCain is on most other issues which, to me, makes it ironic that you would "unconscionably" support him over a generally more conservative person.

Frankly, I think McCain is borderline mentally unbalanced. His joint legislative ventures with the democrats (finance reform, immigration) were colossal failures and does not inspire confidence in his intelligence or political savvy.

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I never claimed they did. However directly or indirectly aiding the Democratic party with my vote is simply unconscionable.

I'm sorry, but that just smacks of a partisan trying to pass himself off as non-partisan.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

I'm sorry, but that just smacks of a partisan trying to pass himself off as non-partisan.

yes, the ol "I'm not a republican, but I vote straight-party republican everytime."

Ok. Whatever.

[SeattleUte]

On what basis am I, as an outsider, to presume that Cougarguard is a closer microcsm of greater Mormon culture that Cougarboard? Clearly it's not. Why isn't Cougarboard a close approximation of greater Mormon culture, at least in the United States? The posters are legion, and the education, and awareness of current events, are at a high level. I submit that, if anyting, the uninformed, robotic, sheepherd mentality is more acute across Mormondom outside Cougarboard. My own experience is that in terms of diversity of opinion and intellectual stimulus (which count for a lot in my value system and what makes me happy and satisfied) I'd rather hang out on Cougarboard than in any ward I attended when I was active, and that's saying a lot because there is much about Cougarboard I find insufferable, as you know.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

I read all your posts, unfortunately.

My statement was an accurate reflection of Presidential exit polling, which for all your hot air, you've never repudiated. Your response was just being nit picky.

It isn't my job to repudiate. It is your job to provide evidence, which you haven't done. If you want to retailor your ridiculous statement to read "blacks were the most monolithic voting bloc of any included in the link below," then fine. But your statement (posted before your link, which you posted as evidence of your statement) is far broader than anything your link supports.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

It isn't my job to repudiate. It is your job to provide evidence, which you haven't done. If you want to retailor your ridiculous statement to read "blacks were the most monolithic voting bloc of any included in the link below," then fine. But your statement (posted before your link, which you posted as evidence of your statement) is far broader than anything your link supports.

As I said, you were just being nit-picky.