Skip to comments.Poll: Mormon enthusiasm high for Romney
Posted on 06/26/2012 10:22:50 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
Mitt Romney has at least one demographic group squarely in his corner headed into November: Mormons.
Some 77 percent of Utah Mormons said they are "very excited" or "somewhat excited" that Romney himself a practicing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints clinched the Republican nomination. And nearly as many say his primary victory is a positive development for the Mormon Church, according to a poll released Monday by Key Research and Brigham Young Universitys Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy.
According to the Religion News Service, studies show that Utah Mormons generally hold the same political opinions as practitioners in other states.But many in the Church are concerned the media will portray their faith unfairly, and an equal amount 68 percent say Romney's nomination will bring at least some bad publicity for Mormonism.
A Gallup poll released earlier in the month showed that registered Mormon voters overwhelmingly favored Romney. Some 84 percent of Mormons surveyed in that poll said they would vote for Romney, versus just 13 percent for President Obama. That's a marked improvement over Republicans' already dominant numbers among Mormon voters; in 2008, John McCain pulled 75 percent of the Mormon vote, versus 19 percent for Obama.
But a separate Gallup poll released last week found that Romney's faith could keep some voters at home. According to the survey, 18 percent of respondents said they would not vote for a Mormon.
Which group will play the "persecution" card more successfully?
Why did the GOP-E believe they could ignore the 18% of voters who will not vote for a mormon? Are the RINOs counting on the desperation vote?
Slow news day??
Subtitle: Moron Enthusiasm High for Obama.
Captain Obvious strikes again!
Many gods, one mind
That must be the dumbest question I've heard in weeks.
—Mormon enthusiasm high for Romney—
In other news, dog bites man. Film at eleven.
Hardly a surprise. I suspect that the real numbers are closer to 95% than 77%.
Vote for Bishop Romney if you want a planet!
um because most are dems who they wouldnt get anyway?...but hey thanks for playing
rude you are correct, your question is the dumbest question in a long while.
There are plenty of valid reasons not to vote for Romney, but if that’s the best you can do, then you are the sort of person who confuses a declarative statement for a question.
So it appears you are saying - there are lots of reasons not to support Romney but by gosh one of them better not be his religion.
Ok, got it.
It's perfectly suitable for mormons to vote for Mitt BECAUSE of his religion, just not suitable for anyone else to vote against him BECAUSE of his religion...that's....wait for it...."BIGOTRY".
The anti-Christian vote..
Bigotry on parade...
There’s a good 25% who won’t vote for a pro-abortion candidate either.
What percentage of Mormons did obama get in ‘08?
You can vote for or not vote for Sarah Palin for any reason you deem to be important.
Who has said otherwise?
Uh, the original poster . . . who appeared to be terribly “concerned.”
This’ll be fun. Droid’s battery is low, so I’ll watch as long as I can. Peace.
Statistically 91% of lds are supporting Romney in 2012 if he is the nominee, which would mean the 9% would most would likely be supporting BHO.
In 2008, after the nominations where over 65% lds voted for Reid, BHO took NV.....
You will have to draw your own conclusions.
It appears through years of statistics that lds will choice the lds candidate over by the non-mormon with statistically significant numbers regardless of the party affiliation.
From the article:”2008, John McCain pulled 75 percent of the Mormon vote, versus 19 percent for Obama.”
Funny how that works.
Excuse me, I must clarify: you are entitled to vote for a candidate based upon whether you like his tailor. But don’t try and explain that your criterion is as relevant or important as that candidate’s position on marginal tax rates.
Let me ask you a question. I'm sincerely interested in your answer. As a Christian, I consider Hinduism and Shintoism to be false religions---i.e., they contradict the Gospel of Christ. My belief does not involve hatred of Hindus or Shintos; in fact, I view them with compassion.
Does my belief that their religions are false make me a bigot?
Sorry, boy, I am permitted to rank the issues as I see fit which are important to me when choosing a candidate.
You are free to rank your issues in any fashion you wish.
Just because our issue rankings are not the same as mine does not in any fashion diminish, the ranking of either of us.
Just voted in the Utah GOP Primary.
My wife, daughter and I voted for Ron Paul, and Lijenquist for senate (anti-Hatch).
However, when you try to equate the probably high % of Romney votes in the Utah primary try to remember that for all practical purposes Romney is the only one running....and even Palin endorsed Hatch. (I really don’t get that one....and I love Palin.)
And the Pope is Catholic?
I believe the expression “bigot” originated from someone saying “by God,” as an expression of unyielding determination. Of course now the term has come to mean anyone with a strong belief disfavored by the left. So yes, committed Christians who won’t get behind a deity wannabe might be considered bigots. Does it mean they are wrong? What if Jesus actually commanded them to reject false teachers? Or does the orthodoxy of the left trump even Jesus?
How an expression of determination got mischaracterized as an expression of small-mindedness is characteristic of the world. Wiktionary backs up your theory. The Normans were religiously determined folk and the more worldly French made fun of their expression “bi got.” If the expression were coined today we’d hear about “bygods.”
Mormonism is downright weird from the standpoint of mainstream Christianity. It’s like they took a more or less vanilla evangelical Christianity, tweaked the theology of Jesus Christ a bit to make it more “interesting,” then dipped into some utter science fiction to finish it out. This could have made Joseph Smith one of the earliest realistic science fiction writers, but he actually believed that stuff.
However that’s not what’s the most bothersome thing about Mitt Romney. What’s most bothersome is his politics. Liberal and flip flopping, and there isn’t any visible connection between that and his star struck religion (Mormons come in both conservative and liberal flavors).
Mormons make up about 1.7 percent of Americans.
Blacks 12.6 percent.
No push there.
And if you are thinking loads of blacks will not vote for obammy cause of his homo stance then you be crazy,.
Otherwise it would make no sense to run with a party. You can't just let people run off and do their own thing and hope to keep a party together.
You'll find the pros pledging they'll support the ticket ~
You'll find people like me pledging to make sure the doufous who got the nomination never runs again ~ not in this state, not in this century~! I'm just a voter and free to do what I want. If I think the Republicans are screwing us with their GOP-e shenanigans, they'll have to do something else to get my vote. It's not enough to know he might believe in God someday.
Sarah, though, is a professional politician and has her eye on Alaska's Senate seat held by Begich, or possibly Murkowski. As we remember Murkowski lost the primary, then ran as an independent. Later she was allowed to join the Republican caucus in the Senate.
This is all highly irregular, but if it's a choice between the politically faithless Murkowski or the politically faithful Palin, the Alaskan party has nowhere to go but Palin ~ and stand against the incumbent in the primaries.
I don't think she's running for President. She's had her time as a target and didn't like it all that well.
Then, if the Republican take over of the Senate is sufficient, she might even move on the party big dogs and demand Murkowski be kicked out ~ to finish her term as an independent, or a sell out to the Democrats. In short, to destroy Murkowski's power base inside the Senate.
Something just utterly trashy ~ but probably effective!
The quality or condition of a bigot; obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, practice, faction, etc.; intolerance, prejudice.
So yes, a Mormon who will not vote for a non-Mormon is a bigot, much like the opposite.
But don't tell me that the above basis is equal to failing to vote for a candidate based upon his stand upon actual issues. It's absurd.
Unless, of course, you believe that the candidate will indeed pack the courts with golden-underwear wearing disciples who will force polygamy on the rest of us. LOL
Well, your theory only holds if the belief is irrational. Am I to assume you do not see a Christian’s faith in the commands of Christ as rational?
What the hell (pun intended) does that have to do with anything? Are you voting for a candidate based upon the “commands of Christ,” or are you voting for a candidate based upon whether he (or she) wants to raise your taxes, etc.?
Another one who thinks God can be put into a box all week and taken out for an hour on Sunday....
I mean, seriously . . . people are religiously-astute enough here to quote me Scripture. How about the Federalist Papers?
And yet another who fails to understand that the Constitution of the US does not preclude me from refusing to vote for a candidate because I see his faith as heresy.
Also, the Constitution of the US does not preclude me refusing to vote for a candidate who has taken THIS oath in a mormon temple:
Which vow would come first to Romney? The oath to the mormon church or the oath of office?
No, that's not what I said, at all. I simply asked you to embrace your inner bigot.
In fact, I need you to reread my comment #28 before you continue to put words in my mouth. It’s gets annoying, after a time.
Excellent question. I thought you’d never get there. As another has pointed out to you, the Christian does not compartmentalize their faith, such that it must be excluded from public acts. If I vote, I vote as one whose entire life is under the rule of Christ. He has instructed us, both in his own words, and through the apostles, that we are not to lift a finger in aid of one who brings a doctrine against the only God and his Christ, that if we do so, we become a partaker in his evil.
I desperately wanted to vote GOP this November. But if, as appears certain, the party nominates Romney, I will be precluded from voting for him out of respect to the command of Christ.
But I understand your difficulty in understanding people like me. You have declared yourself a religious compartmentalist. I and many others here are not. It is a profound difference. We only ask that you try to understand, our objection to Romney is not personal, and not irrational. We simply choose to obey Christ in this matter.
What I find disturbing, however, is that even though the Founders allowed for people to vote (and freely express their religious beliefs by doing so), they most assuredly did not place a religious requirement upon those who seek office. It's that simple.
Who in the world claimed you’re precluded from voting for a Mormon? You know that isn’t the case.
The issue being discussed is whether a Christian can understandably decline to vote for a Mormon.
What YOU said I copied in italics. What I said was this: "And yet another who fails to understand that the Constitution of the US does not preclude me from refusing to vote for a candidate because I see his faith as heresy."
You can throw "bigot" around until you are blue in the face but bigotry is 52,000 mormon missionaries daily going into the world and proclaiming to Christians that the Christian faith is false and the only way to salvation is to be baptized and confirmed as mormon and taking part in arcane rituals in a mormon temple. Bigotry is mormonism claiming that the gospel providing the faith practiced for thousands of years by Christians was false and that God "took it away and replaced it with the "restored" gospel" found only in the fictional pages written by a false prophet in the 1830s.
BIGOTRY as will be seen by the whole world in the next few months in US media, was the refusal of the mormon church to allow black men to access the same so-called "blessings" of mormonism from the 1830s until 1978, (when Mitt Romney was a grown man), due to the color of their skin and to refuse to this day the blessings afforded to mormon men to mormon women.
Go ahead, throw the word "bigot" around as though mormonism were innocent of these acts against others.
AND, the Founders DID NOT place a restriction upon voters considering religion in their choice of whom to cast a vote for. This is a straw man that has been burnt to a cinder numerous times on the Religioon Forum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.