Interesting that 20 percent of Utahns would vote for Romney based on his religion alone. Wonder what those people would say about others who refuse to vote for Romney because of his religion?

Granted, knowing that someone would vote for someone based soley on their religious affiliation is extremely disappointing. That said, I’m not sure that is a solid basis to call every Utah voter a moron. Maybe 1 in 5, but not every single voter.

Question: If the same sample had said they were voting for Ron Paul, would that change your mind on how you view the voters of Utah?

So……..I assume those same 20% would vote for Harry Reid if he was running for Pres and Romney was not? I don’t know whether I would find a “yes” or “no” answer to that question more irritating. Depends on how you look at it, I suppose.

How many voters in this country vote for someone based solely on party? Is that really different? Most people just decide that they usually have the same values as a certain party (or Mormon cadidate) and go from there. So are Utah voters really bigger morons than everyone else?

Not that I think this is good or right…just a thought.

Voting based on religion is seriously juvenile. But voting for someone who doesn’t understand their religion very well (or at least panders to voters like he doesn’t) is downright insane.

There’s a perfect reason not to vote for Romney: because he’s trying so hard to be just like Bush. And here’s why Bush shouldn’t let the White House door hit him in the butt on the way out.

If we’re going to get out of this establishment mess we’ve gotten ourselves into, we need to support Ron Paul for President.

I wasn’t aware that Utah had a monopoly in that area. Nor was I aware that Mitt Romney’s supporters were any more or less stupid than, say, those supporting Rudy Guiliani, or Hillary Clinton. I’m sure even Ron Paul has a few….present company excepted…..;-)

One of my favorite quotes comes from Winston Churchill:

“Democracy is the worst form of government, except all those others…..The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter…….”

Far from stupid. Technically, “stupidity” is doing something that we know to be a bad idea. If that person doesn’t actually represent our best interests, well that only makes us ignorant, or at worst, merely naive.

Then, who am I to tell people what is, or is not, in their best interest? I’m not interested in complaining about ignorance, naivete, or stupidity. I’m only interested in the facts.(whatever that means…..)

The truly disturbing aspect of this poll is that President Bush has such a high rating. I suspect the respondents were overwhelmingly members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who may have relied too much upon Article 12 to offer their response. While I have experienced much consternation myself in this regard, I certainly have no misconception in understanding that President Bush is clearly worthy of Constitutional Impeachment proceedings. Unfortunately the result is further evidence that far too many of us are only vaguely familiar with Article 12 and our Constitutional understanding is even more precarious.

President Bush’s approval ratings in all the USA and all the world are dismal. Utah is the only place on the face of the earth that still thinks anything of the man. This means one of two things:

1) Utah voters are smarter than the rest of the world,

or

2) Utah voters are dumber than the rest of the world.

Although I share Connor’s reasoned dismay at the absurdly high ratings for Bush here in Utah and the seemingly hypocritical 1 in 5 that claim they’d vote for Romney just because he’s Mormon . . .

I think many of the commentators have clearly illuminated the fact that Utahns do not have any unique dispensation of moronic voting patterns. The Churchill quote above is great! People everywhere tend to clump into uninformed voting blocks based on indefensible assumptions.

I think the disappointment for me is that I simply expect *more* of a people whose scriptures and prophets place such emphasis on learning and seeking truth. Perhaps we are the naive ones, expecting any large gathering of like-minded people to buck human nature, to eschew apathy and irrelevant popularity contests, and have every member of the group tirelessly pursue independent truth and reason.

To be fair though, historically there is hope. Sometimes Utah mormons do buck trends and venture out into new political territory.

They were first with the women’s vote if my memory serves me correctly.

And one of the most interesting things in Utah political history is when purportedly church leaders “called” every other family to be Republican (when the whole state was overwhelmingly Democrat) in order to infuse diversity into the system and make the territory more attractive to potential statehood. If church leaders doing that didn’t help highlight the artificiality and arbitrariness of party politics then I don’t know what can. Maybe it was so long ago that nobody remembers the lesson. [btw are the Republican 'calling' stories apocryphal? I've seen variations and have to admit a certain longing for them to be true but when I went to provide a link, I couldn't quickly come up with a definitive source . . . e.g. supposedly Elder Jensen (Church Historian and Democrat, lol) quotes Oscar McConkie on the issue where the kicker is "those damned Republicans think they've had God on their side ever since"]

I just wish they’d do it again, lol. (call every other family to be Democrat or Libertarian or Constitution or Green or ‘PaleoCon Repub’ or something – Heaven knows we could use some help there!)

In 1987, the first presidency called on all members to study the Constitution, but that didn’t do any good. I don’t know what asking them to join different parties would do. I think it boils down to taking to heart the current first presidency counsel on elections, which is to prayerfully consider the issues and candidates and to vote for the person who most likely represents your ideals of good government, and to vote for men and women who are honest, wise and good.

Interestingly, many members in California where I live, also support Romney because of his religion. When I am approached by them, which is often, about giving money or time for the Mitt Romney campaign, I reply that I am giving my support to Ron Paul. Their response is that I should be voting for someone who has a chance . . . otherwise, I am throwing my vote away.

Hmmmm . . . I have looked and looked and never seen anywhere in the counsel from the first presidency about voting for the candidate who has the best chance.

One close friend of mine keeps insisting that I should support Mitt Romney because of all the candidates, he is the only one who has the holy ghost, and that alone should put him ahead of any of the other candidates.

I have never, nor will I ever vote for the lesser of the evils. And quite honestly, although I’ve never voted for a democrat for president, and haven’t voted for a republican since 1980, I consider the democrats to be the lesser of the evils. Both parties want to tax and spend. Both parties have almost total contempt for the Constitution, but the democrats want to tax and spend on entitlement and social programs while the republicans want to tax and spend on wars and Imperialism. Both are evil. I consider the latter to be more evil.

Jay

@rmwarnick

agreed. It seems like recently I have been telling people I know the following more and more frequently:

It is amazing to me that so many members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are willing to blindly vote for Mitt Romney simply because of his religion when the argument that he is making on the campaign trail is: “don’t let my religion affect your decision to vote for me”. If you support Romney’s platform and ideals, and want to vote for him for that reason, that is the freedom that you enjoy, but voting for him simply because you share a religion is irresponsible at best.

Remind me – - just what religion is Mitt? He wants to keep torture, he wants to double the size of Guantanamo, and he wants to invade Iran. He is a member of CFR. His state OKed gay unions. But, he did say he changed his mind on abortion. He said he once did baptisms for the dead, but doesn’t do them anymore. My neighbors tell me he swore up a blue streak down the street from my house as he directed bus traffic up the mountain during the Winter Olympics. He doesn’t sound like a good Mormon to me.

I think I’ll vote for someone else because Mitt isn’t a great example of the church. I think his candidacy will ultimately bring more harm to the church than good. I imagine in the remote chance that he might become president, the church would be under constant pressure from all over the world, and Satan will be really keen on emphasizing any misstep he might make.

Kelly,

I understand what you’re saying, but I’m not going to judge his membership. As far as I’m concerned, his membership or religion is irrelevant, which is the problem that I’m having with so many members here in California. The only thing I judge a candidate on is his ability to honor his oath of office, which Romney could not do based upon his current philosophies of government.

Now, having said that, I’m not totally ignoring the fact that he’s LDS. Because his religion has been so much in the spotlight, I desparately do not want him to win because his policies and political failures, which would be the case, I feel would reflect negatively on the Church.

Interestingly, I was just reading a website where you are asked twelve questions, then, based upon your answers, they tell you which candidate you should vote for. My top candidate was Ron Paul and my bottom candidate was Hillary Clinton. All of the Republican candidates ranked ahead of any of the Democrat candidates. The lowest of the Republican candidates for my answers was Mitt Romney who just barely edged out Barak Obama.

Mormon or not, Mitt Romney is nowhere on my radar as even possible consideration for president.

Jay

I just heard that Hillary is outpolling Obama by 40 points among women. I would venture a guess that a significant number are choosing her based solely on gender. Which seems like it would be even less relevant than religion, no?

Amen, and voting for a woman who stood by while her husband slept or partied with everything that wasn’t nailed down is the worst disgrace to womanhood ever. She was either a pathetic doormat or a power-crazed woman hell-bent on grabbing the limelight (I obviously believe the latter). Either way cheapens women and sets the worst kind of example for young women. The fact that women are willing to vote for her despite all this shows that Utah does not have a monopoly on stupidity. . . . .