A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

This is for encouragement, ideas, and support for people going through a faith transition no matter where you hope to end up. This is also the place to laugh, cry, and love together.
Post Reply
User avatar
Notchet
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:58 am

A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by Notchet »

It appears that no matter who wins Utah’s electoral votes, the church will look bad to the rest of the world.

McMullin: A confirmation of the long held belief that Mormons vote for whomever the church tells them to. I would smile if McM carried 65% percent of the UT vote, which equals the approximate number of LDS in Utah. The more Utahns vote for McM the worse it looks for the church.

Trump: If UT carries Trump, how embarrassing this would be for the predominantly Mormon culture and church, stooping to vote for someone completely outside LDS values just to prevent liberal Hillary from winning.

Clinton: A Democrat win in the MOST conservative state in the union would be an embarrassing referendum vote against the conservative leanings and biases of Mormon church leadership by a large segment of Mormon Utah citizens.

It seems a LDS lose-lose-lose no matter how you slice it.
"I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned" Richard Feynman
User avatar
SeeNoEvil
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:41 am

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by SeeNoEvil »

Hi Notchet! This is quite the election this year isn't it! It definitely will go down in history for a myriad of reasons! It will be interesting to see who wins in UT. Trump definitely isn't very happy right now with UT and blames the "Mormon Mafia" for his slip in the polls. Utah's polls are definitely causing a bit of a stir as the numbers for McMullin continue to rise. I am curious though to know if there has been any direct influencing of the vote from the pulpit. Does anyone know?

As far as the 21st century world wide opinion of Mormons go, I would bet those days are rapidly draining from the pot. Very public events i.e. Prop 8, Nov policy, temple ceremony on You Tube, reveal of super underwear, historical issues etc. is changing the game. And we can give thanks to the internet for revealing the ugly head of the church with all it's warts and faux pas. The election in Utah just might prove to be another black mark on the churches image. Guess we are all on edge as to what is going to happen come Nov. 8th in more ways than one!

PS. I sure miss Harmons! Say hi to everyone for me!
"Every event that has taken place in this universe has led you to this moment.
... The real question is, what will you do with this moment?" - Unknown

"Never arrive @ a point where you know everything - Korihor57
User avatar
trophywife26.2
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:50 pm

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by trophywife26.2 »

I am waiting with bated breath to see how Utah goes! I'd say I'm excited, but that sounds too positive. I'm definitely anxious and curious about it.
Even if it's something disappointing, it's still better to know the truth. Because people can deal with disappointment. And once they've done that, they can feel that they have really grown. And that can be such a good feeling. -Fred Rogers
User avatar
2bizE
Posts: 2444
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by 2bizE »

When he eventually comes out as Gay, Utah will look like a great supporter of gay rights and equality.
~2bizE
User avatar
Jinx
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 9:32 pm

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by Jinx »

I disagree with the OP. I'm actually kind of proud of Utah right now. I fully expected Trump to win by a landslide here because he has a letter "R" by his name. I know Evan McMullin is not an ideal candidate, and it's silly that they're voting for him because he's Mormon, but if Utah goes for McMullin I think it says a lot about Mormons following their consciences rather than their party. Mormons are making other Christian groups look like sellouts.

This is a very left-wing site, but this article pretty much states what I'm talking about. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mor ... 5f6d15724c

Full disclosure: I voted for Hillary.
“This is the best part of the week!” – Homer Simpson
“It’s the longest possible time before more church!” – Lisa Simpson
User avatar
Notchet
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:58 am

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by Notchet »

SeeNoEvil wrote:Hi Notchet! I am curious though to know if there has been any direct influencing of the vote from the pulpit. Does anyone know?
Hi SeeNoEvil...always good to hear from you. The only influencing I have seen or heard of is the traditional letter to members (5 Oct, 2016) encouraging members to vote. The one line in the letter which may hint at subtle influence might be the one I underlined.

Dear Brothers and Sisters:

Political Participation, Voting, and the Political Neutrality of the Church

As citizens we have the privilege and duty of electing office holders and influencing public policy. Participation in the political process affects our communities and nation today and in the future. We urge Latter-day Saints to be active citizens by registering, exercising their right to vote, and engaging in civic affairs.

We also urge you to spend the time needed to become informed about the issues and candidates you will be considering. Along with the options available to you through the Internet, debates, and other sources, the Church occasionally posts information about particular moral issues on which it has taken a position at http://www.MormonNewsroom.org.

Principles compatible with the gospel may be found in various political parties, and members should seek candidates who best embody those principles.

While the Church affirms its institutional neutrality regarding political parties and candidates, individual members should participate in the political process. The Church also affirms its constitutional right of expression on political and social issues.

Sincerely yours,

Thomas S. Monson
Henry B. Eyring
Dieter F. Uchtdorf
The First Presidency
"I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned" Richard Feynman
User avatar
SeeNoEvil
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:41 am

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by SeeNoEvil »

Thanks for posting the letter.
Principles compatible with the gospel may be found in various political parties, and members should seek candidates who best embody those principles.
I can see how the letters statement would point to DJT... being his principles regarding women align with the churches founding fathers. DJT and JS have a lot in common. Sorry.... couldn't resist. :D :D

On a side note there was a commentary on the news the other night discussing the latest robo caller. The station brought in a "expert" on Mormons to discuss the McMullen phenomenon who made the statement (paraphrasing) that because of Utah's history of being the minority and expelled from many states they are naturally sympathetic towards McMullen with his 2 mothers.... say what? :roll: I've only been gone from UT about 5 months.... has something happened there that I don't know about??

Here is the USNews report on the robo caller:
http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/art ... -robo-call
"Every event that has taken place in this universe has led you to this moment.
... The real question is, what will you do with this moment?" - Unknown

"Never arrive @ a point where you know everything - Korihor57
User avatar
Notchet
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:58 am

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by Notchet »

Jinx wrote:This is a very left-wing site, but this article pretty much states what I'm talking about. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mor ... 5f6d15724c

Full disclosure: I voted for Hillary.
I liked and agreed with the Huffpost article. Evangelicals and many other Christians have definately sold their birthright for a mess of porridge. (Trump)

Full disclosure: I also voted for Hillary (indirectly) by voting for McMullin.

My reasons:
1- Could not bring myself to actually cast a vote for Hillary.
2- Hillary's chances of winning UT seem slim, so I did my part to hopefully block Trumps chances of winning UT's 6 electoral votes.
3- Wanted to help confirm the nation's suspicions that Mormons obediently vote for whomever TSCC tells them to.
"I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned" Richard Feynman
User avatar
oliver_denom
Posts: 464
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:09 pm

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by oliver_denom »

Democratic presidential candidates in Utah have received between 26% and 34% pretty consistently for the last 16 years. It was a bit lower when Romney ran, but I'm not including 2012. Compare this to Clinton's current polling which averages out to about 27%, and we can conclude that McMullin's presence hasn't really affected Democratic support.

In contrast, Republican candidates usually enjoy between 67% and 72% support. Compare this to Trump's current polling averaging at 36.4%, and we can get a better understanding of who is switching their normal party loyalties to McMullin. Trump is missing between 30% and 36% of his expected share of the electorate based on past Republican candidates. Where are the missing Republican voters?

McMullin is currently polling at 28.6% and Gary Johnson at 6.1%. That's 34.7% of the electorate choosing a third party which are almost entirely composed of otherwise Republican voters. There's probably a dash of democrat in there, but very little. But that's a problem for McMullin. If 5% of alienated Republicans choose the Libertarian candidate, then there's no way he can reach a plurality. At this point, the voters picking Clinton will stay with Clinton. Those who still back Trump will continue to back Trump. McMullin's best chance for getting over the hump is by attacking Johnson.
“You want to know something? We are still in the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages--they haven't ended yet.” - Vonnegut

L'enfer, c'est les autres - JP
User avatar
azflyer
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 4:10 pm

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by azflyer »

I've had conversations with several non-LDS people I work with on this topic. I am very open about being LDS in my workplace. The people I have talked to (they were all Clinton supporters) have been very impressed in a positive way regarding LDS people's reactions to Donald Trump and in turn, their support for McMullin.

What has been more surprising to me is the number of LDS people that I know that have been extremely hostile towards him.

I am actually voting for a different third party candidate this election, and from my point of view, I see it as a strong positive for the LDS community that they are willing to stand up and not vote for two people that I consider to be the worst Presidential nominees in my lifetime.
User avatar
River Morgan
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 6:52 pm

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by River Morgan »

So McMullen was winning in Utah simply because he is Mormon, then it was noted he has two mothers and five days later he is polling third. Utah!
Every time you can find humor in a difficult situation, you win. -Snoopy
User avatar
Notchet
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:58 am

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by Notchet »

River Morgan wrote:So McMullen was winning in Utah simply because he is Mormon, then it was noted he has two mothers and five days later he is polling third. Utah!
I was not aware of McMullin's sudden drop in the state polls. Well said..."Utah!"
"I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned" Richard Feynman
User avatar
Notchet
Posts: 20
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:58 am

Re: A Lose-Lose-Lose for the church

Post by Notchet »

Hmmm... Some UT polls and talking heads are saying McMullin has moved back into second to Trump in Utah. Might get interesting.
"I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned" Richard Feynman
Post Reply