Mormon leaders express concern at declining caucus attendance


Return To Article
  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Feb. 17, 2012 7:22 a.m.

    Flashback..... really? We have a split government right now. Two houses, each party has one they run. We have had a back in forth of representation in the White house for over 50 years with no party dominating. How is it you make your claim, when emperical evidence shows something completely different. At the state level, when was the last time Utah had a split house? How about in Utah valley, when was the last time you had a split baord.

    This fanetesy world people have made up to support their feelings of persecution is ever so puzzling to me.

    The one place there is no balance is in the state of Utah. The current system is heavily rigged that a few determine the choice of the many. Government isn't intended to be monolythic. When anyone suggest that one party domination is the solution, that is when we know we are in trouble. That is when power will corrupt. That is when you have things like legislative bodies trying to hide what they are doing from the public like the Utah senate passed last year, and then was embarrassed into repealing their law providing a cloack of secrecy.

    I am not sure what the intentions of the church are, but regardless, it is a good call as moderation comes when more people are involved.

  • Owen Heber City, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 4:21 p.m.

    My experience with the real movers and shakers of either party is that there is a vast gulf between the average person and the party professionals. The party professionals are in the business of government -- nothing more or less. It's their bread and butter, and when their livelihood is threatened, they respond more or less as you'd expect a cynical, amoral, godless bunch of people to respond in that situation: They attack the threat -- average citizens -- by spreading fear, labeling and making gross generalizations.

  • MarieDevine Divine-Way Kansas City, MO
    Feb. 16, 2012 2:22 p.m.

    "We Democrats welcome our LDS brothers and sisters and appreciate their opinions, hard work and values in our big tent Utah Democratic Party," Debakis said."

    Democrats are not blind to the fact that abortion and homosexuality are condemned in God's holy books; they are there to give us the option of following God's wisdom and warnings or ignoring them. We will receive what we deserve.

    The helps that Democrats promote come with the added cost of big government payrolls and fight against freedom that God gives us to voluntarily help our family and neighbors in times of trouble. A garden paradise lifestyle would easily provide for the needs of the poor to continue being helped with gardens and food producing pets. God's people need to want His glorious kingdom on earth now so we can be of one accord and have all things in common without big government control forcing our helps and enslaving us to taxes.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    Feb. 15, 2012 5:38 p.m.

    The average rank-and-file liberal generally has his heart in more or less the right place. One of the better New Dealers characterized FDR's project as "promoting Jeffersonian ends by Hamiltonian means" -- that is, using the power of expanded government to uphold the ideal of the independent, self-reliant citizen, who was seen as being threatened by the growth of large industrial corporations.

    Unfortunately, my experience with the real movers and shakers of modern liberalism, is that there is a vast gulf between the average, idealistic liberal layperson, and the party professionals. The party professionals are in the business of government -- nothing more or less. It's their bread and butter, and when their livelihood is threatened, they respond more or less as you'd expect a cynical, amoral, godless bunch of people to respond in that situation: They attack the threat by any means necessary.

  • scottpehrson Monticello, utah
    Feb. 15, 2012 8:23 a.m.

    While I don't agree with his name, I agree with what "trappedinutah" has to say about the whole caucus system. It is terrible in that it allows for a very small but aggressive group to entirely control the democatic process, especially in the rural areas of our state. Bob Bennett was a sacrificial lamb at the alter of caucus politics and Oren Hatch will soon follow. I am not extolling the virtues of career poiticians and my recollections were of Hatch running against Frank Moss on the premis that he had been in office too long. Oren, it is time to go, you can do it gracefully or be kicked to the curb.
    But back to the idiocy of this method. It needs to be changed and quickly because there are many areas in Utah where the quality of local elected officials has been compromised by someone who has enough activist friends that they can circumvent the actual majority opinion of the electorate.

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    Feb. 15, 2012 8:00 a.m.

    To many of you posting from the Utah experience, remember, there are several states in the Union where things are totally reversed as far as the party dominence. Try California, Washington, or try just about the whole east coast. Republicans feel as outside in states like that as some of you Democrats might here in Utah. It is just way things are in America and I like it that if you want a more liberal or conservative state you are free to move there.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    Feb. 15, 2012 6:07 a.m.

    My first Bishop was a lifelong Democrat. I only know that because he and I were particularly close. My current Bishop is a Republican. I know that only because we are very close. The many others in between I have either not known at all or could only suspect from a few comments here or there.

    Yes, some folks (including me) do talk politics in the off moments at church. But I cannot ever recall being asked about my party affiliation in any official or even semi-official capacity. In meetings we are advised over and over again to keep our political views to ourselves. When it has been my turn at the pulpit, I have striven to keep to that standard.

    In my current ward and stake I would assume there are folks of both parties. In the area where I live, the older generation still includes many lifelong Democrats and the young are generally more drawn to that party as well. In the middle, there is more of a Republican bent. I assume that holds true within the church as well (but I don't ask).

    As to how we should look at the various wars. May I recommend President Hinckley's 2003 address titled War and Peace. I believe it is definitive.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 11:36 p.m.

    But should LDS Democrats feel obliged to attend mass meetings in the vast parts of the state where no democrat can be elected, e.g. Davis County and Utah County. Will Democrats in such areas be blessed for attending their mass meetings even though nothing practical can come of it. I think the Church's remarks should be prefaced with a statememt something like this - attend your mass meetings of such can be of practical use, i.e. electing somebody.

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 8:35 p.m.

    The caucus system needs to go. It is nothing more than a tool of the extreme right to put their candidate in office or get rid of someone they don't like. Example Bennett and Lee. The far right could care less about anyone else' opinion. Governor Walker had an 80% approval rating and was voted out. The Tea Party and the rest of the far right have to much influence in this state. They are not the majority and they know it. That is why they staunchly defend such an antiquated system.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Feb. 14, 2012 7:58 p.m.


    Life-long active LDS member here. There was the Sacrament meeting talk where the speaker quoted Reagan and another conservative. The numerous lessons where people feel free to interject their political beliefs. Some Sunday School and Seminary teachers my children had where the teacher led discussions of a political nature. The political chain e-mails (often false) that get passed around by ward members and leaders and then quoted in classes etc. Just a few examples....

    Journalist's code of ethics includes:

    "Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible."

    (Meanwhile, mostly every article last week carried in the Deseret News about the healthcare mandate and contraception stated that abortifacients were part of the mandate).

    "Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent."

    "Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting.

    "Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant."

    " Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others."

    "Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so."

  • donburi South Jordan, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 7:18 p.m.

    @Informed Voter

    Your rant makes it clear that you are not informed at all. It's pretty sad that you think there in an ulterior motive for this.

  • Sandy Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 5:42 p.m.

    I hope the efforts to update the caucus -- hopefully replace it with a primary -- will be successful. That will bump participation more than any plea.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 5:29 p.m.

    The church will get its' lapdog, even if 50 people turn out to the caucuses.

  • New Yorker Pleasant Grove, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 4:54 p.m.

    @ Mike Richards

    Sorry you didn't notice, Mike that I'm from Pleasant Grove. I've been voting in Utah for the last 47 years, and am thoroughly familiar with Utah history, politics, and idiosyncrasies.

    When the "at-large" delegates in the county and state elections, they can easily tip the majority. Have you done your homework so that you now know what the total number of delegates in your county will be and what percentage will be "at large" delegates not selected by the neighborhood caucuses?

    For example if 10% of all delegates were "at large" in a county with a total of 100 delegates, then the neighborhood delegates would have to be 55% in favor of something to avoid being vetoed by a potential block of "at largers."

    If the "at large" delegates are 20% of the delegates, then it would take a 60% of neighborhood delegates to for something before they could assure passage.

    I watched this for years affecting the selection of candidates, the platform, and especially the rules. Then I just quit going.

    The primary you speak of doesn't always happen, and it never affects the rules or the platform.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 4:43 p.m.

    This year more than most, this admonition from the LDS is wise. Either that or the tea party will rule. They aren't in the majority, but they will win anyway if LDS regulars don't go add their voice to the mix.

  • Gemimi Bakersfield, CA
    Feb. 14, 2012 4:32 p.m.

    I feel your pain. It is also difficult to read run-on paragraph rantings and liberal diatribes here by those who claim membership in a church whose every document extols the virtues of Biblical ethics and obedience to the mandates of Jesus Christ...

    Not that knowing when to go to a new paragraph will win over your opponents, but it reveals a soul unwilling to abide by even the basics of universal grammatical rules. Why should they then be willing to cooperate in the community of ideas?

    You would probably be happier back in the European neighborhood of thinking. Just don't get caught in a dictatorial one. They're really not fun.

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 4:30 p.m.

    Since when did a newspaper have to appeal to the Left or even to the "moderates"? Truthseeker would have us believe that in order to be fair, news can't be reported truthfully and that it first goes through a "slanting committee" to verify that nothing too far right is printed.

    What utter nonsense. News is news.

    If the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints encourages its members to get off their couches and participate in the election process, why should it bother Truthseeker?

    How little Truthseeker knows about the LDS Church if he thinks that anyone would speak, over the pulpit about a candidate or about a party. When the Church gets involved, it is about issues, not about people and not about parties. When an issue goes against the Doctrine given us from Christ through His prophets, that issue is fair game. Just because Nazi Germany turned their heads when moral issues came up does not excuse the rest of us from taking a moral stand when ignoring that stand would nullify our belief in God and in His Son, Jesus Christ.

  • stmichaelpray ,
    Feb. 14, 2012 3:26 p.m.

    Two words

    9th Circus

  • Florwood American Fork, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 3:26 p.m.

    The caucus I attended in 2010 had almost double the participation of previous years. Perhaps they are thinking more of turnout in primary and general elections.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Feb. 14, 2012 2:55 p.m.

    "principles compatible with the gospel may be found in the platforms of the various political parties."

    Except that, de facto endoresment of political parties and candidates occurs because of the church-owned Deseret News. The articles are often written from a Republican/Conservative viewpoint and the op-ed and editorial columns are far-right. Are there any moderate, center-right columnists regularly published in the Deseret News? Was there a general article about Obama's budget--covering the various things he has proposed? Or was the main article about Obama's budget focused on how it may affect charitable giving? I would expect if the church truly was not endorsing a political party then their newspaper would be more moderate and even carry articles/op-eds from both sides of the political spectrum.

    But that is never going to happen. So, despite the Church's stated position, many members will continue to believe that one can't be a good church member and Democrat at the same time.

    I've had similar experiences....

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 2:45 p.m.

    Mountainman, that is exactly how I feel when I try to reason with Republicans.

    Perhaps we all need to learn to listen and respect one another. But when you attend a neighborhood caucus only to be shouted down -- with a lot of pretty foul language mixed in -- that's not America.

    Or at least it shouldn't be.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Feb. 14, 2012 2:24 p.m.

    re: USA,

    The operative words are "party caucus". A caucus is not a primary. A caucus is not the general election. A caucus is the time when people who belong to a PARTY elect delegates to represent them at the PARTY nominating convention. Those who choose NOT to belong to a party will have to wait until others have made choices for them. Those who choose NOT to participate will also have to wait until others make choices for them.

    No one is forced to belong to a party, but only the very foolish would think that they should have the privilege of choosing candidates for a party when they have chosen to not affiliated with a party.

    REPUBLICANS decide who will run on the REPUBLICAN ballot in the primary election. I won't comment on the process used by Democrats because I'm not registered as a Democrat. I'll let them decide how they choose those who best represent them and the platform of their party.

    There is no "independent party".

    Your choice is to affiliate with a party or to let others make your decision for you.

    Sitting on the fence and waiting helps no one.

  • ironmania San Diego, CA
    Feb. 14, 2012 2:22 p.m.

    When I lived in Salt Lake, I attended the Democrat precinct caucus. I was the only one who showed up from my precinct, so I nominated and elected myself to be precinct chair. My wife later joined in as vice-chair. As a result, I got to go to the county and state conventions and met many very nice people with good intentions.

    I had a blast and would recommend it to anyone.

  • Carnak Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 1:57 p.m.

    @ Pagan | 1:00 p.m. Feb. 14, 2012
    Salt Lake City, UT

    Last word:

    Supreme Court

  • USA Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 1:54 p.m.

    As a strict independent, caucus season is always a trying time for me as a 110 percenter member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Letter-day Saints (you know, bishopric, high council, quorum president, group leader, other leadership roles, etc.). I can't align with any political party, yet we are admonished to attend our caucus meetings. Perhaps we should organize a caucus of the unaffiliated. My voice is needed, along with so many others, to temper the voices of extremism in the major parties. I just want to see problems solved. I can't stomach registering as a Republican. What to do...

  • Something to think about Ogden, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 1:51 p.m.

    We, Utah, is dominated by Republicans. So, whether there is full participation or low participation, it does not matter in the grand scheme. Utah's will vote for the Republican with an average of around 68-70% everytime. Social issues must be the reason, because most Utahns economically fit into the frame of the Democratic policies.

    Examples of Republican dominance

    Look at the whole Merril Cook experiment. He could not get elected as an Independent... first go round as a Republican and he's in! I think it's good for all Americans to be involved in the process. Yet, for Utahn's, in the end, the result will be the same. Only once since 1948 (LBJ) has Utah voted Democratic in the Presidential race.

    Feb. 14, 2012 1:04 p.m.

    The next time I hear a fellow member of my local NY LDS congregation exclaim, "How can someone be a good LDS and a Democrat?", I'll use the quote in this article, "principles compatible with the gospel may be found in the platforms of the various political parties." As a registered Independent, I have found both attractive and negative aspects to both major parties' platforms...and candidates, as well!

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 1:00 p.m.

    Carnak | 10:57 a.m. Feb. 14, 2012,

    2 word reply:

    9th Circuit

    Feb. 14, 2012 12:44 p.m.


    one word


  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Feb. 14, 2012 12:37 p.m.

    re: New Yorker,

    With all respect due to citizens from New York, your comment is complete untrue.

    In 2010, the citizens of Utah, not the "King Makers", rejected Mr. Bennett in his quest to be "King". The ordinary citizens of Utah went to a caucus and voted for a delegate who pledged to vote for someone other than Mr. Bennett. The system worked. All of Mr. Bennett's millions did not put him on the ballot. The citizens were tired of hearing that someone "deserved" to represent the State of Utah, that someone's father had represented the State and that the son should continue to represent the State. The citizens were tired of hearing that a Senator who only poked his head out of his office every six years, was somehow representing the State of Utah.

    This year, on March 15th, Mr. Hatch is going to learn that the people of Utah have grown tired of his "King Making" rhetoric, or his claim that he is the only person fit for the job, of his political promise to get the job done "this time".

    We have a primary election AFTER the caucus has allowed us to select our candidates.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 12:31 p.m.

    For the Republican Party, the attendance at the precinct level caucus is really what this article is about. At the Precinct level which was highly attended in my precinct last time, March 2010, was extremely high. For 20 years, it was a handfull of people to fill positions for the County and State conventions and sometimes one would have to fill both positions. However, last time, instead of the handfull there were about 80 in attendance. The couple of delegates from each precinct then go to the County Convention and usually a couple of others go to the state convention. The county and state conventions can have multiple people at the conventions, only the selected delegates. It is important to attend and be involved but again, the people attending the precinct level vote or select people for the county and state. So the 80 people did that. In that caucus meeting in 2010, the other majority of those people I hadn't seen before. You are supposed to verify the people in attendance but I don't think that was done for everyone in attendance. Senator Bennett is a good man, but didn't provide feedback for years of letters and e-mails I had sent. Since 2010, Senator Hatch has been more enlightened but also, he has given me feedback for most of the 20 years. The Tea-Party type people did help hold accountability and they were in attendance. Common sense is also important to our system.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 12:25 p.m.

    I think it's good that the church is stressing voter participation and emphasizing both caucus dates. I think there's way too much sentiment among church members (not the leadership) that you can't be a good LDS member and a Democrat. The Pew or Gallup (I forget which) poll had demographic numbers for LDS members and if you did a little extra math you found that while the survey had 79% activity rates, only half of liberal LDS members were active. I take it many of them have had their share of experiences like mine with an institute teacher that insisted we had to support the Iraq war as a holy war against Islam or else we'd be going against the prophet or maybe there's someone who always insists on bringing up Glenn Beck during sunday school meetings and some eventually just stop attending because they start to associate going to church with being a source of stress.

  • New Yorker Pleasant Grove, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 12:11 p.m.

    I used to go to the Republican every year for over 20 years until I found out that the "at large" delegates were so many that they could counteract a very large popular majority of opinion. Then I worked with a group for a while to reduce the number of or effect of the at large delegates. Absolutely no chance of that happening. The "king-makers" have it wrapped up in Utah. Only switching to a primary election instead of caucuses will ever break the power of the Utah king-makers."

  • trapdinutah South Jordan, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 12:09 p.m.

    The caucus system is antiquated, but the worst thing about it here in Ut(opia) is that it pits neighbors against neighbors, neighborhoods against neighborhoods. Civil dialogue is a thing of the past. Each is allowed to believe whatever they believe, as long as they believe as I believe. There are many who latch onto what they believe their church believes about an issue, and they will not compromise - even if their belief is wrong; and any who believe differently are hell-bound heathens. It is incredibly difficult to listen to a self-righteous gun-toting tea party person rant and rave at a caucus meeting, berating and belittling any idea lacking the angry momma bearâs seal of approval, and then listen to them teach a Sunday school lesson on love the following Sunday. I agree with many of the posts above - I am an independent voter - fiercely independent. Not only do I agree with many of the tenets of each party, I also strongly disagree with many of each. I grew up in Europe and the far east, and I have always found many extremely good people in many different religions. I believe the same thing about political parties - there are good ideals in each of them, and people who are better for following those ideals, but none of them is worthy of the power held by the supermajority party here. As we see each year at this time, âabsolute power corrupts absolutely.â

  • Carnak Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 10:57 a.m.

    Pagan | 10:34 a.m. Feb. 14, 2012
    Salt Lake City, UT

    1 word:


  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 10:34 a.m.

    2 words:

    Prop. 8.

  • Kami Bountiful, Utah
    Feb. 14, 2012 9:48 a.m.

    How about expressing a concern that less than have even both to show up to vote in Utah!

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 9:45 a.m.

    Voter turnout rates are known to favor one party or issue above others. As such, this official statement by Church leaders very well may be a veiled attempt to influence political events under the guise of "religious exemption".

    Perhaps it is just as inappropriate for a Church to make any statement about politics, as it would be for a political authority to advise citizens to attend Church, or read your scriptures, or pay your tithing!

  • On the other hand Spanish Fork, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 9:38 a.m.

    @Cherilyn, thanks for presuming to tell me what I think.

  • Informed Voter South Jordan, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 9:37 a.m.

    There was a record turnout at the 2010 -- but too many Tea Party members. This, I believe, is what the brethren are unhappy about because Sen. Bennett was voted out. The Church Does not want to see Sen Hatch voted out by what they think was an extremist result in 2010, so they want more non-Tea Party people to attend this time. News that they want more attendees cannot state the real reason so they shroud it by saying more people should attend. I will vote for Hatch, but I applaud what happened in 2010. Senator Lee is doing a much better job than Bennett, but Bennett's loss was a blow to Church influence in D.C.

  • isrred Logan, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 9:20 a.m.

    "To make it truly valuable, the state needs to allow those registered as Independents to vote in the primary of their choosing. As it is we are forced into one of the major parties"

    Independents are welcome and able to participate in Democratic caucuses and primaries. It is only the Republican primary that requires that you be a registered Republican to vote in it.

  • tholyoak Cedar Hills, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 8:37 a.m.

    I have always been politically independent because I don't agree with any party enough to give up my independence. Perhaps I am not the only one that feels this way, and that is the root of the problem?

  • Cherilyn Holladay, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 8:05 a.m.

    We had a record turn-out at the caucuses in an off-year election in 2010 - more than the Presidential election year in 2008.

    The idea that Government should be the charity-giver, competing with the Church's role and diminishing it is the over-riding theme of a progressive thinker. They are in both parties, but predominantly in one party - the Democratic Party.

    If we want to become Greece, we are on the right road to ruin in this present administration. If you are concerned, come to the Republican caucus where you will have a voice and find like-minded commonsense conservatives. We're going to need a veto-proof Congress with experienced and qualified representation if President Obama should be re-elected.

  • John Loveland OGDEN, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 7:53 a.m.

    As a moderate Democrat, I appreciate the Church for reminding everyone that "principles compatible with the gospel may be found in the platforms of the various political parties." In fact, I switched to Democrat because I believe that the Democrats better embody the teachings of Christ and the LDS church regarding the poor and elderly, tolerance of others, caring for the environment, and so forth.

    Also, I believe that Jim Dabakis' name is misspelled in this article (as Debakis).

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 7:50 a.m.

    Why would anyone say that going to a caucus makes no difference?

    Are they trying to say that because another citizen has a political viewpoint that differs from their own, that that other citizen should not attend the caucus?

    Do they think that because the majority of those who care enough about a representative form of government voted for Republicans, that that form of government should be abolished?

    Do they think that because few Democrats or Independents are elected, that the conservative viewpoints of Utah's citizens need to be ignored and that Democrats or Independents need to be allowed to vote twice or three times - until Democrats or Independents are elected?

    The caucus system works. Those who care about living in a representative republic will go to their caucus meeting. Those who do not care will continue to carp and whine and complain.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Feb. 14, 2012 7:39 a.m.

    I don't live in Utah but here in Idaho, my (and I am certain for thousands of other voters) participation in public meetings with Democrats has been frustrating for both myself and the meeting sponsors. My views on same sex marriage,religous liberty, the second amendment, fiscal responsibility, self reliance, limited government and abortion are not well received in those meetings so I tend to stay away and continue to vote my conscience! In other words, my views are not welcome in the Democratic party!

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 7:11 a.m.

    Yes we do LDS Liberal, run by Obama and the Democrats/progressives/liberals.

  • Yorkshire City, Ut
    Feb. 14, 2012 6:16 a.m.

    I appreciate the writer pointing out that none of this is new--other than addressing lower caucus participation.

  • raybies Layton, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 6:08 a.m.

    Even in the predominant party, multiple voices are desperately needed, especially in Utah. We have the ability to reason through and send thoughtful candidates to office that will not just do whate everyone else is doing, but who will extend thoughtful tolerance and wisdom to all aspects governing our communities.

  • DBeck Eagle Mountain, UT
    Feb. 14, 2012 5:44 a.m.

    Sadly, the lack of involvement is due to the fact that it feels like it makes so little difference. To make it truly valuable, the state needs to allow those registered as Independents to vote in the primary of their choosing. As it is we are forced into one of the major parties and many of us simply are not either/or, we are Independents--we are somewhat liberal on certain things and somewhat conservative on others, rarely all the way one or the other on all things. I will sustain the 1st Presidency in this effort to get people to be more engaged as a member of the LDS church to the best of my ability, but there are serious impediments to doing so that will force many not to bother with being available again this year.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Feb. 13, 2012 11:21 p.m.

    I think they need to be more concerned about a lop-sided One-Party Totalitarian system.

    See you at the Caucuses....