The Fundamentalist are Not going to Vote for Romney in huge numbers, what they
may do is Vote for a Romney and Santorum Ticket.Romney is Mormon
which kill the romance for some right there. He is Not Mormon Enough for other
(like myself) and appears somewhat liberal and pro choice.I just
want Abortion Stopped by any Legal means possible. Also the Illegal Emergent
problem at least contained.I don not care within reason just how
that happens just that it happens. Also Health Care as it is Now written. That
issue is at least in the Courts.Undo the damage that Obama has done
and expand the Military by 2 or 3 Divisions so people are not over deployed and
lose their minds.
Re: Lets Debate,donn Wow - thanks for confirming to us all why we should never
elect a hard-core Evangelical(euangelion=Gospel,2098) president. See (John3:16)
Christians are pro Gospel. Romney had taken positions in
Massachusetts that were anathema to the conservative base, particularly on
abortion and gay rights. Running against Ted Kennedy in 1994, Romney had
declared himself a supporter of a woman's right to choose on abortion, and
claimed he would do more for gay rights than Kennedy. Then he changed positions
on abortion. A year before he launched his presidential candidacy, he tried to
explain his evolving views to several Washington Post reporters.Times
reveals that: Romney’s attempt in 1994 to “out-Kennedy
Kennedy” during a Senate race led him to take stands on issues like
abortion and gay rights that he has since backed away from, giving rise to
accusations that he is a flip-flopper.
@donnWow - thanks for confirming to us all why we should never elect
a hard-core Evangelical president.Are Mormons pro-life? I think the
answer to that is unquestionably yes, and I highly doubt that Mitt Romney
tolerated convenience abortions as a Bishop or Stake President, no matter what
he may have said to get votes in Massachusetts. Do you have any evidence that
Romney facilitated abortions through any administrative decisions while
Governor? Santorum has also said he was fully pro-choice until he ran for
public office as a Republican, so I suppose it's possibly he's not as
ideologically pure as he claims to be. Reagan also changed his position on
abortion. I'm guessing you're only outraged at Romney's change
of heart on this matter.How surprising that White House staff are
portraying Romney as the godfather of their health care plan. Yeah - no
politics or ulterior motive by the White House, as long as those listening are
Re: LetsDebate, the only speculation about Romney is by those who really
aren't paying attention. Besides his stint as governor, he also has a
well-documented track record of leadership.Two big reasons , Born
again(born from above) Christians and conservatives have not to vote for
Romney.1. The right to Life… is grounded in the Christian Faith, see
Psalm 139 :13-15,Also….(Jesus) Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have
done it unto one of the least(elachistos Grk,1646 can mean a baby) of these my
brethren, ye have done it unto me.(Mt 25:40). Yet Romney changed his position
on abortion ,I thought Mormonism was pro-life.2. White House senior
adviser David Plouffe on Sunday labeled Mitt Romney the “godfather”
of President Barack Obama’s healthcare law.
Oh, the Romney Kool-Aid is flowing mightily. I wonder what the posts would be
like if it were Santorum leading the delegate count and Romney was trying to
"We have gone from a country that was respected to a country our current
President has taken us down a road to disrespected and our own people are
becoming dissatisfied."I am sorry, are you saying that under
Bush this country was respected more for starting two wars that it had no clue
how to end? This just made me giggle. We went from a world to where the dollar
and the Euro were at near parity, to the point that you needed more than $1.50
to by a single Euro, and nearly 2 buck to buy a UK Pound.Makes you
wonder if the person who wrote that ever even looked at a poll regarding US
respect over seas. I recommend anyone who has questions look it up and not
believe the radio and internet "the sky is falling" crowd.
@CHS 85, the search for "non-existent WMDs" conducted due to information
Bush's administration received, and later acknowledged none were found --
doesn't prove they didn't exist. I'm saddened by lives that were
lost in Iraq, as well as in any war, also in the terrorist attack on American
soil on 9/11, driving President Bush to do his best to prevent further attacks.
Apparently you have lost loved ones in Iraq, and I'm sorry for that, but
the decisions this current administration is making has negatively impacted our
country, and will worsen if he is re-elected. Our country is terribly in debt
(which more than doubled since Obama became president -- so don't blame
Bush for our debt), our military has been reduced (lowering our security), Obama
has humiliated our country and his office (bowing to enemy leaders -- pictures
available proving my claim), his ever increasing vacations, etc. If you're
not concerned for the future of our country, which could bring destruction you
want to avoid, I'm sorry. I am concerned for the future of my children,
grandchildren, and beyond who will possibly be stuck with the repercussions of
@CHS 85 - you do realize, don't you, that Obama continued the war in Iraq
for nearly 3 years? And, that we continue to fight in Afghanistan, despite the
fact they will probably never be trustworthy or eradicate the Taliban. I
haven't seen that Obama has stopped what you call "endless wars,"
or that there is any less "death and destruction" as you like to
characterize it. Just a President you agree with instead of one you
don't.I'd rather have sanity than insanity, if death and
destruction are included anyway.
@mytymous09How many friends did you lose in an endless war? How
many friends did you know that died in Iraq looking for non-existent WMDs? The first word in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is LIFE.
The previous administration wasted more American lives in their endless wars
that President Obama ever dreamed of. I'd rather have insanity
than death and destruction any day.
I'm more than a bit confused why Paul and Gingrich don't leave the
race already -- must be they love the limelight.@ConnerJohnson --
the so called "reign of terror" you accuse President Bush of spear
heading pales in comparison to what Obama has done to our country -- internally
and externally. I suggest you, and other Obama supporters,do some homework and
read The Roots of Obama's Rage and The Anti-American President Barack
Hussein Obama, and see what illegal, immoral, ridiculous things Obama has done
to our country. You may rant that both of these books have false information in
them, but both actually use Obama's own words to make their point. I just
hope and pray Obama gets defeated and will not subject our wonderful country to
four more years of insanity.
Thanks goodness the Romney people are speaking in this forum with conviction and
reality, whether in Utah or other states in this great United States of America.
We have gone from a country that was respected to a country our current
President has taken us down a road to disrespected and our own people are
becoming dissatisfied. U.S. Constitution needs to survive so our nation can
live. Congress needs to do work and not sit on the side of a President that is
not doing the right.
I am LDS and will vote for Romney. If Huntsman and Romney were in the finals of
the race together I would vote for Rommney. If Santorum were LDS, and Romney
were Catholic, I would vote for Romney. See the trend? We need Romneys skills
The great people of America will not stand for another
Republican/Conservitive/Red/GOP president. The reign of terror set forth upon
our nation and the world by George Bush and the republican party will have to
wait four more years (hopefully longer!!) to take the white house. Obama will
pick apart any candidate like minced meat in the debates, just you wait. And why
does Romney hate ObamaCare? didn't he... ahem... start the healthcare
movement in Mass.?
If Santorum and Gingrich were men of honor, they would bow out for the good of
the cause over the stroking of their own egos.
@WIlliary, @LetsDebateHaving previously worked for DNews, The AP
stories come across with pre-written headlines that are not edited by the DNews
staff. Obviously, any story that is written by a DNews staff member has DNews
written headline, but the wire stories aren't edited. The only edits that
might be made would be SEO edits (SEOs basically making something more google
friendly, foe example changing 'Santorum defeats Romney' to 'Rick
Santorum defeats Mitt Romney'. This makes is so that there are more key
words to link it to a google search)
Williary - the only speculation about Romney is by those who really aren't
paying attention. Besides his stint as governor, he also has a well-documented
track record of leadership and volunteerism with the Olympics, Bain Capital, and
church service. There's no question he has the Midas touch. Also, anyone who thinks the number of anti-Mormon votes he's losing is
equal to pro-Mormon votes he's gaining must be absolutely clueless about
the balance (or, rather imbalance) of those numbers. I think with the exact
same background and record, Romney would have laid this primary to rest long ago
if he belonged to any traditional mainstream religion. I do agree
with you about the headlines. Although AP may have written the stories,
I'm pretty sure DN creates the headlines for them.
If you're running for preacher in chief you gotta get a little crazy on.
The most important thing to remember, Either Santorum or Romney or Gingrich or
even Ron Paul would be a better president than Obama and don’t let us
"Mitt Romney was a Bishop and a Stake President. I can assure you that most
Utahns relate more with Romney than the suddenly born-again Santorum."And yet if blacks vote for Obama for the same reason, they are voting
out of ignorance. Can the same be said for my fellow LBS? I do think what
you said is a valid reason to lean toward a candidate, I just wish the same
consideration and respect was extended to other groups.
I take issue with the assertion that Santorum's views are more in line with
the Mormon values than those of Mitt Romney. Santorum is a social conservative
and that is the limit of his conservatism. During a 2005 NPR interview,
Santorum discussed what he called the 'libertarianish right' within
the Republican Party, saying 'they have this idea that people
should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do. Government should
keep our taxes down and keep our regulation low ... Well, that is not how
traditional conservatives view the world, and I think most conservatives
understand that individuals can't go it alone...'" Senator Santorum consistently voted for big government and government
controls. He has demonstrated a fiscal irresponsibility more in line with the
liberal left than traditional Republican values.
Has anyone done a legitimate survey of LDS church members to find out how much
support is out there for Romney simply because he is "Mormon"? While I
am sure that there are those out there who will vote for Romney for that reason,
I personally haven't met any. I know of a few Mormon Obama supporters and
more than a few Ron Paul supporters. The Mormons I know who are voting for
Romney are doing so either because if they believe he has the best chance of
beating Obama or they believe that he has the best chance of turning the economy
It's not just religion. Romney is more qualified. Like Obama, Santorum
has NO executive experience. That's one of the reasons we're in the
mess we're in. Santorum is a lightweight. We need real leadership.
@ WilliaryNews flash: The DN is likely the only LDS friendly, mostly
conservative paper in the world. If you don't like it's reporting
style, then read the Trib, or better the Huffington post. It
boggles my mind that you spend so much time reading the articles looking for
something to complain about when it is obvious you dislike everything Mormon and
conservative.Don't go to a candy store - full on knowing it is
a candy store - and then complain that they sell too much candy. It is silly.
After seeing a video where Rick was so rude that he kept talking PAST his turn
and used up Mitts turn though even the moderator tried to stop him and Mitt
asked him to quit---- I rather think Rick has shown he prefers a one man
"debate"--- if I were Romney the only way I would agree is if the
moderator had the power to turn off Ricks mike. I think Mitt has the fair
play and integrity that it wouldn't be necessary for that on His own mike -
but probably he would request it as I have always seen him act like a gentleman.
@Willary"Gotta love the DNews and their unbiased, unaffiliated
“reporting!”"You'll notice at the top of the
article that this story was done by the Associated Press, NOT the Deseret
News."The fact is Rick Santorums’ views are much more
in-line with most Conservatives in Utah. Yet, they are voting for Mitt only
because of his religion."Mitt Romney was a Bishop and a Stake
President. I can assure you that most Utahns relate more with Romney than the
suddenly born-again Santorum.
Now, if I remember my history correctly in 1976 the GOP nomination was
contentious, where on the other side of the isle, the Democratic nominee had a
smooth path to the nomination. Ronald Reagan forced a contested convention,
yielding the eventual nomination of Gerald Ford only if they made him, Reagan,
the key-note speaker in the convention. It was a very selfish thing for Reagan
to do. One of his few political mistakes. Ford burned a lot of money and
energy to get nominated and had less in his treasure chest for the general
election.The result was a Carter victory. This is not
what Santorum, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity want you to believe. They will
have you believe that it was the philosophy of the candidate that is the most
important qualification.However, I have studied every presidential
election since 1920 and found that when there is an incumbent in office, the
candidate who endures the most contentious nomination process has always lost.
When there an open seat, fight all you want, and the results are unpredictable.
But where there is an incumbent in office, play nice if you want to win.
williary,There's a big difference in voting FOR someone because
of his religion and voting AGAINST someone because of his religion. One is
because you have the same values and beliefs, as well as knowing he has high
morals. The other is bigotry.Also, you said, "Can’t cry
about losing votes because you’re a Mormon, when you’re getting
votes for the exact same reason." Guess what? Only 2% of the U.S.
population is Mormon, so I doubt he's winning because Mormons are voting
for him because he's Mormon. Trust me, he losing A LOT more votes because
he's a Mormon than he is gaining votes because of it.
@Roland KayserThe Mormon card is working both ways for Mitt. For every
vote he’s losing because of his religious beliefs, he’s gaining one
on the other end. Truth be told, whether people here will believe it or not,
Mitt’s record speaks for itself. He was a very moderate Governor, of a
very Liberal state. That’s the record he accumulated in his only
political stint. Everything else surrounding him is just speculation, wishful
thinking. The fact is Rick Santorums’ views are much more in-line with
most Conservatives in Utah. Yet, they are voting for Mitt only because of his
religion. Can’t have it both ways. Can’t cry about losing votes
because you’re a Mormon, when you’re getting votes for the exact
Gotta love the DNews and their unbiased, unaffiliated
“reporting!”Romney wins Illinois by 12 points and the headline
is “Mitt Romney Routs Rick Santorum.”Santorum wins Louisiana
by 23 points and the headline is “Rick Santorum beats Mitt Romney, still
In any state where the Republican primary voters are composed of 50% or more
Evangelicals, Romney loses. In states where they are 49% or less, Romney wins.
It looks like Evangelicals simply will not vote for a Mormon.