Study: Liberals, nonreligious much more likely to say they won’t vote for a Mormon than in 2007

posted at 9:03 pm on June 13, 2012 by Allahpundit

Wish I had time tonight to read through this study myself, but since I don’t, I’m trusting BuzzFeed’s summary. Nothing surprising here, though. A Gallup poll taken last year at this time found Democrats nearly 10 points more likely than Republicans to say they wouldn’t vote for a Mormon for president.

The big question: Is anti-Mormon bias coloring voters’ impressions of Romney or is anti-Romney bias coloring voters’ impressions of Mormonism?

According to American National Election Studies, nearly 35 percent of national respondents said in February they were “less likely” to vote for a Mormon. That’s up nine points from 2007, when Pew found 26 percent of voters expressing concern about pulling the lever for a Latter-day Saint…

According to the paper, concern about Mormonism has remained relatively stable among Evangelicals, with 36 percent expressing aversion to an LDS candidate in 2007 and 33 percent doing so in 2012. But among non-religious voters, that number shot up 20 points in the past five years, from 21 percent in 2007 to 41 percent in February. There were also substantial increases in Mormon-averse voters among liberals — 28 percent in 2007 and 43 percent in 2012 — as well as moderates, who went from 22 percent in 2007 to 32 percent this year…

The new study argues that the single most accurate predictor of how a voter views Romney is how he views Mormons — whether or not they are Christian, patriotic, hard-working, and friendly. Strikingly, the correlation between attitudes about Mormonism and support for Romney is even stronger than political ideology or party identification…

The paper comes with an important caveat: the survey data was collected in late February and early March — in the heat of the Republican primaries.

Granted, Romney wasn’t the nominee yet when the most recent data was collected, but he’s been the presumptive nominee for 18 months and a candidate for the White House for six years. Since 2008, when a voter is asked how they’d feel about a “hypothetical” Mormon president, to some extent they’re really being asked how they feel about Romney. Five years ago, the average liberal probably didn’t know much about him and didn’t perceive him as a major threat to the Democrats since he never got traction in the Republican primary, so antipathy to the “hypothetical” Mormon president was tepid. This year, as an extremely well-funded, well-organized de facto nominee looking to knock off a weakened Democratic incumbent, he’s as major as a major threat can be — and so suddenly alarm bells about him and his background are ringing among his opponents.

For instance, here’s something that somehow made it past the editors at America’s most famous “news” weekly:

I found myself discussing this situation with several colleagues, and we agreed that Romney doesn’t lie. Let me repeat: Mitt Romney doesn’t lie. He is telling the truth as he sees it — and truth it is, the facts notwithstanding. This is not simply a case of Hamlet arguing about point of view, saying, “For there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.” This is about a conflict between evidence and faith. There is a long tradition in the Mormon belief system in which evidence takes second place to faith. Examples abound, as when two Mormon elders who were questioned about the inconsistency in passages from the Book of Mormon said, “We know the Book of Mormon is true and that it contains the Word of God even in the face of evidence that appears contradictory,” according to The Mormon Missionaries by former Mormon Janice Hutchison. Thus there are no lies, only faith-based certainty that translates as truth for which no apology is needed, since what was said was not a lie.

Children learn to lie at different times in their development, but almost always by the age of 10. Their lies help establish them as separate from their parents, especially if the parents believe them. And one doesn’t have to be a Mormon to lie — just look at John Edwards or former Nevada Senator John Ensign. But in the Mormon Church, there was a decision to accept authority as true — whether or not evidence supported it. Hence Joseph Smith, the founder of the faith in 1820, claimed he was illiterate and received the Book of Mormon directly from God. But he could read, and read very well.

If you took this argument seriously, which some dimmer voters might, you’d have to conclude that devout Mormons are essentially pathologically incapable of separating truth from falsehood. I don’t think the author actually believes that (or am I giving him too much credit?), but he’s out to score a point for The One and so he lets his anti-Romney posture lead him to an inane anti-Mormon generalization.

Which is not to say this is entirely an anti-Romney thing. There’s been more media coverage of Mormonism generally lately because of his rise to political stardom, so it may be that some lefties and nonreligious types are learning more about the tenets of the faith and becoming more critical of it for whatever reason. Don’t forget either that Mormons took a lot of heat from the left for their role in funding the Prop 8 effort in California in 2008 and hard feelings about that endure. (Ross Douthat notes the irony of a group that was despised in its infancy for practicing a very untraditional form of marriage now being despised by some lefties for being too traditional.) And finally, all but the most low-information voters on both sides probably have some sense by now that Mormons are an overwhelmingly pro-Republican demographic. Utah is as red as a red state gets, and apart from Harry Reid, even I can’t think of a prominent Mormon Democrat offhand. It may be that, because of Romney’s ascendance and the success of Prop 8, liberals are now more aware that “Mormon” usually (but of course not always) means “Republican” and so politics is creeping into their perception a bit.

Anyway. Whenever we get into a discussion of which candidates are most victimized by suspicion about the demographic to which they belong, I feel obliged to throw myself a little pity party. I’ll leave you with this chart from Gallup’s poll last year. Party on, fellow nonbelievers!


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

How do they feel about voting for a psychopathic narcissist who hates their guts?

tom daschle concerned on June 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Bigots…

OmahaConservative on June 13, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Liberals being soulless humanists buy into all of the usual Workers Grifters of the World Unite claptrap.

The Liberals of the Democrat Party are returning to their Klan roots which should surprise no one.

viking01 on June 13, 2012 at 9:09 PM

They’re not bigots, they’re just liars.

malclave on June 13, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Anyone watching the racist bigot Juan on Hannity’s show just say that he is a reporter and Michelle Malkin is not because she is a blogger ?

burrata on June 13, 2012 at 9:09 PM

This is the left’s new strategy. They are going to try to marginalize Romney based on his religion. You knew they were going to attack his Mormonism at some point, didn’t you? That’s fine. Two can play this game. Jeremiah Wright, anyone?

Corporal Tunnel on June 13, 2012 at 9:10 PM

OBAMA 2012- No Magic Underwear!

profitsbeard on June 13, 2012 at 9:11 PM

That is an absolutely disgusting piece by Time Magazine. Justin Frank is a lowlife.

Corporal Tunnel on June 13, 2012 at 9:11 PM

UES? Bigot? Or just a bigot baiter?

Bmore on June 13, 2012 at 9:12 PM

How do they feel about voting for a psychopathic narcissist who hates their guts?

tom daschle concerned on June 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

+100

petefrt on June 13, 2012 at 9:13 PM

he’s out to score a point for The One and so he lets his anti-Romney posture lead him to an inane anti-Mormon generalization.

He’s not the only one. A few weeks ago, I overheard someone discussing how “Mormons only help other Mormons,” which I guess is the version of the Buffet Rule for bigots. (Romney actually gave a whopping $3 million to charity on his Buffet-relevant tax return, only half of which went towards his tithe.) “Mormons only help their own” is the type of slur that has been directed at Jews, Catholics, and other religious minorities, so it’s particularly disheartening that it continues to get traction today, but it’s getting enough traction that mormon.org has a page discussing it.

calbear on June 13, 2012 at 9:14 PM

How do they feel about voting for a psychopathic narcissist who hates their guts?

tom daschle concerned on June 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

They can’t wait to tell all of their fellow bigots that they voted for him and can’t understand why he didn’t win.

Rio Linda Refugee on June 13, 2012 at 9:16 PM

One of the exceptions to feel-good civics that makes bigotry a virtue.

obladioblada on June 13, 2012 at 9:17 PM

The Left is everything they accuse everyone else of being.

SouthernGent on June 13, 2012 at 9:17 PM

God Damn America is perfectly acceptable yet God Bless America is completely unacceptable to the liberal mind

Grunt on June 13, 2012 at 9:18 PM

So,AP, you won’t ever be POTUS. There’s always the Nobel Prize of Literature. They’re all atheists, no?

Curtiss on June 13, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Romney’s faith isn’t even an issue this time around for two reasons.

This is an economic election not one dealing with social issues. And unlike some of his candidates in the primaries, Romney has never invoked his faith as part of his political record.

Secondly, you can’t get into Romney’s faith without exploring the two decades that Obama spent worshiping at the religious equivilent of the KKK. Obama was married in this white-hating “church.” His brats were baptized in this “church.” Obama has already attacked religious freedom in the name of giving free contraception to sluts like Sandra Fluke. The last thing he and his people want to do is escalate Obama’s war on faith by attacking Romney’s beliefs.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 9:20 PM

O/T

Allah, I hope you were watching Hannity. Juan Williams just pizzed Michelle Malkin off big time. Referred to himself as a “real reporter” and MM as a “lowly blogger.”

I have a feeling the turnaround on the video for that exchange will be quick!

Flora Duh on June 13, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Ahh, tolerance.

MikeknaJ on June 13, 2012 at 9:21 PM

I’m trusting BuzzFeed’s summary

All Hail the Messiah!

dmann on June 13, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Because liberals are open minded and accepting of other views

Grunt on June 13, 2012 at 9:22 PM

So, an atheist has the least chance to become a POTUS. There is a God.

Rovin on June 13, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Flora Duh on June 13, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Cannot wait for the clip. So glad I am registered at michellemalkin.com…

OmahaConservative on June 13, 2012 at 9:24 PM

So, an atheist has the least chance to become a POTUS. There is a God.

I’d much rather have an atheist as POTUS than someone like Santorum who believes that it is the duty of the federal government to force everyone to follow Christian morals and values and let the Bible circumvent the Constitution.

theoddmanout on June 13, 2012 at 9:25 PM

I’m sure this has nothing to do with the viscious anti-
Mormon bigotry on the pro-Obama channels./
There have been some really nasty commentators on-all pro-Obama. They don’t have anything positive to say about Obama so they resort to smearing Romney’r religion.

talkingpoints on June 13, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Lots of hatred among the left and the atheists.

RoadRunner on June 13, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Is this QOTD?

Losing a whole Year – 3rd Eye Blind

the new aesthetic on June 13, 2012 at 9:31 PM

That column in Time is just…wow.

changer1701 on June 13, 2012 at 9:31 PM

Mormons only help their own” is the type of slur that has been directed at Jews, Catholics, and other religious minorities, so it’s particularly disheartening that it continues to get traction today, but it’s getting enough traction that mormon.org has a page discussing it.

calbear on June 13, 2012 at 9:14 PM

I’m not so sure it is a slur as much as the way these organizations are set up. When I (a Presbyterian) was living amongst the Catholics of Southern Louisiana I was a board member on the local Habitat for Humanity affiliate. Whenever we tried to do community outreach, Catholic organizations and congregations made it clear that Habitat for Humanity isn’t under the umbrella of Catholic Charities so it isn’t where these groups choose to spend their time and resources. I never took it as “only helping their own” as much as a different set of priorities.

Happy Nomad on June 13, 2012 at 9:32 PM

People have some really shallow standards for voting.

MadisonConservative on June 13, 2012 at 9:32 PM

My church body doesn’t recognize Mormonism as a Christian denomination, but then again I’m not looking for a Theologian-in-Chief…

OmahaConservative on June 13, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Liberal tolerance = liberal fascism

Philly on June 13, 2012 at 9:34 PM

It may have more to do with the fact that Romney is LDS than whether they would vote for any generic Mormon, I think.

Tennman on June 13, 2012 at 9:35 PM

So, an atheist has the least chance to become a POTUS. There is a God.
 
Rovin on June 13, 2012 at 9:22 PM

 
Re-election still to be determined.

rogerb on June 13, 2012 at 9:38 PM

…that’s really a meaningless question in that gallup poll at the end there. I vote for candidates based on their positions and what they’ll do. How on earth is a person to say they’d consider a person for president based on some superficial characteristic like that (ok, religion isn’t a superficial characteristic, but it doesn’t really guarantee political views, either). As for a gay/lesbian or an atheist with the same political views I do, it’s extremely unlikely, but if they were nominated, I’d vote for them. Based on their politics, not their identity. I guess it’s kinda off-topic, but I just cannot comprehend the idea of basing your decision for POTUS on something besides what a candidate would, y’know, do as POTUS. The rest of it is window dressing.

AndStatistics on June 13, 2012 at 9:39 PM

This will also backfire on them…

Right Rev. Wright?

Seven Percent Solution on June 13, 2012 at 9:39 PM

Allah, I hope you were watching Hannity. Juan Williams just pizzed Michelle Malkin off big time. Referred to himself as a “real reporter” and MM as a “lowly blogger.”

I have a feeling the turnaround on the video for that exchange will be quick!

Flora Duh on June 13, 2012 at 9:20 PM

This I want to see! I would pay money to watch her shred that little ferret.

4Grace on June 13, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Anyone watching the racist bigot Juan on Hannity’s show just say that he is a reporter and Michelle Malkin is not because she is a blogger?

burrata on June 13, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Yeah, a real reporter that interviews people!
MM tore strips off of poor Juan, but then it wasn’t a fair fight.

We occasionally like Juan because now and then there’s a flash of intellectual honesty, but when that can happen seems to be entirely random. It’s like he rolls the dice every morning and only if it comes up cat’s eyes, he decides he will tell the truth that day. Bizarre.

slickwillie2001 on June 13, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Harry Reid ,Mormon… Okay… Mitt Romney ,Mormon… not okay…?

sandee on June 13, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Forget Big Love And Get Ready For Big Hate

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2012/04/forget-love-shack-and-get-ready-for-big.html

M2RB: The B-52s

Resist We Much on June 13, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Don’t forget that when Prop 8 passed in California, liberals needed someone to demonize and so they turned all their venom towards Mormons (even though it was blacks turning out to vote for Obama that really put it over the top). That would explain part of the shift.

HidetheDecline on June 13, 2012 at 9:43 PM

sandee on June 13, 2012 at 9:42 PM

dingy Harrah doesn’t like how you smell…

OmahaConservative on June 13, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Douchebaggery. headline should read ‘ANTI-religious.’ That’s the truth of it.

rayra on June 13, 2012 at 9:46 PM

ABO.

BuckeyeSam on June 13, 2012 at 9:47 PM

There is, however, a notable exception to these patterns. The state of Utah has one of the lowest abortion rates in the country and one of the lowest rates of out-of-wedlock births. It has a high marriage rate, a relatively low divorce rate, and the highest birth rate (despite a low teen pregnancy rate) of any state. An America that looked more like Utah would have more intact families, less child poverty, fewer abortions — and, for that matter, a better fiscal outlook as the Baby Boomers retire.

Did not know this about Utah. Interesting. What are Mormons doing right family wise that is working, I wonder?

terryannonline on June 13, 2012 at 9:48 PM

It may have more to do with the fact that Romney is LDS than whether they would vote for any generic Mormon, I think.

Tennman on June 13, 2012 at 9:35 PM

THIS! Do they have a problem with Sen. Reid’s Mormonism? N-O.
This is solely directed at Romney.

So, Rev. Wright is the topic that shall not be raised.
Mormonism must be questioned and ridiculed.
Got it.

4Grace on June 13, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Study: Liberals, nonreligious much more likely to say they won’t vote for a Mormon than in 2007

Hmmmm….in the OLD DAYS we’d have called them religious BIGOTS.

GarandFan on June 13, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Isn’t it astonishing that the “TOLERANT” liberals and the non-religious types are the ones who object to Mormonism? I’m becoming inured to the wrangling of the left. I’m worn out with trying to understand how they pick and choose those whom they deem worthy of their tolerance, no matter how fleeting that tolerance is these days, or how very limited that tolerance turns out to be when they choose a new focus for their particular brand of empathy.

thatsafactjack on June 13, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Harry Reid ,Mormon… Okay… Mitt Romney ,Mormon… not okay…?

sandee on June 13, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Man I need new reading glasses. All this time I thought Harry was a Moron.

antipc on June 13, 2012 at 9:51 PM

OT: comment on entertainment industry.

I couldn’t resist watching the original episode of the new Dallas on TNT. Turns out there’s a boatload of oil on Southfork. But Miss Ellie’s will forbade drilling. JR and son want to drill, baby, drill, while Bobby and his son want to sell Southfork to a conservancy because they don’t want fracking on the ranch.

I’m already turned off by Bobby’s environmental leanings. I hope JR and son buries Bobby. But Miss Ellie’s will will be a big hurdle.

BuckeyeSam on June 13, 2012 at 9:53 PM

The big question: Is anti-Mormon bias coloring voters’ impressions of Romney or is anti-Romney bias coloring voters’ impressions of Mormonism?

Take ypiu rpick. These are Democrats we’re talking about here. Any excuse will do.

Cleombrotus on June 13, 2012 at 10:00 PM

MM could really tweak Juan by asking him how incompetent does one have to be to get fired by NPR? and he should thank sugar-daddy Ailes for keeping him out of the flop houses and soup lines of Obamanomics.

viking01 on June 13, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Liberals are bigots. This isn’t news to anyone around here, is it?

Rational Thought on June 13, 2012 at 10:09 PM

If put to a vote liberals wouldn’t vote for freedom over communism or obamanism (communism * fascism + (liberalism*10+dictatorship)).

Color me so surprised.

Wolfmoon on June 13, 2012 at 10:15 PM

The people we’re talking about won’t vote for “ANY” Republican, so screw em’.

Alabama Infidel on June 13, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Bmore on June 13, 2012 at 9:12 PM

…a bigot b j baiter.

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 10:19 PM

I am Mormon. I would be worried if people like Harry Reid were willing to vote for me. I would be concerned that I was in grate need for repentance.

The Rock on June 13, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Allah

Two Words

Glenn Beck.

budfox on June 13, 2012 at 10:22 PM

People excited with the possibility of voters not voting for a Mormon most likely to say they won’t vote for a Mormon?

Liberals project. Who knew?

HitNRun on June 13, 2012 at 10:29 PM

But if we say we won’t vote for a Muslim, we are the bad ones.

The Notorious G.O.P on June 13, 2012 at 10:35 PM

…John Huntsman referred questions about faith to
Harry Reid.

KOOLAID2 on June 13, 2012 at 10:57 PM

There is a difference between nonreligious and anti-religious. I think most of these liberals are anti-religion, not nonreligious.

crosspatch on June 13, 2012 at 11:32 PM

It’s really weird. I, a Mormon, would be fine voting for a black guy, a hispanic guy, a homosexual, a lesbian, a woman, a Muslim–whatever–for President. And yet every day there’s some liberal turdblower out there telling me what a racist, woman-hating bigot I am because I’m a conservative Republican–*yet they won’t vote for a Mormon.*

I have no idea why this surprises me, they’re just staying true to character, this is the kind of messed up shizz liberals do 24 hrs a day and twice on Sunday. Liberals–biggest hypocrites on the planet.

Polynath on June 13, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Harry Reid could not be reached for Comment…

-Wasteland Man.

WastelandMan on June 13, 2012 at 11:49 PM

A Gallup poll taken last year at this time found Democrats nearly 10 points more likely than Republicans to say they wouldn’t vote for a Mormon for president.

Funny, but they have no problem voting for, or supporting, a democrat Mormon who is the Senate majority leader. Funny that.

You think maybe party affiliation has more to do with this than religion?

AZfederalist on June 14, 2012 at 12:14 AM

When they get desperate the mask slips. This election is about to get very dirty as the Dems search for something anti-Romney with which they can gain traction. The media’s non-coverage of Fast and Furious and the other scandals that would have had them howling for impeachment against any Republican are convincing evidence that the media are all in.

Massive ad campaigns and extended Sarah Palin-like rallies will be the only way to do an end run around the Democrat/Media narrative.

Aardvark on June 14, 2012 at 2:17 AM

Is there a religious affiliated candidate I could never vote for? Yes, Islam the death cult. Probably Scientology as well (just too farking weird).

SKYFOX on June 14, 2012 at 5:46 AM

It’s not anti-Mormon bias.

It’s anti-Republican bias.

They’d vote for Harry Reid in a heart beat over a Republican.

The end.

Good Lt on June 14, 2012 at 7:40 AM

This is mere guess, or assertion based upon my instinct, but, here it is anyway:

reason Obama was so ‘enthusiastically’ supported last election and perhaps what lingers at this bedraggled date of his first and only term is that whatever he claimed he believed in was dismissed in the most sincere recesses of supporters — meaning, they UNDERSTAND he was both exaggerating and outright lying. He “performed” a person of “faith” and his supporters recognized that, so, whatever he professed in those regards, his supporters could carry on with enthusiasm about him because it was understood that Obama was “role playing” (and actually did not believe the theology that he claimed he participated in).

I still believe this functions at present about him and it explains the eagerness to support Obama by, especially, Hollywood and other media: Obama’s “understood” to be an able performer working a role and there’s actually nothing there theologically abuot the guy to ‘threaten’ anyone who is repulsed or merely finds objectionable a person of faith.

Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is a person of faith about whom one can see by his life lived and being lived that he takes seriously. Same applied to Bush in the Presidency. They were recognized (are recognized) as being sincere about, serious in, their religious beliefs. Thus, they threaten those who think someone’s theology is on the hunt of their atheism or other beliefs.

Noting that that list there doesn’t include quuestioning voters whether or not they’d vote for a Muslim. Therein lies the slipknot that Obama used — he simply performed an alternative identity very well and didn’t reveal himself truthfully, just as he continues to do: evading reality about what he believes in order to manipulate votes.

Lourdes on June 14, 2012 at 7:42 AM

Lourdes on June 14, 2012 at 7:42 AM

Footnote: however, as to Islam, I *DO* perceive that Islam *IS* “on the hunt of (others)” which makes it utterly unsupportable to me as a voter as a theology associated with any politician. Islam’s very theology seeks to dominate and put to an end the beliefs of others with particular force applied to Christians and Judaists, to state the obvious.

There’s a supremacy aspect to all religious beliefs — one considers one’s theology believed in as the correct message versus others with faults and liabilities — but with Islam, there’s a distinctive process inherent to the theology that seeks to eradicate others, which sets it apart from the rest.

Mormonism, Judaism, Christianity, Budhism even…no one’s practicing nor pursuing others with the goal of eradicating “them” while Islam by it’s very body of beliefs is. Thus, it’s just entirely not supportable as a belief system associated with any politician, not here in the U.S.

Lourdes on June 14, 2012 at 7:51 AM

There is a difference between nonreligious and anti-religious. I think most of these liberals are anti-religion, not nonreligious.

crosspatch on June 13, 2012 at 11:32 PM

That, too.

But I do notice that the Left has little issues with voting for Muslims…

Lourdes on June 14, 2012 at 7:53 AM

A few weeks ago, I overheard someone discussing how “Mormons only help other Mormons,” which I guess is the version of the Buffet Rule for bigots. (Romney actually gave a whopping $3 million to charity on his Buffet-relevant tax return, only half of which went towards his tithe.) “Mormons only help their own” is the type of slur that has been directed at Jews, Catholics, and other religious minorities, so it’s particularly disheartening that it continues to get traction today, but it’s getting enough traction that mormon.org has a page discussing it.

calbear on June 13, 2012 at 9:14 PM

The Left ALSO makes that claim against:

– Males;
– White Males;
– White Heterosexuals, especially when they’re males; and,
– Republicans.

What the Left does is it recycles it’s “complaint mantras” against opponents with customizations to fit personalizations as to their current opponents. But the “white, male, heterosexual” mode seems to be their consistent fall-back attack line.

Lourdes on June 14, 2012 at 7:57 AM

When liberals talk about that important magic underwear issue, I point out that in Hinduism that the monkey god, Hanuman, mistakenly swallowed the Sun thinking it was a mango.

thuja on June 14, 2012 at 8:53 AM

Bigots…

OmahaConservative on June 13, 2012 at 9:05 PM

The one quote that nails it. Thanks Omaha.

itsspideyman on June 14, 2012 at 8:58 AM

Hmmm yes, intolerance, yes. To counter that maybe we should pass a federal law granting special rights because of this intolerance towards people of faith.

jake49 on June 14, 2012 at 9:20 AM

The Left is everything they accuse everyone else of being.

SouthernGent on June 13, 2012 at 9:17 PM

Totally true. Leftists denounce everyone else for various and sundry prejudices (which frequently exist only in the mind of the leftist), but believe in the righteousness of their own prejudices.

SubmarineDoc on June 14, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Don’t forget either that Mormons took a lot of heat from the left for their role in funding the Prop 8 effort in California in 2008 and hard feelings about that endure. (Ross Douthat notes the irony of a group that was despised in its infancy for practicing a very untraditional form of marriage now being despised by some lefties for being too traditional.)

Allah, Pretty simple really – Axe meets Grinder. Too bad the Left doesn’t understand (or admit) the narrative and history behind it which is the LDS Church learned to what lengths a government will go to throw you under-the-bus. I’m not opining specifically on the issue of Polygamy/Bigamy so much as the lesson that was learned – loud and clear. You’d better be willing to stand up to government because Reynolds vs US was an actual price paid (among others) to have the system we have now. There’s no way they’re going to pay twice in it being undermined *again* by Uncle Sam. It’s lost on the libs.

SkinnerVic on June 14, 2012 at 1:14 PM

So, an atheist has the least chance to become a POTUS. There is a God.

I’d much rather have an atheist as POTUS than someone like Santorum who believes that it is the duty of the federal government to force everyone to follow Christian morals and values and let the Bible circumvent the Constitution.

theoddmanout on June 13, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Bigot.

/It seemed appropriate on a Mormon thread

tom on June 14, 2012 at 2:11 PM

So why would anyone think Obumbo’s base would vote for Romney. Did you need a study to tell you the obvious…oh, never mind!

aposematic on June 14, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I’m sick of this “oh, it’s politics coloring their perceptions” excuse. That may be the case, but if so, that’s DAMNING, not something to let them off the hook. Jews are more likely to be Democrats, is that not true? Yet conservatives have NO PROBLEM voting for one.

CanofSand on June 14, 2012 at 5:54 PM

I’d much rather have an atheist as POTUS than someone like Santorum who believes that it is the duty of the federal government to force everyone to follow Christian morals and values and let the Bible circumvent the Constitution.

theoddmanout on June 13, 2012 at 9:25 PM

How many Santorums do you know? You really ought to give us more details to go on so we know who you’re talking about and don’t get him confused with the recent Republican candidate for U.S. President, since you obviously weren’t referring to him since only a complete and total hack – and YES, “tom”, perhaps a bigot – would characterize his position as you did this mysterious other “Santorum”.

CanofSand on June 14, 2012 at 5:59 PM