Why I’m Sitting Out the 2012 Presidential Race

I’m writing this post a little hastily, so forgive the brevity and/or incompleteness of my thoughts. I had thought that I would be writing this a little closer to election time, but someone has already expressed an interest in what I think given Romney’s recent choice of VP candidate. So perhaps now is a good time to just get it out of the way.

Simply put, I’m not planning to vote for Mitt Romney this year. But not for some of the reasons other people aren’t voting for him. Actually, looking at some other people’s complaints has sometimes almost tempted me to give him my vote. Apparently he’s “too white,” “too nice,” “too rich,” too other stuff that shouldn’t make an iota of difference. Oh, and he’s Mormon. Now there are actually some Christians who seriously have chosen to withhold their vote based on that fact alone. I’m not one of those Christians.

So just why am I not voting for the guy? Well first, let me quote myself from a few months ago, explaining why I wasn’t voting for him in the primary:

I don’t think he’s deeply committed to the social issues. One clue of this is his outright endorsement of the three exceptions to abortion. There’s an important distinction between voting for an anti-abortion bill which happens to contain the exceptions if that’s the best that can be done at the moment… and refusing to vote for such a bill unless it contains those exceptions. Which Romney has done. Granted, he is following in an unfortunate Republican tradition, but Republicans have been known to change their mind on these issues (Rick Perry being a notable recent case). I suggest we withhold our vote from any Republican who has not yet seen the light on this issue until they get the memo that we care about it. And honestly, Romney isn’t in this game as a culture warrior.

So there’s one important issue. But actually, I dislike Romney even more now than I did then. I discovered that he’s really not too solid on the gay rights issue either. In particular, if you look at the statements he’s made about adoption, on the one hand he’s said that “every child in America deserves a mom and a dad,” but on the other he’s said that gays do have a right do adopt, and he wouldn’t push to change it in his state. He’s also said that he “hope[s] to represent every race, creed, and sexual orientation.” And in particular, he just recently joined Obama in saying that he thinks Boy Scouts should allow gay leaders.

All of this leads me to conclude that he doesn’t consider it a priority to appeal to the conservatives where social issues are concerned, despite the fact that he’s sometimes been known to make conservative noises.  He’s willing to adjust what he says to match the occasion and context. In other words, he’s a politician’s politician.That’s not a candidate I can get behind.

As for the economic issues, Romney doesn’t really do his own economic thinking. He’s a businessman. He calls in the guys who are supposed to know what they’re doing and consults them. And invariably, they give him bad advice. That’s why his Massachusetts health care plan ended up looking suspiciously like Obamacare.

But what about Paul Ryan for VP? He’s a strong social conservative with good economic sense. Oh yeah, and he’s photogenic. Doesn’t that change anything? Only if they decided to reverse the ticket.

Look, we’ve seen this before: Sub-par, uninspiring Republican presidential candidate picks much more conservative and charismatic running mate in an effort to rope in “the base.” Granted, McCain was much more repulsive, creepy, and generally lacking in good qualities than Romney (one wonders if the people flocking to vote for him in ’08 forgot that he was the bugbear the Republicans used to scare us into voting for Bush eight years before). But still, it’s the same pattern. Make no mistake, Paul Ryan is being used, just like McCain used Palin. If I had been Ryan, I would have politely said “Thanks, but no thanks. My values are firm, and I’m not even sure what you believe.”

And I do think that Palin was somewhat corrupted by her run, even to the point of assuring James Dobson that McCain was “solid” on all key social issues even though he had consistently advocated embryonic stem cell research. She would have been better off continuing to hunt moose and govern Alaska. As it was, she got roped into a nightmare and was never really allowed to be herself. She just became another pawn in the campaign. I fear that something similar may happen to Ryan. [Update: It’s happening already. I told you so.]

In the meantime, I don’t believe in settling for less when it comes to what the Republicans have to offer us. The party has let us down repeatedly, and we need to stop confirming their belief that they can always count on the conservative vote because the Democrats will always be worse. How far is the conservative base going to walk down that road before finally saying “Enough?” We’ve already seen them dancing in the streets over the election of an openly pro-choice Republican congressman (Scott Brown). And they seemed quite prepared to vote for a pro-choice presidential candidate in 2000 (Rudy Giuliani). Where will it end?

So there you have, in a nutshell, why I’m not voting for Mitt Romney this year. And despite the fact that I fully expect many conservatives to turn out in force for him, spurred on by the horrific specter of yet another four years of Obama, I have a feeling I may not be alone.

Advertisements

65 thoughts on “Why I’m Sitting Out the 2012 Presidential Race

  1. JSR

    I guess I’m just comparing options. Obama, who is against everything I believe socially or Romney who at least pays lip service to conservatism? The bottom line is we’re barreling down a path which will lead to it being illegal for me and you to speak out against homosexuality. I would like to at least slow that down, if not change direction. Making it easier for Obama to win by staying home is a shame. Especially when you’ll go to a church that doesn’t believe exactly like you to hear a concert, but require a politician to believe as strongly as you do in order to get your vote. Would we all rather Daniel Mount to be the nominee, sure. He’s not, so if we can’t decide to vote for Romney surely we can decide to vote against Obama. If you live in Alabama, staying home probably won’t matter. If you live in Ohio, Florida, or another swing state, do us all a favor and cast a vote for slowing down the advance of evil in our nation!

    (Please take the above as a passionate belief, not an angry attack.)

    1. Well, maybe I’ll vote for a third-party candidate I like better. 😀

      Seriously, answer this question: What if the Republican candidate was even worse than Romney, but still not as bad as Obama? Where do you think you would draw the line? Would you always vote against the worse candidate even if your choice REALLY stank?

      1. Also, your analogy is very poor. When I cast a vote, I’m making an endorsement of a person. I’m saying “Yes, this is who I want to represent me.” When I see a concert in a church, I’m endorsing the group I’m going to see. Maybe the church has some article in their statement of faith that I would disagree with, but that’s not really relevant. So I don’t really get the analogy.

      2. JSR

        It would totally depend upon the specifics. I’m sure you could create a fictional candidate that I wouldn’t vote for. However, Romney isn’t that candidate. Obama is blatently evolving to a more liberal position. Romney claims to have become more conservative. Romney or Obama will be president, there is no doubt about that. I happen to prefer Romney.

        Be warned, many of the third party candidates are anything but socially conservative.

      3. Don’t worry. I would research any candidate I wanted to vote for very thoroughly.

        I think the key word is “claims to have become.” Do you really want to vote for someone who you’re still not sure shares your core values just because you suspect the other guy is worse?

      4. JSR

        I’m 100% sure there has probably never been anyone running for office who hold 100% of my views. I’m conservative to extremes on social issues. But, at this point I’m not deciding who perfectly represents me. I’m giving my input on whether I want Mitt Romney or Barack Obama to be my president. The time for choosing the person who most closely represented me.was in the primary. Now, I’m giving my input on the two choices being presented to me.

        We make imperfect decisions all the time…pay $3.29 for gas or $3.35. Can I choose neither. Not practically. A shot in the right arm or left arm. Can I choose just not getting the shot? No, not really. Going to work and provide a living for my family or stay home and enjoy my family and we starve to death? Can I pick a happy medium? Nope. Barack Obama or Mitt Romney? Ummm can I choose my Pastor? I don’t really love either one. So I will choose the one who has the best chance slowing down the morral errosion of our country.

      5. JSR

        To the best of my knowledge he hasn’t forced anyone to do anything. Can you really say you prefer Obama over Romney.

      6. What I meant was that he’s identical to Obama in that they would like to do all they could to make it impossible for the Boy Scouts to bar homosexual leaders. Of course right at this moment nobody has yet forced them to do this.

      7. darrel

        How anybody that is a chritstian can vote for Obama is beyond my understanding.He dosen’t stand up for any of the principles that christians stand for. He says there is many paths to heaven .He is badly wrong. There is only one way. Jesus Christ.

      8. Well, I definitely agree that you would have to be a very confused Christian to vote for Obama. And the fact that he has claimed to be a Christian while simultaneously taking away Christian liberties and making un-Christian statements is obviously despicable. (At the same time, George W. Bush said he believes that Christians and Moslems worship the same God, so that’s also a problem.) However, I would consider voting for a non-Christian candidate if he cared about conservative values.

  2. Nathan

    I say this all in love! I’m not trying to come across rude or disrespectful.

    I personally consider voting to be a blessing and a demonstration of the freedom we have to voice our opinions. Because of that, if one chooses not to vote at all, they basically lose their right to complain about whoever wins the presidency. One or the other will win. I don’t care for Romney at all. (I do like Ryan!) Even worse, way worse, is Obama.

    I guess I don’t understand why you feel like boycotting voting is going to help the conservatives get Obama out and a new guy in (Romney is more acceptable than Obama). You either do absolutely nothing about Obama’s stay in the office, or you try and help get him out. Doing absolutely nothing but complaining about both candidates (one of whom will win the presidency) does nothing but, well, make noise.

    It comes down to how much you want Obama gone. Is Romney the better of two evils? Definitely. I’ll take him any day. I’d even rather have Hillary in office over Obama. So, if you really don’t like Obama or the liberal ideologies he represents, do something about it and stand up with the rest of us conservatives to get rid of him. Every vote does matter. If every conservative felt the way you did, Obama would have absolutely nothing to worry about.

    In the end, even if you don’t like Romney, vote just to get Obama out and stand up for what you believe in.

    1. So, would you actually vote for Hillary if it was a choice between her and Obama?

      What if standing up for what I believe in meant voting for a third-party candidate who actually did represent what I believe but had no chance of winning? Would you still tell me I wasn’t doing the right thing?

      1. Let me just ask, since these are real people and not made-up candidates, what about Brown or Giuliani? They’re openly pro-choice, both of them, but perhaps in some areas better than a Democratic candidate. Would you feel obligated to vote for one of them if you were faced with the choice? If so, could that really be argued as standing up for what you believe in?

    2. JSR

      I would have to compare their pros and cons and then make a decision. But, in a general election, I would put my support on one of the two who will eventually be president. Like it or not, as a conservative, if you don’t vote for Romney it makes it easier for Obama to get elected.

      1. Okay, so if I have this right, I shouldn’t vote for a third-party candidate, because I would be taking more of a stand for my beliefs by voting for someone who’s more likely to win, even though he doesn’t really believe what I believe and the third-party candidate does.

        That doesn’t make sense to me.

      2. JSR

        To be clear, assuming there was a discernable difference between the two options…if it was Obama and Barney Frank I would support a 3rd party, which would probably stand a good chance of success.

  3. Nathan

    (First, I’ll just say that Hillary comment was in jest. I would never vote for her unless it came down to only her and Obama, at which point she is the better of two evils.)

    Standing up for what you believe, in this context, means this: voting for the purpose of getting Obama out and a person in who, though they don’t line up with everything you believe in, is much more morally sound than Barack Obama. Plus, we at least know our Vice President would be competent.

    Voting for a third party candidate is much better than doing nothing at all. There’s little chance they get in, but you’re still throwing your support somewhere and voicing your opinion.

    I would have to give you an “I don’t know” about those other candidates. I would probably think twice about it and try to find out what other third-party candidates were present in the race. Either way, that’s not what we’re faced with, since Romney generally holds to certain conservative ideologies I agree with. And he’s got a great running mate (I do wish the roles would reverse…)!

    Standing up for what you believe in means standing up against Obama. Even if you vote for a third-party candidate, you’re still voicing your opinion. It comes down to how much you want him gone and whether you’re going to try and do something about it.

    1. I’m glad to hear you say that. In that case I think we’re more or less on the same page. Unfortunately I have encountered some people who would say that I have a moral obligation to vote for the candidate running against Obama with the best chance of being elected. That I completely disagree with.

      1. I can’t resist pushing just a little on the Hilary thing though. Surely you’re not seriously saying that if they were the only two options (no third-party we’re imagining), you would feel compelled to vote for Hilary simply because you must vote for SOMEONE and Obama is marginally worse?

  4. Phil on Southern Gospel

    If I could vote in the USA, I would have loved to have been voting for Ron Paul. He’s the most consistent candidate out there. His voting record is the most constitutional.

    1. Hmmmmm, actually I’m not so keen on Paul. He revealed himself to be rather unprincipled in the last year or so. He started flirting with some truly crazy fringe groups while at the same time bashing candidates who were more socially conservative than himself. So unfortunately he’s not my ideal candidate anymore, although at one point he seemed quite strong.

  5. So, you’re just not going to vote? I’m afraid I have to disagree with you there. I don’t like Mitt Romney, I much rather would have seen Santorum get in. But when it comes to Obama or Romney, I’d say that Romney is the lesser of the two evil’s, so to speak. 🙂

  6. Lydia

    There’s always a huge difference in these discussions between those who see voting as having a _meaning_ and those who see it is a pure act without a meaning, more like pulling a lever in a machine. Those who see voting as in some sense a speech act having some sort of semantic meaning are less likely to say that you _have_ to vote for some candidate, while those who see it as just pulling a lever in the political machine are going to get all strategic and try to think what they might _accomplish_ with their vote.

    I believe voting has a meaning. In fact, I don’t see how it could _not_ have a meaning. For this reason I’m highly inclined to make the following rule of thumb for myself and recommend it to others: Never vote for any candidate whom you wouldn’t want to put up a yard sign for. Since I can’t endorse Romney enough to put up a yard sign for him, I won’t vote for him.

    That, of course, also takes care of more extreme scenarios ranging from Scott Brown to Hillary Clinton to, I dunno, Hitler over Stalin (or vice versa).

    1. pleusink

      During my 52 voting years I can recall only voting 3 times thinking this man represents my conservative beliefs quite well, Goldwater & Reagan (x2). The other times I made more difficult choices.

      But for an educated person to not vote when when this country has such a glaring choice is appalling to me. Do you really want Socialism? Does this mean you will not vote your entire lifetime – since you may wait that long for the candidate whose views match yours closely enough? Perhaps ………you don’t have your entire retirement savings in jeopardy and diminshing by day? …… or you’re not concerned you that this President has mortgaged our grandchildren’s futures? ……. or perhaps you think it is fine to co-opt 75% of the income of the wealthy (job creators) to redistribute as France is about to do and this President undoubtedly would if he could?…….or do you not care that the U.S. is losing (has lost?) the respect of the world? You could be in a country where the populace has no vote or only males vote. I believe voting is a privilege and a responsibility.

      I am extremely saddened by this slippery slope of immorality the U.S is on……..but to NOT vote……..pitiful and in 2012 could very well be disastrous.

      1. I voted for Santorum in the primaries, and I wouldn’t have said he was perfect, but he had it where it counted. And I would gladly have voted for Ryan if he were running for President and not VP. So believe it or not, I do vote sometimes. 🙂

  7. I guarantee I’m gonna get some major backlash for posting this, but honestly, I don’t care.

    I am a Libertarian. There are many things about the Libertarian Party that I agree with. I don’t agree with all of them, but I agree with more of them than I do with the Republicans and the Democrats. I am very much in favor of smaller government (which both the elephants and the donkeys hate). I believe that government should be able to protect individuals from other individuals, but government has no right to protect individuals from themselves. If you are not infringing upon my rights and not hurting anyone, what you do to yourself is your business (no matter how stupid….that’s your choice).

    What exactly does that mean? Well, if you wanna go get drunk and stoned off your tail (and potentially do all kinds of damage to your body and/or brain), then do it on your own time in your own home and leave me alone. As long as you’re not going out and hurting someone (i.e. driving a car), then your own stupidity pays for itself.

    Now, there are times where that “your business” line is blurred, especially as a Christian. I do not get drunk and stoned off my tail, and I believe that the damage done to one’s self is simply not worth it. That’s my personal choice, both as an individual and as a Christian. I also believe that, as a Christian, I should do my best to reach those who are doing said stupid activity with the love of Christ. I am well within my rights to tell someone about Jesus. And the government has no right to stop me unless I am causing harm to someone in the process (which I am not).

    Also, I do not believe in abortion, but many people consider an unborn child (notice I didn’t say “fetus”) to be part of the mother’s body, and therefore allows her to make her own choice. I believe that an unborn child is already a human being who simply has not grown to the point of being able to survive independent of its mother (how is it any different than a person on a ventilator??). Issues like this (and any other issues that may conflict with my beliefs) are deferred to my faith, not my political leanings.

    Having said all that, I know that the odds of Gary Johnson winning the presidential nod are slim (I know, you’re probably saying…”Who?!”). However, I will not cast my vote for Romney or Obama. In that aspect, I am doing the same thing you are doing, YGG, in that I am voting based on principle, not odds.

    On a side note, Ron Paul, who holds many Libertarian views and who was actually a Libertarian candidate in the 80’s, was smart enough to shoot for the Republican ticket this time simply because it gives him more leverage, but in the end, he didn’t make the cut.

    1. Well as far as drinking is concerned, Prohibition didn’t exactly help did it? 😉 In fact, I heard once of a dry county where the bootleggers were happy for it to be dry because otherwise they’d stop making a profit!

      Regarding abortion, you said, “Issues like this (and any other issues that may conflict with my beliefs) are deferred to my faith, not my political leanings.” I wondered if you could clarify this a little bit. I’m not exactly sure what it would even mean for a belief to be “deferred to my political leanings.” Generally, people’s political leanings are a result of their beliefs and not vice versa. Incidentally, I think it’s possible to be a non-Christian pro-lifer, but that’s another debate.

      1. My being a Christian determines my beliefs, not my being a Libertarian. Many people identify themselves by their political beliefs. I am a Christian who happens to be a Libertarian, not a Libertarian who happens to be a Christian.

      2. Right, but what I mean is, you don’t become a Libertarian and then decide what you believe. You have your beliefs, and then you use those to figure out what party you’re most aligned with. But I think I get your general meaning.

      3. You are correct, but I know many people who adapt their beliefs based on their political leanings, which I will not do. Mitt Romney would be a perfect example of adapting his “beliefs” (or at least his public proclamation) to fit a political agenda.

  8. Lydia

    By the way, people sometimes so over-emphasize the presidential election that they forget that there are all kinds of other opportunities to vote. Our state has a referendum system in place, and in my time here there have been several important referendum votes that have come up–sometimes pro, sometimes con. There are state representatives and federal congressmen. There is one’s state governor race. My local community had a “gay rights” ordinance that I worked tirelessly to defeat two years ago (alas, it passed). So there is all kinds of voting that goes on besides the presidential election. I’m not saying the presidency is unimportant, by any means. But sometimes in America I think we do get over-focused on it, as if it is *the* one place to act as an engaged citizen and do one’s civic duty, but that’s just not the case.

    1. This is true. From pleusink’s reaction, you’d think I was advocating universal quietism. That’s not my position at all. I just don’t feel duty-bound to vote in every race, even a presidential race.

      1. You can make anyone look unattractive if you’re really motivated, and you look hard enough for the right photo. With Ryan, his Achilles’ heel is his 5 o’clock shadow. I’ve seen a lot of appearances where he had gotten on the ball and shaved it, but I gather it grows back uber-fast. So I bet they just found one where he hadn’t shaved it and looked sort of grungy.

      2. AmyH

        No, they picked one where he was talking and had his mouth way open, eyes big and round, and just looked generally crazy or mad or both. In all fairness I saw Fox News do it to Obama in one of their written articles the next day.

  9. John

    Interesting thought in the article and responses. My view (for what it’s worth) is this: One of two men is going to be the president of the United States for the next 4 years. It will be either Obama or Romney. That is a simple, irrufutible fact. There is no third party candidate who has a prayer of a chance of winning the election at this point. So even if a 3rd party candidate came along that was closer to my views that Romney or Obama, a vote for them is nothing more than a statement. It will not affect the outcome (other than the possibility of swinging the vote to the other side if enough people vote for the unelectable 3rd party.)

    Personally, Romney is/was not my first choice, but he is the Republican nominee. Obama ran unopposed, so he is the Democratic nominee. Romney holds to beliefs closer to mine, so he gets my vote. I am absolutely scared to death of what will happen to this country if Obama wins the election.

    I also realize that, as a Christian, I am not voting for a religious leader for our country. I am voting for a political leader. Yes, the religious/moral values of the candidate will affect the way they lead, but again, Romney’s are closer to mine than Obama’s. So he gets my vote.

    Will I like everything he does if elected president? Undoubtedly, no. I didn’t necessarily like everything that G W Bush did either, nor his dad. But they were definitely better than the alternatives at the time.

    When the whole issue of third party candidates comes up, the question one must ask themself is, Do I wish to make a statement? or Do I wish to make a difference? At this point in time, less than 3 months before the election, a vote for any third party candidate — no matter how good they may be — will only make a statement. With the mess our country is in, I don’t think a statemtne will do us much good at this time. We need action. thus my vote for — yes, the lesser of the evils. But someone who has the possibility of being elected, and who will lead this country in a better (albeit not perfect) direction.

    1. Well, clearly you’re speaking for many, many people. And in a sense I understand where you’re coming from. I can see why a reasonable person would follow that logic. Nobody likes to feel helpless. Nobody likes to feel as though there’s nothing to do.

      But I can’t help asking this question: Isn’t there something a little sad and pathetic about the fact that we’re ALL standing around saying “Yeah, Romney kind of stinks,” and yet some of us are still dragging our feet to the polls to vote for him? I think that’s sad. I think it shows that the establishment is arrayed against us. Already they’re making snarky comments about Paul Ryan for VP. And yet he’s the guy the people like. Do you think there might be a connection?

      1. John

        Is it a little sad and pathetic? Yes, I agree. But unfortunately, in the world of politics, that’s the way it often is. Even if all Christians held to the same political views (which they don’t) it would be very difficult to elect someone who truly represents what we believe. Sad to say, but Biblical values are becoming more and more out of the mainstream of American thought and opinion. So it is very possible that we will indeed have to settle for voting the “lesser of the evils” or a more and more frequent basis. Sad, yes. Reality? Yes.

        If we don’t actively vote for the lesser of the evils we are going to find ourselves more and more getting stuck with the worse of the evils. and I’m not just talking about the current presidential campaign. This is the way our country is headed. I honestly don’t see it getting any better. Not only are we on the slippery slope, we are so far down the slippery slope we have probably already passed the point of no return.

      2. AmyH

        I agree about the point of no return and so on. But I think that some of those who are withholding a Republican vote are thinking about 4 years down the road, not just the next term. The Republican party saw us all line up behind McCain. So look what they gave us this time.

      3. Good point, though again, personally I find McCain more repulsive than Romney. But in general I agree that the more we tell the establishment they can get away with, the further they’ll go.

      4. AmyH

        Really? For what he really is or for his fishlike flopping? I thought he was really against gays in the military. And I like his immigration stance. 😛

      5. Well, for one thing he came home from the war and immediately left his wife for some other woman. That puts a bad taste in my mouth. At least Romney is still married to his first wife. Also, McCain never wavered on his support for embryonic stem cell research.

  10. I would vote for Bush if he ran again. As for his saying that Christians and Muslims worship the God, I can see how he got that. Muslims do worship the Christian God, where they fall short is that they think Jesus, was just another prophet. Muslims DO worship the God of the Old Testament so Bush was not technically wrong. Plus, I just liked Bush.

    As for you not voting this round, YGG, I think that is perfectly respectable. BECAUSE you have spent time getting to know where the candidates stand and none of the options fit your stance. If everyone who DID vote would make that kind of an effort to get to know the candidates instead of following the crowd we would likely have a much stronger infrastructure (economically). When you feel that no candidate is a good choice, where is the value in choosing the lesser of the two evils?

    1. No, they definitely do not worship the same God as the Jews. It’s a big mistake to think of the Moslems as being basically on the same page as Israel. Research the Koran a little bit. It’s very clear. “Noone comes to Allah except as a slave” is a direct quote. The Jews have a very different understanding of God as a father, not a slave-master.

      1. That does not surprise, however, they claim that their God is the God of Abraham. They believe Ishmael is the son of Abraham, first son. The God of Abraham is the God of the Jews. They just do not view God as the Jews or us view Him.

      2. Well, under that logic, I could just as well say that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe in Jesus, they just “view him differently” than Christians do. But when your “different viewpoint” is that radically removed from what the Bible teaches, can you truly be said to believe in God, or Jesus?

  11. I understand your point but…If they believed in Him as we do, then they would be Christians. They are as lost as Moses in the desert. I sure would like to find a way to help them with that. Afterall, no one comes to the Father except through the Son. Maybe someday they will join us in the Truth.

  12. John Situmbeko

    Allah is not just the Muslim name for Jehovah. Muslims say Allah is the father of Abraham, that is not true. They also say Abraham’s son Ishmael was taken to be sacrificed by his father, and not Isaac, that too is not true. Allah takes pleasure in the death of unbelievers, Jehovah does not. No Trinity is recognised in Islam. To say we serve the same God is a mistake, for Allah’s way is contrary to Jehovah’s way.

    Who wrote the Quran? Were it holy men of God inspired by the Holy Spirit? The men were inspired by another spirit, the spirit of their god.

      1. This also is not a surprise. Maybe I should clarify; Im not a muslim; Im a Christian. I was simply trying to point out how someone like Bush could have said we both have the same God. it goes without saying in my mind, well, our minds, that muslims are dead wrong, across the board.

  13. John Situmbeko

    Here’s a video I just could not resist to share. I saw it on TV and I just had to search for it on youtube.

    Romney girl even has a facebook page.

  14. PreacherMike

    All Im going to say is that people died for us to have the right to vote. And not voting is ignoring that right, you just leave that responsibility to everyone else. Romney may not be what we as Christians would like, but at least Mormons are morally in agreement with most Christians. Whether he will hold up those standards after being elected we never know for sure. We know that Obama has not and he does not uphold those Christian values. As close as this election appears to be not casting your vote or casting it for some unknown candidate is just giving Obama another vote.

    1. And here I thought when I saw a new comment somebody was posting on one of the new, contentful posts that I actually feel like talking about (sigh).

      For what it’s worth, I’m planning to vote. Just for a third-party candidate. That’s not mathematically equivalent to giving Obama my vote.

      1. PreacherMike

        As Thomas Jefferson once said, “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

        I dont know of a third party candidate that is any closer to Christian values than Romney, the only one that claims to be is Goode and if you have lived in Virginia then you would know not to vote for him. If mathematics is what drives you then you know that it is virtually impossible for a third party candidate to when. I will agree that I wish it were possible but its not. So be realistic……

      2. I know a third-party candidate has no chance of winning, but I also know that it’s incorrect to say I’m doing something mathematically equivalent to voting FOR Obama. I’m voting against Obama, just not for the main candidate running against him.

        I’m not from Virginia, but Goode seems solid where it counts, more so than Romney. What in particular would you say are his drawbacks?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s