That would make sense to me. People with strong religious beliefs often believe they are chosen or doing god's work and that drives them to be successful. It would be hard to belief that god wanted you to be president and then lose the election.

Maybe we were all supposed to pray to find out if Mitt was "the one"

To me, a politician who thinks he has a mandate from God is frightening.

I don't mind the ones who pray for help, or to be watched over though.

If some religious people can believe that pregnancies as a result of rape were meant to happen then it's not a stretch they could believe losing the election serves some purpose.

I have a hard time believing a guy his age really believes that stuff.  Why?  Because by the time you are his age, you've had your share of failures--failures when you thought you were right (in the way it is described in the passage you copied).  Do people really not put 2 and 2 together?  SKPpy aside, does someone as successful as Romney (and to be that successful, you typically have a lot of false starts) really not see through it?

Yeah, but he seemed pretty relieved in his concession speech.  Maybe his "folksiness" was a total cover for wanting to knock Obama's block off, but it sure looked like Romney was glad he didn't win!

That's because someone introduced him to Karl Rove as "god," and GW thought they were being serious...

They do, at all ages.

Take a look at this webpage:
http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi … 9&start=90

You can see some seriously paranoid delusional writing from Mormons horrified at the prospect of Obama being reelected, supported by writings of their prophets.

It's unbelievable.

truth be told, i have voted for repub presidents when they were the more pragmatic choice (think '84, '88), but i could NEVER vote for a mormon as president. not that romneybot would have had my vote anyway, but just saying.

and i could give a rat's ass if someone considers that religious bigotry. sorry, i don't consider that a religion to begin with. i'd no more vote for a mormon than i would an adherent to scientology.

what was really sickening this election cycle was how the religious right in this country (don't kid yourself, white protestants) suddenly allied themselves with a guy who they considered a cultist. it was the most blatant example of mass hypocrisy i have seen in years. 

i am really curious to hear how some of mm's more ardent christian voices justified voting for someone they truly believe is a cult follower.

remember john 1:1?

yeah, well; you're off the public's dime. take the t, for all i care.

"this dude's a loser, I'm so out of here"

"Oh yeah!? I like to fire people who don't give me good secret service!!!!!"

Can you return a boatload of firecrackers if you have your receipt?

no, you can sell them to the red sox. they may need them in forty years or so.

I'm not sure i hold religion against people, and Romney publicly seemed somewhat rational, but i don't think very many of the people who voted for him know how paranoid and irrational prominent Mormons have been (and still are) towards secular governments.

It's like the Tea Party getting hitched with the Branch Davidians, and then becoming passive/aggressive.

actually, being anti-semitic is more of a slant on heritage. i would never bash someone's written account of their lineage (unless it were all lies). i can sleep peacefully every night questioning an irrational belief in goofy angels and sacred tablets that need special glasses to interpret.

i applaud the guy for being so optimistic, but reality was that this race was extremely close. obama's people said--early in the day--that he had prepared remarks in case of defeat.

going out ex tem in the worst moment of your life would have to suck. i will say this: romneybot did a decent job of conceding. he was always wooden anyway, so expecting more from him was ludicrous. he was conciliatory and very thankful to his staff and volunteers.

one thing that always bugged me (and no one i know ever picked up on it) was his incessant lip smacking. i finally got the gf to notice it a couple days before the election, and then she--like me--could never get past it.

any of these guys (if they are human) have to be in awe of the work that gets done on their behalf, by people who do the work for free, and expect nothing in return.

uh, that's on rove, not romney. not only did romney not deliver, but they lost other key elections they thought they had. not many, but enough to effectively ruin rove's myth; and run.

his days of being "the architect" are long over. he's back to being the gofer.

what??? kerry was completely shocked. at 5:00 pm est on election day, he was ready to start planning an inauguration. by 11:00 pm, he was devastated and dumbfounded.

and mccain knew for days he was going to lose. it was only by how much that mattered.

Being that the results of both campaigns were so close, I call bullshit on your assessment.  Also, his funding didn't only come from corporate America, but millions of individuals with conservative values.  The same can be said about Obama, "using other peoples money to fuck them over," that is.  The fact that he was shocked, just means that he was committed to winning his campaign. I would expect nothing less for my money.

I'd suggest excusing himself from Ann, putting a pillow over his face, and screaming

"Frickity frickin frick frack,  sugar....  ahhh fuck it.... BALLS VULVA TITS VAGINA COCK SUCKING BITCH MOTHER.....  huh...?, yes Ann, I'm alright"   not

Somewhat, He trusted Rove so it is on him also.

Rove is done in politics as well as many others such as the Tea Party, Trump, etc because this election really showed just how delusional and disengaged these people really are. They could try politics again however doubtful they will get anywhere after this.

I will leave bashing peoples religions and racism to others.

What I am talking about is God, and Faith in politics and how it shapes many politician's decision making processes, and why it is highly relevant when selecting leaders for our country.

We have two methods of thinking in our country today:

1) We have those who use the scientific method, and they look at the data and use data to reach conclusions and those conclusions then form those people's beliefs.

2) There are those who start with their beliefs or their preconceptions, then they look at data and pick out the things that support those beliefs.  They start with their beliefs and unquestioned faith in those beliefs, then cherry pick data thinking that validates their beliefs, then they wholeheartedly feel their beliefs have been proven as fact.


Two VERY different ways of thinking and of arriving at what you belief is true and "proven" as fact.

It would appear this would explain not only why Romney would have been shell-shocked, but also why so many of his supporters were also shocked.

Not only does it explain how they were confident they were right when others were seeing a very different reality.

It also explains the post-election response in how they need to rationalize the outcome, starting with their beliefs, then looking at the data, picking the data that supports their beliefs and presto, their "truth", which like thinkers are quick to accept because these new facts were birthed from their commonly held preconceptions.

Now, to be clear, this is not an anti-religion position, I strongly support people's religious beliefs and feel that if it helps them, gives them community and security and stability then that is absolutely awesome.

Religion is great, as a personal thing, even as a society/community, but it has no place in our government and no place in our politics.

All i know is, insiders are saying there was a hellofa lot of prayer going on.

For Mormons, that practically equates to inevitability.

I have always looked at religions as books of fables--lessons by which to share guidance to others.   I would suspect that most religious people consciously or subconsciously understand that. 

What is troubling to me is the immediate dismissal by the left of anyone who practices any kind of religious behavior.  Yet, Obama has been involved in religious activities.  Please explain the double standard?  Does the left only accept one religion for which Obama is considered somewhat of a high priest? Assuming that liberalism is the predominant developing direction for the US, is there room in the liberalist belief structure for alternative religious practices? or do you see religiously aligned politicians a thing of the past?

Reminds me of that episode of South Park were Cartman faked having Tourette's Syndrome 

sorry, i know i hear this tack a lot from the right (in the media), but in my reality (yes, anecdotal), there are just as many god-fearing people on the left as on the right. the ones on the left just aren't so ready to bash you in the head with their religion.

the one demo that resonates--to me--out of this cycle is that most younger people don't use their religion (or lack of) as a basis for their political motivations or aspirations. that can only bode well. to me religion is a total wall that most people can't get past when thinking in broader terms (like elections, candidates, etc).

the more people think in broader terms, the better we all will be. religion really has no place in public service, or politics in general. imnsho

every time i hear a politician say "god bless the united states of america" i want to puke. not for the words, but for the hypocritical delivery.

But there is ramped baseless beliefs on the liberal side as well.  The belief that massive government spending and taxation will spark a recovery for instance.  There is no successful historical accounts of raising taxes to improve an economy,yet that is a solid belief of liberals.

To say that conservatives base their decisions on nebulous and whimsical faith is contrary to the very definition of the word.  Most conservative people I know are very factual, real world sorts of people.

It is very much an unqualified opinion to say that religious people on the right are more apt to get in your face about their beliefs than religious people on the left.  You just have naturally less tolerance for people on the right because of your point of view so you probably notice it more.

The bigger question is who are you to tell people how they should think?  The United States has been supporting a broad range of religions since the start.  The idea of separation between church and state was established by some very religious people recognizing that the values of all religious people were generally the same.  You can't stop what people believe in or how they choose to think without becoming China.