Post by Hannah Wheelwright -

Brothers and sisters, there is nothing more dangerous than fear. We learn about that in Sunday school all the time. I want to talk with you a little bit about the fear of being open about political opinions. I am not suggesting that anyone is wrong or ignorant for being quiet about their support for President Obama, and I certainly am not giving expert advice on the topic. But I want to point out a few things on the topic of fear of sharing political opinions. Here’s why:

1.  This is America. You are entitled to freely express your political opinions without fear of repercussion from the federal government. Oftentimes in our culture we extend this to mean that you shouldn’t fear repercussions from anyone simply because of your beliefs. This security to state your stances freely is fundamental to our identity as Americans engaging in the political dialogue of this nation.
2. The concept of declaring your beliefs freely is also deeply engrained in Mormonism. From the oft-quoted Romans 1:16 (For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ) to the brave and heroic examples of our pioneer ancestors, we have a strong tradition of actively making our true convictions known, even when to do so puts us at odds with those around us.
3. Even if, after boldly admitting that you support President Obama, someone were to react negatively such to make you regret being open about it- their intolerance is their problem. As Mormons, we are told to surround ourselves with good people. There are plenty of good people who may not share our political beliefs but appreciate civil discourse and sharing opinions with an open mind. If someone you meet is going to give you a hard time about your beliefs purely because they disagree with you, it might be a good time to evaluate if they will be a good influence on your life in the first place.

Granted: there may be people already in your life, such as friends, family, and coworkers, who may be intolerant and unavoidable. How you handle those relationships is of course a personal decision. Additionally, I am not suggesting that we should risk death or any other extreme outcome in exchange for openly supporting President Obama.

What I am advocating for is a little less fear and a little more faith.

I openly admit that I relish the occasional dirty looks from people who are anti-Obama when they see that I support our President. It reminds me that "there must needs be opposition in all things," and that there is still a lot of work to do to re-elect him.

Every day that goes by when another person finds out that I’m an Obama supporter (it usually becomes known pretty quickly- as I said, I’m extremely open about it) and they get excited to find someone who shares their passion, I am grateful that I put on that Obama shirt or brought my Obama water bottle with me. I cherish the opportunity to connect with like-minded people and to express my deeply held opinion that Barack Obama is the best candidate for President. No amount of insult, derogatory gestures, or rude glances can invalidate that belief. I'm not suggesting that my commitment to Obama is deeper than anyone else's- simply that I choose to risk negative encounters because I value finding those few people in Provo, Utah who do also support the President, and those positive encounters are worth the risk for me.

If we all stood a little taller, spoke a little more freely in the appropriate settings (i.e. not at church), opened our minds to the possibility that those who we thought previously would brazenly disparage our opinion might not be as churlish as we had imagined- who knows what deeper relationships and more significant connections we might develop.

Conversely- for every opportunity we pass up to share our convictions about supporting our President, we’ll never know which voter we may have reached, directly or indirectly, who might have cast the deciding vote for President Obama.

So perhaps now would be a good time to take a minute; think about how you represent yourself and your beliefs. Heading into the heated and controversial campaign season this fall, we could have a little less fear and a little more faith that the benefits of being open about our support for the President will far outweigh the potential for push-back.

106 DAYS UNTIL ELECTION 2012

Welcome to those of you who are visiting our site after reading Kyle Blaine's piece on abcnews.go.com.

A little about us: as stated in Blaine's article, we are not affiliated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints nor the 2012 Obama Presidential Campaign.  However, we are Mormons, and we are for President Barack Obama.  We created this website in order to represent the unique perspective of Mormons who are voting for Obama.  We are all active and believing Latter-day Saints in Seattle WA, Provo UT, and Washington DC.  We are not necessarily Republicans or Democrats, and we are not anti-Mitt Romney, but we are united behind President Obama as he seeks his second term.  For more information on the idea behind this site, read our first post here.  Also, if you are a Mormon who supports Obama and have something to say, we are looking for submissions - so submit here!  Thank you for visiting!

Yahoo News posted an interesting article under the heading,  Road Trip: Mormon-in-chief? Latter-day Saints talk about what a President Romney would mean to them.    The article contains four interviews with Mormons from the several corners of the political belief system - a Democrat, a Libertarian, a moderate, and a Republican.  However, Kim Gardener, the Democrat, says that she is not certain that she is voting for Obama, so I'm not too certain about her... but her video is the is linked here, so all can decide for themselves.  I guess she does have a 2-litre bottle of Diet Coke sitting in front of her at a dinner party, so maybe that makes her liberal?

A friend sent me the link with his own heading: "I'm still voting for Obama."  But honestly, I haven't thought much about what a "Mormon presidency" might mean to me, since I am fairly confident of a win for the President come November.  But apparently many Mormons have been pondering this question - would it be good for the Church?  How would the Church change under another four years of this level of scrutiny?  So I have started pondering what it would mean to me if a Mormon (Romney in this case) was elected president in 2012.  Well, to steal a line from the same friend who sent me this article: mostly I'd be sad that Obama didn't win.

As the election gets closer, the media attention on the LDS Church intensifies.  This month (and this past weekend in particular) we've already seen an article about missionaries on Facebook, the temple garments, and the Businessweek magazine cover (an article about an article.)  None of these articles address Mitt Romney directly, but of course without his campaign, the attention on the Church would be much diminished or non-existent.  We at Mormons for Obama have received attention as well - we've received a few mentions on different online articles and news reports.  (Salon.com, RealClearPolitics.com, and also here on this Boston local news channel.  But don't blink, or you'll miss it!)

We Mormons are everywhere - all over the internet, TV, (and in some cities - on billboards and the sides of buses) - and never have we received this much scrutiny... and so it is with cautious footing that we run this website.  We say this because our hope is what we do here doesn't put up a wall between ourselves and other more conservative or Republican-leaning Mormons.  We appreciate and love them - (and hopefully not in a patronizing, we-are-better-than-you, way.)  After the dust of this election settles, we will still be at church on Sunday mornings worshiping with our fellow Latter-day Saints, regardless of who they voted for the previous Tuesday and regardless of who wins.  But we don't want to miss this opportunity to represent the strong ideals and beliefs of those of us who will be casting our votes for President Obama.

We received this email from Stephen, who happened across our site, and we believe his comments help to shine light on much of our reasoning in putting together this website:

Thank you for putting up this website. I am not LDS, but I have known quite a number of people who were, as I'm from the Pacific Northwest and was an avid genealogist before the Internet changed the game. With but one exception (in the Army) all (Mormons) that I've met have all been kind, generous, and humble - stunning examples of people who live a good life, performed good deeds, and treated others with respect. They were emissaries, living examples of people who truly aspired to be more like Jesus Christ. The "countenance" described in a recent post is something that even I found easy to spot. I've been in Southern California for some time now, and rarely meet Mormon people here. My memories are faded, and they have been tarnished by what I have seen in Mitt Romney. He has not shown himself to be one who cares about people. His lack of concern for those in need--particularly those his own actions have put in need--really surprised me. I was left to wonder if I had drawn the wrong conclusions. I know everyone is different, and one man is never an example of an entire group, but the writings, and even the very existence of this webpage affirm my early impressions. Reading here has been like Romney tarnish remover.

Thanks again making this effort, and for reminding me of truly good people I had long forgotten.

Sincerely yours,

-Stephen

And thank you Stephen for your kind email, and thanks for giving us permission to post it here.  This political campaign still has some months to go, and we hope that we can continue to participate in the dialogue and discussion of the issues - and we hope that we can do it in a way that is respectful and inclusive of those who believe differently than us.  But clearly, we are not perfect - and so we are trying to do better.

So once again, I am looking over the Mormon Ethic of Civility - an article posted on the Mormon newsroom feed back in 2009.  This is the perfect navigating tool for Mormon Dems and Pubs when it comes to engaging in political discourse.

Also, I really enjoyed this piece by Walter Kirn, the author of Thumbsucker, my favorite (Non-Deseret Book) Mormon fiction after Levi Peterson's The Backslider.   The kindness and inclusiveness of Kirn's Mormon roommates and friends is what we offer each other.  I also found this piece on MormonDems.com entitled, "Stop the Madness!"  We might use this as a reminder of how to bring unity between Democrats and Republicans (inside and outside of the Church.)  And if we are still wondering what we can do to better represent ourselves as Mormon Democrats, we might watch this YouTube video featuring an amazing Utah Mormon Democrat; we all know about Harry Reid (and we aspire to be like him,) but Brian King, member of the Utah State Legislature, is a great example as well:

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg-rOJ42IpM?rel=0]

[caption id="attachment_1294" align="alignleft" width="300"] Facial reactions to Mitt Romney's address at the NAACP Convention in Houston on Wednesday[/caption]

Post by Joseph M -

Mitt Romney and Joe Biden both took turns politicking in front of the NAACP's annual convention, and Romney's big booing was widely played on cable news networks and across the internet.  But what you haven't heard is that Vice President Joe Biden was also booed - for telling the crowd he would be closing his speech.  Yes, Biden received a much friendlier reception.  Just watch a few minutes of each speech, and listen to sounds of the crowd; when Romney is speaking you can almost count out the 5% of African Americans that will be voting for him in November.  Even the music greeting the two speakers is in complete contrast: Biden's intro sounds like the start of a party, while Romney's "God Bless America" intro sounds like it's being played by an organ at a funeral.

But putting all of that aside, I am must applaud Romney for attending the convention (while George W. turned down invitations repeatedly.)  However, he made a misstep or two, starting with one of his opening lines: "I believe that if you understood who I truly am in my heart, and if it were possible to fully communicate what I believe is in the real, enduring best interest of American African American families, you would vote for me for president."

Firstly, I listened to this line repeatedly: was his "American African American" line a verbal stumble or was Romney just trying to differentiate African Americans from Canadian African Americans?  Secondly, I find it a bit preposterous that Romney would claim to know (in his heart of all places) what is really best for the African American community.  He proved that he does have a handle on all the negative statistics that circle and stereotype African Americans when he said, "the unemployment rate, the duration of unemployment, average income, and median family wealth are all worse for the black community." But I am fairly certain that he doesn't have some magic trick to solve these issues - if previous Republican administrations didn't make significant inroads here, why should anyone expect that Romney would or can?

[caption id="attachment_1295" align="alignright" width="300"] George Romney hugs son Mitt, 14, and wife, Lenore, at a Detroit news conference on Feb. 10, 1962, after announcing he would seek the Republican nomination to be Michigan's governor.[/caption]

That said, the story of Mitt Romney's father, Michigan Governor George Romney, is an interesting one.  He spoke out in favor of civil-rights and pushed for reforms to counter discrimination in housing. Due to this, he faced opposition from leaders in his own party and from angered whites in his state.  Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has stayed away from discussing race or even his father's civil-rights legacy.  According to Maeve Reston of the Los Angeles Times, "Romney has campaigned over the past year in front of predominately white audiences," and he is "a far more conflict-averse candidate than his father." And apparently, discussing his father's legacy could cause conflict with the conservative base.

But clearly the black vote is not what Romney is after, considering that even the African American Mormon vote seems out of reach; (see this article in the New York Times.)  Some theorize that Romney has even given up on winning the Latino vote, and that his outreach efforts to Latino Americans can be summed up by his bungled Spanish language campaign ads;  even his new ad featuring his Spanish-speaking-missionary son Craig (the curly-headed one, in case you're keeping track) is only being played in limited markets - with just $57,000 total air time bought, (and as of this writing, the dang video won't even play on Romney's website!)  Governor Romney is aware that his chances at winning over this group is limited, and as Eric R pointed out, his stance on Latino immigration is at odds with the official position of the LDS Church.  So that just leaves the white vote - and this is where Romney really has his greatest opportunity.

In 2008, 43% of white voters cast their ballot for Obama, while 55% voted for McCain.  We might expect similar numbers in 2012, although some (including Obama himself) express concern that the President may have lost his luster.  With continued unemployment issues, his "gray hair", and "Republican obstructionists" to Obama's brand of change, these white voters may be shedding their white guilt and their enthusiasm for President's message of hope; this is also evident among the young white vote, and this could result in many of these youths not turning out to the polls.  Additionally, white blue-collar men have decreased from 34% to 28% in their support for the president.

So with these trends among white voters continuing, can Romney expect a win in November?  Some have noted that although whites are still the dominant race in America, Latinos are now at 16%, followed by African Americans at 13% and Asian Americans at 5%.  By some estimates, the percentage of people of color in the USA will overtake whites by 2050 - (minority births have already overtaken white births in the US.)  And this is where Obama's reelection will ultimately be found.  The minority electorate has grown in the past four years, and voter suppression aside, Obama may not need those extra white votes.  So even if Obama experiences some loss of love among white voters, will that necessarily equal more votes for Romney?  Probably not.  It probably means more people staying home on election day on both sides of the political spectrum.

A year ago, The National Journal did a whole bunch of calculations that looked at Obama's 2012 reelection chances in light of race and the nation's changing demographics.  The article is long, cumbersome, and impossible to digest if you aren't being tested on it for your American Heritage final exam, but this here is a pretty good summary paragraph:

"So even if Obama’s support slips among whites, Republicans will face a tough uphill climb if they cannot capture more minority votes. Carlos Curbelo, a Miami-based GOP consultant, asserts that Republicans cannot win if they allow Obama to keep two-thirds of the Latino vote he attracted in 2008. The first step toward turning some of that support, he contends, is aggressively pursuing those voters with Spanish-language advertising. 'Some Republicans say, ‘We do not want to advertise in Spanish because it sends the wrong message,’' he says. 'We need to get to them, no matter what channel they are watching, or magazine they are reading.' And once Republicans have Hispanics’ attention, Curbelo insists, they must make the case that Obama abandoned his 2008 promise to emphasize comprehensive immigration reform. 'There is a gaping hole in the president’s campaign,' he argues."

At this point, President Obama is reaching out to these groups and plugging this "gaping hole", as we saw recently with his announcement that the US will no longer seek to deport undocumented immigrants who came to America as children.  So as we march onward to November, we may find that ultimately, the white vote might not be so great after all.

With the presidential election heating up there is one soundbite we hear from both sides on a regular basis – unemployment.  Although each side will lay out persuasive stories to drive awareness to their positions, unemployment is an elusive number driven by multiple levers.  Using only one measure to judge economic health is not only irresponsible, but laughable.  The GDP continues to grow, the stock market has returned to pre-bubble levels, and corporations are enjoying record profits.  Like all business cycles, unemployment is a lagging indicator and is the last measure to reflect economic change.

The American public gives presidents too much credit regarding the economy.  Presidents are powerful legislators but they do not control economic cycles given our market-based system. Understanding changes in the job market has more to do with Federal Reserve policies than presidential agendas.   Regardless of what you might think of George W. Bush, his policies had little to do with the banking collapse.  Unemployment stayed low during the early Bush years primarily due to the low cost of borrowing money.  Credit cards were cheap.  Mortgages were cheap.  Refinances were cheap.  Americans were leveraging personal debt to drive the economy through revolving credit and real estate borrowing.  Money was pulled from the housing boom and spent on consumer goods and services.

When the economy finally erupted at the end of the Bush administration and the free flow of capital was capped, the market swung the other direction and debt became a crippling liability.  Corporations started cutting costs and consumer good consumption did not meet their growth targets.  The stock market began its decline which further eroded any free capital that could be used to keep the economic engine turning.  The marketplace friction finally took a toll on employment.  The final year of the Bush Administration saw unemployment double due to increased efficiencies and budgetary choices.  Corporate hiring freezes led private sector job declines and proactive attrition was used to shrink the workforce.  With the sudden loss of investment tax, property tax, and sales tax our state and federal government saw almost $1 trillion in lost revenue.  Government was considering cuts in public sector jobs to avoid insolvency.

In 2008, in the middle of the presidential campaign, TARP was passed and signed into law by President Bush (recent polls show only 34% of Americans correctly identify President Bush as the signer) to help banks with capital and drive private investment.  In 2009, one month after taking the oath, President Obama signed the American Recovery Act which did several things:

• Sent significant money to states to free up budgets and maintain public sector employees (teachers, police, fire, etc)

• Invested in public and private infrastructure projects

• Paid for a significant tax cut to drive consumer spending

• Paid for unemployment benefits and healthcare cobra accounts due to the unemployment surge.

Between TARP and the Recovery Act capital was freed up to drive private sector growth, consumer spending, and sustain public sector employment.  Best estimates by reputable economists believe the Obama Recovery Act created or saved over two million jobs mostly public sector, with TARP and Federal Reserve policies driving significant private sector growth (I know fellow President Obama supporters use the following chart, but the data is not supported by legislation signed by the President).

As the campaigns continue to move forward take a second and really evaluate what the candidates are saying.  Unemployment is an important economic indicator, but voting for either candidate solely on this issue will lead to frustration due to lack of control.

Post by Hannah Wheelwright -

With Barack Obama and Mitt Romney so close in many national polls and Mitt Romney outspending the President in both May and June, it is imperative that we do more than just “like” Barack Obama on Facebook. We all have busy lives, and we all have pressing demands on our checkbooks that limit us from making more financial contributions to causes that we believe in; but for all of us who believe that President Obama is the best candidate, we must volunteer our time as well. Even just one hour each week, or a few minutes whenever you have time, could be the tipping point for helping our President win another four years in office.

STEP 1:
Join Dashboard! Go to www.dashboard.barackobama.com and sign up. Dashboard is the official, brand-new, online campaign organizing tool for President Obama, the likes of which has never been seen before. It is a one-stop shop for all your election needs: you can connect with fellow pro-Obama people near you, get in touch with your local Obama for America office, access resources and videos about President Obama’s accomplishments, make calls on behalf of the campaign, see the calendar for events in your area, and report your efforts at the end of each day to better help the campaign crunch numbers and analyze data.

You can also join groups on Dashboard to get more updates and information about events specific to different issues. Consider joining the Mormons for Obama group found here!

http://www.facebook.com/#!/barackobama

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eXqbzSe9x4?rel=0&w=560&h=315]
If you live in a red state, it is possible that your Obama for America office is a single-staff office, meaning that the only person paid by the Obama campaign to work there is the state director. The rest of the staff is unpaid. On the west coast for example, single-staff states include Utah, Idaho, Alaska, and Hawaii. If this is the case, your Obama for America office probably shares office space with your state’s Democratic Party. Other states have their own office for Obama for America. These offices act as exciting campaign hubs for Obama supporters, and the volunteers would love to have you stop by!

STEP 2:
Contact your local Obama for America team! When you sign up for Dashboard, it should put you automatically onto your local team and send an email with your name to whoever is the field organizer. For example, I am the field organizer for the Utah County, Utah team, so I get an email every time someone joins Dashboard who lives in my geographic area. I personally try to contact everyone on my team to let them know of opportunities they could take advantage of- but every team is different, so do some exploring and contact your field organizer if you don’t hear from them.

Depending on where you live, the closest official Obama for America events might be out of driving distance. Be still your soul! It is easy to host your own event and invite people from your area to join you. You could host a screening to watch The Road We’ve Traveled, the 17 minute documentary about President Obama’s first four years in office. You could invite someone from your community to come speak about why your community should support President Obama and have a discussion. Your local Obama for America office can give you specific tips, resources, and guidelines for how to make the event a success.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2POembdArVo]

STEP 3:
Get involved with your neighborhood team! Your local Obama for America office will help you find out which volunteers in your area have already formed one. Neighborhood teams are the nucleus of the grassroots organizing structure- the idea is that by promoting President Obama’s achievements on the community level, you will have much more influence. Check out this short video for more explanation on what a neighborhood team looks like.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl1CjHMMGVA]

STEP 4:
Attend events, host events, and participate online! Any amount of effort you can spare goes a long, long way. On Dashboard, you can click on Make Calls, then choose which state and for what issue you'd like to call. There are multiple scripts (Women for Obama, Environmentalists, Economy, etc) you can use to call people and discuss President Obama's strengths on that issue to try to sway undecided voters. You can make calls anytime during day time and evening hours right from your own home on your own time. At the end of the day, you can Report Your Activity so that the campaign can better analyze their data and hours submitted by volunteers. If you can also get involved with events, that is even better.

As you get more involved with efforts to re-elect our President, I believe you will feel the satisfaction that you participated in something you believe in. On the night of November 6th, as the poll numbers are coming in and the nation sits on the brink of one presidency or another, you will know you contributed and did your part. If you think that President Obama is the better candidate, I urge you to take these small and simple steps to help re-elect him.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQe-wVK9E&feature=player_embedded]

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhWDFgRfi1Q?rel=0]

118 DAYS TILL ELECTION 2012

Post by Joseph M -

As I mentioned previously, I think that this website got a mention on Salon.com - but I can't be certain, because the writer used the term, "Mormons Who Love Obama" when linking to our site. So this might have been in reference to us, or it may be the third book in the soon-to-be famous Swedish crime series... (the other two being called, Mormons Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest and Mormons Who Played with Fire.)

Regardless, Troy Williams does make some interesting points in his article, Romney Boosts Liberal Mormons.  Indeed, the presidential campaign season and Romney's position as the Republican nominee (and a Mormon) has brought the Church into the spotlight like never before.  And indeed, progressive, liberal, feminist, LGBT, and intellectual Mormons are seizing the opportunity to be heard.  They have been voicing their opinions all along... and now (in this Mormon Moment) people are finally willing to listen... people like Williams and the (seemingly) hundreds of people who commented on his article.  Take the "progressive" blog By Common Consent for instance; they began in 2004 - back when most people (myself) still didn't have internet in their homes. And now Mormons all across the spectrum of belief and practice are taking to the internet to make that one last comment that their Relief Society instructor didn't have time for last Sunday because she ran out of time with too much material left to cover.

[caption id="attachment_1227" align="alignright" width="300"] Mormons march during a gay pride parade in Salt Lake City on June 3. (Credit: Reuters/Jim Urquhart)[/caption]

But I disagree with Williams on a point or two.  I believe he is lumping too many people together.  I realize that we like easy categorization (ie., there is wheat and there are tares), but I'm not sure that voting for Obama puts you in one group or the other.  For instance, I can't imagine that this website would give President Packer much pause.  Having served as an apostle for so many years, he's fully aware that Democrats are within the rank and file of the Church as well as its leadership, and we don't necessarily fit into his supposed axis of evil.   And that said, I think that Williams (and many many others) have quoted Packer out of context, missing the whole point of his talk - (which was not directed at the general membership of the church; see this blog for a review.) So while I am very happy to have our website linked in the article, I am not sure we fit the bill.  If Williams was really looking for examples of Mormons gone amok, he might have linked to John Larsen over at Mormon Expression; Larsen's site is even much more off the handcart than Mormon Stories, John Dehlin's collection of podcast interviews with everyone from Dr. William Bradshaw (I loved your Biology class at BYU) to Benji (the guy who thought he could dance.) Larsen's website has a brisk air of the provocative and self-importance; for example, the Larsens are the ones who hosted the write-a-letter-to-remove-your-name-from-the-records-party in SLC last weekend.

So ultimately, I don't believe that MormonsForObama.org sets about to "(expose) the internal stresses and fractures that have long existed within the (Mormon) faith." Mostly, we decided to put this website together because we didn't want others (or Romney's campaign) to define who we are as Mormons.  But apparently in doing so I have now been defined.  I've become a progressive Mormon (or an intellectual or a feminist?)  However, I don't think that I neatly represent any of those terms.  I am just a Latter-day Saint who is voting to reelect President Obama in November because I believe that he will be the best leader for our nation.

With November right around the corner our country is bracing for a barrage of political attacks, skewed data, and faulty logic.  It is our job as citizens to vet these political distortions and hold our politicians accountable.  Forwarding emails, trolling on Facebook, or posting links from partisan blogs does little to support positions and creates a wider divide.  Taking a “good versus evil” stance is unproductive and should remain clear of our civil debates.

How did we get here?

I am often asked how we arrived to such a polarizing environment dripping with angry partisan rhetoric.  My response? Look in the mirror. We have stopped holding our streams of information accountable.  We respond to 30 second sound bites.  We repeat talking points instead of questioning them.  Our media is selling propaganda rather than vetting it.  We now view compromise as political weakness, and “flip-flopping” as a sign of indecision instead of solution building.

With that being said, it’s hard to walk away from Newt Giengrich’s “Contract with America” as a contributing driver of a political downward spiral.  During the 1980’s, Ronald Reagan did a remarkable job uniting our country through compromise and leadership.  Watching 49 states unite in the 1984 election was magical.  This Reagan compromising spirit Newt perceived as weakness and drove the creation of the “Contract with America”.  Newt sold the public on a political agenda in 1994 leading to a remarkable 54 seat swing and Republican control of the house.  Newt then tried to ram legislation through the floor within the first 100 days knowing the Senate would object, creating wide distrust between the parties.   Newt’s rhetoric was so polarizing it led to a government shutdown and eventual loss of the Republican House, and the ripples continue to grow.

What can I do to stop the partisanship?

Turn off the tube.  If your main source of news comes from a 24 hour news cycle which uses irrational conclusions and skewed data to fill their time void, your reasoning skills are declining.  Take a quick gut check – Do you think Fox News is fair and balanced?  Do you view CNN or MSNBC as fact based reporting? Answering yes to either of these questions indicates an addiction to a mind numbing drug called repetition.

Use the shock test.  If you read an email or watch an ad and become “shocked”, take a step back and do some basic fact checking.  It’s amazing what you might learn when challenging a statement you badly want to believe.  No, Obama is not a communist.  No, Romney does not want to fire half of America.  No, illegal immigration is not causing bankruptcy.  No, pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. No, the NRA does not want anarchy.  No, Liberals do not hate America (my favorite). And Yes, Republicans do care about the poor.  If what you are reading does not sound right, chances are it’s not.  A great piece of advice is to vet all of your email forwards through sites like Snopes, Politifact, or Factcheck which have spent considerable resources documenting data based claims (or lack of).  I have little tolerance for friends and family who send me blatantly obvious pieces of political fabrications.  I have been known to “reply to all” with the fact checking information (this usually gets me removed from their lists).

Stop being a troll!  If you use blanket statements while confronting differences of opinion, you're probably trolling.  Trolls talk in emotional charged opinionated responses.  Trolls also use labels to degrade differences of opinions.  Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t automatically make them a (fill in the blank).  Terms like RINO, liberal, and conservative are all trolling labels.  Instead of calling President Obama a socialist for Obamacare, why not discuss points of the law you disagree with.  Since Trolls do not bother with data or use fact based dialogue they are tough to pin down and add little value to conversations.

Ask questions!  There will be times when we engage in a heated political discussion.  When debating from absolute positions we become more polarizing and miss persuasive opportunities which can flip opposing arguments.  Recently I started a conversation with a government employee who hated socialism.  After a series of questions about his stated position it was clear the conundrum he was engaged in.  The most persuasive individuals help others reach a conclusion through logic and reasoning primarily driven through questioning.  Nobody likes to be told why they are wrong.

My final thought is making sure we always respect those we love.  Politics is not worth sacrificing friendships for.  I have made it a point to move political conversations to mediums that do not interfere with relationships.  I have not forwarded a political email in several years, I do not post politics on my Facebook page, and I do not start political conversations (but always happy to engage once started).  To some this might seem timid or cowardly, to me its common respect.  Election cycles happen every other year, but families are forever.

“If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country.” -  E. M. Forster

Post by Hannah Wheelwright -

I have been told I live in the field. I’m not talking about the mission field that is white already to harvest - Utah is actually rather cloudy and brown right now from all the fires, not to mention the raining ash. (Last days, anyone?) I’m talking about a unique field in which I’m a progressive liberal Mormon living in the heartland of conservative, Mormon majority, Republican Utah.  I’m a sophomore Political Science major at BYU who works full time at the MTC, and every day I am reminded that I’m different (and not just because almost everything I own is plastered with Obama stickers and logos).

I wasn’t always so vocal about my political opinions here in Provo. During my first few months at BYU, I distanced myself from identifying with any party; I knew I was liberal, but I was hesitant to endorse a platform about which I felt under-informed. I feared the inevitable moment when some far more educated person would tear my opinions to shreds with their superior evidence and research. But the more I found myself making pro-Democratic comments in my small Honors American Heritage class (many thanks to my professor, Greg Taggart, for always giving me the floor to make the opposing point) and the more I studied the issues, the more I realized I needed to come out of the closet and simply embrace my affiliation with the Democratic Party.

Since then, I’ve become much more comfortable with identifying as a Democrat - not just because I can’t in good conscience endorse the alternative, but because I believe so strongly in the vision and commitments of the Democratic platform. While it’s annoying to frequently hear anti-liberal, pro-Fox News comments, and while I am in the political minority of students at BYU, living in Provo has forced me to be able to articulate exactly what I believe and why I believe. I’ll always be grateful for that.

I’m proud to say, and I say it at every opportunity I get, that the BYU College Democrats is the largest College Democrats chapter in Utah. I love the shocked expression people acquire when they hear that, because it emphasizes that Mormons are not a unified voting bloc, and that the youth and young adults of the LDS Church will become increasingly more diverse in their political views than ever before. We’ve seen already the groundswell of support for the LGBT community within the Church, and much of that support comes from young adults who did not grow up with the same biases and culture that older members of the Church may have.

Of all the challenges of being a liberal in Provo, the deepest and most hurtful will always be the questions of my faith. I don’t write about this to ask for your pity or to encourage you to be more loving to everyone. I write about this simply because it is the hardest thing for me about being a liberal in Provo.  It’s not easy to be told that you have less faith, that the path you are on will likely lead you to become apostate, if not at least to leave the Church, and that then your future children will grow up outside of the gospel all because of your selfish choices. When I was quoted for an article about Pro-Obama Mormons back in May, the comments users added online questioning my standing in the Church were the most troublesome. When the ruling on the Affordable Care Act was announced, (I was eagerly listening to C-Span live with headphones on my computer at work,) I wanted to leap for joy and celebrate. But as my other coworkers at the MTC began to trickle in (this was 8:00 AM in Utah, being two hours behind D.C.), I could see their crestfallen faces. It was the only time I’ve been really glad that they all know I’m a Democrat - I did my best to hide my glee, and they shut the door so I could only hear muted expressions of their frustration and anger.

It’s this mutual agreement to leave each other space to celebrate our views that I appreciate the most, and at the same time it’s a cause of concern, given that it’s only July now and there’s still several months before the election. Because I am the field organizer for Obama’s campaign in Utah County, the Co-President of the BYU College Democrats, a volunteer for several local political campaigns, and because I hope to be more involved with Mormons for Obama efforts, I can sense that my political activity will lead to some kind of conflict sooner or later.

But despite all the tensions I’ve already experienced and expect to experience as a progressive Mormon, I know I can never go back. I’ll always feel a connection to that wonderful hymn-singing, nourish-and-strengthen-our-bodies praying, no-TV-on-Sunday, family-home-evening culture I was blessed to be raised in, but I will continue to study and seek after more knowledge about my questions without clinging to the conservatism that was also part of that culture. And with all its quirks and all my questions, I know my own journey of finding my way through this concentrated conservative field as a liberal Mormon will not be a walk in the park.

But we are all enlisted till the conflict is o’er, and that won’t just be November 2012. I look forward to the challenges in the hopes that I can convince even just one soul to understand why I believe what I do. Who knows, maybe I can plant some seeds in this field.