Here are the first two paragraphs of a statement posted at the LDS Newsroom November 9, 2016, the day after the presidential election of 2016, titled “First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles Congratulate U.S. President-Elect”:
We congratulate President-elect Donald Trump on his election as president of the United States.
We invite Americans everywhere, whatever their political persuasion, to join us in praying for the president-elect, for his new administration and for elected leaders across the nation and the world. Praying for those in public office is a long tradition among Latter-day Saints. The men and women who lead our nations and communities need our prayers as they govern in these difficult and turbulent times.
Now let’s compare that to the statement the First Presidency and Twelve issued congratulating President-Elect Biden. Let’s see … searching at LDS.org … searching using Google … nada. There is no such statement, apparently. The closest I could find was an article posted at the Newsroom titled “Vice President Joe Biden Receives Family History During Temple Square Visit,” from February 2016 (see image at the top of this post).
It isn’t just “We congratulate Republicans but not Democrats.” Here are the first two paragraphs of the congratulatory note to President Obama, posted November 6, 2012, titled “First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles Congratulate President on Election Win”:
We congratulate President Obama on winning a second term as President of the United States.
After a long campaign, this is now a time for Americans to come together. It is a long tradition among Latter-day Saints to pray for our national leaders in our personal prayers and in our congregations. We invite Americans everywhere, whatever their political persuasion, to pray for the President, for his administration and the new Congress as they lead us through difficult and turbulent times. May our national leaders reflect the best in wisdom and judgment as they fulfill the great trust afforded to them by the American people.
So what’s the problem? Why is there no public statement by LDS leadership congratulating President-Elect Biden? Seriously, this is a puzzle that requires some explaining. Even if a similar letter is in fact issued at some point, we need an explanation for why it is coming out a month or two or three after the election. What do readers think? It would be nice if someone had an inside source, something like, “My uncle is a GA and at a meeting with two apostles was told ….” Let me just offer a few possibilities and let readers choose one or offer their own explanation.
Some possible explanations:
- Despite an overwhelming victory in both the popular vote and the electoral college, LDS leaders honestly can’t figure out who won the election.
- Despite a clear victory for Joe Biden, the majority of senior LDS leaders are strong Trump supporters and are withholding a congratulatory letter just to spite Mr. Biden.
- Despite a clear victory for Joe Biden, one or two stubborn senior LDS leaders are strong Trump supporters and are blocking the issuance of a congratulatory letter to Mr. Biden.
- Despite a clear victory for Joe Biden and a desire to issue such a letter for Mr. Biden, senior LDS leaders know that roughly 70% of LDS are strong supporters of President Trump and don’t want to alienate the mainstream membership of the Church by issuing a congratulatory note.
- Despite a clear victory for Joe Biden, senior LDS leaders are waiting for permission from President Trump in the form of a clear concession to issue a congratulatory letter.
- Despite a clear victory for Joe Biden, senior LDS leaders will not issue a congratulatory letter because they have decided to no longer issue such letters but haven’t told anyone of this change in policy.
None of these options are very acceptable. Stupidity, cowardice, spite, partisanship … which is it?
Whatever the explanation, this delay certainly calls into question any remaining credibility of the frequent claim of LDS leadership to be politically neutral. The leadership is not neutral. They’re probably 70% or more Trumpists, just like the membership. Like it or not, it’s now The Church of Jesus Christ of Donald Trump.
Wheat & Tares 
And let me quickly add a link to this post at the This Week in Mormons site, which I discovered after writing my post. The linked post notes the lack of a congratulatory statement to Mr. Biden and goes on to discuss many of the same points I touch on in my post.
http://www.thisweekinmormons.com/2020/11/the-church-has-yet-to-congratulate-president-elect-biden/
You began each of your possible explanations with a lie — “Despite a clear/overwhelming victory”. The reason for no congratulatory letter is obvious. It’s none of the reasons you listed of course. It’s because the winner is still unknown. When the winner is known, the congratulations will follow.
Bwbarnett,
Apparently, you are one of those. But, you will never congratulate President-elect Joe Biden in spite of the results.
Building on what bwbarnett said, in 2016 the Church has usually issued its congratulations only after the losing party has conceded the election. In 2016, they issued it the same day (but after) Clinton’s concession speech.
Before you assign malicious intent, it might be instructive to go back and look at when the Church issued such a statement from the 2000 election. The online newsroom archives only go back to 2016, but I will bet you that if you look they will have waited until after the race was fully conceded. In that context, their current behavior is following the same non-partisan standard as every other year.
Thanks for pointing this out. I hadn’t noticed these published statements of congratulations in the past. I gather that the leadership is concerned that by congratulating Biden or directly telling people to wear masks they will alienate a good chunk of its membership in the Moridor and help spur growth in splinter groups from the church such as the Snufferites.
I see no malicious intent, and no weakness. The matter is still disputed — wrongly, in my opinion, as it is clear to me that Mr. Biden won fair and square — but the fact is that it is still disputed, and it seems the Church authorities are aware of that. I appreciate their cautious approach, and letting the political situation resolve itself.
That said, I am hopeful that the Biden inauguration committee is already talking to the Tabernacle Choir about participating in the inaugural festivities.
Observer,
2000 might not be a good comparison. There, Mr. Gore conceded on election night (I think), and then later withdrew his concession, and did not concede again until a day or so before the electoral college action in mid-December.
So, there is a precedent for a candidate waiting for the states to certify before conceding — and that seems to be what Mr. Trump is doing now, although all reasonable people already know that Mr. Biden will be declared the winner.
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
Just in the interest of maintaining a connection with reality, let’s remember that in 2000 the margin of victory in Florida was very thin (like 500 votes) and there were ballots that were objectively ambiguous — the famous hanging chads. By contrast, in the present election the margins of victory in the closest states are tens of thousands of votes and there is no objective evidence of disputed votes that would, by any conceivable measure, change the outcome in any state. To claim otherwise at this point is simply delusional.
So there is no comparison between 2000 and 2020. Granted, that is a convenient pretense for those who want to continue to throw a wrench in US election machinery, such as the sad actions of that worthless Trump lapdog over at GSA who frustrated the will of the citizenry as well as of Congress, which passed the Presidential Transition Act to avoid just such partisanship designed to undermine a smooth and effective transition. I was a lot mellower on this topic until President Trump began his jihad against America’s democratic institutions. At this point I have very little tolerance for foolish statements like bwbarnett made above.
LDS leaders are not fools, so we need a better explanation than that they actually believe the results of the election are in doubt.
ji, the question about the Tabernacle Choir is a good one. Maybe they’ll let Mitt Romney be a guest conductor.
@JeffSpector Yes thank you Jeff. I am one of those who want the truth and fair-play.
@ji “all reasonable people” — Really?
“It’s because the winner is still unknown.”
All six states where the results were close (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona) have certified election results showing that Biden has won in those states. How exactly is the winner any less known (especially at this stage) than the winner of any past US presidential elections (excepting 2000’s election)?
What do I know? But the comments above illustrate the problem, to my way of guessing. I imagine Church leaders see the election results and the controversy, recognize that U.S. members favored Mr. Trump, and recognize that many members are persuaded by or going along with Mr. Trump’s continued protestations. With all that in mind, I would probably choose not to wade into the controversy. Take a public position that will be controversial with a large number of members? Or wait, and along the way be criticized in the bloggernacle? No perfect answer, but I’m sympathetic to the choice to wait.
It would be really, really easy to dismiss claims of voter fraud (as some judges are currently doing). As a relatively sane, reasonable, and logical thinker, it’s hard for me to dismiss some of the “glitches” we saw on election night change votes pretty consistently from Democrat to Republican, some of which were caught in real time. I’d like to think if the roles were reversed, I’d want to see the evidence of glitches that supported Trump come to light as well, as they very well may still. Democrats had four years to call Trump an illegitimate President. I think the least they can do is allow Trump two months to make his own case against Biden. I do find it interesting that Kamala Harris has not yet resigned her Senate seat. Warranted caution? Probably not.
So yeah, until a concession comes, I think the Church is justified in their lack of congratulations.
Re: choirs
I think I heard that Biden’s team has already determined that there will be no choir, due to the pandemic.
Also, The tabernacle choir has not met for practice or performance since March, and there is no indication that will change for any reason until the pandemic is over. Source: a close family member is in the choir
I imagine the official excuse would be “he hasn’t conceded” but the real reason is “we don’t want to alienate our own base.” Which is understandable but not politically neutral. The fact that Trump hasn’t conceded when he said all along he wouldn’t concede, and has no reason not to concede other than his ego (sorry @bwbarnett, there are no good faith / evidence-based arguments out there, truly), is a pretty poor reason to stay quiet. In fact, it’s all the more reason not to stay quiet (if your objective is to like, do the right thing).
Too often, the LDS had picked the wrong side in historic events: The Civil Rights movement. The Equal Rights Amendment. Support of the Third Reich. Same Sex Marriage. Indigenous people. Adoption policy.
History will add this lack of a letter to the list. History will not be kind to Trumpism.
The reality is that majority of the LDS membership will not notice nor care.
@Elisa I think it is incorrect to say “there are no good faith / evidence based arguments out there”, but you can say whatever you like, as can I. What I would say would be something like, “they haven’t found any evidence-based arguments because the evidence has been hidden/destroyed”. Or maybe “The media outlets aren’t sharing with the general public some evidence-based arguments that have been found, so it appears as though none exist.”
Maybe no evidence will be found, or maybe some will be found but it won’t be enough to overturn any results. Fine. As a few others have said above, let’s see what turns up.
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
john w, i concur, which is what makes the current delay or avoidance of a statement congratulating Biden so puzzling.
christiankimball, that certainly makes sense, and I commend you for maintaining such a balanced view of things. I agree not issuing a statement avoids offending LDS Trumpists, but it also risks offending the 30% of LDS who are non-Trumpists and a much larger percentage of non-US LDS. The long delay shows political neutrality is no longer operative and LDS leaders, in some fashion or another, support and sympathize with Trump. Granted, this is just another step in the steady politicization of the Church, but it’s a big step. For some, it will be the final step. Honestly, at this point if the Antichrist showed up next year, most Mormons would vote for him and he’d get a parade in Salt Lake City along with a tour of LDS facilities.
Eli, it’s not just that judges are dismissing claims of voter fraud, as if this is somehow just an opinion some judges have. The problem is that plaintiffs, those bringing the suits, have presented no evidence to support those claims. Because there isn’t any. When there is nothing to support the claims presented in a suit, even when viewed most favorably for a plaintiff, then a judge will dismiss the case because there is no case. There is nothing to litigate. The fact of the matter isn’t actions or views of judges, it’s a lack of any evidence to support the claims Trump supporters are making in public and (a narrower set of claims) in court. And by agreeing that LDS leaders are waiting for Trump to concede before acting, you are acknowledging that LDS leaders are essentially taking orders from Trump. That is simply appalling. But hey, it’s 2020.
Rockwell, good point about the Choir. I hadn’t thought of that. If they can’t rehearse together, they can’t really perform. I guess we’ll have to wait for 2024 and the inauguration of Marco Rubio or Kamala Harris.
All I know is that when moral leadership is required the church will line up on the side of established injustice or keep their heads low. We all know there’s an embarrassing coterie of hard line right wingers in the church but to cower to them or not to stand up to them is as embarrassing as not to stand up for justice and truth. I know the church is all about obedience but who’s obeying whom?
Meanwhile, waiting for Trump to concede is a complete fools’ errand. He’s never in his life represented anything but his own self interest. The only thing more foolish is to contribute to a “defense” fund that will go straight into his pockets to buy another fraudulent Time Man of the Year portrait to hang in one of the properties he’ll continue charging taxpayers an exorbitant amount for his retirement offices and to house his continuing Secret Service protection.
Dave B.
I obviously wasn’t clear. I never implied every single one of those dismissals (I thought dismissal was a legal term that could involve lack of evidence as much as it meant “casting aside” in the vernacular) were unjustified, or that they were just judges spouting opinion. Most probably were justified, and as such “would be easy to dismiss,” which is partly what I meant. But a couple of judges have done so simply because “of time” or the timing of the evidence presented. I think some evidence is still waiting to come to light, regardless of its validity. Based on what I’ve seen, I simply cannot say it was a flawless election, though that may be true of every election. I’ll readily recognize it may not be enough to change things the other way. Some of it simply is not as easy to dismiss.
“And by agreeing that LDS leaders are waiting for Trump to concede before acting, you are acknowledging that LDS leaders are essentially taking orders from Trump.” Really Dave? I think this mindset is as much or more untrue and unjustified as believing everything a prophet says are the exact words of the Savior. Simply not true. Would you be just as appalled if they had been waiting for Biden to concede?
@BWBarnett, I get that, but at this point you’re relying on “there might have been voter fraud, but there’s no evidence because that evidence if there was any has been destroyed.” As @Dave B pointed out above, this isn’t about what the media is reporting (which I’m not paying a ton of attention to) it’s about what Trump’s teams are actually producing, or rather, not producing, in court (which I am paying a ton of attention to).
I don’t think either of us is trying to prove to the other that voter fraud did or didn’t occur, or that if it did occur, it was not material enough to sway the election (another important point given the significant margin of victory both in the popular and electoral vote here). I think the question we are both looking at is: do the current allegations of voter fraud / Trump’s refusal to concede justify the Church is not congratulating Biden? And for me, the answer is no, given the absence of evidence. As Dave B. said, in the absence of evidence, leaders appear to be “essentially taking orders from Trump,” which I agree is appalling.
When it comes to suspected voter fraud, am I the only one who remembers Trump, when he finally accepted that mail in ballots were going to happen despite his objection, telling his voters to vote by mail and then in person?
Is it only fraud if it involves Biden votes?
Even Erick Erickson, a GA lawyer and broadcaster who’s been blogging for right wing politics for more than a decade and who’s experienced in voting law, said early on that there was no more voter fraud in this election than in past elections, that it was minimal and that it worked both ways. The thinking Republicans at National Review agree. What’s happening now is simply explained as desperation not to accept the outcome and the facts. Or put another way, to nullify the intent of 80 MILLION Americans for the sake of a small disgruntled lot as even most Trump voters have moved on by now. And that’s 80 MILLION after all the voter suppression that GOP governors and legislatures have been engaged in for multiple national election cycles.
It may be a trivial thing to correct, but I found my article saying their may be no choir at the inauguration, but it wasn’t sourced from the Biden team, and it wasn’t certain, so who knows. The bit about the tab cats not practicing or performing still applies.
To the original post, many of those reasons probably apply to people. Probably some of the leaders watch a bit too much OAN and have trouble telling truth from fiction, some don’t want to annoy the base, and some don’t even know the tradition at all. And hopefully some of them think congratulations are overdue.
In any case, it’s too late to congratulate on election results. Too late to be meaningful anyways. Maybe we’ll see something after the inauguration.
Eli, “it’s hard for me to dismiss some of the “glitches” we saw on election night change votes pretty consistently from Democrat to Republican”
So supposed glitches benefited the Republicans? I think you probably meant the opposite. Again, evidence? I’m sure some cases can be found. But enough to overturn the results of this election? That would amount to glitches on the scale of terms of thousands. Extremely unlikely.
“Democrats had four years to call Trump an illegitimate President. I think the least they can do is allow Trump two months to make his own case against Biden”
1) Democrats conceded that Trump won the election the day after. 2) Trump’s campaign had contact with people with ties to the Kremlin. A GOP-led inquiry has found as much. 3) The Mueller report laid out a case for 10 instances of obstruction of justice committed by Trump, but said he could not indict a sitting president, punting the matter of indictment to Congress in which Republicans controlled the Senate. 4) Trump has routinely tried to subvert and delegitimize republic-based democracy.
There is no equivalent to Trump or Trump supporters on the Democratic side. The scale of delusion is simply greater on the Republican side and the rampant denial of the plain and clear results of the 2020 election which have shown a Biden victory for weeks is yet one more display of this mass delusion. To explain away the bad behavior of Trump, his supporters, and cowardly Republican politicians (at least those who refuse to acknowledge the obvious) by invoking bothsidesism is intellectually dishonest. Bothsidesism truly is a toxic argumentative tactic designed not to have fair discussion but as a diversion and smokescreen, and an excuse not to own up to the bad behavior of a political party to which one has sympathies.
I’m going to defend the Church on this one. Here’s the country we live in and the country the Church has to try to navigate: I just looked it up…65-70% of Dems believe that Trump won in 2016 due in part to Russian collusion. That theory was proven to be false but no matter, 65%+ of Dems still believe it.
Likewise, roughly 70% of Republicans believe that Biden won the 2020 election due to fraud. He stole the election. The recounts that back up the original vote counts don’t matter, Republicans still believe it.
To both groups (die hard partisans) I say: get real. But this is what the Church has to deal with and so maybe just maybe they have decided to wait until the Electoral certifies the election on Dec. 14.
@Elisa – Great points Elisa and thanks for bringing us back to the topic at hand — is the church justified in not having extended congratulations to Biden yet ;). Based on many of the posts here, it seems apparent that the majority of us answer this question based on our existing biases for or against the GA’s. We can all throw our biased-guesses into the ring, or go searching for some precedent over the past several elections that might explain it. Or we can just wait until the congratulations come. I’m hoping that as part of the forthcoming congratulations, there will be a sentence that sheds light on the delay. Perhaps a naïve hope?? We’ll see.
BTW, in all honesty, I’m not really relying on evidence of voter fraud to turn up so that Trump can remain in office. Like you, I haven’t been paying a lot of attention to what the media is saying. I’m content to wait and see what happens. If Biden is sworn in, so be it. For me, it was much different emotionally when Obama was sworn in, but I don’t feel that way about Biden should he be sworn in. Not because I like Biden’s policies any more than I liked Obama’s, but more because I am trusting that Christ is in charge and aware of us. Difficult times have been prophesied, and I think they are coming soon, regardless of whether Trump or Biden is the next president.
John W writes “So supposed glitches benefited the Republicans? I think you probably meant the opposite.”
I did mean the opposite. Thank you for catching that. And I already stated I would be welcome to evidence for or against both sides. CNN’s live feed saw the democratic candidate for Kentucky governor rise by 500+ votes while the Republican vote dropped by the exact same number. Some got that on video. And just the fact that Trump consistently led in the swing states he won previously until 3 or 4 in the morning, only to have the tally stop for a while with Biden then catching up afterwards has got to push the needle on any sane person’s BS detector by just a little bit. I don’t think Democrats outvote Republicans through absentee ballots by that much. To call it delusional is a very large oversimplification.
“There is no equivalent to Trump or Trump supporters on the Democratic side.”
Steve Scalise certainly wasn’t shot by a Trump supporter. Antifa and BLM have caused more damages to businesses and property than any Trump supporter I know has. I don’t think I’ve heard Biden disavow that violence as often as I’ve heard Trump denounce white supremacy (which I also denounce and don’t understand what exactly they think Trump is doing for them). What your statement shows me is a real lack of understanding of just how varied Trump supporters are.
I did not vote fore Trump in 2016. I did this year. He governed far more conservatively than I thought possible. Most of those accomplishments struggled to get air time in mainstream media, and even on Fox and social media. I thought most of what Trump did made the federal government smaller, though at times he did the opposite. I felt he should be called out where necessary. I still feel that way. I can’t stand his personal life, and I wish he would lay off the tweets, but I felt the good he accomplished outweighed that. And if he made it through the next four years, a much more polite Pence was waiting (and oddly enough, many on a more liberal forum than even this one that I frequent are more afraid of Pence than they are Trump). I’ll freely admit some biases. The fact that I’m here is evidence that I routinely try to challenge them. I think if one is unable to admit a similar bias on the other side, it can be just as bad as this “bothsideism” you write of.
Really, I don’t envy the Church in any action it has to take. Even the most well-meaning and innocent statements (or lack thereof) seem to anger more and more people. Sometimes I’m amazed they still do conference as often as they do.
Even AG Bill Barr found the courage and clarity to make a public statement in support of the legitimacy of the election results. …and he has to face Trump down for 6 more weeks while trying to broker a pardon!
josh h, Russia interfered in the 2016 to the benefit of Trump. That is plain fact beyond any reasonable dispute. Did the 2016 Trump campaign collude with Russia to swing the 2016 election in his direction? Absolutely. In August 2020 a GOP-led Senate panel that spent three years investigating Russian interference into the 2016 election produced a 1,000-page report detailing a vast number of contacts between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin and other people with ties to the Kremlin (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/politics/senate-intelligence-russian-interference-report.html). Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference yielded 199 criminal charges, 37 indictments or guilty pleas, and 5 prison sentences. He also laid out a detailed case for at least 10 counts of possible obstruction of justice by Trump. What Mueller said he was unable to find was strong evidence that contact between the Trump campaign and Russia or another foreign government that would meet current legal definitions of conspiracy. But again, it is very plausible to believe Trump’s obstruction made it difficult for the Special Counsel’s investigation to find anything on the level of conspiracy.
On the other hand, is there anything that would remotely suggest that the 2020 election was rigged in favor of Biden? Trump has filed more than 40 lawsuits so far to have all but one tossed out. Many of these suits have been tossed by Trump-appointed judges as well. Recounts show no significant change at all.
It is perfectly reasonable to believe that the 2016 election was tainted because of foreign interference and bad behavior bordering on illegal by the Trump campaign. Such a belief can be established on mounds of evidence. Someone could even claim that there was conspiracy, in the legal sense, between Russia and the Trump campaign and it wouldn’t be a far-fetched idea, even though it has yet to be proven by any inquiry (again, Trump obstructed, which is a felony, but Mueller said he could not indict a sitting president and punted the issue to Congress which was controlled by Republicans beholden to rabid Trump-supporter interests).
To believe that the 2020 election was rigged in favor of Biden is simply delusional. There is absolutely no valid reason to believe this.
There is no legitimate comparison between the two sides on the matter. This is a false equivalence of grand proportions. And you appeal to bothsidesism because, as you have said, you are a Reagan conservative who has sympathies for American conservatives. And while you recognize the toxicity that has overtaken American conservatism, you downplay the significance of conservatism’s descent into mass delusion and unconstitutional behavior by saying, without any basis in fact, that the Democrats are somehow just as bad and just as delusional. This is complete nonsense. This kind of logic may seemingly, yet deceptively, be above the partisan fray. Yet it is not in any way above the ideological fray. For this narrative excuses a lot of the bad behavior on the part of conservatives by grossly exaggerating the extent of bad behavior on the part of liberals and other supporters of the Democratic Party. What Trump is doing is extraordinarily bad on a level that it unprecedented in US history. What his supporters believe is unprecedentedly delusional. There is no fair comparison between Democrats believing that Trump colluded with Russians in 2016 and mass voter fraud in 2020.
@Eli I appreciate you being on here and sharing your view when you know it’ll get a lot of downvotes (really I am, not being sarcastic, you are super respectful of people).
But that voter fraud argument just makes no sense. It may be that people typically don’t follow election results as closely as they did that night so this was surprising and confusing to them, but it is REALLY normal for election results to suddenly change because new votes got reported from precincts that were more heavily one party or the other. Not only do I believe that yes, mail-in ballots would have leaned democrat because Trump told people to vote in person, but also, a lot of the early votes coming in were from rural areas and the later ballots from larger, urban, more democrat areas.
I remember in 2010 going to bed thinking Meg Whitman had won the California gubernatorial election because she was WAY ahead in the votes that had come in so far. When I woke up, she’d lost by quite a lot. That’s when I learned about how reporting works and the impacts of republican and democrat pockets in precincts.
Truly would be a magnificent feat for democrats to engineer an election where they win the presidency but lose the senate. A much, much simpler explanation was that Trump bothered enough moderates that they split their vote.
And now I’m yet again far afield because I don’t think the point of this post is to debate election fraud. It’s to determine whether it’s reasonable for the Church to believe there is sufficient uncertainty about the outcome of the election to decline to comment. And I again submit that it’s not reasonable.
Is it possible that there is an answer to this discrepancy that doesn’t assume church leaders are terrible human beings? The last time the congratulations were given was before RMN was the prophet. Could it be that President Nelson has always disliked this practice since it singles out a single nation in a worldwide church? Is it possible that now as prophet he has decided not to participate in this? It certainly wouldn’t be the first time he has made a change in things that were long established practices.
Curious that the people most upset by the lack of a statement congratulating Biden are also those most likely to downplay statements condemning homosexuality.
Eli: I’m probably nearly equally concerned about a Pence presidency as I am of Trump (given his reckless handling of the pandemic in particular, his constant lies, the overwhelming evidence he’s a serial sexual assaulter, and his corruption). Worse than Trump, in my book, are Trump’s supporters and enablers in government. Mitch McConnell is worse. Pence is intentionally a white Christian nationalist whereas Trump just uses them to achieve his goals–he’s not a true believer of their vision (although he is an isolationist). Pence is also sexist, just in a different way. He doesn’t use women for sexual gratification (maybe not even his wife), but by refusing to meet with them he’s fine with limiting their careers. He’s just a gross patriarchal artifact, like so many.
Regardless, many of your statements don’t sound accurate to me. Yes, Scalise (who is pretty gross himself) was shot by a Bernie bro. They were violent extremists, although Bernie himself is not and didn’t incite violence. Your point that not all who like a candidate are the same is valid. If we compare this case to Kyle Rittenhouse, though, who drove across state lines to murder protesters, there is a specific pathology that led Trump supporters, including pastors of churches, to fundraise for this murderer in the wake of his arrest. There is no justification for shooting other citizens based on disagreement. Likewise, Trump personally made celebrities of the couple who “stood their ground” holding automatic weapons in their suburban neighborhood and invoked Kyle Rittenhouse in rallies. That’s akin to inciting violence. More directly he said during the 2016 election that the “second amendment people” should “take care of” Hillary. That was an open invitation to assassinate his opponent. He also said there were “fine people on both sides” after a white supremacist mowed down Heather Hayer in his car. This is new ground.
Dave: I’m sick to the stomach over the fact that the Church is enabling this anti-democratic attempted coup. If there had been any evidence of voter fraud substantial enough to overturn the election, I’d have no problem saying let’s wait and see. But there never has been this whole time, just lies on top of more lies. I can’t imagine the Church believes those lies. If they are waiting until he concedes, that will never happen. He has said repeatedly that he will never concede. I see moral cowardice here, fear of their own base, and a complete disconnect from truth. As I showed in my post a week ago, the Church has been chipping away at their statement on political neutrality for years. They aren’t neutral anymore. They quit being neutral about political policies in 2008, including reversal of the prohibition against using member rolls and meetingplaces. As of 2016 they quit being neutral about candidates (when they cut the part about only voting for those with integrity and good moral character), although they aren’t yet to the point that they will openly endorse a candidate. Instead they can dog whistle. Well, now that I can hear those whistles, I can’t unhear them.
@KLC, “Could it be that President Nelson has always disliked this practice since it singles out a single nation in a worldwide church?”
Given that he recently did a worldwide devotional about a U.S. holiday, and Oaks’ conference talk explicitly addressed accepting U.S. election results, no, I don’t think that’s likely. If that’s the best explanation you can come up with I think that sort of illustrates the point of why this is confusing to people.
I don’t think anyone is saying this proves church leaders are terrible human beings. But I think it’s reasonable to expect greater transparency from the church when it deviates from a long-standing and expected practice, particularly when so many members hang onto the church’s every word (because the church asks them to). Sometimes silence speaks volumes and this is one of those times.
Eli,
You need to educate yourself about Antifa: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-about-antifa/2020/09/11/527071ac-f37b-11ea-bc45-e5d48ab44b9f_story.html
The FBI has found no links between Antifa and most of the violence and vandalism during the George Floyd protests. In fact, the FBI has found links between vandals and right-wing Boogaloo Movement that has fostered ambitions to spark a race war in the US. Plus Antifa is not affiliated with the Democratic Party and Democratic leaders, including Biden and Pelosi, have formerly denounced Antifa. The BLM movement, which is an organized movement with leaders, has denounced the violence and vandalism. Now contrast that with Trump’s praise of white supremacist groups and slowness to denounce them.
As for the Steve Scalise shooting, bear in mind that all Democrats denounced it unequivocally. Elizabeth Neumann, former head of the Department Homeland Security appointed by Trump who has also said that she voted for Trump in 2016 and supported him for much of his presidency, came out and said that right-wing groups are a far greater threat anything on the left to domestic security. Trump has emboldened these groups. There is no Democratic equivalent of this kind of behavior. No Democrat has emboldened radical left-wing groups. They’ve always denounced violence where there is violence. Trump also congratulated the Trump train, a group of drivers that surrounded an harassed a Biden campaign group in Texas, that ran a Biden bus off the road. Marco Rubio also congratulated them.
We can continue to do comparisons, but you have to play fair and do the comparison to its full extent. Not just throw out a comparison that smears the Democrats and then duck out. This is irresponsible hit-and-run behavior.
“Like it or not, it’s now The Church of Jesus Christ of Donald Trump.”
The post is good, but what an unbelievably stupid last sentence.
Personally, I think the reason there hasn’t been a congratulatory statement is because there’s been no concession. That means people disagree, and issuing a statement throws weight on one side of the disagreement, which is going to piss certain people off. The Church doesn’t need to do that. I’d say withholding the statement shows more neutrality that declaring a winner when there’s still a dispute (even though Biden clearly won).
“This is irresponsible hit-and-run behavior.” Now, where else have we seen irresponsible hit and run behavior? Oh yeah. Charlottesville.
I agree with Josh H: It’s almost certain that the Q15, out of legalism and prudence, thinks the election isn’t *officially* over. They are correct because, of the two ways for an election to be decided, neither has occurred:
1) Formal, public concession(s) leaving only one potential victor, or
2) A vote in the Electoral College and transmission of their votes to the seat of government (the U.S. Senate).
#1 hasn’t happened (and likely won’t), which is a dramatic and terrifying departure from all elections in living memory. And #2 can’t happen until December 14. So, although the election is over for mathematical and political purposes, it remains technically undecided for legal and constitutional purposes. As a lawyer, I will admit that this is an extremely arcane, legalistic way to think of elections, but I’ll also say that it’s what the Constitution actually sets up, for better or worse. To me, this is a watertight justification for withholding a congratulatory statement, and it’s not inconsistent with any historical practice of the Church (correct me if I’m wrong, please).
So please don’t jump reflexively onto the “Church of Trump” bandwagon of accusations. The Q15 are the kind of people who are far more likely to have actually read (and have an allegiance to) Article II than to have ever put on a MAGA hat. My hypothesis is that, once the Electoral College vote is made public, we’ll see a statement immediately. Let’s see if I’m wrong.
Elisa,
Thank you for your kind words. I understand where you are coming from, but my understanding if that every precint should theoretically be able to process at generally the same speed, regardless of being rural of urban. I realize there can be exceptions. Personally, I wasn’t dissuaded from using a mail-in ballot, but could see how some were. I’m doubtful the ratio could have been that huge.
Hawkgrrrl,
I believe the pathology you speak of is very, very limited to a minority of Trump supporters. I’d love to see them rooted out. I think many other supporters took Trump’s statements and tongue-in-cheek, but they were no less appropriate. I felt many of Trump’s actions spoke louder than his words, though he did denounce more than once. I’m hopeful I understand where you’re coming from, however.
John W. writes “We can continue to do comparisons, but you have to play fair and do the comparison to its full extent. Not just throw out a comparison that smears the Democrats and then duck out. This is irresponsible hit-and-run behavior.”
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Were you not doing the same with Republicans earlier, calling most of them delusional? Can you really accuse me of just ducking out? Haven’t we gone back in forth enough on other posts that other readers are likely just rolling their eyes at us as it goes on?
“You need to educate yourself . . .” I appreciate the link. I read it. I always do. Maybe I’m misinterpreting things, it’s always one of the greatest drawbacks of the internet, but so many of your responses seem to start out so condescendingly. I’m rarely bothered by it, but is it that hard to believe there are Trump supporters out there trying to be good people, willing to engage in conversation, capable of sincere thought, and educated as much or more as you are (and no, I don’t have a PhD like you do but I don’t think an education is ever complete)? If this is how you engage people in person, then I’m a little more understanding as to why you know few decent Trump supporters.
@Eli, I don’t really know why you believe that theoretically every precinct should report at the same time and that staggered reporting is indicative of fraud. Where have you heard or seen that? I have never heard that.
Even if precincts theoretically could report at the same time – they don’t. They haven’t in past elections, and certainly this election had additional complications with so many more mail-in ballots that made reporting even slower. None of that suggests fraud. I just really don’t see an argument. Twitter posts, random pictures or videos posted online, news stories and slow-reporting precincts simply aren’t evidence. Even (later-discredited) allegations of fraud like random stories on the internet generally only involved a few hundred ballots; nothing that would remotely move the needle here. This isn’t Bush v. Gore.
I voted for Biden (shocker) but I can tell you that if an incumbent democrat was acting like Trump right now, I’d be furious with him/her as well. This isn’t a partisan issue for me, it’s a democracy issue.
Eli, polls show over half of Republicans believing that Biden was declared the winner of the election because of fraud. Republican leaders mostly have not acknowledged Biden to be the winner largely because they fear the reaction of Trump supporters. Trumpism had taken over the Republican Party. Obviously not all Republicans (I.e. Mitt Romney) support Trump and have some integrity. When I speak of mass delusion consuming the Republican Party, obviously I don’t mean the few who have stood up against Trumpism. But yes of course, mass delusion has overtaken the Republican Party, and Trump’s ability to violate the law and constitution, lie repeatedly, and attempting to subvert democracy all while enjoying widespread popularity and support by the Republican party and conservative voters is evidence of mass delusion. And no you don’t get to cry Antifa (which is exactly what Trump does) simply because I mention an inconvenient fact about the Republicans. Antifa isn’t the Democratic Party. Democratic leaders aren’t behind Antifa. They don’t voice support for it.
“Haven’t we gone back in forth enough on other posts that other readers are likely just rolling their eyes at us as it goes on?”
The beautiful thing about this blog is the upvote/downvote feature which lets you know where your comment stands with the readers. My comments in response to yours have simply gotten more upvotes and fewer downvotes than yours. Which suggests that the readers here aren’t rolling their eyes at my comments, but they are at yours.
In the bigger picture, the Church’s problem here is how to deal with a country’s political system when that political system starts to go off the rails. If we were talking about any country other than the United States, the Church’s playbook would be pretty well established. The Church deals with other countries’ politics in a pragmatic way. Church leaders gauge the situation and make the choice that seems best for the Church’s long-term interests in that country. Occasionally the Church will take some criticism for this, but most people don’t blame the Church for taking that approach. That’s how diplomacy works.
It’s different in the United States because veneration for American political institutions is so deeply embedded in Church culture. We’ve spent so much time talking about the inspired Constitution and the inspired Founders that we’re beyond being invested in American progress—we feel responsible for it, both in the sense that we think we deserve credit for it and that we feel a holy obligation to save it. That idea of Mormon responsibility for America seems to be an unacknowledged assumption in all of the comments on this thread.
(There are plenty of political problems that can create dilemmas for an institution like the Church in countries throughout the world. Those problems are never easy to handle—it’s never as easy as saying, “We’ll just be pragmatic about it.” The point I want to make here is that the Church’s unique problem in the present situation is rooted in its uniquely problematic relationship to American politics.)
Now America’s president is working furiously to undermine the integrity of the election, giving the ultimate middle finger to all of us on his way out of office. And plenty of members of the Church are cheering him on. America is looking a lot more like a banana republic than it used to. However patriotic they might want to be, the Church’s leaders probably need to start recognizing that the Church should become less entangled with the American political identity.
I’m not suggesting that Church leaders are thinking about these things at all. They’ve given no indication that they are. I’m just suggesting that they ought to be thinking about them. The decision when to congratulate Biden is a political decision, and one that the Church can’t avoid. It’s kind of a mess of our own making, though we didn’t make the mess deliberately. It is what it is, and the only real question is where to go next. It would be nice if Church leaders started indicating that they are thinking about bigger and longer-term issues for the Church in making these political decisions.
If I was worried about down votes, I’d have left years ago. However, if your up votes are as much due to how you phrase things rather than just the content of your comments, then maybe that says more about you and readers here than I initially thought. Maybe you thrive off it. It’s 2020, so I don’t know that I’d blame you. 😉
Elisa. Normally I’d be furious as well. I’m not just trying to hold onto some hopeless cause. Something genuinely feels off, but yes, I’ve been wrong before. Waiting to see seems prudent. And no, I don’t think Trump would refuse to leave. If he did, most I know would honestly be the first in line to escort him out the door, no matter how much they loved what he stood for. And you’re right, there have been differences in the way precincts have processed things in the past. I just don’t recall seeing it go this long in the past, real-time media coverage notwithstanding, but maybe your memory is longer than mine.
@Eli “something genuinely feels off …”
Honest question, have you considered whether you feel those feelings because you want Trump to win or believe he must have won because everyone around you voted for him? Because I will own that I probably discredit the fraud evidence quickly because I want Biden to win and believe he must have won (not because everyone around me voted for him 😉 but because other people outside my state did!!!). I just don’t think feelings are a reliable indicator of truth. I think they have a lot more to do with what we want to be true.
I hope that doesn’t come across as a criticism as you are taking a beating here ;-). That comment just struck me because it’s something I’ve been thinking about a lot as I am realizing how susceptible *I* am to that kind of bias and how deep it runs, and what that means about how I will ever be able to see eye to eye with people whose desires (and therefore beliefs, and feelings) are super different from mine. On the one hand, I do believe in instinct. On the other hand, I think we have to be super skeptical of our feelings, especially if they happen to corroborate what we want to be true / what happens to be in our own personal best interest.
Game of whack-a-mole every time with you. If militant centrism determined truth the earth would be oval. We don’t want to offend flat earthers or call them delusional.
The Australia ambassador plays golf with Trump. He has realised that he must let Trump win, on one occasion he beat Trump, and he was excluded from golf with him for a month.
In this context the conservative Prime Minister of Australia congratulated Biden on the 8th of November. Presumably no more golf, or any other cooperation.
Billy, The precident is that both Obama and Trump were congratulated by church leadership by the 9th of November, so it looks like a conscious decision not to on this occasion, when it is most important.
A member of my ward lives half the time in Utah. She is still saying on facebook she expects the lovely President Trump to win. She is a good person, and I do not understand.
So if 70% of American members are trump supporters, and 73% of them believe Trump won the election, thats about half the members believing Trump won the election. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/2020-election-results-almost-no-trump-voters-consider-biden-the-winner.html
Who do republican members trust enough to accept their advice on the election result? The church is the only institution with the power to help these members accept reality. So far they have refused that responsibility, by not congratulating Biden. I am surprised that Oaks has not come out and defended democracy, after his conference talk.
How can you have a democracy where the leaders, and followers of the republican party do not accept the result of the election. No longer believe in democracy? Many government actions require the support of the citizenry, how can a biden government operate if a large block of the country refuse to accept that they are the legally elected government?
Again half the country are operating with a different set of facts, on all the important issues in America. I can not see how this will be corrected. The church could show leadership?
I have been impressed that there has not been major civil unrest yet. But will that continue when Trump facts are not what happens. Will trump supporters accept another reality, or fight for their reality?
America is seen as not having the community spirit (unity) to join together to achieve common goals, as most other first world countries do. Trump seems to have united his supporters, and his supporters seem to be the group most resistant to unity.
If that unity could be harnessed in worthy purposes, poverty could be eradicated, along with homelessness, healthcare for all, racism removed, and so much more, America really could be great again.
Elisa,
Fair question. I would say that wanting him to win is a very small part of it, although I was greatly doubting he could pull it off even days before the election.
The thing is, for every one person I met who voted Trump in 2016 and was now voting for Biden, I probably met three who did not vote for Trump in 2016, and were now voting for him. In my reading and watching a variety of news sources, nowhere did this feel more true than in swing states. Despite that and talk of a “silent majority” of Trump voters, I felt Biden could have had a sizeable silent following as well. Maybe that is what exactly has played out.
And yet, I felt far less enthusiasm for Biden from anyone than I did for Hillary. I felt most weren’t voting for Biden, but against Trump. Three fourths of election night played out exactly as 2016 did, and then suddenly it didn’t. I simply cannot, in good conscience, say nothing at all is off, but if that’s exactly what we find, I’ll accept it.
John W. I gave your last comment an upvote so it can hold you over until the next time you’re willing to come down to my level and educate me.
I’m sorry, I never noticed that the church was politically neutral. When did that happen? Was it before or after the email from my stake telling me how to vote on a recreational marijuana initiative?
Not to mention Prop H8 in CA.
…or any measure involving full civil rights for gay Americans going back to the 90s and Hawaii.
Easily offended, too. So long.
Ethan & Alice: It definitely looks to me like the Church wanted to be credited for being politically neutral, but they abandoned it little by little since Prop H8 (well, they literally threw it to the wind, contradicting all prior statements, suddenly claiming that the Church *always* exercises its right to weigh in on so-called moral issues. Even though that was Monson who eradicated the statement to the members about political neutrality and opened the floodgates for strong-arming members to phone bank and donate to a cause that many of them weren’t even interested in, let alone supportive of, Nelson seems equally interested in using the membership as a voting bloc by dispensing opinions on policies like recreational marijuana without actually providing a single defensible argument to explain it.
Loursat: The reality is that in a gerontocracy, no individual leader really needs to think more than about 5 years into the future. The future is hard for any of us to imagine, but God gives these guys the term limit of mortality and advanced age.
Maybe the mistake is looking to the 15. Perhaps we should be turning our expectations to the Newsroom. /s
I found this article by the conservative National Review sums this clown show perfectly.
Trump’s Disgraceful Endgame
https://apple.news/AeqNZSQTSQ5akbPXLkx5cww
The Church is probably holding out hope that Donald Trump will be able to sweep aside the American democracy and remain in office. That would provide an opportunity for the Choir at Temple Square to perform at the Trump Coronation to be held at Mar-a-Lago.
Interesting post–but more for what it reveals about the author’s (Dave B’s) political stance than about the LDS leadership’s. Move along here, people.
I just wonder what, if any, personal characteristics would Republicans deem disqualifying to represent them as POTUS? (not policy issues)
That the majority of Mormons and Evangelicals continue to support Trump, no matter what he says or does, makes me wonder/question the value of organized religion? Organized religion should be the means by which people become more kind, humble, charitable, honest and truth seeking. Trump demonstrates none of these attributes, yet his followers continue to worship him. (One even comparing him to Captain Moroni).
Trump has a long history of conning people. (As he is doing right now soliciting donations to fight the election results).
For example,
Trump set up a charity and then had to shut it down and pay $2 million for solicitation of donations without a license and misuse of funds–including funds for Veterans etc. Then there is Trump University which was ordered to pay $25 million to students he defrauded.
““Honesty is more than not lying. It is truth telling, truth speaking, truth living, and truth loving.”
(James E. Faust)
“Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or anyone else.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
What are Church leaders waiting for?
Their silence is deafening.
Geoff – The precedent (congratulating previous presidents by 9 November) is distinguishable, because in all prior cases, their opponents had already conceded by that date. This election really is different in that dramatic way. It’s strange (in a macabre sort of way) that we’re all expecting institutions (like the Church) to pretend that nothing is different this time. That is exactly the wrong response to such egregious norm violation. Even journalists and heads of state who have congratulated Biden have mostly taken Trump’s silence as par for the course with him. Where’s the outrage? Did it just run out of steam sometime earlier in his term?
We should create institutions that punish antidemocratic conduct like Trump’s. And the Church, being neutral as to candidates, isn’t the right place to look. No serious student of history should expect the Church to solve a political problem this large. Instead, as Loursat says, the best move may be a graceful disentanglement.
So direct your rage at the *political* actors who’ve either (1) not congratulated Biden or (2) failed to clearly and firmly condemn Trump’s silence. The Church’s silence is a symptom, not a cause.
Really The church of Jesus Christ of Donald Trump. That is a terrible statement I would be ashamed to even write that down. Get real obviously it is to soon to issue a congrats until everything is cleared up and that makes sense to me.
Thanks for the comments, everyone, and the wide-ranging discussion.
alice: “{w}aiting for Trump to concede is a complete fools’ errand.” Exactly, first since he won’t agree, and second because who on earth thinks it’s a good idea to outsource your ethical decisions to Trump? LDS leaders should stop deferring to Trump (what they seem to be doing and what many commenters think they should do by waiting for a concession or signal from Trump) and just DO THE RIGHT THING. Most foreign leaders have figured this out and acknowledged his victory and congratulated Biden. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM with LDS leaders?
josh h: “I’m going to defend the Church on this one.” I’m waiting for someone to do this. It would be in the form, “The Church has not yet acknowledged Biden to be the President-Elect because X.” Going on about the 2016 election doesn’t work because the Church acknowledged Trump the next day. Saying Trump hasn’t conceded yet won’t work because he will never concede. Somebody just give me a one-sentence explanation/justification that makes sense.
Angela C: “I’m sick to the stomach over the fact that the Church is enabling this anti-democratic attempted coup.” Spot on, as always. Doesn’t anyone else care? And if the Constitution is DIVINELY INSPIRED, as Mormons and leaders so often claim, you’d think they’d make a little more noise when someone comes along trying to wreck it?
Billy Possum says wait for a concession or for the Electoral College to vote. But waiting for a concession is outsourcing the decision to Trump (and everyone is offended I’m saying that what the LDS leadership is doing, taking their orders from Trump) and waiting for the formal Electoral College vote is something they have never done before. Waiting until it is very very certain what the Electoral College outcome will be is reasonable. That’s what most foreign leaders have done, in which case an LDS statement should have come out two weeks ago. Again, give me a coherent reason they haven’t issued a statement.
Connie doesn’t like my jab at The Church of Jesus Christ of Donald Trump. Look, Mormons voted for Trump at a higher percentage (around 70%) than any particular religious group. That’s real data that supports my claim that we have become the Church of Jesus Christ of Donald Trump. And the deference the LDS leadership is paying to Trump by not acknowledging Biden won the election is a second fact that supports it. If you disagree, give me some facts to the contrary. Explain why Mormons love Trump despite all his deplorable Trumpishness. Explain why LDS leadership is deferring to Trump when they ought to be doing just the opposite. Mitt Romney saved the Utah Olympics. Maybe he can save the Utah Church. Let’s make him President (of the Church).
Dave,
The coherent reason is that there’s been no concession. Earlier congratulations in prior elections were based not on predictions (even near-certain predictions) of the EC outcome, but on public concessions (though the concessions *coincided* with near-certainty about the EC vote). It is black letter law that, when one party to a legal contest gives up, the contest itself ceases to exist. When Kerry and McCain and Romney and Clinton conceded, the EC outcome became legally, constitutionally irrelevant – a mere formality. Which is why, in the past, the Church hasn’t needed to wait for the EC vote. There was no longer an election contest for the EC to resolve.
Again (and you didn’t really respond to this point): It’s Trump that has changed all this, not the Church. Trump, in his pathological obstinance, made the EC vote actually matter, for the first time in modern history. This is *not* normal, and the Church’s abnormal response makes complete sense.
You can argue about whether the Church or others *should* wait for a legal resolution; I’m simply saying that it *is in fact* doing so. Where’s the incoherence?
TL;DR: “[W]aiting for the formal Electoral College vote is something they have never done before,” in Dave’s words, precisely because the refusal to concede has never happened before.
Last post, I promise.
I’ve tried really hard to stay out of this one, but misinformation continues to multiply.
Let’s start with concessions. Billy Possum says “It is black letter law that, when one party to a legal contest gives up, the contest itself ceases to exist.” Not in elections. Concessions have no legal significance.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/04/election-concession-tradition-trump-biden-presidential-race-2020/6169639002/
According to that same article, “As a legal matter, a candidate unwilling to concede can contest the election into January.” In other words, even after the EC has voted. That makes concession an entirely unworkable standard. The EC vote is at least a workable standard, but if used in this case, I would expect the Church to adhere to it in the future too.
As for the wild vote swings overnight, that had nothing to do with which precincts count fastest–it was overwhelmingly a function of when mail-in ballots were counted relative to in-person ballots. This was explained in the media before the election and multiple times during the count itself (although some reporters could not help falling back into old patterns.) Florida and Ohio counted mail-in ballots first, giving Biden a lead that he eventually lost. Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin counted mail-in ballots last, giving Trump a lead that he eventually lost. In Pennsylvania, at least, the Democrats tried to change the rules so that mail-in ballots could be counted earlier, but the Republican legislature would not go along. (Cynics would say they were counting on the resulting confusion to discredit their own State’s vote. I was inclined to believe that, but the legislature’s refusal to consider sending an alternative set of electors to the EC has convinced me that I misread their motive.)
Although precinct-specific counting speeds were not a significant factor in this election, they have been in the past and might be in the future. The fallacy lies in assuming that all precincts are roughly the same size. In fact, rural precincts are typically much smaller than other precincts (a little more than half the size), so it doesn’t take as long to count their votes. (For 2004 data, see https://web.archive.org/web/20061214025307/http://www.eac.gov/election_survey_2004/chapter_table/Chapter13_Polling_Places.htm)
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
Billy, I think you’re on the wrong path here. This is an election, not a legal case. The concession is an informal acknowledgment by one party that they have lost the election, but it has no formal effect (it doesn’t end the election process) and it can be withdrawn, as Al Gore did in 2000. And he was perfectly justified in retracting his concession on the facts of the 2000 election. Basing acknowledgment on the opponent’s concession in earlier elections was a convenient decision point, but if a losing candidate refuses to concede, that doesn’t mean you wait until the inauguration or the Electoral College formal vote to proceed. That, in fact, would fly in the face of applicable statutes (see below) as well as common sense. I don’t think many people sincerely believe that is the appropriate response; that’s just a pretense those supporting Trump us to extend the election process and give him more time to engineer a de facto coup, retaining office despite losing the popular vote by 6 million votes and the Electoral College by a landslide.
It is certainly a fact that Trump is disregarding many traditional norms — which were there for good reason, and Trump’s willingness to transgress those norms are for his own personal or financial benefit, not for any benefit to the country. That violates his oath of office, of course, but that seems of little importance to Trump or his supporters. But there is no reason the Church or any other person or entity has to go along with Trump. “Oh, let’s wait until the Electoral College formal vote proceeds before acknowledging that Biden won the election” is an indefensible position. The networks don’t take that view. Foreign leaders don’t take that view. Importantly, the Presidential Transition Act doesn’t take that view, instead quite clearly telling the GSA to initiate a transition, including funding for the incoming president and access to federal officials and security briefings, when there are clear “apparent successful candidates” (referring to the President-Elect and the Vice President-Elect). The GSA determination (technically “ascertainment’) was designed to be a ministerial determination, not a political one, meaning the GSA administrator should make that determination following clear facts in the normal course of business, not (as she did) taking orders directly or indirectly from Trump. But that’s just one more effective feature of our government that has been wrecked Trump and his spineless, brainless, gutless, partisan GSA administrator.
So waiting for a concession is a position espoused only by those who support Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of a free and fair election. Is that what you think LDS leaders are doing, supporting Trump’s attempt to manufacture a de facto coup?
“Antifa and BLM have caused more damages to businesses and property than any Trump supporter I know has.” [Except the “I know”, this is a demonstrably erroneous statement.]
Peaceful protests are one of the rights granted in the First Amendment.
Objective findings from ACLED (Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project)
(Summary of findings)
[“non-state actors” refers to self-styled militia groups. See informative TIME article at the end.]
[Links to follow.]
“The Black Lives Matter Movement
Nearly 73% of all demonstrations over this period are associated with the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement.2
* Since 26 May, the day after George Floyd was killed by police, ACLED records over 7,750 demonstrations associated with the BLM movement across more than 2,440 locations in all 50 states and DC
* States with the most events: California (819), New York (430), Florida (380), and Illinois (331)
* The vast majority of these events — more than 93% — involve non-violent demonstrators
* Approximately 9% of all demonstration events associated with the BLM movement — or nearly one in 10 events — have been met with intervention by police or other authorities
* Of these interventions, government personnel used force3 in more than half — at least 54%
* The majority of these events are reported in California, Oregon, and New York
* Authorities have also targeted journalists covering BLM demonstrations: ACLED records over 100 events of government violence against the media during demonstrations in 31 states and DC
* State intervention and use of force in demonstrations has increased relative to this time last year
* Non-state actors are becoming more aggressive and are increasingly engaging demonstrators
* Since Floyd’s killing, ACLED records over 100 events in which non-state actors intervened in demonstrations, including militia groups as well as individual attackers
* Individual perpetrators — sometimes linked to hate groups like the KKK — have launched dozens of car-ramming attacks targeting demonstrations around the country
* ACLED records activity by over 20 distinct militia groups across the US during this period, and non-state actors are engaging in demonstrations more often relative to this time last year
* Armed individuals are also becoming more common at demonstration events; in some cases they are present without engaging in the demonstrations — claiming to ‘keep the peace’ if not openly intimidate perceived ‘enemies’ — while in others they have engaged directly in demonstrations associated with the BLM movement. In total, over 50 such incidents are recorded since late May
* The BLM movement has prompted a series of counter-protests, and many have turned violent
* Since May, over 360 counter-protests have been reported around the country
* Of these, more than 40 — nearly 12% — turned violent
* Counter-protests are growing and increasingly turning violent relative to this time last year
Globally, in the weeks following Floyd’s death, ACLED records at least 8,700 demonstrations in solidarity with the BLM movement across 74 countries.4”
TIME: “Armed Right-Wing Groups Aren’t ‘Militias’—We Need to Stop Calling Them That” (10/30/2020)
ACLED link:
https://acleddata.com/2020/08/31/us-crisis-monitor-releases-full-data-for-summer-2020/
TIME link:
https://time.com/5905374/armed-rightwing-groups-are-not-militia/
thank you @LastLemming and Dave B for confirming that a presidential candidate’s concession is legally irrelevant.
Voters (via the EC) pick the president. If we gave legal effect to a concession, theoretically the winning candidate could concede to the loser, and the loser would become president despite not having won the election, giving the conceding candidate absolute power to pick the president over the will of the actual voters. Not how it works. Not a good excuse for remaining silent.
I wish our leadership would be explicit but they do show what they think if one pays attention..
Trump is the first President not given his genealogy by our church leaders. I interpreted it that this guy is so different it’d be a waste. He was given a statue of Christ when he came to Salt Lake and Eyring looked as if he were introducing Trump to Jesus for the first time in his life. Trump looked baffled as to why they’d think a statue of Christ is something he’d want because being crucified makes someone a loser. I know for a fact that at least one apostle did not vote for Trump. I find it odd to suppose this one apostle would not have discussed with the others and that they would not have agreed. Trump showed everyone who he was before the 2016 election. The Twelve had to know Clinton had not grabbed any man’s crotch and bragged, paid taxes, paid her bills, didn’t incite violence at her rallies, didn’t suggest that in the good old days we could just kill whomever without consequence, didn’t say crude things like her daughter ‘s breasts were such a “rack” that Bill would have dated her. Trump showed us he’s a cruel immoral bully and a fraud who married a woman who posed in lesbian porn photos–frame one of those and hang it on the wall next to the Proclamation on the Family while telling preparing your next porn talk? I don’t think so. At least we don’t have photos of Bill out there doing his albeit “straight” sexual escapades. They saw Trump make Steve Bannon , white supremacist, his National Security Chief.
They heard and saw Mitt Romney and Jeff Flake stand up and speak out for what’s right. They saw Trump use fear and negativity–which are not of God. Elder Christofferson made it clear that he knew and liked Bob Woodward–on Lds.org. Uchtdorf talked about and had a video on LDS..org about Fascism and the Berlin Wall–the year Trump is talking about building the wall.
When Trump was denigrating immigrants, our church leaders disagreed, asking to view them with compassion. The apostles travel the world and hear from other leaders what they think of our President. Right after 2016 election, Pres. Nelson asked whether the, MOSTLY CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN members know how not to be deceived and get revelation to know the truth. We were told to focus on Christ and be like Him. Elder Hales made the comment that you don’t vote on one issue only. Recently, Dallin Oaks said people should accept the results of the election. He knows it isn’t rigged. IF you have ears to hear, that is what you hear. He said Black Lives Matter.
Peaceful protest is a constitutional right we all have. Pres. Nelson visited with black leaders and the photos were on the church website. The apostles do make it clear if one is paying attention.
I wish they’d be absolutely explicit. You’d think these conservative members would turn around and do the right thing if he told them they were wrong.
All of that doesn’t sound like the Twelve disagreed on which candidate embodied gospel principles the best. Do the apostles fall for fear and negativity? Would they vote for the most contentious candidate when they know contention is of the devil? No.
It may be that the silence is hoping to keep the mostly republican membership or it is part of the plan –six virgins are ready and six won’t be.
No matter what they say or do, it won’t change that prophecy. Until the Second Coming, we’re just going to live with half the church thinking it’s righteous to hate when you’re on the right side.
p.s. I also think it may be courteous policy not to congratulate the winner until the other concedes for neutrality’s sake. I think the church should be explicit and clear about the danger of believing conspiracy theories. Pres. Nelson is concerned about members getting deceived. So point to it and call it out. I wish he’d say ” Conservatives stop trashing liberals and vice versa.Love each other.” Address the hate– that’s
been rising with right wing talk media since the 1980’s. They should have nipped it in the bud back then. It’s a bit late now as it’ s become normal.
ELI—Trump said the sanctuary cities, the democrat ones, resisting his immigration tactics, would pay for it. Democrats weren’t burning down their own cities. The right wing fringe “militias “were coming in because Trump is their guy. The sheriff didn’t want them coming in and more Kyle Rittenhouse situations happening. On FB they posted they were coming in and the police had better step aside because they outnumber them. There were some who came to fight these militia types. And Criminals were looting. Peaceful people were protesting and kept protesting after George Floyd’s death because black deaths kept on continuing. If you go on the Anti-Defamation League’s website, they have to know who and what the problem is because
Jewish lives depend on that.
Sasso,
Thank you for the links.
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
I think we’ve pretty much touched all the bases on the narrow topic of the missing Biden statement, so I’m going to go ahead and close comments. I’m sure there will be similar posts over the next few weeks (possibly when the missing Biden statement finally appears?) that will provide the chance for further discussion.