5 ms·

I think your concerns about his previous professions are based on Hollywood stereotypes rather than reality, to be frank. If you want to talk stereotypes, I'd

I think your concerns about his previous professions are based on Hollywood stereotypes rather than reality, to be frank. If you want to talk stereotypes, I'd say Evan exemplifies the positive stereotypes often associated with the LDS community -- kind, dependable, patient, hard-working, etc. With regard to his personal motivations -- he's clearly a patriot, as his record of service as an intelligence officer more than sufficiently demonstrates. I think his motivation is largely to do something, anything, to provide an alternative to the choice between Trump and Clinton. I would likely do the same if I had the same opportunity set that he currently does.

cookiecaper 10y ago
>I think your concerns about his previous professions are based on Hollywood stereotypes rather than reality, to be frank. I've known other field intel officers in real life, and while I enjoy their friendship and admire them for many things, there's no doubt that they're a little different than everyone else. That's not usually a problem in the course of everyday life, but setting oneself up as a political candidate for high office is not everyday life anymore. While you need to be both intelligent and highly skilled to work for intel agencies, you also need to have, at best, a fluid view of personal integrity and authenticity. I don't see how this is based on "Hollywood stereotypes", since movies usually portray spies as superheroes. >If you want to talk stereotypes, I'd say Evan exemplifies the positive stereotypes often associated with the LDS community -- kind, dependable, patient, hard-working, etc. As a member of the LDS community you reference, he sets off my bullshit detector. He's baiting Mormons hard by using specific inside-baseball phrases. He's exploiting the opportunity created by the heavy LDS distaste for both candidates. He'll only rank significantly in states with high LDS populations (evangelicals are generally suspicious of Mormons, and more likely to be comfortable with Trump). I'm sensitive to this kind of thing. I actually think were McMullin not Mormon, no one in Utah would be paying attention. And I don't think that's the right way to vote. >I think his motivation is largely to do something, anything, to provide an alternative to the choice between Trump and Clinton. Ah, but if he's as smart as you say, he knows that there is no alternative to the choice between Trump and Clinton at this point. That ship has sailed. So what's his real motive?
- selimthegrim 10y ago
  Is there not some "white horse prophecy" where a Mormon will save the Constitution in its moment of danger?
  - cookiecaper 10y ago
    Not really. While this is widely believed, it's apocryphal. [0] If we do believe the apocryphal account, there are still a couple of issues. First, it doesn't imbue a duty to vote for a Mormon guy. If the Constitution really were in maximum danger, it'd be dubious that voting in a normal election would be the mechanism used to save it. Second, it doesn't say that a Mormon will save the Constitution by becoming president or anything like that. It says the Elders of Israel (that is, the men of the Church) will save it. That means more than voting for one guy. It probably means something more like being instrumental in a major cultural adjustment that would cause the principles in the Constitution to be valued again. This is harder than voting, so people don't prefer this interpretation. It may not even be literal -- the Constitution could be suspended/ineffective in what we now know as the U.S., but "saved" by Mormon elders who set up a separate government that substantially respects its principles. Whether one accepts this apocryphal prophecy or not, it does not mean Mormon candidates should be favored, and IMO, it shouldn't be a significant factor for Mormon voters. [0] http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/blog/church-statement-on-white-horse-prophecy-and-political-neutrality http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/blog/church-statement-on-white...
  - mdturnerphys 10y ago
    https://bycommonconsent.com/2016/06/05/dear-mormon-voters-of-the-american-west-maybe-youre-the-white-horse-weve-been-waiting-for/ https://bycommonconsent.com/2016/06/05/dear-mormon-voters-of...
    - cookiecaper 10y ago
      I abandoned the LDS blogosphere (the "bloggernacle", if they still call it that) many years ago. This article would be salient and useful if it stuck to its initial point rather than going on to advocate explicitly for HRC. That should've been a separate article. I'd love it if Mormons got a more realistic/normal perspective on the White Horse "Prophecy", as the author advocates at the beginning of the article, but I don't think saying that we have to vote for a specific candidate to invoke it (just not the candidate you would expect) really helps anything.
saosebastiao 10y ago
> I think your concerns about his previous professions are based on Hollywood stereotypes rather than reality, to be frank. But you just compared him to a Hollywood stereotype. Which is it? Is he Jack Bauer or Peter Priesthood?
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 10y ago
  So where does Chuck Norris fit in the continuum?
- leroy_masochist 10y ago
  I didn't compare him to a Hollywood stereotype, I said that the job he did at CIA is as close to Jack Bauer as exists in reality.

cookiecaper 10y ago

>I think your concerns about his previous professions are based on Hollywood stereotypes rather than reality, to be frank. I've known other field intel officers in real life, and while I enjoy their friendship and admire them for many things, there's no doubt that they're a little different than everyone else. That's not usually a problem in the course of everyday life, but setting oneself up as a political candidate for high office is not everyday life anymore. While you need to be both intelligent and highly skilled to work for intel agencies, you also need to have, at best, a fluid view of personal integrity and authenticity. I don't see how this is based on "Hollywood stereotypes", since movies usually portray spies as superheroes. >If you want to talk stereotypes, I'd say Evan exemplifies the positive stereotypes often associated with the LDS community -- kind, dependable, patient, hard-working, etc. As a member of the LDS community you reference, he sets off my bullshit detector. He's baiting Mormons hard by using specific inside-baseball phrases. He's exploiting the opportunity created by the heavy LDS distaste for both candidates. He'll only rank significantly in states with high LDS populations (evangelicals are generally suspicious of Mormons, and more likely to be comfortable with Trump). I'm sensitive to this kind of thing. I actually think were McMullin not Mormon, no one in Utah would be paying attention. And I don't think that's the right way to vote. >I think his motivation is largely to do something, anything, to provide an alternative to the choice between Trump and Clinton. Ah, but if he's as smart as you say, he knows that there is no alternative to the choice between Trump and Clinton at this point. That ship has sailed. So what's his real motive?

selimthegrim 10y ago
Is there not some "white horse prophecy" where a Mormon will save the Constitution in its moment of danger?
- cookiecaper 10y ago
  Not really. While this is widely believed, it's apocryphal. [0] If we do believe the apocryphal account, there are still a couple of issues. First, it doesn't imbue a duty to vote for a Mormon guy. If the Constitution really were in maximum danger, it'd be dubious that voting in a normal election would be the mechanism used to save it. Second, it doesn't say that a Mormon will save the Constitution by becoming president or anything like that. It says the Elders of Israel (that is, the men of the Church) will save it. That means more than voting for one guy. It probably means something more like being instrumental in a major cultural adjustment that would cause the principles in the Constitution to be valued again. This is harder than voting, so people don't prefer this interpretation. It may not even be literal -- the Constitution could be suspended/ineffective in what we now know as the U.S., but "saved" by Mormon elders who set up a separate government that substantially respects its principles. Whether one accepts this apocryphal prophecy or not, it does not mean Mormon candidates should be favored, and IMO, it shouldn't be a significant factor for Mormon voters. [0] http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/blog/church-statement-on-white-horse-prophecy-and-political-neutrality http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/blog/church-statement-on-white...
- mdturnerphys 10y ago
  https://bycommonconsent.com/2016/06/05/dear-mormon-voters-of-the-american-west-maybe-youre-the-white-horse-weve-been-waiting-for/ https://bycommonconsent.com/2016/06/05/dear-mormon-voters-of...
  - cookiecaper 10y ago
    I abandoned the LDS blogosphere (the "bloggernacle", if they still call it that) many years ago. This article would be salient and useful if it stuck to its initial point rather than going on to advocate explicitly for HRC. That should've been a separate article. I'd love it if Mormons got a more realistic/normal perspective on the White Horse "Prophecy", as the author advocates at the beginning of the article, but I don't think saying that we have to vote for a specific candidate to invoke it (just not the candidate you would expect) really helps anything.

saosebastiao 10y ago

> I think your concerns about his previous professions are based on Hollywood stereotypes rather than reality, to be frank. But you just compared him to a Hollywood stereotype. Which is it? Is he Jack Bauer or Peter Priesthood?

0xdeadbeefbabe 10y ago
So where does Chuck Norris fit in the continuum?
leroy_masochist 10y ago
I didn't compare him to a Hollywood stereotype, I said that the job he did at CIA is as close to Jack Bauer as exists in reality.