Tim Bridgewater 42%
Mike Lee 33%
Undecided 25%
The sampling error in this one is +/- 4%, and the undecideds in this poll are still logging in at an even higher percentage than the Lee polling data: 25 percent. That's a whopping percentage of people who probably won't know who they're voting for until they are in the voting booth on election day.
This race symbolizes what is true about political polls in general -- you can't believe anything you read in the newspaper.
The only real poll is what happens in the balloting at the voting booth.
This year it makes a difference how you vote and for whom. Whatever your persuasion, please get out and make your vote count for the candidate you choose.
I've been criticized for my early backing of Mike Lee, but nothing since January has dissuaded me from my call back then. He's a rock-solid conservative choice. I like his constitutional cred, I like his family roots, and I like him as a principled man who is not in awe of the party politics or the traditional power brokers in Washington D.C. I like Mike.
He'll bring down the status quo in the Senate and shake things up. I don't think Tim Bridgewater will. That's what it comes down to in my mind.
Join me in making up your mind before Tuesday, and let's send Mike Lee to the Senate in November.
Haven't followed this race too closely since I'm not registered a party member. Lee is much more well-spoken, seems to have a better grasp of issues, which you'd expect from a lawyer with his credentials and parentage. Federal bills and the enormous volume of existing statutes present a legislative landscape so complex that it's difficult for a conscientious voter not to send a high-powered lawyer to D.C.
ReplyDeleteBut...
The BOM warns us about permitting unrighteous lawyers and judges taking control of the government. Now the key word there is unrighteous, not lawyer or judge. But I fear we have unwittingly created a self-perpetuating system of lawyer-legislators, particularly in the US Senate. One source says 56 of today's Senate have law degrees, and 49 of them were practicing lawyers when elected. That is an astounding ratio.
The BOM tells us about corrupt lawyers/legislators whose object was "...to get gain. And they got gain according to their employ." Lawyers have an inherent conflict of interest with both a small, just government and righteousness. It seems that in some BOM periods, they succumbed to the natural man; the love of money got the best of them. Is this not the case today?
You say "he'll bring down the status quo in the Senate and shake things up." Didn't Bob Bennett promise likewise? Do you remember the ads he ran in his first campaign, how he promised to make the 1040 the size of a post card? What did he ever do toward that end?
I remember how a lot of people got very excited about Enid Greene. Forceful, well-spoken, compelling, a fresh face. She fell flat on it.
Greene in particular exemplifies one of my main points: our Capital is the belly of the beast. It is one of the most corrupt places on earth.
There is too much power at their disposal there, and Lord Acton's dictum on absolute power is one of the greatest truths ever spoken. One may go there with the best of intentions, but the place has the ability to
convince you of your own importance (look no further than Sen. Hatch). The pressures to compromise for the sake of politics and/or money are so enormous that one must be a virtual Nephi, Joseph, or post-Pentecostal Peter to withstand it. Money, sex, power, fame - they're all dangled in front of these guys constantly. No wonder why we're in the boat we're in.
You say Mr. Lee is principled. A lot of people are disagreeing with that, owing to his work for the State against Energy Solutions and then
becoming attorney for ES, fighting against the State. I understand that an attorney needs to make the best argument on behalf of his client, and it could be that he had a change of thinking and no longer agreed with the state's position. Others would claim he's an opportunist who chased after bigger bucks. The truth is to be found in the heart and in the
details, not in the sound bytes that we've heard on both sides, and I haven't had time to investigate. If you have, I'd be interested in your response.
I mention all this because I find your enthusiasm for Mr. Lee to be naive. As the examples above illustrate, it's all talk, and talk is cheap. Go ahead and support a candidate, but experience tells us that we
should keep wide open the eye of suspicion. Our public life is full of pandering politicians who have their own designs but few, if any,
leaders. It has been this way for a very long time, and despite the clamor for change, shows no sign of abating.
I would not depend too much on family heritage or priesthood position either. We have a stake president from an outstanding pedigree who is
running for president , yet he is so well known for now taking positions that seem so contrary to his positions of just a few years ago, when he was appealing to a different constituency, that his name is synonymous with a type of footwear.
Continued next post...
We need uncommon men, elites, to lead us out of the mess we're in. But today's elites don't seem to match the character of the gentry who found this country. In my opinion, they seem most intent on amassing more money and power for themselves, at any expense. I fear we are heading towards a new feudalism.
ReplyDeleteFinally, Mr. Lee isn't Superman. He won't "bring down the status quo" or "shake things up" on his own any more than Thomas Jefferson secured our independence all by himself. It took a cadre of wise men, armies of committed followers, and the grace of God to win that battle. It will take at least that much to win ours.
I'm sorry for the cynicism, but this is what a half-century of experience has taught me. I am not apolitical, it's important to be involved. Simultaneously, I think it is important to acknowledge the limits of politics and government. We must engage on the political front, but America will not become what it ought to be until there is personal transformation on a massive scale, beginning with ourselves. For members of the Church and other Christians, that change comes by faith in Christ unto repentance. That should be our primary work and focus. Otherwise, we trust too much in the arm of flesh.
Thanks for the comments -- I think there is little here with which to find fault. Only time will tell whether Lee can remain on the "bright side of the line" or if he turns to the dark side. I'm hoping for the former.
ReplyDelete