NOM

Given the make-up of the new first presidency, then I'm predicting L. Whitney Clayton and Tad Callister.

There's literally no one else I think Oaks and Nelson would want to appoint more. These guys have been hatchet men for a decade, taking heat for every controversial task Nelson and Oaks gave them. It's reward time.

That would be fantastic. But just as I called Rasband, I'll call Clayton as the shoo-in. Callister or Robbins would be the icing on the cake, but they might shake it up and call a non-lawyer white dude from Utah as the other one. Not one from a different "flavour" to quote Nelson, but a non-"standard" white guy. Maybe from Canada or Australia. Can't make it TOO diverse.

I'll stick with my prediction in another thread:

Two, old, rich white guys.

wtfluff wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2018 3:06 pm Two, old, rich white guys.

If they weren't old, rich, and white when they are called they will be by the time they're dead.

I am thinking Gong will be one of them.

oliver_denom wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:46 am Given the make-up of the new first presidency, then I'm predicting L. Whitney Clayton and Tad Callister.

There's literally no one else I think Oaks and Nelson would want to appoint more. These guys have been hatchet men for a decade, taking heat for every controversial task Nelson and Oaks gave them. It's reward time.

Tad R. Callister is 72 and Whitney Clayton is 67. I can shrug and accept that these are very likely candidates. But both of these men are older that Dave Bednar (age 65). So neither one has a firm shot at becoming prophet. If Nelson really wants to secure a legacy, he will need to select someone younger than his wife. Wendy is 67 and is also older than Dave Bednar.

Corsair wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2018 11:13 am

oliver_denom wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:46 am Given the make-up of the new first presidency, then I'm predicting L. Whitney Clayton and Tad Callister.

There's literally no one else I think Oaks and Nelson would want to appoint more. These guys have been hatchet men for a decade, taking heat for every controversial task Nelson and Oaks gave them. It's reward time.

Tad R. Callister is 72 and Whitney Clayton is 67. I can shrug and accept that these are very likely candidates. But both of these men are older that Dave Bednar (age 65). So neither one has a firm shot at becoming prophet. If Nelson really wants to secure a legacy, he will need to select someone younger than his wife. Wendy is 67 and is also younger than Dave Bednar.

It will be a test of legacy verses loyalty. Luckily for Nelson, he can probably split the difference and do both by choosing one who is due and one who is young.

Corsair wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2018 11:13 am If Nelson really wants to secure a legacy, he will need to select someone younger than his wife.

Are there any notable candidates, who embody the social and political ideals of Oaks and Nelson, and in the 55-62 age range?

I'm hoping for Elder Joaquin E. Costa. He seems to be sympathetic to the LGBT+ community. (Which is probably why he won't be chosen)

I liked reading this about him:
https://nerdygaymormon.tumblr.com/post/ ... ys-general

He seems kind of Uchtdorf-esqe too. (Which is, again, probably why he won't be chosen)

moksha wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 12:16 amAre there any notable candidates, who embody the social and political ideals of Oaks and Nelson, and in the 55-62 age range?

Probably hundreds, if not thousands. Unfortunately, we don't have access to the software application that the GA's use to vet potential new members of the board of directors.

Right before they announced the new apostles in conference last time I told my TBM wife "I bet Rasband will be called". Right after that Rasband's name was mentioned. She was kind of freaked out.

I would like to do that again. I think I will go with Clayton...

I too think it will be Whitney and Tad.

Mormorrisey wrote: ↑Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:25 pm That would be fantastic. But just as I called Rasband, I'll call Clayton as the shoo-in. Callister or Robbins would be the icing on the cake, but they might shake it up and call a non-lawyer white dude from Utah as the other one. Not one from a different "flavour" to quote Nelson, but a non-"standard" white guy. Maybe from Canada or Australia. Can't make it TOO diverse.

I've really been seeing a hard push in conservative culture against the idea that diversity is a value. There's a combination of this with the false belief that diversity means hiring based on some criteria other than merit. It's not even spoken anymore, but a reflex that when a representative of any minority group earns a high ranking position. It's a reflex that both Oaks and Nelson appear to have, but that's only from what leaks out to the public.

For all I know they are the complete opposite. However, it would not surprise me a bit if they held these beliefs and intentionally steer away from anyone who has even the appearance of "a diversity hire". If I were to speculate, then I think you'd need to get to someone like Holland before this sort of prejudice isn't at play.