Backroads

No reasonable person needs Trump to convince them of the obvious fact. 

I'm talking about his bombastic narcissist/boastful brawler personality style.  As far as I can tell, it has been on display for at least 30 years. 
Scenario: Trump gets nominated.  Trump also gets convicted, and runs his campaign from his prison cell.  Trump gets elected, because the Dems run Biden or someone worse.  And because The Donald is simply the best at this sort of nasty character assassination fisticuffs stuff.   First executive act is to pardon himself of his various high crimes and misdemeanors.  
I don't want to calculate the odds of that scenario, but they're not zero. 
No really, 

THE ANSWER: 
I believe all 3 are fake.  These are all accounts that sought membership in my ward's Facebook page.  Folks requesting access answer 3 questions: 
- Are you a member of [NT's] ward, and are your records on our rolls?
- If not, who recommended this site to you?  Sorry for the hassle, we just get a lot of scam accounts and I need to verify you're real.
- Do you promise to follow the group guidelines?
All three of them gave a "yes" to question 1.  None of them appear in my ward directory.  None of them said a single thing when I blocked their account and told them why.
 
I'm grateful I don't have a bishopric member who fights for these spam accounts because "We should let 'em all in, they look like nice people, and maybe they'll learn something and feel the spirit."  I know other folks have to deal with that level of technical savvy. 

If you mean party involvement, I have stayed a registered Republican in an order to vote in the primaries for better candidates.

No cross threading allowed!!!

This is certainly where I'm from. Truth be told, as far as pure political job went, I didn't mind Trump as president. Didn't vote for him, but the job itself I think was done okay. But not only can I not stand him as a person, I never could get behind him as a true conservative (and I realize I'm not the first person to make that complaint). 
My father-in-law is a salt-of-the-earth old-school conservative rancher and he was very much on board with MAGA. Not because of Trump's morality, but your remark about that baser desire for protection was a big one. I think in many ways it was a mere symptom of a much greater disease: many people feel they have to become reactionary just to get some claim for their own values. It's not perfect and I don't think many think it is, but they have to make a choice between one point of craziness or another. 

I think the real problem is the obvious lack of virtue within the political establishment rotting our country as a whole.
Jesus Christ did not interfere with politics during his mortal ministry.   We have no idea if he ever voted for a politician.  He did pay taxes though.

As has been pointed out, the Church leadership has for years released generic statements about “all parties have done good points, vet the candidates as individuals”, etc.  This is nothing new, and I think the article’s author is to some degree making a mountain out of a molehill.
I also agree with @Carborendum in that I think our Church does face a bit of a generational gap, exacerbated by school systems that a) endorse and promulgate the ideals of the sexual revolution; and b) have bought into the cult of authenticity that says humans don’t need to change because what they are is what they were created to be.
That said:  I think that as a Church we have largely eluded the Trump problem, because our leadership never really openly embraced and endorsed him the way many on the Christian Right did.  I realize I’m not really an insider to the CR; but to my outsider view—they spent forty years setting themselves up as the faction of self-discipline and character (especially on matters of sexual restraint), and proclaiming that these were foundational elements of a stable (and Christian) society; and then for the asking they jumped completely into the camp of a guy who had been notoriously promiscuous, had been pro abortion, and had been credibly accused of wife-rape (among other probable character flaws relating to honesty, thoughtfulness, etc).  I think a lot of people felt a lot of whiplash when that happened and started asking “geez, other than gays being evil, what DO you guys stand for?”  And it betrayed a baser desire among many on the Christian Right to seek protection from strong-men with all the worldly trappings of power (particularly governmental power); which again—seemed antithetical to many longtime observers of the Christian Right generally and made their longtime/sometime libertarian allies particularly contemptuous of them.
We Latter-day Saints have problems of our own (one could certainly argue, as many hardcore LDS conservatives generally and LDS Trumpers in particular do, that we’ve generally been too accommodationist with secular governments throughout the COVID crisis).  But a wholesale sellout of a concept that had been a bedrock principle of our spiritual faith and political actions over the last forty years, isn’t one of them.  

Last time I had to cut off my nose before I could vote for the candidate I chose. This time I'd have to cut off my entire head to do the same. Unfortunately, if I cut off my head I would then be unable to proceed. 

I'm the type that usually has a hodge-podge on my voting slip, but I think straight ticket voting gets a bad rap it doesn't deserve.
Voting straight-ticket is often a great way to show your general political values you want represented. You may not like everyone and everything, but you like the general track record of the party.

This was my point - people leave the Church because they are not converted to the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.  That's the reason.  Everything else is just what they say to justify leaving.  Yes, many these days are or will be deceived, others will decide they like sin better (though they won't likely put it in those terms), others will say it's too hard, etc. etc.  But the reason they leave is because they have not been converted.  The way to address the problem is as Alma taught: with the preaching of the Word.

Anyone considered this dilemma before?

Welcome, Dylan.
FCA is just a group of people who want to associate with each other and work toward common goals. It appears they welcome Latter-day Saints as members, but don't want them as leaders. Is this fair? To be blunt: Yes, it's fair. People who form associations are allowed to choose how those associations manifest themselves. If we're honest, we will admit (heck, we will openly proclaim) that we do not see many doctrinal issues in the same light as our non-LDS Christian cousins.
Look at it this way. If your non-LDS friends wanted to join you in your Young Men's activities, would you welcome them? Of course you would. Would your bishop then call them to formal positions of leadership within the youth groups? Impossible, or at least highly unlikely. But that's discrimination! Well...yes. Yes, it is discrimination. The word "discrimination" means the ability to make distinctions between things. We can discriminate between a small cat and a large rat, and pick the cat out 10 times out of 10. Based on that distinction, we decide how we're going to treat the animal. We Latter-day Saints are in fact distinguishable from our other Christian friends, a thing we're not unhappy about. But this also means they probably won't ask us to preach in their churches, even if we visit their churches. They probably won't ask us to pray at their barbecues, even if we show up at their barbecues. And they probably won't invite us to be leaders in their organizations, even if they invite us to participate in them.
Try not to take it personally. Instead, if you're going to participate in FCA, do so with a positive attitude. Don't worry about leadership in the group. It could be worse; they could accept your application for leadership, then demand you change your beliefs and actions. This way is probably better for all involved.

Pix or it didn't happen. 
 
https://www.polygon.com/entertainment/23815723/barbie-movie-outfit-ideas-best-cosplay-inspo
 
(I also dressed as Ken.  There are no pix.)

I told it to tell me about Alma the Younger in cowboy poetry from:
 
Alma's Redemption: Co
  ChatGPT In the land of Zarahemla, a tale unfolds, Of Alma the Younger, a story oft retold. A wild and wayward soul, he once did roam, Like a lone cowboy, far from his home.
With rebellious spirit and heart led astray, He trod a path of darkness, night and day. But a voice from above, like a lonesome breeze, Called him to truth, his heart to appease.
As a thundering stallion, his conversion did come, Breaking his pride, like a bucking bronco run. From a life of sin, he turned his gaze, Finding redemption in unexpected ways.
Like a tumbleweed carried by the wind, Alma found grace, his soul to rescind. With courage renewed, he preached the word, A shepherd to lost souls, his voice was heard.
Through the wilderness of doubt and despair, He rode on the range, spreading a prayer. With the Savior's love, like a campfire's light, Alma's story shone, in the darkest of night.
So remember Alma, the cowboy divine, His journey of faith, like a winding vine. A prodigal son turned preacher so bold, In the annals of time, his story is told.
   

I'm sure it was.  But I remember how I took satire as a child.  And regardless of how ridiculous things were, the mindset of a child takes a lot of it in as truth.
That's a good summary.  I only listened to a couple of minutes to realize he does the same thing with all the videos that I've seen of him.  
He says some things that are actually true.  But he's basically making mountains out of molehills.  Is the movie politically radical? Satire or not, yes it is.  Is it evil?  Well, if you consider the woke movement a representation of Satan in the modern world... Well, I'll let you decide.

Dig it.  Dude is a bit too Irish for my blood, here are my people: 
 
I pity folks who are more than 2 or 3 generations away from soul-crushing life-shortening poverty.  Y'all get comfortable and entitled, and forget how it can be for folks.
(This topic is one of the main reasons I'm a conservative patriot, btw.)

Many miracles taking place there. Here is an awesome picture of one of the church buildings in Laihana. I can't seem to find the zoomed out one, but the fire scorched all of the buildings and cars leading up to the chapel...but stopped right at the property line. Even the trees next to the building didn't get burned down. It is now being used as a shelter and resource center. Pretty cool.

They are the Manataurs. A clan of manly minotaurs.
Most convenient clip

They are the Manataurs. A clan of manly minotaurs.
Most convenient clip

They are the Manataurs. A clan of manly minotaurs.
Most convenient clip

I quite enjoyed the movie. I found quite a few layers of satire going on.
Not nearly the depth of political mongers I feared.
I also feel anyone offended by it was also offended by these guys:
 

I haven’t seen it and have no desire to, but I think the people “offended” by the Barbie movie aren’t really offended by it. They just want attention, or to show off how moral they are, etc. Usual reasons. 

You have to be kidding me – AI (experts) could not solve traffic patterns?  Rather than resort to AI there is a very simple and easy solution for traffic flow.  This can easily be solved by very inferior intelligence by utilizing slime mold – that has no brain or any brain (calculating) capabilities.
Slime mold was able to solve the most complicated and complex traffic patterns of Tokyo.  In 26 hours.
Here is the link:  https://www.livescience.com/8035-slime-mold-beats-humans-perfecting-traffic-networks.html
 
Note that the date on this link is around 12 years ago.
 
The Traveler