While I won't suggest this is society's distinction between the two, in my mind it's about what happens if you exert independent thought that conflicts with the institution's beliefs and what happens if you attempt to leave the group. Many ex-Mormons claim their former church is a cult and that life in Mormon dominated areas become very difficult for those who have left the faith. Same for Jehovah's Witness but the impact is smaller because not many areas are dominated by them and you don't have to move far to get away from it. On the other hand, the worst cults will hunt you down across the country (and possibly the Earth) if your existence is offensive enough to them, which isn't something typically seen when leaving a mainstream Christian religion. A Mormon in Alabama leaving the church isn't likely to face much social ostracism while a Southern Baptist might, especially if they reject Christianity entirely, but their life isn't likely to be in danger.

Lifted from Wikipedia:

"[H]is mother had given the church about 100 million yen (US$720,000), a parcel of land she had inherited from her father, and the house where she lived with her three children; she subsequently declared bankruptcy in 2002. She had continued donating to the church following the bankruptcy. A male relative later recalled being contacted by Yamagami and his siblings to complain that they had no food at home, prompting the relative to deliver meals and money for living expenses. [..] Yamagami's older brother, who had a longtime struggle with cancer, was not able to afford medical treatment; he died by suicide in 2015."

To me, that sounds quite a bit worse than your average Christian church.

There are certainly some predatory Christian hucksters out there; people like Kenneth "I need my private jet to spread the gospel" Copeland spring to mind, but there are many more (as well as many more abusive ones). Religion is often a comparatively "easy" target for abuse.

However, the religion of Christianity as a whole isn't centred around the concept of "send me your money". I think that's the main difference: is the religion as a whole primarily centred around abuse, or is it just various groups within the religion that operate like that?

There are plenty of cults within Christianity, but Christianity as a whole?

I'm sure there are more formal and academic descriptions, and things can become a bit tricky around the edges for sure, but I find "is it primarily centred around abuse of its members?" to be a reasonably workable every-day distinction.

> What exactly separates a "cult" from any other church?

Usually the difference between a cult and a sect is how hard it is to leave it. church more usually define practice of the "established religions" or as long as it stay close enough to it.

Islam is usually considered an established religion. And yet in some countries run by extremist fundamentalists, apostasy is literally punishable by death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam?wprov=sfla1

I think in this case it would be more similar if all of the party members were part of the same minority denomination. While most U.S. polititions are Christian, they are members of mostly independent churches that are organized into separate denominations. That is one reason that we have generally been wary of Catholic politicians - because we don't want our government to be under the influence of the Pope.