If Mitt Weren't a Mormon -- written February 12, 2008

It has been a week since Super-Tuesday, five days since the Republican presidential field narrowed considerably from three to two with Mitt Romney’s decision to leave the race. During this time journalists and political hacks have engaged in a dizzying level of analysis regarding the many dimensions of candidate appeal revealed in last Tuesday’s contests. Since Romney left the race there has also been a fair amount of discussion about what “went wrong” for him. How did the successful business-man and big-spender on media fail to garner enough support to stay in the race? Was he too perfect? Too liberal? Too conservative? Or, could it possibly have been his religion? The final question, tacked on to every story, but never fully explored: Did Mitt lose because he was a Mormon?

This question easily calls forth polling numbers that demonstrate that large proportions of the US population are reticent to vote for a Mormon. But, it fails to fully address the issue of the role Mitt’s religion in the race. The question that should be asked, and may be more revealing, is this: What if Mitt weren’t a Mormon? What would his fate have been if his religion had not been the defining characteristic of his campaign?

I am not saying that he set out to make it a race about religion, nor that he made a mis-step on the campaign trail over the issue of his religion. In fact, I think he handled it pretty well. Admittedly, as a Mormon myself, I watched the Romney race with interest. I never intended to vote for Mitt. A committed Democrat, the fact that we share a belief in God or modern prophets does not over-come our differing views on healthcare, taxes, education, the economy, war in Iraq, and a plethora of other issues when I sit down to decide who I think should run the country or serve as commander-in-chief. However, like many other members of my faith, I noted how frequently press centered on his religion – more than almost any other qualification, characteristic, or experience.

Which leads back to the unanswered question: What if Mitt were not Mormon?. What if Mitt were a Baptist, a Methodist, a Catholic, almost any other Christian denomination – what would have been his fate then?

It’s simple. If Mitt were a believer in a more “mainstream” denomination of Christianity, but precisely the same in every other respect, he would be the front-runner right now.

If Mitt’s views on Jesus had been identical to those of the evangelical base of the Republican party, there would have been little basis for Mike Huckabee to sweep into Iowa and rally home-schoolers and the Christian-right around the banner of the “true” Christian. The Baptist-preacher-musician turned politician would not have had the in-road he needed to make a splash; his campaign would have fizzled, because the business-man, family-man, devout Christian extraordinaire would already have wrapped up the votes.

The problem in this race was that the more conservative candidate, with whom the establishment was comfortable (as compared to Maverick-McCain who regularly angers the ultra-right) did not provide an adequate degree of comfort due to his religious views, providing an in-road for a strong, southern evangelical who missed no opportunity to talk about his belief in God and brand of Christianity. So, as Mitt had to distance himself from his faith and ask people to look at him as an individual, Mike Huckabee came along as the embodiment of his faith, in every reference asking the public to look at him as a fellow-Christian.

Thus, the more progressive, independent wing of the party turned out for John McCain (as they have in past races) and the other two candidates split the remaining, more conservative votes -- handing McCain a victory with under 50% of the vote in every state he won except NY, NJ, and Connecticut.

In all, it is hard to imagine that such a splintering among the more conservatives and such a well-spring of support for Mike Huckabee would have developed if Romney had been a Baptist too.

However, the fascinating thing is that not only did Romney’s religion lose the Republican primary for him, but even as the Democrats are embracing two trend-setting candidates of their own and demonstrating that the doors of their large, open tent can be flung wide open, there have been comments made to reveal that even Democrats may not yet have room for a Mormon. The ideal candidate, the one most likely to be supported by all across the political spectrum, seems to be the individual who professes faith in and belongs to the “right” Christian denomination, but does not follow the religion too strictly or believe in the Bible or religious teachings too literally. Such a devout follower of faith is also politically untenable.

Thus, it is not only those of us who are Mormons who should pause at the fate of Mitt Romney. Religious individuals of many stripes throughout the country ought to stop and wonder what Romney’s fate means for them: can a Muslim, a Jew, an atheist, even, be elected in such an environment? Is purity in political ideology inadequate to recommend a candidate if their personal convictions and ideas about God vary? Are we less reluctant as a country to accept various races, genders, and socioeconomic backgrounds than differing religions?

In reality, the only true answers can come as actual candidates venture into actual races and their actual fates are known. But, Mitt Romney’s failure to secure the Republican nomination says a lot more about our country’s prejudices and preferences than it does about Mitt.