Decision ‘08

Can a Mormon Be Elected President?

That’s the question Robert Novak has, as he pens a mostly positive portrait of Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Romney is definitely in the 2008 race, says Novak, and furthermore, he seems to be laying the groundwork ahead of his potential rivals. Interestingly, in the midst of discussing a Romney visit to Michigan, Novak mentions a move by Republican party leaders to bar non-Republicans from voting in the primary, a move that would be sure to harm John McCain, with his crossover appeal that may exceed his party appeal.

To answer Novak’s question: yes, I think. But could an atheist (at least an admitted one)? I doubt it…as long as Romney doesn’t make an issue of the LDS, I suspect his opponents will shy away from attacking on this angle for fear of offending one of the more rapidly growing congregations. This campaign is getting more interesting by the day…

18 Responses to “Can a Mormon Be Elected President?”

1 Mark Coffey Says:
December 31st, 1969 at 6:00 pm
utron, of course I mean no offense by bringing up what I consider unusual beliefs, so forgive me if I did offend.

It may be that I underestimate the liability attached…but as you say, if you can make it fly in Massachusetts, that’s an encouraging sign.

beber and utron, thanks for the additional info…by golly, Decision ‘08 readers are so smart!…

You know, it occurs to me that Romney could, if attacked, perhaps even turn things to his advantage with a ‘religious tolerance’ theme…
2 The Commissar Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 3:08 pm
OT: please check your email.
3 bebere Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 3:12 pm
Actually, Nick, as far as I could tell, the only ones bringing up Romney’s religion in the last gubernatorial election here were the democrats and the Globe. To get a taste of the religious bigotry from this great bastion of liberal tolerance, just take a look through http://www.soxblog.com. He’s been following this in great detail for a while, now.
4 bebere Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 3:14 pm
Did I call you Nick? I’m sorry…Mark…MARK.
5 Mark Coffey Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 3:26 pm
Susie, thanks for the tip - did I call you Susie? Just joking - I appreciate it. Have a good one…
6 Clint Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 4:03 pm
I haven’t been following Romney since his unsuccesful senate run in Mass (long, long ago). If I recall correctly, he’s not just a Mormon — he’s a bishop.

Now, I realize governor Huckabee is a reverend, and I have no problem with that — but at some point you really need church and state heirarchies to be truly distinct.

Does anyone know if he resigned his church office (assuming I recall correctly) when he became Governor??
7 Fargus Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 4:04 pm
He wouldn’t be the first. Was it Brigham Young who ran for President, or was it still Joseph Smith at that point?

OK, a quick Google has told me it was Joseph Smith.

I don’t want to come across as bigoted or anything, because I’m not, but have you read a lot about Mormons and their beliefs? It’s very…..interesting, let’s say.
8 Mark Coffey Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 5:00 pm
Yes…very interesting…indeed.
9 Mark Coffey Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 5:01 pm
Don’t know the answer about him resigning or not…
10 bebere Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 5:38 pm
He did move to get the big temple built in Belmont, complete with a golden image of the Angel Moroni sounding his trumpet - as for his being a bishop, I really don’t know anything about that. My feeling is that if it were the case, the Globe would have “outed” him long ago.

Re: the religion itself, well, retroactive conversion aside, I really don’t have a problem with it. I haven’t heard of any “Avenging Angel” posses being sent out recently, either, for that matter. Polygamy? Was outlawed in the late 19th century, though there are some wacko sects that do practice. They’re a minority, though. Heck, I’m sure that there are more polyamorists in MA than polygamist Mormons out there, to be honest.(Admission, I’m originally from an area of high Mormon population, so I don’t tend to get as hot and bothered about them as most folks here do.)

If I remember correctly, it was a Kennedy who was the first Catholic president back in the sixties, and we all know how WEIRD Catholics are, so all things in perspective.

As for Romney’s chances of becoming the first Mormon president - I’m sure that there will be an African American, a woman or a Jewish person (well, maybe not a Jewish person) first. Laying down the odds isn’t really my forte, but I’d have to say that that it would be quite a longshot.
11 utron Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 5:40 pm
I’ve got a certain amount of interest in this question, being a Mormon myself. Not a very good one, obviously, or I wouldn’t be hanging out here. (I keed, I keed.)

I suspect the Mormon issue might be a bit more of a liability than you think, Mark, mostly because it cuts against him from both the right and the left–religious conservatives dislike Mormons because they don’t regard them as real Christians, while leftists regard them as religious conservatives. But he finessed this issue in MA, where I would have expected it to be a fatal liability, so I could easily be wrong.

A point of clarification for Clint: Mormon bishops are selected from the congregation. It’s an unpaid position, leading a congregation of a few hundred, at most. Usually a lot less. Much closer to being a deacon than to being a Catholic bishop. The church and state issue was a more valid concern, IMHO, when Ezra Taft Benson served as Eisenhower’s Secretary of Agriculture when he was also a member of the Mormon Church’s central hierarchy.
12 bebere Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 6:06 pm
I’m quite surprised to see Romney be elected, myself, to be honest. A lot of this had to do with some really classless campaigning on the other side, however. Folks were pretty unhappy with his predecessors, too.
13 Mark Coffey Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 7:05 pm
Do tell…it’s too bad I wasn’t blogging when he ran for election, sounds like I missed a doozy…
14 Mark Galliher Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 9:36 pm
I’m with utron — to James Dobsonite conservative Christians, Mormonism is at least a slight negative; those folks would be more comfortable with a conservative Catholic, maybe even a conservative Jew, to the extent religion matters at all.
15 Mark Coffey Says:
June 16th, 2005 at 10:30 pm
Mark, I agree it’s a (slight?) negative…if it can be overcome, like JFK’s Catholicism, I guess time will tell…
16 Andy Says:
June 17th, 2005 at 12:57 am
If a Mormom could win in MA, anything is possible. What’s more, Mitt has a track record as CEO of business, organization (Winter olympics) and State governor.

When it’s all said and done, I think he has more in his resume than McCain could ever show — records walk, BS talks. Plus McCain was a senator and you know their track record in getting into the oval office.

Another point that will knock down John a notch or two is McCain-Feingold and the inevitable erosion of bloggers’ 1st rights.
17 Clint Says:
June 23rd, 2005 at 1:07 am
ultron –thanks for the clarification. I assumed the term was equivalent to a bishop in the Episcopal church — which is a long-term position of considerable religious power.
18 Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Novak Rides A Favorite Horse Says:
April 27th, 2006 at 10:16 am
[…] Perhaps I’m just hopelessly out of touch, but I find it odd that Mitt Romney’s religion keeps coming up in Robert Novak columns. I’ve commented on Novak and Romney twice before, once on May 8, 2005, and once on June 16, 2005, and both times the discussion seemed too focused on Romney’s Mormonism. […]