A recent Los Angeles Times–Bloomberg poll concludes that thirty-seven percent of Americans will not vote for a presidential candiate who is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Latter-day Saint or Mormon). Mitt Romney a leading republican presidential candidate is, of course, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ. If the poll is accurate, then Mitt’s campaign faces a hurdle not faced by a presidential candiate for over 40 years: religious bias.
Only Muslims Fared Worse
The Los Angeles Times story today points out that only a Muslim presidential candidate would fare worse than would a Latter-day Saint:
BOSTON — Most traditional barriers to religion in presidential elections have toppled, a new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found. In particular, the survey released today shows that anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism are fading among voters.
But uneasiness about some religions persists. Thirty-seven percent of those questioned said they would not vote for a Mormon presidential candidate, and 54% said no to the prospect of a Muslim in the White House. In addition, 21% said they could not vote for an evangelical Christian.
Fifteen percent said they would not vote for a Jewish presidential candidate, and 10% were unwilling to cast ballots favoring a Catholic chief executive.
Challenge For Romney
No Muslims appear likely to seek the presidency in 2008. But the numbers could be a threat to Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (as the Mormon Church is formally known) who is exploring a run for the GOP presidential nomination.
“It is something he will have to address,” said Merle Black, a professor of politics at Emory University. “It will be a challenge. It doesn’t necessarily kill him as a candidate, but he may have to talk in more detail than he ever has before about his faith.”
It appears Romney will have to have his Kennedy moment and deliver the Mormon factor speech, much like JFK did over 40 years ago assauge the fears of some voters. I have previously blogged about Romney addressing the Mormon issue here and here. In light of this most recent poll, it appears that speech will likely be a certainty at some point.
Yet, Mitt Romney successfully ran for and won election as Massachusetts Governor. He also ran, though unsuccessfully against Senator Edward Kennedy for United States Senator–though it is unlikely religion was a major factor in that race. Clearly religion was not a factor in the gubernatorial election–but that was a state contest in a more liberal state, rather than a national election where the voter pool is much wider, a potentially more shallow as well:
His religion apparently was no detriment in Massachusetts in 2002, when he easily won election as governor. Massachusetts is one of the most heavily Catholic states in the country, and also one of the most Democratic.
The governor is from a family that is almost as political as it is Mormon. His late father, George Romney, was a three-term governor of Michigan who also made a brief, unsuccessful run for the Republican presidential nomination. Lenore Romney, the Massachusetts governor’s late mother, lost a Republican bid for the U.S. Senate.
Mitt Romney, who made a fortune as a venture capitalist, suffered defeat in his maiden political outing in 1994 when he ran against Democrat Edward M. Kennedy for a U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts.
I believe the continued obsession of the national press of Mormonism is fueled to a great degree by the continued evangelical bigotry toward Latter-day Saints and their religious beliefs. Evangelicals continue to publically proclaim that Mormons are members of a cult, and that they are not Christian:
Romney is reticent about his religion, citing privacy and contending that candidates should not be judged on their “brand of faith.” But he regularly describes himself as a Christian, saying, “Jesus Christ is my savior.”
Some branches of Christianity do not embrace the Mormon Church. On its website, the Southern Baptist Convention includes Mormonism in a section called “cults, sects and new religious movements.” Kenyn Cureton, a vice president of the Baptist convention, says his church does not regard Mormons as Christians.
“They are not orthodox in their beliefs,” Cureton said. “They have additional books that they add to the Bible, which evangelical Christians believe is God’s word. They believe that there are many, many gods and that you too can become a god in your own world. It sounds good, but unfortunately it is not based on sound teaching.”
Cureton praised Mormons as “very moral, very family-oriented people.” Southern Baptists, he said, “would appreciate that angle. But as far as our beliefs, we would have disagreements.”
Quite Christian of our evangelical brothers to perpetuate this religious bigotry and bias even in the 21 century. Yet, one political consultant, Mike Murphy who continues to advise Mitt Romney discounts this early poll, and its conclusions:
Republican political consultant Mike Murphy, who advised Romney in his gubernatorial bid, said any discussion about Romney’s religion as a potential obstacle to the presidency was premature, and probably misplaced. Murphy also has counseled the Massachusetts governor as he tests the waters for the 2008 presidential race.
“I think the poll is wrong,” Murphy said. “I think this is a classic example of how with polling data, you can find something that is not predictive at all.” Besides, Murphy said, “When he ran for governor of Massachusetts, everybody said there was no way a Mormon would win in one of the most Catholic states in America. I’ve been to this movie before.”
JFK Faced Simliar Poll Numbers:
“If he runs, I think he won’t be judged only through that prism,” he said. “When you break it down to one aspect for a guy, that is a mistake. Polls, I am sure, said the exact same thing about John F. Kennedy a year before he ran.”
Indeed, in a Roper poll from June 1960, 35% of respondents said either that it might be better not to have a Catholic president or that they would be against it. Then-Sen. John F. Kennedy gave a speech on the subject of his religion that September, and he was elected president two months later.
Still, others disagree pointing out that Catholic and Jewish candidates have not faced the same type of bias, because Mormons have never been considered a mainstream religion–a fair conclusion; however, I think in recent years the Church has become much more mainstream, compared with the early Church which seemed often to be at odds with the government and society.
So, what’s a presidential candidate who happens also to be Mormon to do? One of the critical things I think he has to do is to emphasize his impeccable past experience and credentials:
The governor is from a family that is almost as political as it is Mormon. His late father, George Romney, was a three-term governor of Michigan who also made a brief, unsuccessful run for the Republican presidential nomination. Lenore Romney, the Massachusetts governor’s late mother, lost a Republican bid for the U.S. Senate.
Mitt Romney, who made a fortune as a venture capitalist, suffered defeat in his maiden political outing in 1994 when he ran against Democrat Edward M. Kennedy for a U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts.
As a young man, Romney was a Mormon missionary in France. He graduated from LDS-sponsored Brigham Young University in Utah. Romney was president of an LDS stake — a group of local congregations, comparable to a Catholic diocese — in Belmont, Mass., where his family settled more than 30 years ago. He has also overseen a local Mormon congregation as a bishop.
Additional noteworthy accomplishments, courtesy of The Commonwealth PAC include:
Accomplishments as Governor
Elected in 2002, Governor Romney has presided over a dramatic reversal of state fortunes and a period of sustained economic expansion. Without raising taxes or increasing debt, Governor Romney has balanced the budget every year of his administration, closing a $3 billion budget deficit his first year in office. By eliminating waste, streamlining the government, and enacting comprehensive economic reforms to help spur growth in Massachusetts, Romney helped the state achieve a surplus that currently totals nearly $1 billion.
At the beginning of Governor Romney’s term, Massachusetts was losing thousands of jobs every month and businesses were closing their doors. Today, the unemployment rate is averaging more than a full percentage point lower, hundreds of companies have expanded or moved to Massachusetts, and the state has added more than 37,000 jobs in just the last two years.
2002 Winter Olympics
Governor Romney first attained national recognition for his role in turning around the 2002 Winter Olympics. With the 2002 Games mired in controversy and facing a financial crisis, Romney was asked to take over as President and CEO of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee, leaving behind a successful career as an entrepreneur.
Governor Romney has said he felt compelled to assume the seemingly impossible task of rescuing the Games by both the urgings of his wife, Ann, and by the memory of his father, George Romney, who had been a successful businessman, three-term Governor of Michigan, and a tireless advocate of volunteerism in America.
Mitt Romney at the 2002 Olympic GamesIn his three years at the helm in Salt Lake, Romney erased a $379 million operating deficit, organized 23,000 volunteers, galvanized community spirit, and oversaw an unprecedented security mobilization just months after the September 11th attacks, leading to one of the most successful Olympics in our country’s history.
Early Business Success
Prior to his Olympic service, Romney enjoyed a noted career helping businesses grow and improve their operations. From 1978 to 1984, Mr. Romney was a Vice President at Bain & Company, Inc., a leading management consulting firm. Following a period of decline after Romney’s departure, he returned as CEO several years later and engineered a complete recovery. Today, Bain & Company employs more than 2,000 people in 25 offices worldwide.
In 1984, Romney founded Bain Capital, one of the nation’s most successful venture capital and investment companies. Bain Capital helped launch hundreds of companies on a successful course, including Staples, Bright Horizons Family Solutions, Domino’s Pizza, Sealy, Brookstone, and The Sports Authority.
Governor Romney has been deeply involved in community and civic affairs, serving extensively in his church and numerous charities including, City Year, the Boy Scouts, and the Points of Light Foundation. He also earned Massachusetts’ 1994 Republican nomination for U.S. Senate.
Governor Romney received his B.A., with Highest Honors, from Brigham Young University in 1971. In 1975, he was awarded an MBA from Harvard Business School, where he was named a Baker Scholar, and a J.D., cum laude, from Harvard Law School.
Finally, I think it inevitable that Romney must also replicate a JFK moment and directly address the religion issue in an attempt to sweep it away as did JFK nearly half a century ago. This religious litmus test idea should have died in the early 1960’s–but apparently did not. Hopefully not only for himself but other future political candidates Romney can drive a dagger through the heart of this religious bias and bigotry before the 2008 presidential is in full swing.
Note: David over at A Soft Answer also has a good write up on this here.
July 4, 2006 at 7:45 pm
I posted the following at my blogsite http://iowansforromney.blogspot.com/ it’s my take on this issue.
“Explaining the 37% . . . Religious Bigots? The Uninformed/Uneducated? or Politically Calculating Liberal Democrats?”
Yesterday, there were two articles here (Bloomberg) and here (LA Times) reporting on a poll gauging what religions Americans feel least comfortable about in hypothetical presidential candidates. . . .
If there’s one thing I know, it’s to NOT trust the conclusions (or even impressions) of journalists when they are analyzing data (sure, there are some really bright ones . . . but it’s well established that, among educated adults, they aren’t the bastion of brains that many would have you believe). Also, I always look at the source of information when gauging it’s possible “agenda”, and the L.A. Times is well recognized as one of the most liberal news sources in the nation; that they would want to cast doubt on a prominent GOP candidate who stands to draw significant support moderate voters is not surprising.
Also, to reach sound conclusions one must start with sound premises . . . in this case, a poll must ask the right questions and to the right people (I think that the actual questions asked should be made public if they are going to publicly publish the “results.”) This poll, unfortunately, neither ask the right questions nor did it ask the right people; the resulting incorrect conclusions may discourage some potential Romney supporters.
First off, the explanation of how the poll was conducted states ” The Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll contacted 1,321 adults nationwide by telephone June 24 through 27. . . . Results were weighted slightly to conform with census figures for sex, race, age, education and region.” Conforming with census figures is a bad way to gauge what “likely voters” would do in at the ballot box. The number opposed to a hypothetical Mormon candidate dropped to 35% among registered voters and, I would guess, would drop even more among those that actually would make the effort to get to the polls (AKA “likely voters”).
“Support for a Mormon candidate tends to rise with education and income levels, the poll shows. Sixty-six percent of college graduates and 70 percent of those with incomes of more than $100,000 a year say they could vote for a Mormon presidential candidate.”
So the number drops to 34 % for college graduates and 30% for high income earners. So, who are these 30% of high income earners that are opposed to a hypothetical LDS presidential candidate? I propose that nearly all of these are Democrats, mostly coming from self-described “liberal Democrats” who, as a political group, are the most intolerant to the idea of a Mormon president at 50%. They know that Mormons are, almost invariably, the antithesis of their pro-choice, pro-gay-rights, socially and fiscally liberal platform and policies. Obviously, this large block of voters won’t matter in the GOP primary, and I don’t think Romney would be expecting to get their vote in a general election anyways. So I count them as a non-factor.
As the articles describe, there is as much political ideology represented in the 37% figure as possibly, anything else. How else do you explain the following?
” . . . 22 percent of registered voters say they wouldn’t support an evangelical Christian . . .”
The same group of liberal Democrats are rearing their heads here. One alternative explanation is that there is a proportion of moderate or fiscally conservative Republicans that are opposed to strongly religious hypothetical candidates (still wary of the sometimes radical “religious Right”).
So, in an attempt to exclude these politically calculating liberal Democrats simple subtraction between the “registered voters” opposed to Mormons (35%) and Evangelicals (22%) is only 13% (I will address this remaining 13% below.) These two religious groups are as near to “block voters” for Republicans as any of the other religious designations and so the opposition to them is understandable.
“14 percent wouldn’t back a Jewish candidate, and 9 percent say no to a Catholic. Fifty-three percent say they wouldn’t vote for a Muslim.”
Catholics are definitely more politically diverse as evidenced by prominent politicians on both sided of the aisle; Sam Brownback and Jeb Bush for the Republicans/John Kerry and the Kennedy’s for the Democrats. Most people have either already voted for a Catholic for president (Democrats/Independents) or know they would support someone like Jeb Bush.
The Jewish number can be ascribed, in part, to the fact that people are hesitant to fulfill the stereotype of being an anti-Semite. Also, the popularity of Joe Lieberman comes into play . . . again, because nearly all Democrats have recently already voted for a Jew on a presidential ticket. I don’t completely buy the conclusion from the articles that Americans are really that much more tolerant of Catholic or Jewish religions than the other religions listed.
This highlights a major point, that we are all creatures of habit and generally fear to tread into the unknown. Who can say that they’ve already voted for a Mormon for a high office? The percentage has to be somewhere in the low single digits. This is part of the reason that their implication that Mormonism is a major obstacle for Romney is vastly overblown.
So, back to the 13% difference between Mormons and Evangelicals . . . this is the only percentage that I think potentially relates to a religious/doctrinal objection to a hypothetical LDS presidential candidate and the only percentage that would matter in a GOP primary or among the “swing vote” in a general election. This fits pretty closely with the 1998-9 figure from the fledgling Orrin Hatch campaign where 17% of Evangelicals said that they wouldn’t vote for a Mormon (I think I’m quoting that one right . . . I’ve heard it lots, but if anyone could point me to the source I would appreciate it!)
Turning those two figures on their head, we could stretch to say that 83% of Evangelicals would vote for a Mormon and 87% of people from the recent poll do not have a religious/doctrinal objection to a hypothetical LDS candidate. Any viable candidate could work with those numbers!
But wait, there’s more! (Is this reading link an “infomercial” yet?). The religious objection will assuredly abate as the campaign wears on. Much of the objection is based on misinformation or lack of information altogether. As people realize that Mormons haven’t practiced polygamy for over 100 years, that Mormons believe all that Christ taught and view him as the Savior, and that Mormons are pretty darn normal people in day to day life who usually try to live what they believe, there will be less and less concern about having one as a Chief Executive.
However, the majority of any remaining objection will disappear as people evaluate Romney as a candidate and are impressed with his candor, accomplishments, and policies. In the end, I see the fact that Romney is LDS being the deciding factor for maybe 3-7% in a GOP primary and definitely less than 5% in a general election. This handicap will be offset by the strong grassroots movement and financial support that individual mormons will give to Romney, especially in a swing state like here in Iowa.
History tends to repeat itself . . . the LA Times article says:
Indeed, in a Roper poll from June 1960, 35% of respondents said either that it might be better not to have a Catholic president or that they would be against it. Then-Sen. John F. Kennedy gave a speech on the subject of his religion that September, and he was elected president two months later.
So, the answer to the question in my title about what factor is responsible for the 37% is, not surprisingly, “All of the above.”
July 5, 2006 at 7:01 am
My guess is that they simply asked something like, “Would you vote for a Mormon presidential candidate.” This is a terribly biased question–calculated to generate the kind of response worthy of headlines.
I think that if the question were phrased like, “Would you vote against a well qualified presidential candidate just because he was Mormon?” you’d get different responses.
July 5, 2006 at 7:09 pm
Jeff–interesting analysis of the poll. I’m not so sure all liberal democrats are the “evil” here. I for one am what some consider to be a liberal democrat. I’ve never voted republican in a presidential election. Most Mormon politicians, read Orrin Hatch, turn my stomach. But, I’m very interested in Mitt Romney. I don’t think Hillary is electable; however, she is light years more qualified than the bozo who currently occupies the oval office. Anyway, it will be interesting to see how things play out.
DKL–I agree. A different wording would certainly garner a different response.
July 7, 2006 at 12:50 pm
Guy,
I found a blog reporting on the LA Times article which shows that 37% of voters won’t vote for a Mormon. I thought you might be interested.
July 12, 2006 at 10:29 am
In Roll Call today, Karlyn Bowman (of AEI, a conservative think tank) comments on the survey. She notes that the last time a Gallup Poll asked this question (1999), 79 percent said they would vote for a Mormon and 17 percent said they would not. The latest poll was not conducted by Gallup, so the results might not be precisely comparable, but it looks to me like an alarming deterioration in our position.
She also says that “regular church attendees were more resistant.”
July 13, 2006 at 7:26 am
Washington Post’s The Fix has more on Romney and the PAC he set up in South Carolina.
I think the most interesting fascet about Romney in South Carolina is that none of the major donors are from South Carolina.
I still stand by my assertion that when it counts, Protestants are not our friends.
July 16, 2006 at 7:41 pm
Dan, Thanks for the updated tips on the Real Clear Politics post and the WP’s Fix post. I also agree for the most part evangelicals are not our friends, at least the radical fringe evangelicals. There are, however, some who are more moderate, including that blog Evengalical’s for Romney, which is interesting. I’d be curious to know how representative their thinking is within their own community. Like Reagan once said, Trust but Verify.
I can’t believe I just quoted Ronald Reagan.
Last Lemming: It does look like Romney’s going the wrong way–but it’s still early. Some successful showings down the road in early primaries could make the poll moot.