A Loss for Romney, a Loss for Republicans
Posted by jettboy on January 21st, 2008Caution: This post speaks of generalities, and does not represent the whole of groups. It is based on observed trends and noticed statements of opinion.
It has been stated by some that Mormons are the Republican version of Blacks for Democrats. Both vote in the party with wide margins and no one pays attention to them because of this consistancy. There is a difference, even if critics haven’t made it a point. Mormons are not afraid to go independent or buck trends if they feel slighted. That is something that the Republican establishment are ignoring at their own risk.
Here is the opinion that is going to create eyerolls, but should at least be considered; Mormons feel if Romney doesn’t get the Republican nomination it is only because of Anti-Mormonism in the Party. It may not mean anything in the short term, but it is going to sour relations in the long term. Frankly, after this most recent Presidential primary election and Romney isn’t elected then it would only be the Democrat’s stupidity or own bigotry if they don’t pick up more of the Mormon vote for the future.
Here is why the above situation is more than wishful thinking or a stupid tantrum: Nevada and Wyoming. Although Romney would have won without the Mormon vote, the high percent who supported him is worth examining. It is not, as pundits believe, because Mormons will vote for a Mormon just because the person is Mormon. That is a factor, but it can only go so far. Not many Mormons would vote for Harry Reid if he were the Presidential nominee. They see Romney as both a Mormon and one that holds similar political positions. His faith mostly makes them take notice.
Romney’s faith alone is not enough to hold him up with as large a number of Mormons as he has gotten. Mormons look at the two other frontrunners and see red. Both Huckabee and McCain have had harsh words for Romney and his Mormon beliefs. It has been most obvious from Huckabee who said and did things hard to hide as obvious attacks. McCain, on the other hand, has been less direct, but still has said some questionable statements of bias. Two events stand out; his own equivocation on Mormons as Christians and his mother’s loose tongue.
McCain has another problem; his attacks on Romney. They may sound to observers like mere political attacks. However, to Mormons who have heard a few foot in mouth comments coming from him and his camp (an operative comparing Mormonism to the Taliban in case you missed it), his attacks are attacks on Mormon supporters. The “flip-flop” charges are actually something Republicans should stay away from because many Mormons aren’t buying it as politics as usual. As a recent study has shown, dislike of Romney as flip-flopper is for many a cover for more blatant anti-Mormonism. That should be a worry to the Republicans who want to remain a political force. That should be a concern to McCain who wishes to become the next President. Republicans cannot remain strong without the Mormon vote even if they don’t need them to remain active.
Although I am recognized as a staunch conservative Republican, it should make my voice (or those like myself) heard even more. I am talking to you Orin Hatch, Cannon, Bennett et. al. The Republican party is on the path to losing the Mormon vote and they don’t even notice. In case you scorn such an idea, take a look at the most visible practicing Mormons who aren’t politicians. The two most vocal have been best selling and award winning author Orson Scott Card and the long winning Jeopardy contestant Jennings. If you haven’t noticed both of them are the rare breed conservative Democrats. They could very well be the future of the Mormon political movement if Republicans are not more careful. Not to mention that at one time during the Clinton administration the most conservative and orthodox district in Utah that included Provo had a Democrat as a representative. The reason he lost was because Clinton decided to not listen to him or his constituents.
That brings us to why, at least at this point, Romney losing the Republican party will ultimately damage Republican chances with the Western United States. Mormons have long memories and hate anti-Mormons worse than Liberals. If Huckabee or McCain win the primary, then Mormons will feel the person most qualified will have lost because of religious bigotry. It may not sound fair, but too much has already been said and done by both of these politicians for Mormons to ignore. Republicans, vote these two in ahead of Romney at your own peril.
The republicans are losing my vote for sure. I’ve not even considered Romney after hearing his remarks even in early debates (double Guantanamo, anyone?).
He represents the business-as-usual politician to me. While I think he’d be an A+ stake president, neighbor or boss, there’s no way I’ll be voting for him. I don’t agree with his terror/war stance, and he’s been inconsistent in the past on important issues.
If Ron Paul doens’t get the nomination, I’ll be stuck with the usual predicament I’m in at election time:
Who is the least bad of all these people?
Comment # 1 left by John on January 21st, 2008
Interesting post, Jettboy. Personally I think it is a bit over the top, but interesting nonetheless.
I think that Deomcrats have fallen for the same type of trap in the past, so I don’t think you are to far off. The old ’southern democrats’, I believe, were individuals who were liberal on social issues but conservative on moral issues. For many years this fit many people from the southeast US. In recent years the Democrats have lost many of these people. I don’t think it is coincidence that the last two democrat presidents were from the south and did not hide their protestant background. I feel the democrats have lost this group in recent years, to the republicans advantage.
So, you may be right about the same thing happening to the republicans and Mormons. But I am not sure that people outside the mountain time zone are going to care. Mormons are still small potatos politically.
I have met many Mormons who think of themselve as strong republicans, but when you talk with them for a while you doubt they are really republicans at all. Except for one thing - abortion. I say this because I would not be all that surprise to see a shift within Mormonism politically in the future.
So I agree with you at some level, but I do not think many people on the outside will notice - or care.
Comment # 2 left by Eric Nielson on January 21st, 2008
You know I wonder about this. I think it is harder to be a blue democrat than it is for Mormons to be excluded by the Republicans.
The reason is that the majority of the Dems believe in more radically left social engineering than most.
While I have no problems with the ideas of fairer health care or improving delivery of programs I do have a problem with the Democrats largely kneejerk moralism on wars, and what I see as willingness to listen to extremists like the Michael Moore variety champagne socialists.
Now in saying that Republicans extremism is no better (no abortions ever, no sex education, bring the bible into every form of public life, racist immigration policies, extreme libertarianism and the like. But the difference is that often the Republicans are moderated because the monied interests within the party are not interested in the extremes unlike the democrats (George Soros).
Of course I am Canadian so it is not like I get a vote. Yet I still wonder how likely it is that Mormons would wholely skip out of the Repubs.
Comment # 3 left by Jon W on January 21st, 2008
So the take-home message is Mormons don’t really have sincere political convictions and are in fact such thin-skinned, petty whiners that they will take their bat & ball and go home if people keep calling them names?
Comment # 4 left by madhousewife on January 22nd, 2008
On one hand, I think Mormons do tend to support members in elections, but, unlike you, I think that includes Harry Reid. On the other hand, I think we are not quite as politically predictable as everyone seems to assume.
After all, Idaho and Utah elected two of the first Jewish governors, and Idaho elected Larry Echohawk, as Attorney General and nearly made him governor. I’d vote for him again for anything he chose to run for, and his status as a Mormon does have a something to do with that, although not enough to be a deal maker.
I feel like I have to vote Republican nationally because of their pro-life position. But as far as voting in Idaho where I live, where republicans and democrats both tend to be pro-life, it’s pretty easy to vote for either depending on their views on other issues where I tend to be a bit more liberal.
And I probably shouldn’t admit this, but I actually voted against someone for a state office because he was a pompous twit when he was a high-councilor in our stake . . .
Comment # 5 left by C Jones on January 22nd, 2008
actually, madhouse, it is because of their convictions and self-respect that mormon will take the bat and ball and go play somehwere else. They have in the past.
Comment # 6 left by Jettboy on January 22nd, 2008
And where should they play? In the Democratic party, where there’s such overwhelming tolerance for Mormonism and conservative policies? Or should they form their own party? Yeah, that’s a way to stay relevant.
Joining the Democratic party is a fine option, provided that you are, in fact, a Democrat, i.e. that the Democratic party accurately reflects your ideas of good government. As a protest move, it’s pretty foolish. And immature. And pointless. I would be embarrassed if Mormons left the Republican party because of perceived slights against Mitt Romney or even against the Church itself. Can anyone seriously suggest that the overall tenor of the Republican party is anti-Mormon? No, because it’s ridiculous. It’s not like there’s a plank in the platform condemning us (anymore). So some Republicans make anti-Mormon comments. If Mitt Romney does somehow secure the nomination, don’t think we won’t see more of the same (or worse) coming from Democrats. Then what should we do? Leave the country?
Comment # 7 left by madhousewife on January 22nd, 2008
I think you are over reacting on Mcain’s comments. As a Mormon, I have never felt any anti-Mormon hostility come from him.
I think Mormons in general vote for Romney in droves for a slightly different reason. They don’t see anything bad in him. After all, what kind of Mormon flip flops? What kind of Mormon is insincere? When we think of our ‘good Mormons’ we think of honest men and woman. In contrast, most people view Romney as dishonest, and a horrible panderer. We Mormons just don’t see it in him.
P.S. I support Mcain.
Comment # 8 left by T. "Chimpy" Greer on January 25th, 2008