In the Nevada caucus, Mitt Romney has a crucial advantage: his Mormon faith.
Just 7.5 percent of Silver State residents are Mormon, but when it comes to Saturday’s caucuses, Mormons will likely constitute a significant chunk of voters. In 2008, about a quarter of Republican caucus voters were Mormon.
“Not only will they vote for Romney,” says Nevada GOP strategist Robert Uithoven of the state’s Mormons, “but they always turn out. No matter what election, no matter who’s on the ballot, they are as reliable voters as you can find in Nevada.”
“Typically political strategists in this state try to zero in on where the LDS vote is going to go, because they are such reliable voters,” Uithoven adds, comparing it with how the senior vote is tracked closely in many states because seniors are such reliable voters.
Advertisement
For Romney, Mormons are a demographic group he can almost entirely capture. Last cycle, according to exit polls, 94 percent of Mormon GOP voters backed Romney. Silver State politicos anticipate that Romney will likely perform about as well this year with Mormon voters.
“Most of them are going to see this as an opportunity to get an LDS [member] as the nominee, if not the president,” says David Damore, a political-science professor at University of Nevada–Las Vegas. “And that’s going to outweigh anything else.”
For Gingrich, Paul, and Santorum, Nevada thus proves a uniquely difficult state to win. It’s theoretically possible to lose the Mormon vote and win the state, but it would require finding a significant bloc of support among the three quarters of voters that aren’t Mormon. On Monday, Gingrich was blunt about the difficulties of winning the state, saying, “Nevada’s tricky because of the Mormon influence, but we have a shot at it.”
There is one campaign, however, that is actively fighting to wrest away some of the Mormon vote from Romney: Ron Paul’s. Last cycle, Paul placed second in Nevada (albeit a distant second, trailing Romney by 37 points), and this year, he’s trying to improve on his previous showing. The campaign has both national and Nevada-based coalitions of Mormon supporters, and is working to make the case to Mormons that Paul’s candidacy, not Romney’s, is closer to their beliefs.
“Ron Paul can really, in some sense more than Mitt Romney, appeal to the Mormon vote in that he’s a strict constitutionalist, and supporting the Constitution is very much part of the Mormon faith,” argues Connor Boyack, a Utah Mormon and a prominent member of Paul’s national LDS coalition. “Though Mitt Romney is a member of our faith, his record and his advocacy and what he would do as president conflicts with a lot of things that many Mormons consider important and believe as a fundamental part of their faith.” One example, according to Boyack, is the conflict between Romney’s hawkish foreign-policy views and a Mormon scripture quotation that urges one to “renounce war and proclaim peace.”
But he concedes that Paul’s platform also alienates some Mormons, who don’t like, say, his stance on drug policy.
Overall, Nevada insiders are dubious that Paul will be able to win even double-digit support among Mormons, much less take any significant portion of the vote. “I certainly think Ron Paul will get some Mormons to vote for him, but not in any kind of consequential numbers,” says Uithoven.
And Romney’s Mormon support isn’t all that is buoying him in the state. Nevada Republican strategist Pete Ernaut calls him the “prohibitive favorite,” pointing to Romney’s significant ground presence. “Romney far and away has the bigger organization and more thorough ground game, because he’s been working here for the better part of four years,” Ernaut says. “And I don’t think there’s any comparison between his operation and the others.”
Even Boyack concedes that it can be tough to persuade Mormons to look at a candidate besides Romney.
“I do know that many people base their support for Mitt Romney almost entirely on the fact that he’s a Mormon,” he says, “and they feel it would be great to have a member of our faith in the White House, just as black people did with Obama.”
I was wondering when the Morman stories were going to break. I am surprise that there is no reference to the irrationalism of Mormanism. That the story first breaks in NRO is surprising. I thought NRO stood for individual liberty, unfortunately, there is a collectivist mentality being displayed here.
I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and I'll tell you that a lot of LDS people are supporting Romney relying on his faith and not on his record. I've heard many members of my church invent every kind of excuse for his record as governor, his left-wing candidacy for the senate and some the weak policies he has today. I am a Ron Paul supporter and there are actually more of us than you might think.
First of all, I want to make it clear that our church does not take a stance on political candidates and has not in anyway endorsed or even subtly encouraged its members to vote for any particular candidate (though I'm sure many people will not believe me on that.) There is no rule, commandment or even suggestion to vote for fellow church members. That being said, it is no secret that Latter-day Saints overwhelmingly vote republican in the USA and most love supporting fellow church members for political office. This is not a religious doctrinal thing, it is a cultural thing.
I think most LDS people don't like Paul because first of all he is not Romney who they unquestionably support. Also, they don't agree with him on foreign policy, like many republicans, and are against his views on things like the drug war (conservatives and liberals alike are selective of their support for the 9th and 10th amendments.) However, most LDS individuals are religious in their devotion to the constitution as written so Dr. Paul may garner support from members of the church who can bring themselves to consider other candidates. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Paul is as perfect as many of his fans do but I think that his vision is right for America and that he is the only one who is serious about our debt and the size of government.
It is very true, as the article suggests, that within the LDS community many people view a mormon president as an inherent good in the same way many black people in 2008 were especially excited to support a black (or bi-racial) president. Most of them think that their support of Romney is deeper than just support for a fellow member of the church but anyone can rationalize anything. Truth be told, the main reason John Huntsman didn't do as well among the LDS community is because he made a few comments that others within the church perceived as trying to distance himself from the church.
I have really nothing good to say about Newt Gingrich; any open minded person can clearly see that he is a bad human being and the epitome of everything wrong in Washington. Rick Santorum on the other hand seems to be an honest and mostly consistent man whom I respect and admire. I think he is wrong on a lot of policy but that is my only concern with him. In the end the LDS community will likely vote for Romney but hopefully there will be some of us who will at least consider the other candidates. Again, this is not a religious doctrine that causes members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to vote for each other but a cultural one.
I'll admit that as a Mormon, Mitt Romney's faith is a factor in my support, but it is not as simplistic as presented here.
Other Mormons cannot rely on their membership to garner support. Harry Reid is anathema to most Mormons because his policies conflict so sharply with core Mormon principles. Frankly, many Mormons are a bit dubious about his authenticity and think he gives us a bad name.
John Huntsman received very little Mormon support in part because he wasn't conservative enough, but also because he refused to stand up for Mormon beliefs. He wouldn't admit to being a doctrinaire Mormon. Instead of his true belief, it was his "faith tradition." That is a big turn-off for a people with a persecution complex eager for someone to stand up for them in the main stream.
Mitt Romney is "dyed-in-the-wool". He served as a Bishop and a Stake President. That goes a long way to building his credibility in the Mormon community. He is trusted as a true Mormon. In many respects, this dampens some of the doubts about his conservatism. "If he really believes as I do, he can't possibly be as liberal as he came across in Massachusetts, right?"
Mormons are the most conservative and most republican religious demographic in the country, bar none (see Pew Study). Mormons believe they have an insight into what truly drives and defines Mitt Romney. Naturally, we want to support one of our own and Romney has convinced us that he may be worthy of that support.
I'm going to agree with Lewis. As an LDS person I don't feel obligated to blindly support any LDS politician under any circumstance. (see: Reid.) I still keep my own counsel about who I will vote for, and why, and this has much more to do with a person's stances, experience, and track record, then it does with where that person goes to church on Sunday. If Mitt Romney were just a congressman or senator with the usual D.C. resume, I'd not be so enthusiastic. But Mitt is a businessman who cleaned up the Olympics, and fixed a floundering state budget in a contentious "adversarial" envrionment. In our abysmal and perpetual economic crisis of 2007-2012 I think these achievements on Mitt's part are key to Mitt's appeal. They would be just as appealing if they came in a non-Mormon package. That Mitt is a Latter-Day Saint is just icing on the cake for me. I feel very comfortable advancing Mitt as my man, because I think he'd do a good job and acquit himself well, and thereby help the country, as well as helping the public image of all LDS members -- we who have stood under the shadow of so much scorn and misunderstanding, both historical and current.
Well, during Harry Reid's most recent relection campaign - the Mormon Church supported him. And the church used its power to get members to host Reid events.
james Gibson, an Area Seventy for teh Mormon Church, pressured church members to host events for Reid.
It's a problem. The LDS superstructure is about LDS memebrs in power - not about conservative values.
Care to cite your verifiable sources on those claims, cj? Because I can almost guarantee you that your claims are bogus. The Church goes out of its way to *NOT* support specific candidates, even member candidates, and while the Church *does* ask its membership to be civic-minded and vote as often as they can, it will never tell the membership how to vote or for whom to vote. I think you've either made this up on your own, whole-cloth, or you're buying into some bad information from an unreliable source.
The fact that Mormons vote for a Mormon shouldn't be too surprising, as they are also human beings. Exit polls in Florida should be ample evidence that they are not alone among the religious sects in their support of Mitt Romney. Also their turnout for McCain, who ran a very effective smear campaign against Romney in the last election should garner them respect in their ability to do what is best for America, not just vote along religious lines.
They are values voters, and tending to believe in leadership through example, they will not likely be able to conceive of Newt Gingrich as the nominee. Many I know are shocked at the ease with which Evangelicals in SC overlooked Newts moral issues. Santorum and Paul (MANY MANY Mormons support Ron Paul) are much better choices that square with their family values and love of the Constitution.
As for Romney's arguable conservative bonafides, most Mormons are probably doing what other voters are doing - voting on likeability, electability, and the trust that the candidate will do what he says he will do (e.g. Obamacare repeal) once in office.
I'm an Indian American and honestly, if I had a chance to vote for a guy who represented my beliefs who happened to be an Indian American - I would be excited about that! But, I wouldn't vote for a guy who didn't represent my beliefs. So I don't think Mormons are voting for Romney just because he's a Mormon, though, upon finding a Mormon who also represents their beliefs they may be more excited.
As far as the rest of us... I am a Christian and I don't think Mormons are Christians, but I find it reprehensible for anyone to discriminate against them based on their beliefs. If Romney is the candidate who best represents you based on his record, stated philosophy, etc., then vote for him. If he doesn't, then don't. But his religion is between him and God. His conscience should not be a topic of debate.
I too am Indian-American and tend to agree. While I think it's amazing this country currently has two governors of Indian origin, I find them both appalling and would never vote for them based on the one single thing we have in common.
Of course it's stupid. As stated previously, I am a member of Romney's church. What you have to keep in mind is that people don't recognize their own prejudices. Most mormons don't want to think of themselves as supporting Romney just because he's mormon so they will emotionally latch on to some other aspect of him as the "real" reason for their support so that they don't feel like sheep. Most mormons latch on to his success in business and his job with the Olympics as the sufficient reason to support him.
I'm sure most black people and white apologists in 2008 were able to convince themselves that they weren't only voting for Obama because he's black. He sounded inspiring during his speeches if you didn't listen critically, he graduated from two Ivy league schools, he had an inspiring life story (if only certain parts were told,) he sounded somewhat populist (again, if you weren't listening critically) and came off as a hero for the poor. Now, a lot of this was phony but most of his supporters were only looking for a reason to support the first black president so they were done with their research once they heard a good narrative about him.
Most LDS people honestly don't believe that their support of Romney is about his religion. I've talked to a lot of people at church who feel that virtually every criticism of Romney is wrong and they get defensive if one is brought up. Many Newt supporters are the same way with Newt, though it's not because of religion: it's about supporting the anti-Romney who they think can win.
If Romney were not mormon members of my church would be far more critical of him and their votes would be more divided. Since they don realize this prejudice you can see why they get defensive when asked questions like "Voting for Romney because he is a mormon is OK, voting against him because he is a mormon is not?"
Well there you go...Romney takes the LDS vote while Santorum and Gingrich split the Catholic vote.
One reason Mitt is not "very concerned about the very poor" may be because there are not many "very poor" Mormans.
The Faith has some very strange beliefs, but the followers are incredibly charitable, taking very good care of LDS families in need. They promote good habits, hard work, service and self reliance.
I have had the privilege to know many Mormans....virtually all are just fine folks.
But should Mitt get the nomination, I am absolutely certain BO's super-Pacs will "introduce" America to the Morman Faith...and it will not be a flattering portrayal.
And unlike the racist, America-hating liberation theology of the pastor of BO and Michelle - Rev. Wright - this religon will be endlessly & relentlessly positioned and often smeared.
I can easily understand why Mormons would be attracted to having one of their own as President. But two points: First, if this is okay, why is religious bigotry alleged when non-Mormon Christian express a preference for candidates who share their own faith? Second, Mormons ought to be careful what they wish for, because the Left and the media is going to give their religion the mother of all rectal exams if Romney wins the nomination.
If a non-mormon christian votes FOR someone of their own faith, that is certainly not bigotry, but voting AGAINST someone because they are Mormon may fit the bill.
Mormons have always been champions of conservatism and family values. For a Christian to single single out Mormons as enemies or a threat to their way of life is beyond silly.
Frankly, I can't be too hard on evangelicals for opposing mormon theology. With the amount of misinformation and distortions propogated about our beliefs, it can be hard to make a fair assesment.
As far as the impending exam, I welcome it. It's an opportunity to set the record straight for the honest of heart. The contrast between detractors and those who will treat the subject fairly should be interesting.
Thank you for the evangelicals comment, Mr. Masterson. It helps me to understand a very presbyterian army chaplin. Also, one member of the church told me Mitt would not win b/c he is a member and hell will be raised against him by the other side to affect us all. I am relieved that I ignored his warning and sought to help the conservative cause, for me, meaning supporting the good family man with excellent acumen for solving real world problems, meaning the one and only Mitt Romney. I know as you have pointed out that it will happen, the barrage of falsehoods about Christ's church. But having read the history book that Mormon protected during his life for our benefit, I don't expect anything else.
Thank you for the evangelicals comment, Mr. Masterson. It helps me to understand a very presbyterian army chaplin. Also, one member of the church told me Mitt would not win b/c he is a member and hell will be raised against him by the other side to adversely affect us all. I am relieved that I ignored his warning and sought to help the conservative cause, for me, meaning supporting the good family man with excellent acumen for solving real world problems, meaning the one and only Mitt Romney. I know as you have pointed out that it will happen, the barrage of falsehoods about Christ's church. But having read the history book that Mormon protected during his life for our benefit, I don't expect anything else.
"First, if this is okay, why is religious bigotry alleged when non-Mormon Christian express a preference for candidates who share their own faith?"
It's not okay, is the short version.
The only justification for Mormons voting tribally *just this once* might be to break what appears to be a genuine glass ceiling, with substantial numbers of evangelical voters not so much preferring to vote for one of their own (which is no longer an option, with the two main Not Romney candidates being Roman Catholics), but rather out of an explicitly expressed intent to keep Mormonism from being made respectable by having one of its members as President. I'd like to think that just as (hopefully) the symbolism of electing the First Black President will have worn off this year, allowing people to vote based on political principle, getting the First Non-Traditional-Christian-Except-For-The-Adams-Boys President milestone passed, will let Mormons vote objectively, too.
If y'all will promise to vote against Romney solely for his Wendell Willkie-esque recent conversion to conservatism ("I don't mind a [lady of ill repute] in church," said one of the critics of Willkie's nomination, "but I don't want her leading the choir right away"), then this Mormon will promise to cast a symbolically non-tribal for Santorum. (Not voting for Aaron Burr Gingrich, not no way, not no-how.)
Follow
