 |
Romney |
 |
For some time now, I’ve thought that Romney was most likely to be the eventual Republican nominee. Two general points support that conclusion: the “fatal flaws” of the other Republican frontrunners, and Romney’s own polish.
Observers who feel Romney’s chances are slim often cite his Mormonism as his “fatal flaw.” Recent coverage and polling, however, has begun to confirm my feeling that through good PR, Romney’s Mormonism can be presented as palatable to voters.
Newsweek’s cover story on Romney and Mormonism reveals how much the candidate would like to gloss over the issue. When a reporter brought up Romney’s boyhood church, Romney’s reaction was awkward:
Nothing is more politically vexing or personally crucial for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney than the story of his faith. Raised in a devout Mormon family by parents who were both principled and powerful, Romney has downplayed both his religion and his own family history. Instead, he has talked up his résumé as a private-sector “turnaround artist” who reversed the fortunes of troubled companies and the faltering Salt Lake City Olympics and now can come to his party’sâ€â€and country’sâ€â€rescue. Mindful of the sway of evangelical Christians over the GOP base, he has positioned himself as the candidate with conservative principles and strong faith, even adopting evangelical language in calling Jesus Christ his “personal savior” (vernacular not generally used by members of the Mormon Church). But when he’s pressed on the particulars of his own religious practice, his answers grow terse and he is quick to repeat that his values are rooted in “the Judeo-Christian tradition.”
Newsweek’s writers suggest that in order to become a compelling candidate, Romney will have to embrace his faith, and his biography as a Mormon, more fully. In somewhat melodramatic terms, they say:
The fate of Romney’s candidacy may come down to one question: can he embrace his own biography to create a political and personal narrative that has heartâ€â€and soul?
Yet while Romney may refine his image by growing more comfortable in his own skin as a Mormon, in my opinion drawing more specifically on his Mormon heritage would hurt him. The campaign may not have resolved the issue. But by downplaying it, and encouraging the perception that Mormonism is similar to “mainstream Christianity,” the campaign has prevented the “Mormon issue” from barring Romney’s path to current front-runner status in Iowa and New Hampshire.
The results of Newsweek’s own Iowa poll are revealing. At 24%, Romney leads over nearest rival Fred Thompson by 8 points. Though the article focuses on the statistic that “only 45 percent of registered Iowa Republicans say America is ready for a Mormon president,” the rest of their numbers signal that the reality is different.
Romney’s reputation is positive among Hawkeye State Republicans; 55 percent of all GOP voters have a “mostly favorable†view of him (13 percent have a “very favorable†view). Fifty-nine percent of the narrower group of likely GOP caucus-goers have a “mostly favorable†view of Romney, while 19 percent have a “very favorable†view of him. But less than half of them (45 percent) think the country is ready to elect a Mormon president. Although 57 percent of Iowa Republican voters surveyed say they are “somewhat familiar†with the Mormon religion (16 percent say they are “very familiarâ€Â), 54 percent consider Mormons to be Christians. (Evangelical Christians make up 42 percent of likely GOP caucus-goers in the state, according to the poll, and 45 percent of Republican voters overall.) Three quarters of likely GOP caucus-goers (77 percent) view Romney as a politician who can get things done and more than half (55 percent) suspect he can affect needed change.
Why would 77% view him as a “politician who can get things done” while only 45% think the country is ready for a Mormon president? In my view, the answer partly lies in our tendency to think of ourselves as more open-minded than others. The question itself - “Is the country ready…” - is also not very precise. What does its answer really tell us? Better might be: “Do you think that Americans outside of Iowa would vote for Mitt Romney?” In other words, how different are Iowa Republicans from Republicans elsewhere?
Finally, as for the issue of whether the Religious Right would support Romney, a partial answer was provided by an interview (h/t Article VI Blog) with Family Research Center President Tony Perkins, who said on Romney:
Q: What advice would you give Romney?
I gave up consulting when my candidates kept losing, so I’m not one to give advice. But I’d say keep doing what he’s been doing… In my opinion, he’s one of the strongest on our issues. It’s true he has had a change of position on these issues. I do believe they’re genuine. I do not see him going back. He’s staked ground that he has to hold to.
[Mormonism] is an unknown religion, in the sense that people are not familiar with it. Some people have said he should be like John Kennedy. I think it’s a little different of a scenario. There are a lot of commonalities between Catholic and Protestant state. Mormonism, there’s a lot of distinctions. He’s best when he’s focused on the issues and his policy positions; then down the road he can have a dialogue on faith.
We’re a third, roughly of the Republican party and we’ve had a good relationship with fiscal conservatives and national security conservatives over the past 30 years. We need a candidate who is acceptable on our policies, as well as fiscal policy and defense and foreign policy.
In other words, Perkins is saying that if they trust Romney on abortion and other values issues, evangelicals are willing to overlook the differences between Mormonism and evangelical Protestantism.
********************************
So, what’s the progressive take on Romney? I think he’s the man to keep an eye on for now. Giuliani is a lightweight - and as nominee, he would command weak support from a lot of the Republican base. Romney, however, is more skilled at presenting himself and despite the flip-flopper image (which Giuliani suffers from as well), Romney can at least claim to draw on more substantive and diverse leadership experience. I think Romney has a better shot at rallying the GOP base, and I believe that the Democratic nominee, especially if it is Hillary Clinton, would have a harder time defeating Romney than defeating Giuliani. Giuliani can be made to look ridiculous, while Romney is again more polished and put together. If he is nominated, Democrats will need to draw on a strategy for beating him that goes beyond assuming that his Mormonism will make him look “weird” in voters’ eyes. If Iowa polling is any indication, we may all be overestimating how much Romney’s Mormonism matters.
I think that, on the plane of policy, Rudy and Giuliani would not be so different - and I think that both of them would represent a continuation of Bush in a broad sense. That includes things like torture, which I imagine sets Giuliani’s mouth to watering. How did Giuliani answer the question, if you remember? Was he one of the ones who toned down their responses?
You may be right in the analysis here. The way to challenge him would be on his record, not so much as a flip flopper but the fact that he was governer of the bluest state in the union. How does that reconcile? It’s really more than just changing your position, it’s a 180.
On top of that, you play up the differences (which would be hard for Hillary). Romney is bad on a lot of issues people really care about. While torture may be a non-starter (there are a lot of people in America that think we SHOULD torture terrorists), you can hammer him on civil liberties, Iraq, health care. Things that people do really care about and he’s on the wrong side of.