If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Especially if you came from Mormon Archipelago as it only includes my major article posts.
Thanks for visiting!
Due to the bruising nature of the primaries, Evangelicals have been getting a lot of ire in the Bloggernacle (a lot of it justified). Romney’s religion has been constantly rehashed as a stumbling block for the Evangelical vote.
However, if enough Evangelicals support Romney and he gets the nomination, his religion “problem” won’t be going away. Although the Mormon issue has been widely portrayed as a GOP matter, Democratic voters are even less likely than Republicans to vote for a Mormon.
Well, first of all, polls like this one (see Table 4) suggest that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to rule out voting for a candidate on the basis of his Mormon faith. Now maybe all those anti-Mormon Democrats are African-American Baptists or working-class Catholics, but Dems with a post-grad education are more anti-Latter Day Saint than Dems with just a high school degree, which at the very least suggests that there are plenty of secular voters who wouldn’t pull the lever for a Mormon. Not, presumably, because they want to establish an “only Trinitarians need apply” standard for public office in the U.S., but because they consider Mormonism weird and cultish, and they don’t want a President who buys into its tenets.
According that April 2007 poll, Republicans are more likely to vote for a Mormon than Democrats by 50 - 38. That may be because Democrats don’t like the Mormon religion, they don’t like religion period, or they don’t like the predominant politics associated with Mormons. What else?
Could Democrat voters be as bigoted as Evangelicals?
Tags: anti-mormon, Democrats, evangelicals, Mitt Romney, mormon
11 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://www.asoftanswer.com/2007/11/20/if-you-think-the-evangelical-right-is-bad/trackback/
20 November 2007 at 1:25 pm
Chris H.
I am less likely to vote for Mitt because he has become the kind of weird conservative that evangelicals could support. When I was a conservative, I disliked evangelicals for religious reasons. Now, as a liberal, I disagree with them across the board.
Liberal Democrats will vote against most Mormons because of their politics. Evangelicals will vote against Mormons because of their religion. One is bigoted, one is reasonable. The highest ranking Mormon is one of the highest ranking Democrats in American politics. Of course, Harry Reid and I may not count as good Mormons because we are liberal democrats.
None of this matters. Since the Equal Rights Amendment, Mormons and Evangelicals have been more than willing to come together over politics. If Mitt wins the nomination. the religious rights will happily back him. I will continue to oppose both.
I love your blog. I am currently writing from the great state of Maryland.
20 November 2007 at 1:44 pm
David H. Sundwall
Chris H. -
Welcome back to Maryland! Are you seeing Rich for Thanksgiving? If so, tell him “Hi.”
I think you make a fair point that Democrats are more likely to oppose a nameless Mormon due to politics than religion. But as you and Harry Reid should demonstrate that’s not a completely fair preconception.
But I also think that voters on the left are more likely to lump Mormons with the Christian Right (even if the CR won’t have us) and therefore dislike us equally.
Thanks for the compliment.
20 November 2007 at 1:45 pm
JKC
I’m not sure where you’re getting the “on the basis of his Mormon faith” part. The poll only asked whether the respondents would be likely to vote for a Mormon, not on what basis they would make the decision.
The fact is, Mormons in the United States are seen as middle-class conservative white people with big families who live in the two reddest states in the Union. Whether that perception is wrong is one thing, but certainly does prevail and it isn’t absurd.
Given the associations with Mormons that the general public has, the poll might have well asked “would you be more likely to vote for a Republican?”
But if the poll had instead given some options, like “a) less likely, because Mormons oppose abortion rights and gay marriage, or b) because Mormons are cultish and weird,” then we could draw some conclusions from it.
20 November 2007 at 1:54 pm
David H. Sundwall
JKC -
The whole media narrative for Romney’s campaign so far has been whether the GOP-significant voter block of evangelical conservatives can vote for him in the primaries.
Zero attention has been pair to whether Democrats can support a Mormon candidate. There has been prominent examples of anti-Mormon prejudice among the mainstream center-left (search The New Republic and Slate if you need examples).
You’re correct that the poll did not get to the underlying reasons why many Democrats dismiss a Mormon politician out of hand. Be it religious or poltical, I think that’s unfair bias and so far undiscussed.
20 November 2007 at 4:07 pm
JKC
Don’t worry, I completely agree with you that there has been anti-Mormon prejudice in the media. But the media is willing to call out anti-Mormon unfairness too, at times. September Dawn’s reception seems to show that.
As far as the fact that no media attention has been paid to whether Democrats can support a Mormon candidate, I think you’re absolutely right, but I don’t see why it’s an issue. The fact is, there are no Mormons running on the Democratic ticket, and until Romney actually gets the nomination, or at least gets very close, there isn’t any chance that any Democrats would even have the opportunity to vote for a Mormon. Why would the media talk about it?
There is only one thing I disagree with you on: the notion that Democrats “dismiss a Mormon politician out of hand.” Yes, it is true that Democrats generally do not vote for Mormons, but isn’t that just because Mormons are generally Republicans? The poll only reflected voting preferences, it cannot fairly be interpreted to say anything about whether those voting preferences are the result of an out of hand dismissal or of a not entirely unjustified view that Mormons are more likely to support policies that they disagree with.
On a personal level, yes, I think it is unfair to assume that a particular candidate’s Mormonism will dictate his political positions. But when you’re talking about a faceless nameless hypothetical candidate, I think its natural for people to use the only information provided about that candidate to deduce what he might stand for politically.
20 November 2007 at 5:52 pm
David H. Sundwall
JKC -
Those are all good points and I don’t think we disagree too much.
I guess I’m just sensitive to the media’s portrayal that rejecting a candidate because he’s Mormon is only a Republican issue. Chalk this up to whining about the biased media.
You’re right that there’s no Democratic Mormon candidate right now, but Harry Reid Reid is Mormon yet there has been no real connection between what his religious views may be and how they affect his public policy. Despite their most prominent leader being a Mormon, Democrats are still significantly less likely to vote for a candidate when the only criteria is being Mormon. (I realize running for president is very different but there has been NOTHING on Reid’s religion and how he will perform as Senate Majority Leader.)
It’s a fair perception that Mormons are generally Republican - and this may be an unfair quibble - but that wasn’t part of the poll question. There has been enough commentary and questioning from the left that suggest that opposition to a Mormon candidate is not just political but more an antipathy towards a conservative religion. Maybe that’s the same as saying it’s just political but I see it as more than that.
But you make good points, and I’ll have to see if I reconsider it as the campaign goes forth.
21 November 2007 at 8:35 am
David B
I think in saying “I’m just sensitive to the media’s portrayal that rejecting a candidate because he’s Mormon is only a Republican issue” and then attributing that to the “biased media”, you’re being a bit blind to the context.
Right now, Romney is trying to convince Republicans that he’s palatable to them. Therefore, it’s only natural that the media attention would be on where he stand in relation to Republicans, not Democrats. Similarly Giuliani and Thompson.
You get the same thing on the Democratic side with Obama and Edwards.
You get more stuff about whether McCain and Clinton can appeal to their respective opposing parties, but that’s mainly because they have more of a history as national political figures.
Sorry, but i see no bias in the media here, just a herd mentality.
21 November 2007 at 9:27 am
David H. Sundwall
David B -
I would like to think by admitting my sensitivity I am not being completely blind. I agree that the context of the issue right now is the GOP primary and that is what is matters right now.
But to my posts’s original point, with the abuse that Evangelicals get right now in the media and in the Bloggernacle, I think it is was worth pointing out that this poll says that Democrats are even more predisposed than Republicans to not vote for somebody because he is Mormon .
However, I do believe that there is a bias/herd mentality that it is all too eager to pile on the Christian Right. The ridiculously overplayed coverage of the Evangelical/Mormon rift makes it easy to portray the Christian Right as bigoted where there is plenty to go all around. (It’s been awhile, but how much coverage was there when Sen. Kennedy unloaded the Mormon card on Romney in the ‘94 race?)
Of course, it may not matter if Romney doesn’t get the nomination. But it will be interesting to see if Romney does get the nomination, how the Dems will handle the issue.
21 November 2007 at 9:30 am
David H. Sundwall
An example why I think the media is being ridiculous:
Today’s Reuter’s story: Romney a tough sell for many U.S. Christians.
What a newsflash! Why is this a news story today?
Is there a better explanation why the media’s coverage is so overblown? I am convinced it’s anti-religious bias.
21 November 2007 at 12:41 pm
JKC
Anti-religion bias in the media is probably a factor. But I think that’s too simplistic.
The fact is, religion more significant for the current Republican party and less significant for the current Democratic party. Not only that, but the evangelical movement within the Republican party has been more vocal and more active in the last two elections. The Democrats have not successfully made religion an electoral issue. Against this background, isn’t it natural for the media to talk about the religion of Republican candidates, especially if that candidate’s religion is one that is theologically (even if not politically) antagonistic to the evangelical movement that is supposed to the the Republican powerhouse lately?
I don’t know that there’s a “better” explanation, but there is a more complete explanation that takes into account the way the two parties use religion right now.
I think you’re absolutely right that the media is beating the Romney story to death. But they do that with every story, I don’t think Romney is an exception.
21 November 2007 at 1:35 pm
David H. Sundwall
Can’t I have the last word on my own blog?
JKC -
Religion gets more attention in GOP politics but I think it’s big in both parties.
What got this post started was this Jonah Goldberg post where he nails the double standard that prevails with Democrats and religion.
Yet somehow, GOP politics is branded as dangerous mix of religion and politics where Sharpton’s, Clinton’s, and Obama’s appeals to religion are not.
Granted, the Evangelical power players on the right don’t mind this as it gives them more influence. But I think its erroneous to dismiss how important religion is to Democratic politics and the media’s casual treament of it.