Huckabee's Populism, Romney's Mormonism, Etc.

Below is an e-mail I recently sent concerning the current presidential campaign. Some people who are thinking through the issues might find it helpful, so I've decided to post it.

I've changed my mind from time to time regarding which candidate I want to support, partly because changing circumstances have resulted in shifts in the electability of the candidates. Thompson's electability, for example, has significantly declined. And since I have so many other things to do aside from following politics, and since there are so many plausible candidates in the Republican field for this election, I haven't followed the issues enough to reach a highly confident conclusion. Even people who follow politics as part of a full-time job have been undecided or have changed their mind about who to support among the Republicans.

I have some problems with Huckabee, like the ones you've mentioned, and there are a lot of other criticisms circulating. It would take a lot of time and effort to research all of them, and I haven't done much research on Huckabee. I'm largely relying on initial impressions and the research done by other sources I trust. Part of my difficulty with Huckabee at this point is what I don't know about him. I should learn more over time and adjust my opinion of him accordingly.

I'm more familiar with McCain, and he has a lifetime rating of more than 80% with the American Conservative Union. That's a significantly high rating, despite the importance of some of the issues McCain is wrong about. I think his electability is the best among the Republicans, even better than Giuliani's. (His temper is a significant potential problem, though. Especially if he's going up against Barrack Obama, he needs to watch his facial expressions and tone of voice, particularly in debates. He has a lot of potential to come across as Al Gore did in the 2000 debates and as Gore has come across in some of his speeches since then. I doubt that McCain would scream the way that Gore does at times or be as bad as Gore in his facial expressions, but he does have that sort of problem to a lesser degree.) McCain seems to be the best of the five major Republican candidates on issues like foreign policy and the military at a time when those issues are prominent. He also has a lot of good advertising, on television and elsewhere.

I'm currently leaning toward McCain, but would be open to Huckabee as I learn more about him and open to Thompson if he goes up in the polls. I would vote for any of the five major Republican candidates, but Romney and Giuliani are my least favorite. Thompson has been getting better, and he did well in the debate yesterday, but it seems that his electability has been diminished too much for him to recover.

Romney's Mormonism is a significant problem, even though I don't consider it always unacceptable to vote for a non-Christian. For example, in an election in which two Mormons were running against each other, one politically liberal and one conservative, I don't see a problem with voting for the politically conservative Mormon. A vote isn't equivalent to an assertion that I agree with every characteristic of the candidate. If the 2008 election is a matter of choosing between, on the one hand, a theologically and politically liberal Protestant and, on the other hand, a theologically moderate and politically conservative Mormon, I would consider the latter significantly better and would vote for him. We don't have a federal church. Americans don't have much interest in Mormonism, so a Romney presidency, though it would help further Mormonism somewhat, probably wouldn't do it much. And Romney probably would try to avoid making much of his Mormonism in public. Letting a Mormon in the White House would do some damage, and I hope it never happens. But the damage done by a theologically and politically liberal Protestant would also be significant.

It's difficult to weigh all of the factors involved, but my sense is that letting a Mormon be President for four or eight years probably is better than letting somebody like Clinton or Obama get elected. I view Romney's Mormonism as in some ways similar to Thomas Jefferson's deism. I'd prefer a Christian, and, contrary to today's prevailing political wisdom, electing somebody so distant from Christianity is a significant problem. But it's a problem we've had before, and it has to be weighed along with a lot of other issues. Thankfully, it looks as if Romney won't be the Republican nominee. But if he would be the nominee, the damage done by his Mormonism might not be much more significant than the damage done by Jefferson's deism. Romney's Mormonism is worse in some ways, but I think the two are comparable to an extent.

There's a lot at stake in the election. It's important that one of these five Republicans is elected. But some of the problems among those five, like Romney's Mormonism, are significant and are often underestimated. Republicans should vote for Romney if he gets the nomination, but he shouldn't get the nomination. And any future support for him should be accompanied by far more qualifications (criticisms of his errors) than we've seen so far.