Reader comments
Mormon Media Observer: Mitt's curtain call

I don't think Romney's failure had anything to do with Mormonism, much as the media has tried to paint Christians as bigots. Romney's church affiliation was far less an issue with the media than was Huckabee's--although Huckabee had been a governor for 10 1/2 years and hadn't been a pastor since '91, the media disdainfully considered him "the Baptist preacher."

It's very simple. Up until a couple of years ago, Romney had been supportive of the pro-choice/pro-gay agenda in his state. His conversion wasn't convincing, and the millions of his own money he put into the campaign made some conservatives feel he was trying to buy their votes. Voters who supported the human life amendment, marriage amendment, and FairTax simply found a candidate whose message resonated with them.

California was Romney's last stand on super Tuesday and we let him down. I passively watched when I should have got involved volunteering to help with his campaign. If he runs again in 2012, I'll be an active member of his campaign. We let the best qualified candidate get away this election. I do think there is a lot of mormon hate taught by the Baptists and Evangelicals that gives any Mormon running for Pres. a disadvantage.

I didn't vote for him because I disagree with him. As a Mormon, I am always confused when my brothers and sisters flock to the Republicans, who hold them in such distain. There are certainly Democrats who don't like organized religion, in general, but I haven't ever heard the suggestion voiced that one shouldn't vote for someone because they are "religious" or a Mormon. It just isn't raised as an issue among Democrats.

I was disappointed, but not surprised. The Book of Mormon clearly states that in the latter-days the Gentiles will harden their hearts and reject the gospel, thus causing the "remnant of Jacob" to go through them as a lion amongst the flocks. The (relatively) few who repent will be numbered among the House of Israel and ASSIST the remnant in building the New Jerusalem. Let's do what we need to do in order to be numbered among the House of Israel who inherit this land.

As a member of the LDS Church in Iowa who was actively involved in the whole process, I can tell you that Romney's Mormonism is what allowed Huckabee an opportunity to win the caucus. I had several people who didn't know I was a member of the LDS Church tell me flat out that they would never vote for him because of his religion. Obviously, there were other factors involved as well, such as what appeared to be a recent conversion to conservatism on his part, although truth be told, I think he had previously positioned himself as more of a moderate than he really was in order to win in a very Democratic state. In the end, though, I don't think any Mormon would have prevailed against a Southern Baptist preacher who could easily rally the support of hundreds of protestant church congregations.

Mitt Romney's campaign was not a failure. Many people I work with were terribly disappointed when he dropped out. His supporters were split between Huckabee and himself which hampered his success. He ran a good campaign based on principle, not on religion. He will be back and he will win. The mass media hurt Mitt more than any anti-mormonism. He was splitting the "evangelical" vote in almost all states except for the south. THAT IS SUCCESS!

Jay, take a look at Romney's RECORD as governor in Massachussetts and then come back and tell us how he voted on the issues of human life, marriage and taxes.

It was a combination of his religion and the label of flip-flopper the media gave him. Now I know McCain would never change his mind (taxes - amnesty) nor would Huckabee (amnesty) but those aren't flip floppers, right?

Exactly right -- a kick UP the stairs. I like it!

Instead of everyone coming together this will keep us more divided.

Greg,,,,it won't do any good to look to a 2012 try by Mitt, simply because Obama will be the next president for two terms. The most liberal canidate has been sucessfull in painting such a "gloom and doom,- the sky is falling!" campaign, that a lot of america, including the left leaning media have been sold, all the while, not having to explain a single accomplishment as a senator. The Republicans have lost the trust of america, to simply put forth a canidate that makes many hopefull promises, no matter how much more experiance, he might have as a leader.

I agree with the writer. Who cares what the evangelicals think. They're attacks were only seen for what they were: not good-faith theological diffeernces, but rather rank bigotry.

You thought that NY Times piece on Mormons was "unfair"?! Wow. You've become blinded by your obsession with media bias.

Mormons understand that people find them odd for their beliefs, but they don't understand WHY. It's because rank and file members find themselves defending a history that they're ignorant of. Have a courage to dig deeper into the church's history and founding, and you'll then understand. What Mormons call misperceptions in reality is often their own ignorance.

Howard Fineman and Jim Wallis, both powerful voices in the news media, said it best: Romney lost not because of his religion but because he was not likeable and he was insincere. In short, he was a used car salesman who changed his position according to the way the wind blew.

I've come to the conclusion that many Mormons want to be accepted as mainstream Christians. Mormons never have been and I don't think ever will be considered "kissing cousins" with Baptists and some of the other "mainstream christians". You know what, that's ok with me. I don't need Bible thumpers from the South to validate my religion and to be honest, if Southern Baptists are mainstream christians, why would I ever want to dumb down my religion for their approval.

Jay,

I live in Mass. Rommey certainly was not in favor of same sex marriage. That I know.

"In Manhattan, The New York Times poked fun at LDS missionaries who didn't realize that Mitt Romney has dropped out of the presidential race. In my book, it's an unfair piece, particularly the headline: 'Missionaries spread the news, but don�t read it.'"

That might not be flattering, but it IS accurate. The missionary rules forbid reading, watching, or listening to the news. So why call the description unfair? Because missionaries *can't* read the news because the rules governing their missions forbid it?

Don't blame the New York Times. Blame the White Bible.

Not ready for an LDS president? Are you kidding me?

Mormons have shaped our countries history and innovation. FamousMormons dot NET has an array of successful mormons who most americans know and accept!

Help me understand. The information on this blog indicates comments that are offensive will not be posted. It appears that anything that blasts the LDS Church is not considered offensive, but anything that dares mention Baptists is considered offensive. WHY???

It is a sad commentary on America IF Mitt Romney`s religeon detered his bid for office.
I am one of many in Florida who voted for Mitt, recognizing that (as far as I`m concerned) he was the ONLY real gentleman and respectful person running for office! His religeon is genuine to him, he has "lived it" proudly for his entire lifetime. His beliefs differ from mine, but I thought that fact was what defined our nation! (Someone with different beliefs, living what he believes and producing positive and helpful results in this world!)
He would have made a wonderful president, providing wisdom, genuineness and pride to this country.