Governor, you are no Jack Kennedy

Don’t get me wrong, it was a good speech (you can read the transcript here) and well-delivered.  I have no doubt that much of the mainstream media will be speaking highly about it because it appealed to their sensibilities and was quite reasonable.  Democrats will also likely see much merit in the speech, and rightly so.  It was a speech many a Democrat could have delivered and would have been very effective in a general election…but therein lies the problem.  This isn’t the general election, and the reason Romney was forced to give this speech was not because moderates and progressive-leaning voters couldn’t stomach his Mormonism.

He was forced to make “a personal decision” to do what he had repeatedly said he would not and deliver the speech because he’s having a serious problem with evangelicals and other religious conservatives, especially in Iowa.

But unlike Kennedy a half-century ago, Romney isn’t facing the concern that a single Pope will rule Washington (I doubt 1 in 10 Americans could even tell you how the hierarchy of the LDS is set up), so his assurances that authorities in his church (or any other) will not exert influence on presidential decisions doesn’t really matter.  Let’s be straight up.  The concern with Mormonism–especially from the Republican base who will decide the primaries–is that its members are part of a cult.  It’s not a concern about Mormon influence on policies because the Mormons are pretty much in lock-step on the issues with the religious right.  The concern is with someone who doesn’t believe in the “right Jesus” but still claims to be Christian and within the theological tradition of the Church.

That problem will still exist after this speech because he did very little to counter all the anti-Mormon stereotypes…and I’m not sure how he could have done so.  Another problem is that he gave his detractors several new things to start hitting him on.  His assurances “that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions” is either a flat out lie or something that will be quite disquieting to all the religious right leaders he is courting who definitely expect some access to the Oval Office if their guy becomes president…I mean, come on.  Whether a religious group or not, you don’t spend tens of millions of dollars helping someone get elected and then accept the fact that you will have no influence over his decisions once he’s in office…

Second, his opponents are going to have a field day with the line: “Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world.”  Everyone knows Romney’s been changing his positions on a bunch of key issues (and beliefs) as politics dictated.  Maybe there was a true conversion every time.  I don’t know.  But I do know that voters, especially on the right, have their doubts.  To play the martyr now about how he understands the importance of holding to his convictions no matter the political consequence is all well and good, but there are going to be a lot of folks who point to his flip-flopping on abortion, taxes, gays, etc as the political winds changed…and that undermines the admirable “damn the world, I’m sticking to my beliefs” argument he made yesterday.

Overall, this discussion is somewhat of an academic exercise for faithful democrats.  Romney is still a very bad choice for president, and we won’t be voting in his primary.  But I’ll close with this.  While I don’t think this speech will help him a whole lot in his primary, I’m glad he gave it.  As I said at the beginning, it was a speech a Democrat could have given.  His supporters (even those on the right) will fight desperately to defend and validate it.  And that moves this American discourse on faith in the public square in a positive direction.