I personally agree with many commentators that yesterdays speech Mitt Romney gave on faith and the presidency was a wonderful rhetorical work and one of the few speech highlights of election 2008. Now let me trash the very idea behind it.

There are two overwhelming things I did not see in most of the press coverage. Now I don’t have the view of a true christian conservative. I only know how that group votes from statistical data, conversations I have had with members and what the media reports. I know about the disagreements on whether mormonism is a religion or cult and I understand why some people might have unease voting for a person who holds a core religious belief that is counter to their own philosophical or spiritual view.

Unless the person was a satanist I personally would never disqualify a candidate on their religion and so the idea is foreign to me and honesty I would have to hear the satanists view on economic policy before I disqualified him. That is me though.

With that said and with the biggest respect for those people who do make their decisions in that way, come on now. The year on my calendar is 2007 and as reminiscent as the speech and the overall idea was to John F. Kennedy discussing his catholicism, it would be a pretty sad moment for the civil rights movement if our nation was in the exact same place today as it was in 1960, four short years before the passing of the Civil Rights Act. The fact that anyone in this nation needs to be convinced that, a mormon or a woman or an African American or a homosexual or a member of any other race or ethnicity or religion, is capable of being the head of state for all Americans and not just their small group is asinine.

I do not doubt that there are small groups of people who hold a point of view that is not as inclusive as most of America. Call them what you like, bigots, racists, closed-minded, whatever they go by they are both a pox on this country and a true symbol of America’s greatness. A pox because their intolerance runs counter to the spirit of our nation and a symbol as our tolerance of their counterpoints is the exact spirit of our nation. I also do not doubt that many harbor trace amounts of racism, sexism or phobias about sexuality or different religions, but I don’t know that is what Mitt Romney is facing here.

I am not entirely convinced that the main argument behind the speech is true. Yes evangelical’s are probably not racing to embrace mormonism or its representatives but is that the reason they are not embracing Mitt Romney and instead embracing Mike Huckabee? I doubt it.

When I look at Mitt Romney and compare him to candidates like Mike Huckabee it is not religious affiliation I see as the defining characteristic for a conservative voter who uses religious and social issues as their main criteria for candidate selection, it is Mitt Romney himself and his background. There is not an issue these voters care about that Romney wasn’t on the opposing side of just a few short years ago.

Guns, gays, God and yes even taxes and economic policy were all different under the Massachusetts Gov. then they are as the national candidate. Sure he now promises everything under the sun to these voters and argues that as Mass. Governor he had to actually govern for all its people and their beliefs. Well wouldn’t the same be true as president when nearly fifty percent of the nation and a chunk of the Republican party all see things differently than very conservative evangelical and religious voters?

These voters are looking at ideology over the day-to-day experience of the presidency. Why would they not vote for someone who instantly shares their ideology, not just their religious affiliation but the core political and social beliefs they hold dear?

In some ways Romney’s speech attempted defiance and to frame opposition to his candidacy as opposition to mormonism, which would be un-American and should be intellectually disqualified thanks to Article 6 of the constitution. But is this truly what is occurring? The elephant in the room is that these voters just might not like Mitt Romney and might not trust that he will actually do any of the things he says he will. Not because of his mormonism but because of his record.

Just as Hillary Clinton received flak for attempting to frame opposition to her as “men ganging up” Romney might be deserving of flak for attempting to use his mormonism as the obstacle to receving evangelical support. Now I cannot say with 100% assuredness that every voter or even the majority of these voters are not making their decision without a prejudiced notion. I do know that a mormon candidate who had a long and defined history of opposing gay rights, being pro-life, supporting gun rights, being a strong leader on taxation, opposing illegal immigration (and not employing them) etc. would not only be more attractive to evangelical and catholic and protestant voters but to all Republicans.

At this point, what all the analysis I personally witnessed yesterday missed is this. Romney has spent an enormous amount of money in Iowa and that money won him a lot of early support. When you pummel someone to the ground they have trouble seeing light. Huckabee has had a few weeks of good showings, good media buzz and has given voters a glimpse that there is an alternative, especially the large amount of “undecided” voters who were lingering and waiting. Now Romney is being pushed aside.

Clinton had another avenue beyond playing the victim and she used it to meet debate expectations. She put aside the victim argument and responded “of course they are attacking me, I am winning.” Romney doesn’t have a fallback with his record. He can say to the voters as consistently as possible “that was the old me, from this point on I share your ideas and will give you what you want”, but there will always be a lingering doubt.

Not long ago his best bet was to court voters with his own personal economic story. Because that money was involved with the sub-prime mortgage fiasco that avenue has also dried up. Right now all the Republicans have turned from pummeling voters with their messages to pummeling Huckabee with opposition research. If it works, Romney has an opening to take back this crowd, if it doesn’t I don’t see how in Iowa, the South or much of the midwest Romney could compete. It isn’t mormonism but Romney himself.