This article was originally published in early 2006 -- it was the first to argue on a national forum that Romney's Mormonism might be a strength to his candidacy.

Apparently, the cultural revolution of the 1960's did not do much for religious tolerance. At least that is the “scoop” coming out of our nation’s capital as portrayed recently by well-known conservative columnist Robert Novak.  According to a recent article on whether Mitt Romney can sway the southern evangelical vote, Novak interviewed several key evangelical leaders who indicated that their rank-and-file would rather vote for Hilary Clinton than see a Mormon in the nation’s highest office and that without their vote, Romney cannot win.

Them’s fighten’ words.

Though well-respected, Novak and his sources are not free from a challenge, so let me do the challenging.

Are Novak and his sources implying that the most morally conservative voters in the United States would rather endorse a left-wing, abortion-endorsing, socialist-leaning, gay agenda-adopting, Bill Clinton-marrying, liberal than a God-fearing, card-carrying conservative Mormon, who has had remarkable success in business and in politics, and who has shown he is able to win a liberal state like Massachusetts? Either something is very wrong with Novak or something is very wrong with the Evangelicals he is interviewing.

Here are some of my observations as to why Novak and his sources have been sniffing the Cathedral incense too long and why Romney is the GOP’s best bet in returning a candidate to the White House.

First, he is the best of the leading candidates.  If you hadn’t noticed, his competitors are a mean gray-haired old man named John McCain from Arizona who cannot decide if he is loyal to the GOP or whether he is just a conservative Democrat.  You can only cross that line so many times without someone noticing.  The other candidate is Rudy Guliani.  He was a great mayor, but before 9/11, he was on his way out of office because of political scandal involving a marital affair.  Additionally, an examination of his political views put him on the far left of the conservative political spectrum, which, once interpreted, means he supports gay marriage rights and abortion.  If the highest office was only about 9/11 he would be a shoe-in, but the White House is about setting a conservative agenda and he fails on this count.  That leaves Romney.  

Romney is a well-seasoned politician who rescued the billion dollar Salt Lake Olympics from scandal, who has successfully run an investment business (which specialized in turning around companies in trouble) and has been a well-respected governor in Massachusetts after returning that state’s budget from a significant deficit to black and healthy.  He is conservative, he is religious, he can cross-over to get Democratic votes, he is young and healthy, he is a financial wizard and people just like him.  Certainly, Ronald Reagan has very little over this chap.

The second reason Romney is the best candidate is that in a Romney-Clinton run, the Mormon will win.  How is that possible, one might ask?  Here is a fair analysis.  

Romney is criticized for his Mormon faith, but a closer and a more fair examination will see straight through this issue. In many ways his Mormon faith might just be what is needed for the GOP.  If Romney is going to be criticized for something, can you imagine anything better than being too much of a goody-two-shoes?  A few appearances with the likes of Johnny Miller, Donny Osmond, Gladys Knight, Steve Young, Pat Buchanan’s sister Bay Buchanan and other prominent LDS folk will quickly put the religious conservative masses at ease. Though there are some in the deep – and we are talking in the woods deep – south will perceive Romney’s Mormon faith as a barrier to the highest office, in the end, it didn’t hurt Kennedy to be Catholic and being more morally adroit than every President since Washington should not offend most within the relgious mainstream. If it did, can you imagine America’s image after-the-fact? Ouch. And we thought Iran and China were unaccepting of religious diversity.

Let’s assume for a moment that Romney does lose a state or two in the south – which is highly unlikely given that his record is an exact match with the political movements of the south. But let’s assume the wacky far-far right wing convince their faithful that Romney is growing horns in his head.  No problem.  Political pundits have forgotten that Romney can carry a few northeastern states – something no one since the young John McCain has been able to do. A gain in only one state between Massachusetts and Minnesota will easily replace a religious revolt in a southern state.  In fact, the whole concept of religious intolerance might just motivate folks from the northeast to vote for Romney as a centralist who is not beholden to the extreme right.  Wouldn’t it be nice to have a president who doesn’t have to call Jerry Falwell for advice before he signs a bill?  Just where is that a problem for America?

And then there is the secret weapon.  Most in the east, including Robert Novak and many supposed religious leaders in the deep south have no experience in western elections. That is probably why these “leaders” would attempt to flex their muscles this early in the game – because they are not only ignorant, but they are also ignorant.  Specifically, they are ignorant to Romney’s power base in the west.

Perhaps Novak and these narrow-minded religious leaders have overlooked the fact that the west, from the Colorado mountains to the Pacific Ocean, was settled and secured for the United States by religious refugees escaping persecution.  Those refugees were called Mormons. Every major city in the west has its roots in Mormon settlements and the Mormons stayed.  There are millions of them in the southwest and northwest and they are politically strong.

Consider the recent scourge and embarrassment occurring in Las Vegas politics. Once the corrupt politicians were thrown out of office, the electorate replaced them with Mormons. Why?  Because Mormons have shown over time they are trustworthy in office.  Not perfect, but at least trustworthy.  Howard Hughes surrounded himself with Mormons. On both sides of the parties, Democrat and Republican, Mormons serve or have served as local, state and federal elected officials with very few “issues.”  That tradition is ingrained in the political workings of the western states.

Mormons also turn out in droves to vote.  In Nevada, for instance, Mormons only represent eight percent of the population, but when it comes time to vote, Mormons are so dedicated that they represent nearly twenty percent of the voting block.  That is one in every five votes.  It doesn’t matter who lives in the southwest, only who votes in the southwest, and Mormons have a long and very stable record of voting in every election.  If Romney is challenged because he is Mormon, you can expect a monster turn out of the Mormons to the polls and that would spell doom for any competitor.

Consider as an example of the Mormon electorate muscle-flex, the recent pro-marriage initiatives in liberal states like Hawaii, Oregon and California.  Thanks to a highly effective Mormon turnout, these initiatives passed by hefty and comfortable margins.  It wasn’t the Mormons alone, but those familiar with Mormon politics know that conservative Christians and Jews were equally motivated to “do the right thing.”  We can expect a repeat of that same accepting mentality when it comes to putting the right man in office, regardless of his religious views.  In the west, Mormons are the norm and are mainstream.  That means Romney can spend more time enlightening the south.

If the faithful Mormons simply turned out in high numbers in the west, it would be a real challenge, but one cannot overlook the built in support system that Romney will have coming to the southwest. Mormons are not only good voters, they are also fantastic volunteers and they love conservative politics.  Ninety-five or so percent of Mormons are also Republicans.  If we count millions of Mormons in the southwest, we should assume that Romney will be able to motivate many of these millions to help advance his campaign. You will also see a strong number of the religious right advance his candidacy in the southwest as Mormons have worked hand-in-hand with the religious right on many moral issues.  With potentially hundreds of thousands of these workers, there will be few city blocks without a Romney for President sign.

Clinton would have to pull off a major miracle to simply overcome the numbers of volunteers.  Obviously states like Utah and Idaho are already in the bag for Romney, but other states like Hawaii, Washington, Oregon and New Mexico would actually be in play because of the strong volunteer force Romney would bring to the table.  Indeed, Romney could even take California with the right message and the right VP Candidate. No other candidate would even have a shot at many of these states.

Is it possible that Romney’s being separate from the far religious right might be the very thing that makes him so attractive to voters? If John McCain is a strong candidate because of his ability to attract the cross-over vote, then Romney is a Goliath as he can attract both the conservative voter as well as the cross-over Democratic voter as he will not be beholden to those with radical right viewpoints.

So when Novak talks about losing a few narrow-minded evangelicals, and that the loss of these votes spells doom for Romney, he fails to recognize the off-setting strengths and intangibles that Romney brings to the table.  When one considers what an army of volunteers can do for Romney – unpaid and motivated – and how many western and cross-party voters he will get out, you start to see the true picture of why Romney is the best candidate for the Republican Party.