Photos by Spencer Anderson
Six months ago, Mitch Davis announced he was forming a political organization called RunMittRun.org to encourage Mitt Romney’s candidacy for president of the United States in 2008.
Today, Governor Romney formally announced his candidacy by forming an exploratory committee under the rules of the Federal Election Commission. Concurrently, Davis announced he is organizing a new political organization called www.OurSharedValues.org.
We asked Mitch to share his view of what lies ahead for Mitt Romney and the Church, as well as Mitch’s independent effort to address the religious prejudice that seems bound to afflict both. Our discussion follows.
Editors' Note: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is neutral in matters of party politics. The Church does not endorse, promote or oppose political parties, candidates or platforms. See Church statement on Political Neutrality here.
MM: So, it’s a big day for Mitt Romney.
MD: And for America. What a magnificent thing that someone as qualified and visionary as Mitt Romney is willing to enter the arena of federal politics.
MM: And it’s a big day for the Church?
MD: Some would say it’s a wonderful day, others that it’s a dangerous day. I think it’s a bit of both, but I also think it’s an inevitable day.
MM: Why do you say that?
MD: Mormons have been discriminated against on the basis of their religion since the days of Joseph Smith. At a certain point, most groups of persecuted people square their shoulders and say, “Enough is enough.” I think Mitt’s candidacy will likely force the issue of anti-Mormonism to a head. There is going to be a lot of discussion on the topic over the next two years, probably more than Mitt or the Church would prefer to see.
MM: That’s a pretty interesting forecast.
MD: I don’t think I am predicting anything that hasn’t already happened, or that isn’t already happening. I am merely predicting that what is already happening will increase in its scope and magnitude to remarkable levels.
MM: Can you give us some examples?
MD: When I formed RunMittRun several months ago, I said that Mitt was likely to face religiously-driven attacks from at least four quarters: his Republican opponents, his Democratic opponents, left-leaning media, and religious extremists. The amazing thing is that all four of those predictions proved true before Mitt even declared his candidacy.
MM: Republican opponents have attacked Mitt’s religion?
MD: Sure. Mitt attended a Republican
Committee meeting in South Carolina a few months ago. There
was a lot of press in attendance. One of the Republican activists
at the meeting stood up and demanded Mitt answer questions about
his religion in front of the entire assemblage. She came prepared
with notes about Mormon doctrine and history, and, asked the
typical questions about polygamy, etc. It was reported
the next day that this woman was on John McCain’s payroll.
MM: What about Democratic opponents?
MD: I signed up on Hillary’s website several months ago so I could keep tabs on her organization. Since then I have received numerous emails directing me to press releases attacking Mitt for his stands on gay marriage, abortion, and other religious issues. The irony is that these Democratic press releases were attacking Mitt for allegedly taking stands that were in harmony with the Democratic Party! So it was liberals issuing press releases accusing Mitt of being too liberal in hopes of discrediting him with conservative voters.
MM: And what about left-leaning media?
MD: The good news is that right-leaning media seem to be lining up to support Mitt, and many of them seem to be trying to minimize the religion issue. I think that is a clear indication of how Mitt and his campaign would like to see things go: minimize Mormonism, keep it out of the spotlight. But most media leans more left than right and I think what some see as the peculiarities of Mormonism are likely to prove too tempting a target for that crowd.
MM: Do you think the mainstream media have an agenda to attack Mitt and/or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
MD: I think the more liberal elements of the mainstream media have it in for social conservatives in general. To the extent Mitt becomes the standard bearer for social conservatism, he will become more and more of a target for left-leaning members of the media, and the Church will become an inadvertent recipient of that same negative attention. For the most part, however, I think the media mainly have an agenda to sell newspapers and improve their ratings. If they can stir the pot and start a religious war in America, they will have plenty of sensational news to cover for the next couple of years.
MM: A religious war?
MD: We’re already in the middle of a culture war. On the left we have the group some people call “secular progressives.” On the right we have the “social conservatives.” A very large number of the social conservatives are Republican Evangelical Christians. They have a lot in common with Republican Mormons when it comes to politics. But they have been vehement denouncers of Mormonism when it comes to religion. The tremendous irony — and this is not lost on anyone in the media — is that Mitt Romney is the only shot Evangelical Christians have at a socially conservative candidate in 2008, and the greatest impediment to Mitt’s election is the long-standing tradition of anti-Mormonism in America, which tradition has been largely fomented by Evangelical Christians.
MM: So… it’s hopeless?
MD: It’s not at all hopeless. If anyone on earth is capable of getting these two groups to unite over values rather than divide over doctrine, that person is Mitt Romney. The rest of us just have to be disciplined enough to not let him down along the way.
MM: What do you mean by that?
MD: Mormons and Evangelicals have to both recognize that any effort to divide the socially conservative right over religious doctrine only benefits the secular progressive left. We have to be disciplined enough and humble enough to not allow ourselves to be drawn into internecine bickering. We have to unite around our shared values, rather than dividing over disparate dogma.
MD: Exactly. But that is much easier said than done. Some of the articles that will be written about Mormonism may be merely annoying. Others will be outright infuriating. It will be extremely difficult to hold ourselves in check and not lash out when political mud gets slung our way. Did you happen to see the Andrew Sullivan stuff?
MM: We did our best to ignore it.
MD: Good idea. But for those who missed it altogether, Andrew Sullivan is a gay rights activist and a major writer for Time magazine. He is not a fan of Mitt Romney because of Mitt’s outspoken opposition to gay marriage. So he recently devoted an entire week to debunking Mormonism on his Time-sponsored website, including disseminating a photograph of a man and a woman in temple garments. He got more emails from angry Mormons in a couple of days than he usually gets in a couple of months, and he couldn’t have been happier. Because for Andrew Sullivan it was just good sport, defiling our garments and ridiculing our religion, but we Mormons took it much more personally. I think that is a type and shadow of things to come. There are so many media delivery streams, I think it will be nigh unto impossible for Mitt Romney or the Church to control the message, and it will also be very difficult to control the members of the Church, particularly if they feel the Church is being attacked and no one is defending it.
MM: Okay, Republican opponents, Democratic opponents, left-leaning media and…?
MD: Religious extremists. But first let me point out that there are a lot — I would say even the majority — of Evangelical Christian leaders, who have tacitly suggested they could and would support Mitt Romney for president. That is a very positive thing. But it is not clear how much influence those leaders will actually have on the members of their flocks when they get inside the voting booth, particularly since many of those same Evangelical leaders have been telling their members for years that Mormons are part of a non-Christian cult. During my RunMittRun effort, I actually talked with some of the highest level leaders of the Evangelical movement about this issue. Ironically, some of those who indicated they might be most favorable toward Mitt’s candidacy were also adamant that Mormons could not be classified as Christians.
MM: Ouch!
MD: Ouch is right. But I don’t think we can get hung up on that. We can’t try to win that point rather than allowing Mitt Romney to win the White House. We need to patiently confirm that we worship Jesus Christ as our Savior and let others parse the definition of Christianity down to embarrassingly indefensible levels.
MM: But shouldn’t someone try to set the record straight doctrinally?
MD: There are a few widespread misconceptions of Mormonism that I think will need to be addressed in order for Mitt to get elected. A very high number of Americans think Mormons still practice polygamy, for example, that we worship Joseph Smith rather than Jesus Christ, and that we don’t believe in the Bible. Little wonder that a high percentage of Americans also say they could not vote for a Mormon for president. It is not Mitt Romney’s fault that there are so many misconceptions of Mormonism out there, and it is not his responsibility to correct those misconceptions.
MM: Can the Church do it?
MD: Not in the context of a partisan political campaign, and not without risking the appearance of proselytism. Because the minute any of the leaders of the Evangelical community sense that there may be an effort by the Church to proselytize through Mitt’s campaign, any and all support for Mitt from those leaders will evaporate. There is already an extraordinarily high level of sensitivity bordering on paranoia among some Evangelicals that electing a Mormon to the White House would result in a windfall for the Church.
MM: Wouldn’t it?
MD: I think electing a Mormon president would help dispel some of the common misconceptions about Mormonism, but I don’t think it follows that there would be a huge wave of missionary success coming out of it. I voted for George Bush twice and never considered becoming a Methodist. And I don’t think the Baptists got an uptick in converts during Jimmy Carter’s presidency either.
MM: Then what are Evangelicals so worried about?
MD: During our focus groups in South Carolina…
MM: You did focus groups?
MD: Yes. We did the telephone survey in South Carolina you reported on back in August. http://www.ldsmag.com/arts/060810davisp2.html Then we followed it up with four two-hour focus groups in October. It was an extraordinary experience. Fifty percent of the people coming into our meetings were determined they could not vote for a Mormon for president. By the end of each session, that number was down to ten percent.
MM: How did you change their minds?
MD: We helped them understand the difference between mainstream Mormons and fundamentalist extremists who are not members of the Church, we cleared up a few doctrinal misconceptions, and we let them know how many Mormons are already prominent leaders in many fields of endeavor in the United States. We humanized mainstream Mormons for them. So many of these folks hear “Mormon” and immediately think of either Warren Jeffs or the Amish folks in black coats. It was really extraordinary to learn how extremely misunderstood Mormonism still is by many, many people.
MM: Isn’t that mostly a regional problem in the South?
MD: The researcher who performed our polling in South Carolina performed a similar poll in Orange County, California, following the dedication of the Newport Beach Temple. The Church had received extraordinarily positive media coverage during the temple open house. But the numbers in Orange County were almost identical to the numbers in South Carolina. The only difference was that Muslims were better liked in Orange County than Mormons, whereas South Carolinians preferred Mormons over Muslims.
MM: You’ve got to be kidding.
MD: I wish I was.
MM: That’s absolutely fascinating.
MD: Unless you’re Mitt Romney. Then I imagine it’s a little frustrating.
MM: Back to the anti-Mormon extremists.
MD: Yes, of course. The fourth group that I predicted would attack Mitt based on his religion were the anti-Mormon extremists; those who would be mission-driven to debunk Mormonism at all costs. And some of those groups have already produced anti-Mormon tracts and videos specifically addressing Mitt Romney’s potential run for president. One of the videos I saw was quite interesting in that it spent the first three fourths of its airtime attacking Mormonism as a deceptive, dangerous cult, then spent the last fourth trying to say, “But it would be okay to vote for a Mormon.” I mean, I really felt for the guys making this video, because they appeared to be very sincere in their desire to find a way to do the right thing for America by allowing for the advancement of a socially conservative candidate without allowing the Church to gain any ground in the process. What they really appeared to be after was to find a way to utilize Mitt Romney’s candidacy to besmirch the Church without going so far as to make his election impossible. Quite a difficult balancing act.
MM: Indeed.
MD: And it is just that kind of attack that will be difficult for many Mormons to absorb without wanting to strike back.
MM: So… what’s the answer?
MM: More tomorrow?
MD: Looking forward to it
