I came up with an interesting theory regarding the anti-Mormon calls being made about Mitt Romney in New Hampshire. These are push-polls allegedly made against Mitt Romney designed to expose him as a Mormon.
However, what if the Romney campaign was actually behind these polls? Why would they do this? How about to make Romney seem the victim of an anti-Mormon campaign? Many evangelical Christians see themselves as persecuted and as a minority.
Could this be a way for Mitt to try to endear himself with the evangelical community as victims of religious bias?
Dunno, seems at least as likely to hurt Romney as help him, so it seems like it would be a dumb risk to take on his campaigns part
Also, I usually think of Push-polls as being used to spread a lie or rumor about a candidate. Romney is in fact a Mormon, so what distinguishes a push poll drawing attention to his religion from one that honestly asks if people won’t vote for him based on his religion.
If Romney’s campaign were behind these calls, that would be a really bold gamble. It would take a few people, maybe a few dozen, to do the calling, and one leak would finish his candidacy.
I have no idea who is behind this, but I am sure we can all commit that we will never vote for whoever runs such a campaign, and that the candidate responsible is not fit to be President.
I loathe Romney and love the theory, but I don’t think so. Too many people will have a knee-jerk negative to two points:
“Among the questions was whether the person receiving the call knew that … his five sons did not serve in the military … and that Mormons believe the Book of Mormon is superior to the Bible.”
The 1970’s were about 30 years old, so I don’t think the race issue would do excessive damage in New Hampshire.
It’s usually pretty hard to tie it to a particular candidate though, or even their campaign. It’s too easy to blame it on some maverick staffer, and in many cases it probably is due to someone acting more or less on their own.
Still, hopefully the NH AG will supeona the company involved and we’ll find out who paid the bill anyways.
I’ll vote for the Democratic nominee even if his/her campaign proves to be linked to this some way; a corrupt Dem administration 2009-13 would still be preferable to the best conceivable Republican one. Not that such involvement is likely. I’m sure most of the Dems would prefer to face Romney as the Pub nominee rather than Giuliani: Fewer skeletons, but the Mormon thing alone makes him easier to beat, no push-polling necessary.
I agree that these polls are distasteful. But I wonder what, specifically, Republicans find unfair about the polls. I find the attacks on a candidate’s faith (as opposed to his or her personal views), and the intermixing of religion and politics objectionable. But of course, mixing politics and religion has been an intentional strategy on the part of the Republican party. This strikes me as the foreseeable consequence of doing so. You cannot simultaneously argue that a candidate’s faith is an important part of their qualification to be President and that his or her faith ought not be the subject of political attack.
Shodan, did you vote for Bush in 2000? Because this is right out of his playbook. In South Carolina, before their 2000 primary, the Bush campaign (read Karl Rove) authorized a push poll asking if voters were less likely to vote for McCain if they knew he had an illegitimate black child. Now, the McCains had adopted a Bangladeshi girl, so the child was around and visible, but the push poll put the worst spin possible on it.
So did you vote for Bush in 2000?
Oh, and for the first time, possibly, I agree with you. The candidate responsible for the push poll I mentioned was and still is not fit to be President. And has proved that constantly.
Its not the information contained in the calls, but the fact that they’re anonymous that makes them dishonest (and illegal). Campaign calls in NH (and I imagine many other states) are supposed to declare who their calling on behalf of. If McCain or whoever wanted to hire people to call and tell everyone that Romney is a Mormon, that’s alright, but not if they pretend to be from a polling firm.
Well, at a minimum the uproar is about both the content and the anonymity. My opinion is that is more to do with the former than the latter, but that’s open to debate.
Frankly, considering how much John McCain has sucked up to Bush after the Bushes went after him with this same tactic, I’m not particularly upset to see him whammied with it again, the little weasel.
Still, I consider it completely unacceptable. Completely unacceptable. I wouldn’t put it past any of the Democratic candidates, but it seems like a waste of money for them to be targeting Romney in New Hampshire. Wouldn’t Giuliani make more sense, especially if he’s not actively campaigning there otherwise?