By this, I am assuming you mean one that made a blanket statement claiming that we should treat all religious minorities the same, and then they include atheists in that group. I will respond as though this is true…
I would have no problem with them. I have no problem with other people’s rights to choose religions, so long as they have no problem with my right to choose none. I don’t see how that is a true issue at all?
Brendon Small
I don’t really care if someone believes in a God. As long as they don’t try shoving it down my throat I’ll consider them. I figure that many candidates are like many people and use religion as a tool because they know that without it, they’ll never get elected.
I’d feel that he’d just undercut his chances to get elected.
Although a few Independants have interested me I would not vote for one unless he/she had at least a slight chance based on the opinion polls–If either the Dem or the Rep is going to win anyway, I would rather vote for whichever I thought was the lesser of two evils.
For a similar reason it’s unlikely that a non-Xtian will get my vote. As far as I know all POTUSs so far have been Xtian and it is extremely likely that the next one will be too, regardless of how I vote.
I wouldn’t mind having a not-too-orthodox Jew as POTUS–and I’d love to see a Buddhist in the office. Call me intolerant if you like, but the thought of a Muslim in the White House scares me. I (rightly or wrongly) perceive in them a greater tendency towards fundamentalism and fanaticism–the traits that most put me off regardless of a persons specific religion.
Which leaves me with a choice between a Dem Xtian and a Rep Xtian.
From my observations and in my opinion many if not most Reps seem to be the true-believer types that would press the button and kill us all if they had a dream that god/jesus told them to. Most Dems strike me as the kind of regular Joe/Jane that give lip service to Xtianity partly because to not do so would destroy their chance to win.
So, I will almost certainly vote for whichever Dem wins the nomination. Historically, in my 25 years of being of voting age, I have never voted for any Rep for any office.
I wouldn’t care if they were religious in their personal lives, as long as it seemed like they wouldn’t let it affect how they used their position.
I have a healthy amount of skepticism for politicians who say they are very religious anyway. Like anything else, they’ll play up one aspect of themselves in order to get votes from certain groups. A lot of people hold religion really high up when they are considering who to vote for, and politicians know that.
I don’t think an openly atheistic or even an agnostic politician could get elected any time soon, at least in the US.
As evidenced by the fact that I don’t know if I’m an atheist or what these days, I’ve never considered this ‘where it counts the most.’ Throughout history, leaders have used religion to their advantage and political candidates in the U.S. are no different. I think some are honest in their faith, others are grabbing for votes - in other words it’s pretty much like every other issue.
Of course, this year I’m as iffy about voting as I am about spiritual matters, but that’s probably a coincidence.
Look at the responses, it seems to be a legit question that people have put some thought into.
Jim
I vote for the Democrat.
Our primary is too late to make any difference so my voice is already largely silenced when it comes to choosing a candidate. I can’t conceive of an instance in which I would vote for a Republican for president so, Democrat.
Mostly harmless. 
I suspect, the present occupant of the seat of supreme exective power aside, that most politicians mouth the words in order to get the votes have have a much wider variability of believe than so expressed. Even Reagan, who frequently invoked the name of God with unnerving fervor, and Nixon, who was a Quaker, didn’t really seem to take their faith to the bank when it came to their executive capacities, and I’d guess that Kennedy and Clinton paid nothing but lip service to their nominal religious casts.
On the other hand, the Chimp in Charge seems to be a true believer, which I suspect is secretly (or not so secretly) the main thematic driver in this overarching pusch to extend American influence into the Middle East, and candidates like Fred Dalton Thompson don’t give me any warm-and-fuzzies. On the whole, however, I’d tend to vote on issues and the candidates records thereof rather than the superstitions they hold that do not directly impact their ability to execute the duties of office or cause them to experience hallucinations.
Stranger
I remember Hillary Clinton gave a very good response to a religion question at the debates in Vermont. She said that she was wary of those that wear religion on their sleeves, and she chooses to keap it to herself. It was something like that anyway.
I can’t really call myself a firm-100%-sure-beyond-all-reasonable-doubt-there-is-absolutely-no-God-atheist so my opinion on the question may not count. In any case, when choosing who I vote for, I look at the whole picture and pick whoever’s position on the issues is closest to mine. The fact that a candidate belongs to a particular religion, sect, or cult rarely affects the decision of who I vote for. The only exception I can think of is if a candidate was a Scientologist but even in that instance, I would still vote for him or her over some extreme right-winger who was an atheist or agnostic. (I know they’re rare but they do exist.)
Straight answer is that I am not a single-issue voter. Religion vs Athiesm, Abortion vs Choice, Guns vs No Guns, Taxes vs Deficits, Skulls vs Masons…I always try to evaluate the total package in a candidate. IMO, anyone who casts their ticket based on a single-issue litmus test doesn’t deserve the right to vote.
There have been many highly religious leaders who honestly respected and defended the constitutional separations.
As a devout athiest, I vote like I would hope others vote - I research the issues and the candidate’s positions, and I add in information about them like their strengths and weaknesses, and I vote for the candidate with the best combination of chance of winning and having the right positions and strengths. And then I go eat a bunch of jelly doughnuts or something, to get the taste out of my mouth.
I think at the present it would still be practically impossible for someone to win a very high office without claiming to be Christian or at least Jewish, and pretty difficult for someone to win most elected positions after announcing that they are athiests.
I also find I vote for Democrats most of the time, because Republicans are so vile that all the finer points disappear into the noise. But I don’t think this makes me a Democrat, I think it just makes me a responsible citizen. And to be completely accurate, some Republicans like Warner or Specter or either of those women from Maine don’t seem that bad (though I can’t vote in their elections).