I shy away from talking about how weird Mormonism is, at least in my political work, because I really do believe that political parties and politicians should not promote or denigrate anyone’s religion. But it is a pretty strange set of beliefs, and a huge number of people have trouble understanding why they should trust someone who subscribes to those beliefs. To some degree the same can be said of any religion other than Christianity and Judaism. And, of course, this country was founded in a way that took account of the religious differences within Christianity. Our federalist system gives a lot of power to the states partly out of economic differences that existed in the late 18th-Century, but mainly because the colonies were founded and dominated by different sects. Congregationalists in Massachusetts didn’t want to be discriminated against by Anglicans in Virginia or Quakers in Pennsylvania, or Catholics in Maryland, or Baptists in the Carolinas. We couldn’t have created a country of united states without assuring all people could participate in our federal government regardless of their personal religious beliefs. It’s an extremely important principle, and I won’t ever disrespect it.

These days, every state has considerable religious diversity, as well as lots of people who aren’t religious at all. So, it’s not like religious people feel like they should choose a state to live in based on the religious history of that state. Atheists (and to some extent Jews) might want to stick to big cities or the coastal states if they don’t want to feel ostracized. And Mormons probably feel most comfortable in Utah and the surrounding Mountain States where people are used to their religion, or it is the norm.

Harry Reid is the most powerful Mormon in the country, and it doesn’t seem to present much of a liability for him. His religion is rarely invoked, and even more rarely with any kind of negative connotation. But it would be hard to know that Reid is a Mormon by merely observing him go about his business. He doesn’t wear his religion on his sleeve and he seems like a fairly ordinary guy.

Of course, religious differences are less important in Democratic politics because the party is inclusive and officially secular. I don’t mean secular in the mean and nasty way that Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck use the word. The party doesn’t promote secularism. But it operates with the secular principles of the Founding Fathers. All faiths and no faiths are welcome.

Now, I mention all this because it’s part of the puzzle in trying to figure out what is going to happen in the Republican primaries. Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons. Most Mormons are Republicans, both because of their social conservatism and because a high percentage of Mormons operate small businesses. But most Republican primary voters are not Mormons. In fact, a huge percentage of Republican primary voters are evangelical protestants who belong to churches that do missionary work in direct competition with Mormons. This segment of the GOP is extremely hostile to Mormonism and will not vote for a Mormon in the primaries. Some of them won’t vote for a Mormon in the general, even against someone like Barack Obama.

This makes it harder for Mitt Romney to win the nomination. He can do really well in the Mountain States, but they have relatively small populations. He can do well on the coasts and in New England where people just aren’t that interested in religion in a political context. He can compete in most of the Midwest; his father was the governor of Michigan in the 1960’s. But he’s dead in the water in the South, which is (ironically) the home base of the Republican Party.

The interesting thing is that the Establishment of the GOP, which is based in Washington DC and New York City, is fine with Mitt Romney. In fact, they have been unable to come up with a back-up plan in case Romney doesn’t do well in the primaries. Given that Romney has already given up on the first contest in Iowa and is bleeding support to Michele Bachmann in New Hampshire, it’s looking pretty grim for Establishment Republicans.

But I think that the main thing is not Romney’s Mormonism. I think he’s a shitty candidate. His flip-flop-flipping dwarfs anything that could be hung around John Kerry’s neck. David Plouffe, who ran Obama’s campaign in 2008 and will be running it again in 2012, has called Romney “a world-class political contortionist.” You can expect that label to stick.

Considering that Romney created a health care system for Massachusetts that became the model for ObamaCare, it’s surprising that Romney is ahead in the polls and has raised the most money among Republican candidates. Yet, his fundraising has been anemic. Maybe that is partly because the GOP plans on taking advantage of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling to fund Super PACs. But, still, it seems like there is a decided lack of enthusiasm for Romney’s candidacy.

But if not Romney, then who? Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is getting no traction and raising little money. And the only other candidate with a resume is also a Mormon and also compromised by association with the Obama administration. That would be former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, who served as the president’s ambassador to China.

Personally, I don’t want to be overconfident, but the GOP is failing to field a credible opponent. The last time this happened was in 1972. And I have all the respect in the world for George McGovern, but he was never going to beat Nixon. Mondale and Dukakis had far better shots.

If Romney wins the nomination he has a chance to do at least as well as McCain. But if someone other than Romney, Huntsman, or Pawlenty wins it?

In that case, we could be seeing Obama win in more than 40 states.