Nate Cohn is intrigued by “the Romney campaign’s decision to highlight in Tampa the candidate’s role as a Bishop in the Mormon Church”:
Are there risks in emphasizing Romney’s religion? I suppose, but they’re not nearly as serious as Romney’s favorability issues. A Pew Research survey found that a majority of Americans already know that Romney is Mormon and are comfortable with it. Although a minority of voters aren’t comfortable with Romney’s religion, there’s not much evidence that it has reduced Romney’s support: among Republicans and Republican leaners who are uncomfortable with Romney’s religion, Romney still leads Obama 93-4—which is actually slightly better than his 92-5 lead among Republicans and Republican leaners who are comfortable with Romney’s religion. Whatever reservations evangelical voters have about Romney have clearly been outweighed by their opposition to Obama. Realistically, voters are going to find out about Romney’s religion anyway, so they may as well own it and portray it well to ameliorate the reservations of any voters with discomfort.
What I think is different and notable about this is that it reveals that Romney isn’t just a Mormon but a former high ranking church official – roughly at the level of an archbishop in his relations to a archdiocese (though, of course, not as an ordained person but as a lay leader of his church). I wonder if there has ever been a major party nominee for president who was once a bishop, a cardinal, or a church official with the kind of authoritah that Romney wielded? Dishness, have at it.