Everyone following US politics is likely well aware of Romney's situation involving state-mandated healthcare, and how he has tried to separate himself from his past with healthcare to pander to the right wing.

But the current leading-Republican has another interesting situation that you no-doubt know of: He is a Mormon.  Wonder why I refer to this as a "situation"?

In the past, Mitt Romney was criticized by Evangelicals due to his Mormon beliefs.  To many Christians, Mormonism has been referred to as a cult, something that has hurt Romney's campaigns in the past.  

But now, Evangelicals seem to have come to terms with his Mormonism.  This election, their philosophy is "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."  Romney seeks to remove the Muslim/AntiChrist/Communist/Socialist/Atheist (pick one or any, Neocons use them interchangeably) president, while stripping government reforms and (as the Evangelicals hope) putting in place social regulations...  Including a focus on God within our government.

It seems that anyone that even hints at pushing for religion within government and schools gets the support of Evangelicals.  

But if Romney were to win the Presidential Election, that support would disappear within a week of being sworn in, more immediately if he is sworn in on The Book of Mormon.

The Evangelical community will begin to wonder if Romney will push his version of Christianity (some debate whether or not Mormonism is Christian).  Would he try and promote polygamy? Marriage with children? Would he try and subdue the beliefs of non-Mormons in America?

Many of the born-again hardcore Evangelicals within the US are a paranoid group, a fearful people, with pastors that act as fear-mongering shepherds of their own ludicrous brands of Christianity.  As soon as they remember his beliefs are unlike their own, they will speak up against him.  This leads to his situation of a Catch-22.

Catch-22, n.:  A situation in which a desired outcome or solution is impossible to attain because of a set of inherently illogical rules or conditions.(TFD)

Romney would be unable to place many social reforms without insane criticism from the Evangelicals (it's unlikely, but they could even use anti-homosexual legislation against him, as it would attack homosexual Christians).  In their senseless worries, we will possibly be saved from religion-based regulations (stemming from the President's desk, at least).  Even if he pandered to the religious community with promises of a return of God to the White House, he would possibly be stopped by those same people.  Unless he has the same exact beliefs as them, Evangelicals will never fully accept him.  Nothing is ever good enough for them.

While I certainly can't guarantee all of what I have said, our odds are better off with Romney compared to, say, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum.

Am I wrong?  Should I walk the plank for my take on this?  Give me your input!