On page 173 of Nixonland, Rick Perlstein states the 
following about Republican politician George Romney, who was the father 
of Mitt Romney, the Republican who lost the 2012 Presidential election:
“[George] Romney, a Republican who kept on getting elected in a 
Democratic state (he called America’s cult of rugged individualism 
‘nothing but a political banner to cover up greed’), was a media 
darling.  The Mormon bishop with what Jules Witcover joked was a ‘full 
head of silvering Presidential hair’ made great copy: he didn’t work on 
Sundays.  He fasted before big decisions.  His granddad had fled with 
three wives one step ahead of the polygamy laws.  A new book of personal
 reminiscenses of JFK had just come out.  ‘The fellow I don’t want to 
run against is Romney,’ it reported him saying.”
What tanked George Romney’s Presidential ambitions was his statement 
that he had been brainwashed into supporting the Vietnam War.  Not only 
did that make him look weak, but many people may have thought that 
Romney was a phony after they heard that statement.  After all, one 
observer noted, Romney continued to publicly support the Vietnam War 
even after the time that he said he had concluded that he had been 
brainwashed about it!
But I can identify with why Romney was such a darling, and with how 
his religiosity actually contributed to his political stature.  My guess
 is that, in the eyes of many, being religious is an indication that one
 takes matters seriously—-that one takes morality and human worth 
seriously.  That is very attractive to me.  And yet, I can’t say that 
all politicians’ religiosity is attractive.  For example, I do not care 
for how many evangelical conservatives seemed to equate genuine 
Christian commitment with political support for George W. Bush.  George 
W. Bush said that he looked to his heavenly Father rather than his 
earthly father for advice on Iraq.  In my opinion, he should have 
consulted his earthly father rather than giving the impression that God 
was the source of his decision to wage the Iraq War.  Moreover, the 
haste with with he got us into Iraq arguably contradicts the virtues 
that one can associate with religiosity: gravity and carefully weighing 
one’s options in prayer before God so as to make the best decision and 
to minimize harm to human beings.
Jimmy Carter’s religiosity was attractive when he first ran for 
President.  Here the country was, recovering from the stench and 
corruption of Watergate, and this church-going man came along and gave 
the impression that he would clean up Washington.  But his religiosity 
may have gone sour, a bit.  I think of his sermonizing against greed.  
People in those hard times did not want to hear a sermon, but rather 
they longed for hope and encouragement.
In 2008, I thought that Republican Mike Huckabee’s religiosity was 
attractive.  He appeared to be a kindly man.  He was a pastor.  And he 
manifested a concern for the poor and illegal immigrants, something that
 I did not see too often among Republicans.  But, in my opinion, 
Huckabee became a right-wing shrill, one whose religiosity amounted to 
encouraging evangelical conservatives’ whiny persecution complex more 
than empathy or concern for the marginalized.
Personally speaking, I would like a President who fasts and 
prays—-not to the exclusion of learning, mind you, but as a way for that
 President to humbly acknowledge his or her limitations and the gravity 
of decisions.  But something else that attracts me is intelligence: I 
like for Presidents to display some intelligence on the topic of 
religion.  I don’t know if President Barack Obama fasts and prays, but I
 have been impressed by his thoughtful insights about religious issues.