Iowa's anti-Mormon bias?

It's never too early to talk about the next election and Marc Ambinder is looking to handicap the Iowa caucuses 27 months before they will happen. (Imagine doing this analysis in October 2005. How many would have predicted Barack Obama would win the Iowa caucuses? Anybody? Oh well, let's go on with the charade.)

His main point is that if Palin and Huckabee are both in Romney may try in Iowa. Reasoning: The first two will split the evangelical wing of the party and Romney could win with the remainders.

If Palin stays out Romney will stay out... opting for the McCain "skip Iowa" strategy. The reason writes Ambinder:

"Mitt Romney won't attribute his loss in Iowa to anti-Mormon bias, but plenty of his advisers are willing to go there."

Really? Iowa has an anti-Mormon bias? The only thing negative comment I heard in the 40 years I lived in Iowa was a prayer that they wouldn't come to your door.

The notion that somehow Iowa is more (or less) anti-Mormon than any other part of the country is ridiculous. But only a small percentage of Iowans will participate in the 2012 caucus. The perception is that Iowa's Republican party is dominated by Bible thumping right wingers that will never fully support a maverick (McCain) or a Mormon (Romney).

Romney's people seem to forget that in the summer of 2007 he led all Republicans in polls in Iowa and crushed his competition at the 2007 Straw Poll in Ames.

Apparently sometime between the summer of 2007 and January 2008 Iowa Republicans suddenly became anti-Mormon.

Or maybe Huckabee ran a better campaign. Romney's people would rather blame their failure on prejudiced Iowans... and that's not fair... not even for Iowa Republicans.