You would reject a candidate for dogma? I wrote “values”, like being pro-life, anti queer rights, pro religious expression, pro family, pro marriage. If I had to reject any candidate that does not agree with me on dogma then I would be limited to an Orthodox Catholic candidate. I certainly would not vote for Giuliani. He is Catholic but he does not support American and Christian values. Mormons generally do. For that reason religion is the WRONG reason to reject Romney. That said I do not care for Romney but it has nothing to do with his religion.
Well "dogma" is a broad term. Some folks' "dogma" is that the pre-born folks are not folks. Yet you take that into consideration...
I wrote “values”, like being pro-life, anti queer rights, pro religious expression, pro family, pro marriage. If I had to reject any candidate that does not agree with me on dogma then I would be limited to an Orthodox Catholic candidate.
Down-the-line "dogma" as my filter? (No)
So any of the candidates could come up to you and say: "Art, my great-great-great uncle said thus: "Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the 'whore of Babylon' whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. Any person who shall be so corrupt as to receive a holy ordinance of the Gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent"...and it wouldn't bother you? (BTW, this quote is from Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 255...Pratt is thus related to Romney).
Any of the candidates could adhere membership to any fraternal or religious organization that openly labeled you and your faith beliefs as "apostate" and call you & other professors "corrupt" and creedally an "abomination before the Lord" and you would be fully inspired to vote for them, eh? (See LDS "scripture," adhered to by true believing Mormons, Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, vv, 18-19).