I think they would absolutely be electable. Let's remember that it was not theology that voters were all riled up about ... if it were, we would not have had multiple Unitarian Presidents by this point, as they literally deny the divinity of Christ.
Few people knew, cared (the country was less religious in its earliest days, especially prior to the Second Great Awakening, contrary to popular belief), or understood that. Jefferson and Lincoln not being members of a church at all and with a history of skeptical statements about religion implying deism would be a major problem today; it was actually attempted by their opponents (especially Jefferson) but largely fell flat at the time.
Also I've always found it ironic that a state like Texas went from voting against Smith because "AHHH Papism!" to voting for FDR by its biggest landslide margin ever, when Anglicanism is basically just Catholic lite. Still believes in intercession of the saints and all the rituals and sacraments and liturgy, etc. Still has bishops, with their head bishop simply based out of Canterbury instead of Rome.
But you know, it can technically be considered "Protestant," which makes all the difference in the world to the types of Americans who are more concerned with labels and prejudices than thinking logically about things.
Really, the anti-Catholicism was more an extension of anti-immigration/prejudice against ethnic minorities than it was any coherent religious/theological opposition. The nonsense about the Pope running the country was just an excuse.
Poll
