Did Trump permanently change Mormon voting patterns?

[Padfoot]

Last year in November I asked what McMullin voters in Utah would do in 2020 if they didn't have a way to register a protest vote.

I was reminded of this post after reading this article.

At this point I don't think it is too radical to suggest that Biden's lead in the Arizona polls is at least partially if not entirely due to Mormons who voted third party in 2016 moving toward the Democrats in 2020.  I'm now wondering if Trump has potentially caused long-term changes to Mormon voting patterns.  Will Mormons "come home" to the GOP once Trump is no longer the party standard bearer or has he remade the party in his image to such an extent that the 2024 nominee (assuming it isn't Trump himself) will also receive lukewarm support from Mormon voters?

[100% pro-life no matter what]

I expect 2024 to kind of look like a mix of 2012 and 2016 (not predicting margin or the winner, just relative strength), as the swings with Mormons and suburbanites were a mix of what would have happened anyway and something unique to Trump that wouldn't be there with a Republican who doesn't make controversial statements on Twitter nonstop.

[Tiger08]

That reminds me of another question I had: are most NeverTrump Republicans (or R-leaning Independents) right-of-center people who have personal problems with Trump but would feel comfortable voting for pretty much any other Republican, or are these centrist voters who feel uneasy voting for people to the right of Romney or McCain and are drifitng leftward anyway? In other words, are their problems with Trump primary personal or are they political as well? The former group would probably vote Trump if it was on political positions but don't want to vote for him as a person. I am in the former category and there are probably a not-completely-miniscule number of those in Southern and Midwestern suburbs (Pro-Life Single Issue Voter's earlier commentary about college-educated Evangelicals having similar political views to Mormons on most things makes sense here). Maybe comparing Kasich voters to Rubio voters in the 2016 primary would be a decent proxy for this? Not just talking about Biden voters here, also including people who are voting third party, doing a write in, or staying home

[darklordoftech]

If it’s because they think Trump is too hostile to immigrants, they won’t go back to voting GOP. If it’s because Trump cheated on his wives, they probably will go back to voting GOP.

[Sol]

It's worth noting that a lot of Trump's comparative weakness with Mormons is the result of his margins being compared to Romney, who got colossal margins in Mormon country for obvious reasons. IMO 2008 is a decent guide for the possibilities of the Mormon vote--i.e. some snapback to Republicans but an ultimately decent margin with reference to history.

[lfromnj]

It's worth noting that a lot of Trump's comparative weakness with Mormons is the result of his margins being compared to Romney, who got colossal margins in Mormon country for obvious reasons. IMO 2008 is a decent guide for the possibilities of the Mormon vote--i.e. some snapback to Republicans but an ultimately decent margin with reference to history.

Yup I use 2008 for utah districts

[Padfoot]

It's worth noting that a lot of Trump's comparative weakness with Mormons is the result of his margins being compared to Romney, who got colossal margins in Mormon country for obvious reasons. IMO 2008 is a decent guide for the possibilities of the Mormon vote--i.e. some snapback to Republicans but an ultimately decent margin with reference to history.

The problem I see with that argument is that according to the Pew poll results cited by the article in my original post, Bush '04 actually did just as well with Mormons as Romney in '12 which would suggest to me that Romney's status as a fellow Mormon may have increased Mormon turnout but it didn't influence their partisan breakdown.  I would also suggest that '08 represents a relative low point in Mormon support for the GOP due to the historic nature of Obama's candidacy and/or the low approval numbers for both GWB and the GOP in general.  In turn that would make 2012 more like a snapback to the most recent GOP norm rather than an exceptional high.

With that said I do agree that Republicans will still consistently win the Mormon vote comfortably moving forward but I'm wondering if Mormons will almost be an inverse of what Hispanic support currently looks like for Democrats.  I'm thinking something like a 60-40 or 65-35 split rather than 80-20.



(Unfortunately Pew doesn't have the 2000 or 2008 numbers so those are missing data points for me.  If there is another poll you know of that would have this data I'd love to see it for comparison.) 

[Hope For A New Era]

McMullin voters will probably do a 50/50 split.

There will come a time, I think, at which the religiosity of Mormons will no longer be enough to overcome the extreme educatedness and urbanness of that demographic. It will probably happen very quickly, and then there shall be a glorious Bluetah.

[Sol]

It's worth noting that a lot of Trump's comparative weakness with Mormons is the result of his margins being compared to Romney, who got colossal margins in Mormon country for obvious reasons. IMO 2008 is a decent guide for the possibilities of the Mormon vote--i.e. some snapback to Republicans but an ultimately decent margin with reference to history.

The problem I see with that argument is that according to the Pew poll results cited by the article in my original post, Bush '04 actually did just as well with Mormons as Romney in '12 which would suggest to me that Romney's status as a fellow Mormon may have increased Mormon turnout but it didn't influence their partisan breakdown.  I would also suggest that '08 represents a relative low point in Mormon support for the GOP due to the historic nature of Obama's candidacy and/or the low approval numbers for both GWB and the GOP in general.  In turn that would make 2012 more like a snapback to the most recent GOP norm rather than an exceptional high.

With that said I do agree that Republicans will still consistently win the Mormon vote comfortably moving forward but I'm wondering if Mormons will almost be an inverse of what Hispanic support currently looks like for Democrats.  I'm thinking something like a 60-40 or 65-35 split rather than 80-20.



(Unfortunately Pew doesn't have the 2000 or 2008 numbers so those are missing data points for me.  If there is another poll you know of that would have this data I'd love to see it for comparison.) 

That's exactly my argument--that Mormons will be more Democratic than they used to be, but not as much as Trump's 2016 collapse would suggest.

[lfromnj]

Fun fact , Utah is the only state in 2004 where Gay marriage did better than Kerry.

[Left Wing]

I think what happens to Ben McAdams this year will be a good indicator. Although Jon Hunstman losing, makes me think they might be even more anti-Trump now, to the point of not voting for anyone who worked for him.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I think what happens to Ben McAdams this year will be a good indicator. Although Jon Hunstman losing, makes me think they might be even more anti-Trump now, to the point of not voting for anyone who worked for him.

Why do you think so? Jim Matheson's performances were not exactly good indicators of the Republican-ness of LDS Utahans.

[Left Wing]

I think what happens to Ben McAdams this year will be a good indicator. Although Jon Hunstman losing, makes me think they might be even more anti-Trump now, to the point of not voting for anyone who worked for him.

Why do you think so? Jim Matheson's performances were not exactly good indicators of the Republican-ness of LDS Utahans.

Because Burgess Owens is going to have to make a play for mormons who don't like Trump to win. If they aren't receptive to him, it shows somewhat of a trend. Matheson just lost because it was a wave.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I think what happens to Ben McAdams this year will be a good indicator. Although Jon Hunstman losing, makes me think they might be even more anti-Trump now, to the point of not voting for anyone who worked for him.

Why do you think so? Jim Matheson's performances were not exactly good indicators of the Republican-ness of LDS Utahans.

Because Burgess Owens is going to have to make a play for mormons who don't like Trump to win. If they aren't receptive to him, it shows somewhat of a trend. Matheson just lost because it was a wave.

?? Jim Matheson never lost. He retired in 2014 after having continually won his races in a district that voted Republican by crazy margins in presidential elections.

[Left Wing]

I think what happens to Ben McAdams this year will be a good indicator. Although Jon Hunstman losing, makes me think they might be even more anti-Trump now, to the point of not voting for anyone who worked for him.

Why do you think so? Jim Matheson's performances were not exactly good indicators of the Republican-ness of LDS Utahans.

Because Burgess Owens is going to have to make a play for mormons who don't like Trump to win. If they aren't receptive to him, it shows somewhat of a trend. Matheson just lost because it was a wave.

?? Jim Matheson never lost. He retired in 2014 after having continually won his races in a district that voted Republican by crazy margins in presidential elections.

Sorry I forgot he didn't lose. But he did likely retire because he knew he was going to lose. THere' no other reason he would have retired that young.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I think what happens to Ben McAdams this year will be a good indicator. Although Jon Hunstman losing, makes me think they might be even more anti-Trump now, to the point of not voting for anyone who worked for him.

Why do you think so? Jim Matheson's performances were not exactly good indicators of the Republican-ness of LDS Utahans.

Because Burgess Owens is going to have to make a play for mormons who don't like Trump to win. If they aren't receptive to him, it shows somewhat of a trend. Matheson just lost because it was a wave.

?? Jim Matheson never lost. He retired in 2014 after having continually won his races in a district that voted Republican by crazy margins in presidential elections.

Sorry I forgot he didn't lose. But he did likely retire because he knew he was going to lose. THere' no other reason he would have retired that young.

I can agree about that.
What I meant to say is that Jim Matheson won multiple times while his district stayed pretty Republican otherwise, so Ben McAdams might be able to do the same. Although, granted, Burgess Owens appears to be a stronger opponent than what Matheson used to have so there may be less ticket-splitting this time.

[lfromnj]

I think what happens to Ben McAdams this year will be a good indicator. Although Jon Hunstman losing, makes me think they might be even more anti-Trump now, to the point of not voting for anyone who worked for him.

Why do you think so? Jim Matheson's performances were not exactly good indicators of the Republican-ness of LDS Utahans.

Because Burgess Owens is going to have to make a play for mormons who don't like Trump to win. If they aren't receptive to him, it shows somewhat of a trend. Matheson just lost because it was a wave.

?? Jim Matheson never lost. He retired in 2014 after having continually won his races in a district that voted Republican by crazy margins in presidential elections.

Sorry I forgot he didn't lose. But he did likely retire because he knew he was going to lose. THere' no other reason he would have retired that young.

Interestingly the race was still pretty close in 2014 of all years.

[Hope For A New Era]

I think what happens to Ben McAdams this year will be a good indicator. Although Jon Hunstman losing, makes me think they might be even more anti-Trump now, to the point of not voting for anyone who worked for him.

I promise you that had absolutely nothing to do with it. Cox has been Herbert's "heir apparent" since the beginning. He's just really popular. If Cox hadn't run, Huntsman probably would have won easily.

[The Mikado]

Without echoing RI's colorful views on Mormons, I do agree with him to the extent that if Mormons ever do fully change, it'll be a top down thing with the LDS Church hierarchy making a conscious decision to sever from the GOP. That won't happen soon, but it's not impossible it'll happen in coming decades.

Also, if ANY ethno-religious group in America is capable of doing it, the LDS absolutely could set up a "Deseret Party" fully controlled by it that could contest and win Utah and control Utah's state government and Congressional delegation and try to be a kingmaker delegation in DC. Just a state-specific political party that would sever them from the GOP's national trends while still allowing them to align with the GOP on important issues.

[Padfoot]

Also, if ANY ethno-religious group in America is capable of doing it, the LDS absolutely could set up a "Deseret Party" fully controlled by it that could contest and win Utah and control Utah's state government and Congressional delegation and try to be a kingmaker delegation in DC. Just a state-specific political party that would sever them from the GOP's national trends while still allowing them to align with the GOP on important issues.

Although I think its probably the least likely scenario I also find it to be the most interesting "what if."  I think it's likely that they'd be kingmakers if not the plurality party in Idaho as well.  I'd also wager that they could win a significant number of state legislative seats and local government races in several other western states too.

[TDAS04]

Permanently?  Forever is a long time, who knows.

Though I can see Mormons being more conscious of Republican hypocrisy for a couple cycles beyond Trump.

[支持核绿派 (Greens4Nuclear)]

I don't think Trump permanently changed Mormon voting patterns, so much as the potential for a leftward shift was already there in the Obama era. This is anecdotal, but the more academically inclined Mormons at my high school who took a lot of AP courses were (and probably still are) relatively left-leaning in their political/cultural outlook.

[Adam Griffin]

I do think at minimum, there is increasingly an irreconcilable difference between two Republican Party factions in the UT (perhaps "Mormons" and "Non-Mormons" is the simplest way to describe it, but I don't think it's that cut-and-dry) that will lead to whichever group doesn't have its flavor of candidate represented defecting in relatively large numbers to third-party or Democratic candidates (which obviously may make Mormon margins for the GOP smaller - if only through increased 3P support; overt D support may remain relatively unchanged).

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

They probably snap back unless Trump wins a second term. 8 years of Trump would do a lot of damage to republicans mormon numbers

[Indy Texas]

The thing about Mormons is that unlike (other) white Christians, they've never operated under any pretense of being a majority in the country or the "real" Americans or expected a dominant role in American popular culture or the collective understanding of the country. They know their history. They know why they were effectively exiled to Utah. They know what Evangelicals say about them; they heard the "magic underwear" jokes from secular liberals when Mitt Romney was running for president. They dealt with it.

The fact that very few people in the halls of political power or corporate boardrooms or entertainment own the Book of Mormon and believe in the teachings of Joseph Smith does not drive them into fire and fury.

Compare to white Protestants, who regard it as their birthright to be the arbiters of American-ness and at a bare minimum be permanently treated as first-among-equals in the commanding heights of the culture. They've lost that position and it's caused them to become absolutely unhinged.