Why did FDR win Utah by landslide marigns four times, despite opposition by LDS leadership?

[Alben Barkley]

LDS President Heber J. Grant, a Democrat, was opposed to the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) and caused a front-page editorial to be written to that effect in the church-owned Deseret News. Grant shared the view of J. Reuben Clark and David O. McKay that the New Deal was socialism, something they all despised. FDR had campaigned on a platform that included the repeal of alcohol prohibition; meanwhile, Grant was a leader in the Utah state Prohibition movement. Despite this, FDR won Utah in each of his four elections. Grant, seeing the majority of the church members supporting FDR, regarded this as "one of the most serious conditions that has confronted me since I became President of the Church." Later, when Utah voters agreed by plebiscite to become the 36th state to ratify the Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution, thus completing the process of ratification and repealing Prohibition, Grant was devastated; in a general conference, he told the Latter-day Saints, "I have never felt so humiliated in my life over anything as that the State of Utah voted for the repeal of Prohibition." (Not unrelated to the passage of prohibition in Utah was Grant's strengthening of the Church's own requirements that its members abstain from alcohol.)

Politics in the state of Utah have generally been considered to have begun and ended with the LDS Church, with whoever the church endorses tending to win the state easily (a sizable majority of residents being Mormons; this was even more true in the early days). Indeed, thanks in large part to this, Utah was one of just two states (the other being then staunchly Republican Vermont) to vote for William Howard Taft in 1912. Moreover, it went from voting for William Jennings Bryan by a massive landslide margin in 1896 to opposing him in both of his subsequent presidential bids for similar reasons.

I had always assumed the reason FDR won Utah comfortably all four times he ran (and then Truman also won it easily in 1948 for that matter) was because the Mormon leadership was generally behind him. But according to the above passage, that does not appear to be the case at all. It appears in fact they were dismayed that their laity was defying them to vote for the pro-booze "socialist" FDR in droves, and even went so far as to (gasp!) repeal prohibition themselves!

What gives?

Today it's unfathomable that Utah (which demographically would seem to be a state that should vote about as Democratic as Colorado if not for the LDS influence) could just ignore the purported moral authority of the church like that. It would be the equivalent of the state not only voting for Biden by double digits, but also ratifying a Constitutional amendment protecting Roe v. Wade forever.

I find it hard to believe Mormons of the time were less devout. Is it just that at the time the state's voters were more driven by economic concerns at the end of the day, like most of the rest of the west?

[Del Tachi]

I don't think UT was as Mormon in the 1930s/40s as it is today, IIRC

[Leroy McPherson fan]

Great Depression. That pretty much says it all.

[Mr. Smith]

I don't think UT was as Mormon in the 1930s/40s as it is today, IIRC

You can't be serious, can you?

Also, despite what you plebs, Gentiles, Apostates, etc. believe, The Church is not some kind of hive mind, but there is still a concern for The Collective or Greater Good that is hard to miss. The New Deal
more than tapped into that concern, especially with The Great Depression.

Even if there was opposition to it, the state was a Conservative Democrats paradise [but not in the Dixie sense, hence Taft, Harding, and Coolidge's yuge victories...but Hoover's was very underwhelming] until Eisenhower started to court over that support.  There's a reason Bryan won 1896 and McKinley barely won 1900 [ironically iirc, The General Authorities actually did
weigh in on that as a means to not look like a bloc or cult...if this hadn't happened, Bryan would've waltzed through again!]

[Vice President Christian Man]

Voters in Utah like most Western states benefitted from prairie populism which FDR was seen as a successor of. It wasn't until the rise of anti-communism and eventually the rise of The Christian-Right and opposition to government regulation that the state shifted into the staunch Republican stronghold it is today, although SLC has made it slightly friendlier to The Dems than in some recent elections.

[TDAS04]

Maybe they didn’t listen to religious leaders as much back then.

[Schiff for Senate]

Maybe they didn’t listen to religious leaders as much back then.

Not true; in fact, they listened even more so and generally whoever the church supported won lots of votes in some parts of UT. UT's politics today is boring and extremely Republican, but in the early 1900s it had the volatile and very fascinating politics.

[Leroy McPherson fan]

Perhaps more interestingly, how did Al Smith only lose it by 7 in 1928?

[TDAS04]

Perhaps more interestingly, how did Al Smith only lose it by 7 in 1928?

According to Wikipedia, Mormon hierarchy endorsed Smith.

[Mr. Smith]

Perhaps more interestingly, how did Al Smith only lose it by 7 in 1928?

What part of "Utah was not a YUGE Republican stronghold until 1952" does Atlas keep failing to understand here?

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Probably that massive, historic agricultural depression in the American West during the 1930s, and the key plank of the Roosevelt administration being government support for agricultural prices.

[SInNYC]

Perhaps more interestingly, how did Al Smith only lose it by 7 in 1928?

Protestants, especially southern ones, hated both Catholics and Mormons, so that they had somewhat of a common cause.

Jews also voted for Smith, though that that might have been due to him personally (he was anti KKK and had prominent Jews among his advisors).

[Adam Griffin]

From 2018:

Mormons account for 49% of the 1.1 million residents in Salt Lake County — the lowest percentage since at least the 1930s, the Salt Lake Tribune reports. That’s according to membership figures provided by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that include active and nonactive members.

Worldwide, church membership growth has decreased in recent years, with 2017 being the slowest in 80 years [mid-1930s], according to Martinich’s research.

According to that, SLC County was comparably non-Mormon in the 1930s as it is today, with SLC County comprising a comparable share of state population in 1930 (38.1%) as it did in 2020 (36.2%).

This implies there was either a loss of LDS faith and/or a greater influx of non-Mormons in the 1920s/30s which may have contributed to the swing. Multiple data-points point to LDS having a slump during the Great Depression in general, followed by movement of tens of thousands of Utahans further west.

Another point in the article I thought I'd look into:

Salt Lake County is now one of five counties in the state where Mormons aren’t the majority, joining Carbon, San Juan, Summit and Grand. The proportion of Mormons in Weber County is also nearing that mark, down to 53%, the figures show.

Carbon, San Juan, Summit and Grand combined were 6% of UT's 1930 population; today, they are only 2%. It's not a huge difference per se, but if these counties were historically non-Mormon much more so than the state, then their statewide share of pop (+ SLC) of 44% that's majority non-Mormon could have had at least some impact relative to their present-day 38% majority non-Mormon population.

[Pres Mike]

Maybe, just maybe, the people of Utah can make their own choices?

Yeah, they usually take cues from the church. But perhaps on some things, they don't?

Their lives got better under FDR. That means more than anything the church says

[Indy Texas]

Mormons were not politically homogeneous and in the early years of Deseret, some church leaders actually encouraged congregations to have people in both parties so that they would be able to protect their interests no matter which party won an election.

Back then, there was a sense of the Democratic Party as being more accommodating toward religious minorities (ex. Catholics, Jews) and Mormons in the 1930s were just a few generations removed from the active religious persecution they suffered in the Eastern US at the hands of the Protestant majority (which the Republicans were seen as the party of).

Also, Utah was a big mining state and back then, miners were Democrats.

[One Term Floridian]

Also speaks to how much of an overpowered electoral juggernaut FDR was

[Alben Barkley]

Mormons were not politically homogeneous and in the early years of Deseret, some church leaders actually encouraged congregations to have people in both parties so that they would be able to protect their interests no matter which party won an election.

Back then, there was a sense of the Democratic Party as being more accommodating toward religious minorities (ex. Catholics, Jews) and Mormons in the 1930s were just a few generations removed from the active religious persecution they suffered in the Eastern US at the hands of the Protestant majority (which the Republicans were seen as the party of).

Also, Utah was a big mining state and back then, miners were Democrats.

That’s all true, but let’s not forget the Missouri governor who issued the Mormon extermination order was a Democrat! Always struck me as a little odd early Mormons largely leaned D despite that. Seems like the kind of thing that might cause some bad blood for a while.

[Alben Barkley]

Maybe, just maybe, the people of Utah can make their own choices?

Yeah, they usually take cues from the church. But perhaps on some things, they don't?

Their lives got better under FDR. That means more than anything the church says

I’m not suggesting otherwise. It’s just that historically, they tend to vote so lockstep in line with the church’s position that you could almost liken the LDS in Utah to a political machine like Tammany Hall once was in New York. So it’s pretty astounding FDR was able to break that hold so decisively.