Hillary Clinton Was Never Going to Win Utah

It’s not just because the state is overwhelmingly Republican. It’s also because she’s a woman.

Women backing Donald Trump rally at the Utah state CapitolAP Photo/Rick Bowmer

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Among the many ways the electoral map got scrambled as Donald Trump’s poll numbers tanked this summer and fall, perhaps the most intriguing was the possibility that Trump might lose Utah. Polls showed a neck-and-neck race in the state that voted overwhelmingly for the Republican candidate in 2012. Mormons, news stories said, were deeply offended by the boorish GOP nominee, who was everything they detested: a mean, philandering, sexist, immoral lout who had the nerve to make fun of their beloved Mitt Romney. State leaders, including Republican Sen. Mike Lee, declared their opposition to him. The Deseret News, owned by the LDS church, called on Trump to drop out of the race last month.

But while it made for an interesting political drama, Trump—who has outperformed expectations around the country and may be closing in on a victory—was never likely to lose Utah. And that’s partly because the main alternative, Hillary Clinton, was a woman.

Utah can be a difficult place to be a woman. The patriarchal culture of the state’s dominant religion is strong. Women aren’t allowed to be ordained as leaders in the LDS church, and they’re taught to be subordinate to men. The religious viewpoint is reflected in the state’s politics. No woman holds statewide office in Utah. Only 15 percent of the state Legislature is female, compared with 24 percent nationally and 42 percent in neighboring Colorado.

The pay gap between men and women in Utah is the fourth-highest in the nation, with women making only 70 cents for every dollar made by a man. Utah has one of the worst gender gaps in the country in college graduation rates, and the depth of the education gap may be further masked by all the bachelor’s degrees given out by church-owned Brigham Young University in “family and consumer sciences,” with college courses like “Preparation for Marriage,” interior design, and food preparation in the home—classes dominated by women.

The state has extensive abortion restrictions, and until just recently BYU made a practice of punishing students who were the victims of sexual assault, with collusion from the local Provo police department, which reported them to the school. It’s not a place where women were likely feeling empowered to be “with her.”

“I think that internalized misogyny is what will ultimately lead Mormon women to vote against their best interests,” predicted Utah activist Kate Kelly when I spoke with her last month. Kelly is a Mormon feminist who was ex-communicated from the church in 2014 for advocating the ordination of women, so she has some experience in this department. “They won’t say, ‘I’m not voting for Hillary because she’s a woman.’ They’ll use coded language. ‘She’s deceitful, she’s too shrill, she’s immoral.'”

The education deficit between men and women in the state may have reduced the likelihood that the state’s women would vote for Clinton, given Trump’s success with less educated voters. One of the reasons Trump lagged in the polls nationally is that women deserted him in droves, with Clinton leading among women, at various points, by between 15 and 33 points. That wasn’t the case in Utah, where polls heading into the election showed a small gender difference, with 40 percent of men and 33 percent of women backing Trump.

Clinton put Utahans, particularly Mormon women, in a genuine bind. “It’s this interesting conundrum, where we can’t vote for Trump because he’s an unmitigated slimeball, but we can’t vote for Hillary because she’s everything we’re taught not to be,” says Kelly. “She’s the opposite of the pedestal paradigm that Mormon women are told to strive for. She works outside the home. She doesn’t cook. She talks powerfully and stridently about important high-level issues. All of these things are very frowned upon by Mormon women, and in a way, they’re afraid of them.” And in the end, Kelly says, to vote for Clinton, Mormon women might have to take a hard look at their own faith. “If women can’t be leaders in our church but they can be the leader of the free world,” she said, “what does that say about our church?”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate