From The Atlantic: Are Mormons Keeping Mitt Romney Afloat?

[Julian Englis]

An interesting question. Are the Republicans being dominated by a very small faction, members of the Church of Latter Day Saints?

From the last bit of the article:

This is not to suggest a stitch up, but rather to note the surprising demographic strength of the LDS Church. Worldwide, its membership rocketed from 4 million in 1978 to 11 million members in 2000. In America, it has increased by about 30 percent since 1990. There is evidence that domestic growth has flat-lined, but heavy concentration in certain states has given it increased political clout.

Consider the importance of states with sizable Mormon populations to this year's primaries. Shortly after he won the Florida primary, Romney faced his first Western challenge in Nevada. Although he was always going to do well in The Silver State, a strong victory was necessary to prove that Florida wasn't a one off and he had momentum to carry him to victory in Michigan at the end of the month. Romney won Nevada with 50 percent. Importantly, turnout was a dismal 32,894 -- well below the total Mormon population of the state, at 174,662. According to CNN exit polls, a quarter of all participants were LDS members and 88 percent of them voted for Mitt. Nationwide, only 2 percent of Americans are Mormon.

One month later, there was Arizona. Arizona wasn't as important as Romney's home state of Michigan, which voted on the same day, but for a while Santorum was close to Romney in polls and it was vital that Mitt win the Arizona primary. He did so easily, by 47 percent. Turnout was 505,635. The local Mormon population is 381,235 and, according to CNN, 14 percent of voters were LDS members. Three days later came Washington state, which was, again, important for establishing Romney's credibility after a series of defeats by Santorum. Romney won with 38 percent on an appalling 1.4 percent turnout. The turnout equaled 50,764 Republicans -- in a state with a local Mormon population of 263,004. Romney has also won Idaho and Wyoming, both of which have high densities of LDS members (Idaho is the second most Mormon state in America, after Utah). It is surely significant that Mitt has yet to be truly tested in a Western state that doesn't have a significant population of Mormons. The only such challenge he has faced so far was in Colorado, which he lost 40 to 35 percent. Ergo, even if Mormons aren't directly responsible for Romney's Western victories, they have been critical to their scale and maintaining his campaign's momentum.

More at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/03/are-mormons-keeping-mitt-romney-afloat/254393/

[Spider Jerusalem]

1. I don't think "dominated" is really an appropriate term honestly

Mormons represent some significant number of likely Republican voters, and in several Western states, they're enough to tip the balance; but I don't really think it's fair to suggest that the Republicans are being "dominated" by a relatively small group of voters, any more than it's fair to suggest that the Democratic Party was dominated by Catholics when Kennedy won the nomination, or to suggest that the Democratic Party is "dominated" by Jews in New York. And the hypothesis there isn't especially convincing anyway; the total number of LDS members voting in the Arizona GOP primary, from those numbers, was around 70K (14% of 505K); Romney won Arizona by more than 100,000 votes over Santorum.

[get the red out]

2. I always just assumed this

Maybe it isn't proper to talk about, but Mitt Romney has a voting block there no matter what he says or does.

[IDemo]

3. Without question, in Idaho

The state's political leanings - consisting of both libertarian and radical conservative elements, would have made Paul and Santorum the heavy favorites over any moderate in any other year. It's no secret here that Mormons will look after members of the flock before any other consideration is given.