Utah differs from other Republican states in a number of significant ways. They are generally pro-immigrant, so much that some hardline Republicans have started referring to SLC as a "sanctuary city". With so many Mormons who've gotten to know the poor inhabitants in foreign countries while they served missions, there is a great deal of sympathy for migrants and less regard for the technicalities of their status.
They care a lot about civility and decorum; Utah did go Trump, but it was the reddest state in presidential elections since Bush 1, and it was only light red in 2016. Some people were calling it a toss-up state after McMullin entered the race, and he did end up taking double-digit percentages, far better than any other third-party candidate.
Like other state's reps, Utah's delegation has struggled in figuring out how to approach Trump. It's a tough situation for everyone. Chaffetz has flipped on Trump a number of times, endorsing, un-endorsing, and then re-endorsing. As another commenter points out, other Utahns in Congress are firmly anti-Trump.
The state has a pragmatic streak and has installed a state-funded light rail to reduce pollution. They're building new homeless shelters. Despite the harsh climate, SLC is a common destination for panhandlers because it's easy to get help there.
Yes, it's true that Utah is conservative, but it doesn't have quite the same edge you find in other largely-conservative places, like the South.
The inversion sucks and is definitely one of the worst things about Utah (another reason not to be there in winter), but it's usually only a problem for a few weeks (usually in January). I'm not sure how you propose resolving that. The state can't just snap its fingers and force everyone to drive zero-emissions cars, and they've already installed a light rail that is quite accessible throughout the metro. SLC and other cities in the area have strict anti-idling ordinances.
Opposing Obama's recent annexations of land (most prominently, Bear's Ears) into the National Parks system should not automatically be interpreted as being anti-public-land or anti-environment.
They care a lot about civility and decorum; Utah did go Trump, but it was the reddest state in presidential elections since Bush 1, and it was only light red in 2016. Some people were calling it a toss-up state after McMullin entered the race, and he did end up taking double-digit percentages, far better than any other third-party candidate.
Like other state's reps, Utah's delegation has struggled in figuring out how to approach Trump. It's a tough situation for everyone. Chaffetz has flipped on Trump a number of times, endorsing, un-endorsing, and then re-endorsing. As another commenter points out, other Utahns in Congress are firmly anti-Trump.
The state has a pragmatic streak and has installed a state-funded light rail to reduce pollution. They're building new homeless shelters. Despite the harsh climate, SLC is a common destination for panhandlers because it's easy to get help there.
Yes, it's true that Utah is conservative, but it doesn't have quite the same edge you find in other largely-conservative places, like the South.
The inversion sucks and is definitely one of the worst things about Utah (another reason not to be there in winter), but it's usually only a problem for a few weeks (usually in January). I'm not sure how you propose resolving that. The state can't just snap its fingers and force everyone to drive zero-emissions cars, and they've already installed a light rail that is quite accessible throughout the metro. SLC and other cities in the area have strict anti-idling ordinances.
Opposing Obama's recent annexations of land (most prominently, Bear's Ears) into the National Parks system should not automatically be interpreted as being anti-public-land or anti-environment.