One thing you might want to look at is your population here. DISCLAIMER: What I am about to say is my academic opinion based on the four years I spent getting a BA in Religious Studies, but is controversial in the study of religion.

One thing about religion in the United States, is that population and socio-economic means played a large role in why dominations became popular in certain areas and why some denominations seem to be more...energetic...in opposing others.

Typically, and there are always exceptions, but typically, denominations like Lutheranism and Presbyterianism are made up of higher educated and higher paid individuals for the most part. If you took the richest person in the congregation and the poorest person in the congregation and compared their incomes, they would be more even. This leads to a less fundamental and sold-out theology.

This is not the case with Methodism. Methodism, and Mormonism as well, tend to be made up of individuals on a lower socioeconomic rung of the ladder, ramping up their fundamentalism and sold-outness. Meaning that the two are more likely to be in conflict.

At the time of the Mormon wars, the Methodists were going through the period of the Second Great Awakening which was responsible for a re-invigoration of Methodism and a new period of social activism within the church. This is also when they adopted the Holiness movement, which is the three step process to true salvation, meaning religion became a much more personal experience that required signs from god.

Finally, the Second Great Awakening awoke (lol, get it) something called millennialism in the Methodists. They believed that the Great Awakening was sign of the end times and that Jesus was coming back very, very soon. Like, within a few years. This meant that Methodists had to ramp up their social reforms in order to have every thing perfect and sinless before he came back, so they could go to heaven.

For Methodists in Missouri and Illinois, Mormons were not just a weird group of Christians moving in and taking over, they represented a real religious crisis. They were a physical representation of the sin and false idols that had to be removed before the return of Jesus.

So, the socioeconomic status of Methodists in Illinois and Missouri made them much more dedicated to religion. They just went through this huge revival that got them all ramped up and convinced them that Jesus was coming back. To make things perfect for Jesus, they waged a personal war against the Mormons.

I hope this helped. I'm sorry this was so long but I love this stuff.

I'm certain others with a better knowledge of Mormonism and 19th century history in America can provide more insight, but I'll share what I know.

Early Methodism had some theological similarities to Mormonism that the other groups you mentioned did not. First, Methodism was part of the holiness movement, and it had a very high degree of optimism regarding sanctification (growth in holiness). This became known as the doctrine of Christian Perfection. Mormonism had / has a similar emphasis upon perfection, but with differences that the Methodists would have taken issue with. On the Mormon doctrine of perfection, see, for example: http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Perfection

For the doctrine in Methodism, see http://www.ccel.org/ccel/wesley/perfection

Next, Methodism and Mormonism both reject the Calvinist view of God's predestination of the saved, adhering instead to what is generally called the Arminian perspective, which emphasizes a greater degree of free choice and cooperation with God's grace. (see, eg. http://christianity.about.com/od/denominations/a/calvinarminian.htm)

Finally, Joseph Smith had personal experience with Methodism.