Why didn't FDR help the Spanish Republic?

[buritobr]

FDR was neutral in the Spanish Civil War.
Why didn't he send weapons to a democratic elected government that was fighting against far-right nationalists who were trying a coup d'stat?

FDR had progressive political views. I though he would not agree with the far-right.

Johnson was also a progressive president in domestic policy and supported far-right coup d'stat against leftist democratic governments abroad, but he was president during the Cold War.
There was no Cold War in the 1930s.

[politicus]

FDR was anti-socialist. He was also President in a country with a strong anti-socialst tradition and the Spanish republican government was dominated by Socialists allied with Communists and Anarchists.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

More relevantly, at this time the United States was heavily anti-interventionist. Building up our own Armed Forces, let alone giving aid to another country, was nearly impossible at that time. Even sales were impossible because of the narrative that our intervention into World War I had been because of the loans made to the Allies that would have gone bad had they lost.

[politicus]

Then there is the question of whether "FDR  didn't help the Spanish Republic" is really accurate. It seems it is not.

From the backcover of Dominic Tierney's "FDR and the Spanish Civil War: Neutrality and Commitment in the Struggle that Divided America":

"Between 1936 and 1939, Roosevelt's perceptions of the Spanish Civil War were transformed. Initially indifferent toward which side won, FDR became an increasingly committed supporter of the leftist government. He believed that German and Italian intervention in Spain was part of a broader program of fascist aggression, and he worried that the Spanish Civil War would inspire fascist revolutions in Latin America. In response, Roosevelt tried to send food to Spain as well as illegal covert aid to the Spanish government, and to mediate a compromise solution to the civil war. However unsuccessful these initiatives proved in the end, they represented an important stage in Roosevelt's emerging strategy to aid democracy in Europe."

[politicus]

Looks like it is the modern standard work on the subject. Dominic Tierney is associate professor of polsci a Swartmore, senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, PhD in international politics at Oxford etc.

Diplomatic History called it "a model of superb diplomatic history."

You should probably read it if you want a serious answer.