The "progressive movement" was actually a range of movements, many of which disagreed with each other. They won support from every part of the political spectrum, depending on the issue. Factors such as religion, region, ethnicity, class, education, sex, etc. etc would affect what reforms, if any, an individual supported. It was a rare individual indeed who opposed every reform proposed between 1890-1920.
Prohibition initially won support from multiple groups, both conservative and liberal. It had majority support in both major parties. Drys on the left tended to see alcohol as a way big businesses could keep workers in poverty and dependent upon their jobs--"The Whiskey or Beer Trust." Conservatives often saw alcohol as a moral issue. Baptists and Methodists, regardless of their politics, saw alcohol as sinful. etc.
Opposition came from all over the political spectrum as well. Liberal "wets" saw prohibition as discriminating against workers, who tended to drink beer, which could not be stored for long periods of time, in contrast to the wealthy, who could store a lifetime of whiskey and bourbon. Samuel Gompers opposed it for that reason. Conservative wets saw prohibition as an over-reaching government regulation on private property. Both left and right saw it as a violation of personal liberty.
You can not lay the blame for prohibition on any one political group. It had support, and opposition, from every part of the political spectrum. It was a progressive reform, but not every progressive reform was liberal. Just because in the early 21st century "progressive" means left-wing does not mean that you can label political causes from 100 years ago using the same definition. Any cause that wins the support of JD Rockefeller AND William Jennings Bryan can not be pigeon-holed into one political ideology.
