Political draft season is in full swing!

By Renae Cowley, Frank Pignanelli

Republican Renae Cowley is a political consultant, lobbyist, social media influencer and professional rodeo athlete. Frank Pignanelli is a Salt Lake attorney, lobbyist and political adviser who served as a Democrat in the Utah State Legislature.

Cowley: For perhaps the first time ever, TMZ and MSNBC headlines are identical on Trump’s unconventional cabinet appointments. I’m not sure if you can call them the Avengers or the X-Men, but what is apparent is this cabinet is intended to upset the Washington, D.C., apple cart, also known as the “deep state.” Donald Trump said throughout his campaign that he mistakenly appointed too many “experts” from inside the Beltway. This dramatic, celebrity-centered course correction is intended to majorly reform the federal government. Here is who I will be keeping my eye on:

FBI director: Kash Patel said he would empty the Hoover Building. Will he or won’t he?

Defense secretary: Pete Hegseth. Looks like central casting for the hero of an action movie.

Department of Government Efficiency: Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy. This will have the most sweeping impact on the federal government — whether good or bad, only time will tell.

Health and Human Services Director: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. I’m all about MAHA, so bring it on.

Director of National Intelligence: Tulsi Gabbard. Do I know exactly what this role is? No. Am I eager to see what she does? Absolutely.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator: Dr. Mehmet Oz. Oh boy.

Secretary of Transportation: Sean Duffy. Fox celebrity No. 1.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel: Mike Huckabee. Fox celebrity No. 2.

U.S. Ambassador to France: Charles Kushner. Terrible idea. Surely there are other qualified individuals without a familial connection to the commander in chief.

White House press secretary: Karoline Leavitt. What was I doing at age 27? Nothing even remotely this cool. Get it, girl!

And finally, shoutout to the BYU graduate and Latter-day Saint Jamieson Greer, Chief Trade representative.

Pignanelli: “The necessity of (Senate) concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation … and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers No. 76

The only other president elected to nonconsecutive terms was Grover Cleveland, who did not seek the reappointment of his former cabinet members. Trump is following this narrow precedent.

More importantly, Trump utilizes his previous experience to work fast with a flurry of nominations. While this is causing a flummox in traditional D.C. circles, it does play into his persona as a disruptor.

Further, Trump’s announcements force business and foreign leaders to negotiate with him six weeks before the inauguration. We now have two presidents formulating and implementing policy.

Utah leaders will work well with the proposed Interior secretary, North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum. Also, it should be no surprise that Musk and Ramaswamy will look to Utah’s governance as a guide to efficient government.

Senators are doing their best to refrain from offering declarations of how they will vote and make statements of deference to the president’s constitutional authority to appoint. So far, they have been discreetly exercising Hamilton’s predictions.

Will there be changes in Utah Gov. Spencer Cox’s administration?

Cowley: It is common to see minor changes in cabinet positions after the election. Gov. Cox and Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson have assembled a strong cast to support their policy priorities. If any leave, it will likely be to pursue new opportunities, not due to political pressure.

Pignanelli: In the past, some governors required all cabinet members and other major appointments to submit a resignation letter, and only a few would ultimately be accepted. Presidents elected in a different political party from the immediate past incumbent often want a clean sweep to ensure their agenda is followed.

But Utah is different.

The last time there was a political power change was 40 years ago. Also, Utah chief executives have a strong track record of appointing competent administrators. While natural attrition occurs, there is little justification for significant changes, as the state has been well governed.

Cox will likely hold over many of his first-term appointments, but they will eventually move on to seek different endeavors. Cox assembled a good team, and there is little need for significant change.

The state Legislature announced new committee assignments. What changed and what does it mean for the upcoming legislative session?

Cowley & Pignanelli: The shakeup in Senate leadership altered their committee landscape, while many chairs held their important positions. The most significant change in the House is rural Rep. Bridger Bolinder’s, R-Grantsville, new chairmanship of Health and Human Services and Rep. Jordan Teuscher, R-South Jordan, as Rules Chair.

Renae is excited to see members of a younger generation (Gen X), Sen. Kirk Cullimore, R-Draper, and Sen. Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork, taking the reins in two leadership positions in the Senate, normally reserved for more patinaed lawmakers. Like Sen. Mitt Romney said, “it is time for a new generation of leaders.”

Frank is gleeful that many “more seasoned” lawmakers have maintained or been awarded key positions. These include a powerful committee, Business and Labor, that is in the steady hands of the well-respected and experienced Sen. Evan Vickers, R-Cedar City. Sen. Ann Millner, R-Ogden, (former Weber State president) will now co-chair Higher Education Appropriations.

Predicting what politicos are grateful for this Thanksgiving

By Renae Cowley, Frank Pignanelli

Republican Renae Cowley is a political consultant, lobbyist, social media influencer and professional rodeo athlete. Email: capitolcowgirl@gmail.com. Frank Pignanelli is a Salt Lake attorney, lobbyist and political adviser who served as a Democrat in the Utah State Legislature. Email: frankp@xmission.com.

Cowley & Pignanelli: Utahns and our politicians have much to be grateful for this Thanksgiving weekend. Here are the expressions of gratitude we think they will be sharing over their Thanksgiving feasts:

Every man, woman and child in Utah: “We are extremely grateful that we can now watch TV and enjoy pharmaceutical and automobile advertisements instead of the constant barrage of political ads!”

Podcast bros: “Grateful the mainstream media is discussing our impact on the election. Maybe now our parents will finally listen to the shows if they can figure out how to use a podcast app.”

Senator-elect John Curtis: “I am grateful that Utah voters gave me an overwhelming mandate to undertake the most important mission on their behalf — wearing crazy socks in the Senate chamber.”

Gov. Spencer Cox: “Grateful for a decisive victory that should mean a quiet four years of governance, where we can all disagree better. Well, fingers crossed, anyway.”

Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson: “As Utah’s election officer, I am grateful for another efficient and fraud-free election — despite the Utah County confusion!”

Utah legislators: “We all love our local college football teams. They are providing a much-needed distraction to voters who were targeting their frustration towards us. Thanks!”

Reps. Blake Moore, Burgess Owens and Celeste Maloy: “We are grateful to be in the majority and welcome the newest member of the delegation, Michael Kennedy. We are already cracking jokes about having ‘a doctor in the House.’”

Moderate Democrats: “We are grateful for the overwhelming statement from millions of Americans this election. In other words, VINDICATION!”

Moderate Republicans: “We are thankful that our friends to the right will still need us to pass anything.”

Senate Pres. Stuart Adams & House Speaker Mike Schultz: “We’re grateful the majority of American voters followed our lead to elect conservatives who promised to cut wasteful spending, protect women in sports and lower taxes. We hope that we will thank them next year for actually doing it.”

Millennials: “We are grateful to make up the plurality of voters in the last election, cementing our dominance in politics and policy-making. Now what did we vote for again?”

Boomers: “Next year, millennials and Gen Z will outnumber us by population. So we are thankful for our relevance this year.”

Elon Musk: “I am extremely grateful my support of Trump paid off. Now I get to slash and burn wasteful government programs, giving me endless material for my viral tweets.”

Joe Rogan: “I’m thankful my pal Elon might take my globally popular podcast to cable TV, should he buy MSNBC.”

Every political reporter: “We express our gratitude for the bountiful blessings that are Trump’s unconventional, quasi-celebrity cabinet appointments, providing us with a cornucopia of material to report on.”

National Democrat leaders: “Since our goose got cooked in the last election cycle, we are grateful dry turkey will dominate holiday conversations for a while, taking the heat off our poor election performance.”

National Republican leaders: “We are grateful to voters for the red wave and the mandate that gives us to govern … at least until the midterms.”

Salt Lake County Mayor Jenny Wilson: “As the highest-ranking Democrat in Utah, I’m always glad to have fellow compatriots on the council to sustain my vetoes.”

Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall: “I am thankful the Utah Hockey Team is playing well and remains extremely popular with voters. I just hope the Jazz will make it to the playoffs.”

Sen. Mike Lee: “I am thankful to be back in the majority so I can give more speeches in committees and on the floor about the Constitution — this time, from a better seat.”

Sen. Mitt Romney: “Free at last, free at last and about to enjoy my retirement from politics … for now, at least!”

Lobbyists: “What a great country. Where else is there complex legislation with thousands of pages that no one has read or understands, compelling clients to hire us? In addition, there are billions of dollars just begging for our advice on how they should be spent. It is truly a bonanza of blessings.”

National pollsters and campaign experts: “We are grateful Americans have a short attention span and will hopefully forget that we once again missed our predictions by a mile this political season.”

Donald Trump: “I’m thankful to be coming home after the holidays. I hope they still deliver McDonald’s to the White House.”

Biden: “I am grateful for my failing memory. Otherwise, remembering all my recent blunders would make Thanksgiving conversations a real drag, man.”

Pignanelli & Cowley: We are deeply grateful the Deseret News allows us to share our weekly political perspectives. Politicians can’t help but be peculiar and interesting creatures who generate ample news and controversy to keep us busy. We are thankful the elections are over, the holidays are here and the politicians we annoy have a sense of humor — at least, most of them!

Party realignment — permanent change or a flash in the pan?

By Renae Cowley, Frank Pignanelli

Republican Renae Cowley is a political consultant, lobbyist, social media influencer and professional rodeo athlete. Frank Pignanelli is a Salt Lake attorney, lobbyist and political adviser who served as a Democrat in the Utah State Legislature.

Now that the election is in the rearview mirror, both sides are conducting an autopsy of the results and their meaning. Not to be left out of this chin-scratching affair, we offer our thoughts.

Do the presidential election and “Red Wave” signal a permanent shift in American politics?

Cowley: Our government sees many swings in the pendulum of power. Although I am tickled pink to see Republicans dominating, if history is any indicator, I’m not naive enough to think it’s a permanent trend.

It is hard to distill the cause of this electoral landslide down to just one thing. It could be an abysmal Democrat candidate, a referendum on woke culture, a frustration with inflation, the border crisis, unrest in Ukraine and Israel or a combination of the above.

The 2026 midterm election will be the first electoral review of Donald Trump’s policies. The far right might be disappointed if he has not done enough and the left may think he has gone too far. The only thing to be sure of is that political prognosticators will not be short of any fodder in the next two years.

Pignanelli: “Somehow, in my lifetime, Democrats have gone from being the party of the factory floor to the party of the faculty lounge.” —Bill Maher

In addition to discounts on movie tickets, advantages to old age include historical perspectives. For over 60 years, I have regularly witnessed major changes in power. Almost every time, the traditional media declared the decline of the losing party — which always rebounded within years.

The 2024 election was another cyclical event, but there is a difference. For a decade, the bases of the parties have been shifting. Such movements occur every several generations (i.e. 1850s, 1890s, 1930s, etc.). Thus, there is a strong likelihood that many of the changes observed in recent years will be more sticky. The test will be in four years when Trump departs and whether that disrupts or strengthens the new coalition.

I will be older and — hopefully — even wiser then.

What does the future of the Democrat party look like? Can Utah Democrats adapt and pivot to regain political relevancy?

Cowley: The Democrat Party must abandon the hypocrisy that got them in this position, none so blatant as the jilting of women. They profess to care about us, but their policies are robbing biological women of opportunities in sports. I’m shocked that Democrats think so little of my gender that they openly encouraged women to lie to their husbands about who they voted for. Most women are in charge of household finances and feel the sting of inflation. Democrats’ premise that women would care more about abortion rights than this array of issues is myopic.

Utah Democrats face a steep challenge in our red state, yet this electoral outcome presents new opportunities. When my esteemed co-author, Mr. Pignanelli, was the House Minority Leader, their priorities centered around job creation, supporting local businesses, combating crime and promoting bipartisan actions against discrimination. They didn’t get mired down by national party politics. Lessons in history can prove invaluable insights to the future. A return to common-sense policies could be the ticket to increasing Democrats’ election victories.

Pignanelli: Utahns don’t blame Diet Coke for its majority market share over Diet Pepsi. Similarly, Republicans are not to blame for the struggles Democrats have encountered.

Utah Democrats have contributed much to the state and have the potential to offer even more. However, success requires better communication and offering appetizing policies.

This does not mean the Democrats need to be conservative in all matters, especially because that term has become confusing in the Trump era. The objective should focus on voters’ genuine concerns and offer common-sense solutions. Adherence to the core principles of support and respect for the truly needy remains a priority. But it’s essential in the marketing that Democratic leaders are viewed as beholden to satisfying the necessities of the many and not the narrow issues of some special interests.

This formula has been used — and ignored — by parties for many years and is again readily available.

Trump improved his electoral outcomes with nearly every significant demographic. Does this signal a realignment of party policies or is this just a Trump thing?

Cowley: Trump garnered support from the most unlikely cast of characters, disenfranchised Democrats who were previously some of his strongest detractors. He united the world’s richest nerd, Elon Musk; blue blood Democrat Robert F. Kennedy Jr.; Democrat congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard; former Democrat and podcast celebrity Joe Rogan; and more.

There is a political realignment happening. The right now fights for small government that protects American jobs and women and is anti-war and pro-clean air, clean water and clean food. If Republicans can stay focused on these issues, the trend may continue.

Pignanelli: Normally, I would posit this is just a Trump thing. But one must recognize the charismatic and articulate J.D. Vance. If the Trump administration fulfills only a few of its promises, he could carry that flag. Otherwise, personality-based parties often fracture and lose control of messaging.

Will pollsters ever get it right?

By Renae Cowley, Frank Pignanelli

Republican Renae Cowley is a political consultant, lobbyist, social media influencer and professional rodeo athlete. Frank Pignanelli is a Salt Lake attorney, lobbyist and political adviser who served as a Democrat in the Utah State Legislature.

We offer prognostications for future campaigns in the aftermath of the most polled election in history.

How did the pollsters get their presidential predictions so wrong?

Cowley: Pollsters have a hard time pegging Donald Trump elections. It’s probably not just one thing but a perfect storm of unique, hard-to-measure factors that make predicting his elections so evasive. Trump supporters not answering polls presumably had a part to play.

One of the few sources to come close to predicting accurately was Polymarket, a betting website for politics, pop culture and more. This is far from scientifically significant, but supporters of the platform argue that because it involves hard-earned money, rather than talking to a stranger from a call center, it’s more accurate. If I were a betting woman, I’d guess a majority of Polymarket users are white, millennial, GameStop-investing men who, more often than not, lean Trump. Pollsters would call this a self-selecting sample, not to be relied on for scientific analysis. Regardless, I think Polymarket will become a mainstay in election discussions.

Pignanelli: “For too long, the polling industry has taken voters as they have found them rather than seeking to really understand how they think.” —Tom Lubbock and James Johnson, J.L. Partners

There are many examples of errant voter research. However, the best description of a flawed approach to surveys and campaign strategy is the Des Moines Register’s final poll, released days before the election, claiming Harris was three points ahead in Iowa. Trump received 56% and Harris almost 43%.

There were shockwaves in the political world when this poll was released because Selzer & Co. are so well-regarded. But as Lubbock and Johnson pointed out in the Wall Street Journal, survey callers mostly talked to liberal older white women on the phone for 20 minutes during the workday.

Lubbock and Johnson also document that online polls used by other firms analyzing the presidential contest provide skewed results because those respondents usually work from home. In other words, pollsters are not reaching people who do not trust polls or don’t have time to talk on the phone.

Surveying voters and consumers remains an essential element of our democracy and economy. Yet again, the professionals in this arena are reminded to adjust their approach to gather more realistic insights.

By the way, J.L. Partners predicted Trump would win both the electoral and popular vote.

Cowley: No candidate can replicate Trump’s decades of investment into building his brand. Trump honed and promoted his persona long before he ever ran for office through TV, media and pop culture. Kamala Harris was mostly MIA as VP and was only in the race for three months. All of King Midas’ gold could not make up that gap. Good, bad or indifferent, voters would rather have the devil they know.

I am fascinated by Team Trump’s big risk on ground game. They were short on funds and outsourced it completely to Turning Point USA and Elon Musk’s America PAC. Their gamble paid off. Perhaps this disruption in campaign norms will lead to other out-of-the-box, creative solutions from non-beltway sources.

Harris doubled down on the consultant class while earmarking several million to pay for celebrity appearances. We’ll get the final tally of exactly what she squandered her money on in the next FEC filing early December.

My takeaway is money can’t buy elections, but it can sure buy you a ton of annoying commercials during NFL games.

Pignanelli: This election shattered even the most traditional rules I thought inviolate in retail politics. Person-to-person ground games were fundamental tactics that usually guaranteed success in close races. However, the use of podcasts and other electronic versions was much more effective. Knocking on doors may still be critical in smaller contests, but national and statewide campaigns must adapt to the new dynamics.

Shrewd campaign operatives will begin to adopt these evolving tactics, especially in the primary elections. In the next several years, these methods of electronic outreach will be tailor-made for local citizens.

There was a red wave nationally. Did Utah see the same landslide victory for Republicans?

Cowley: Republicans up and down the ballot did extremely well and even improved their margins in numerous races, except for one: Trump. He received nearly the same percentage as in 2020.

Several Westside Salt Lake County Republicans won with landmark margins. Republican Jill Koford beat an incumbent Democrat in an Ogden-area swing seat, yet Trump had no electoral gains. Utah Republicans don’t like Trump’s bombastic demeanor and want a president that reflects their values of civility, decorum and compassion. Despite these reservations, his record in the White House and meager opponent earned him Utah’s electoral votes.

Pignanelli: Results in Utah were reasonably predictable. A bigger red wave would have occurred had there been a different GOP nominee or if Joe Biden was still at the top of the ticket. This is the third time that Utah voters accepted Trump’s policies despite other concerns. They have been ahead of the rest of the country for years.

October surprises

By Renae Cowley & Frank Pignanelli

There are two topics that dominate discussions every four years: October surprises and the Electoral College. We do not want to miss our chance to opine.

Columnist Karl Rove described the closeness of the presidential election by utilizing the famous “butterfly effect” posed by scientist Edward Lorenz. (“Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?”) We discuss what might make the difference in this extremely close race.

COWLEY: I didn’t expect to see back-to-back catastrophic hurricanes, but apparently, neither did FEMA. The federal government’s appallingly deficient response speaks to President Joe Biden’s and by proxy, Vice President Kamala Harris’, incompetence. Americans are suffering while Harris holds campaign rallies in North Carolina. These voters may see this as a deciding issue if they can even return to their homes to vote.

Donald Trump criticized Harris for avoiding media interviews. Now, she’s on a media blitz right as Trump backs out of 60 Minutes and cancels the second debate. Not only is this hypocritical, but he is also missing opportunities to court undecided voters.

An all-out war in the Middle East (or hopefully the avoidance of one) would undoubtedly have the biggest impact on the election.

PIGNANELLI: “We may not even recognize [the butterfly effect] happening until we’re looking in retrospect. Such is the state of our deeply polarized, closely divided nation.” – Karl Rove

Butterfly populations are decreasing due to various environmental and development factors. Yet, more rare than the actual insect is the so-called “butterfly effect” in politics. Tiny disturbances may impact a small category of voters but rarely change outcomes. Although the presidential election will be decided by less than 40,000 voters across seven battleground states, other elements will be involved to shift persuasion (i.e. voter turnout, major controversies, foreign affairs, etc.).

An October surprise in this presidential election will be a significant mistake made by a candidate rather than exposure of some controversy by a competing campaign. Both candidates have made statements or ignored specific tactics that may lead to a change with voters.

In the meantime, I recommend that readers worry more about repopulating their gardens with these beautiful creatures than about some slight political minutia.

Although presidential candidates are fighting for every vote, the Electoral College will decide the winner of the presidential contest. Is this institution antiquated with a realistic path to be abolished, or is it still needed?

COWLEY: The Electoral College is a constitutional compromise that gives smaller states proportional representation, like the allocation of congressional seats. Without it, predominantly Democrat urban centers would select who occupies the White House.

Attempts have been made to replace the Electoral College with a popular vote, including by Richard Nixon. Today it would overwhelmingly benefit Democrats. Utah, with a population half the size of New York City, would be wholly ignored.

All but two states use winner-take-all, where regardless of how close the popular vote is, all electors are awarded to the winner. If states followed Nebraska and Maine and allocated their electoral votes proportionally, it might open the door for three parties.

James Madison made the case for electors to exercise independent judgment rather than be committed. It’s an interesting argument that would make electors more well-known who now are probably more obscure than elected county surveyors (no offense, surveyors).

The race for 270 is wonky but has produced every president thus far. I don’t see that changing.

PIGNANELLI: The institution has evolved beyond recognition from the founders’ original intent of selected citizens deliberating in a thoughtful process — as described by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Papers 68. The existing “winner takes all” method is warping presidential elections as campaigns spend billions targeted on a few battleground states. However, status quo advocates like Renae contend a national presidential election is fraught with danger. A compromise is in order.

Maine and Nebraska provide two electors for the statewide winner, and the remaining electors are based on results in each congressional district. Because this substantially resolves current disadvantages, some politicos are advocating for a countrywide adoption. Electoralvotemap.com applied this system to contests since 2000 and concluded that margins would have varied but with similar ultimate results, except Mitt Romney would have won in 2012. Utah is among several states with minimal voting power in national elections. The Maine/Nebraska modification protects any small-state advantage while forcing candidates to moderate and focus attention on regions currently ignored.

Political onlookers are holding their breath for an October surprise in Utah. Will there be one?

COWLEY: The recent signature-gathering legislative audit provides ample fodder for Democrat Brian King and write-in candidate Phil Lyman. Using a tiny sample of Gov. Spencer Cox’s signatures submitted to be placed on the primary ballot, discrepancies in the validation rate were found. King and Lyman are unlikely to ignore this. The data from the audit is weak, but it’s hard to disagree with recommendations for increased transparency.

PIGNANELLI: Decades ago, as a candidate, I used October surprises against my opponents, and they returned the volleys. Now, mail balloting and pervasive social media diminish the effectiveness of most last-minute attacks. An unexpected major controversy external to campaigns would be the only impactful event.

Opinion: Finally. Civility is returningThe Salt Lake City tax increase, messages from local church leaders and VP debate signal a return to civic discourse

By Renae Cowley & Frank Pignanelli

The current political climate is characterized as acrimonious and unhealthy. But last week, Utahns’ hope for decency was realized. We are happy to explain.

The Salt Lake City sales tax increase to fund the sports entertainment district passed, teeing up what many expected to be a significant referendum fight. Remarkably, vested parties reached an accord, preventing what would have been a neighbor-versus-neighbor battle. Why is this important?

Cowley: I’ve been involved in fighting a dozen referendums, and this would have been the most contentious and vitriolic fight we have seen yet. It speaks volumes of both sides’ character and commitment to the community that they were able to come to an agreement. I’m rarely one to support a tax increase, but this outcome is good for our capital city and state.

Mostly, I’m glad that my hockey-loving husband will be taking me to games downtown rather than dragging me to outer darkness (aka past 900 South).

Pignanelli: “The best fights are the ones we avoid.” – Jackie Chan

Salt Lake City residents dodged internecine warfare, as emotions were running high on both sides and each possessed legitimate concerns. Losing major-league sports to the suburbs would be devastating to the city. However, fears of an endangered Abravanel Hall and other cultural aspects were also meritorious.

Regardless of residence, Utahns cared much about the outcome of this controversy. I remember when Abravanel Hall opened in 1979 and how the entire state rejoiced. This fabulous building — the home of the Utah Symphony — has been a source of pride ever since. This heritage was acknowledged as a critical component of resolution.

Instead of an inflammatory tirade, Utahns will witness accommodation and a win-win for everyone. Gratitude abounds for the Utah Way.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints held its biannual general conference last weekend. In the Saturday session, church leaders urged cessation of toxic rhetoric and hateful messages. Why were these statements important?

Cowley: A survey indicated that 1 in 3 Gen Z employees lie about their political beliefs in the workplace in fear of conflict. When I tell someone I work in politics, I learn to smile as they try to hide their disapproval. It’s said that you should never discuss politics or religion in polite company, but I disagree. Public policy is important, as is the free exchange of ideas. We should talk about it more, not less, but with respect to opposing views.

In general conference, President Dallin H. Oaks said, “Sharp differences on issues of public policy often result in actions of hostility, even hatred.” He reminded us of Christ’s words, “Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God,” and concluded with, “As we pursue our preferred policies in public actions, let us qualify for his blessings by using the language and methods of peacemakers.” To that, I say, “AMEN!”

Pignanelli: Although a Gentile, I have listened to significant portions of every general conference for over 40 years. The gems of wisdom delivered last week reaffirm my dedication to observing the semiannual event.

Utah enjoys a well-deserved reputation for cordiality. But recently, I have been saddened by constant unnecessary, inflammatory language from some local leaders. Thus, I am grateful for the conference’s admonitions.

The reference to Jesus Christ was especially critical. Regardless of one’s belief, it is undeniable that the Gospels describe a Jewish preacher with strong opinions and strict demands for his followers. Yet everyone he encountered was treated with dignity and respect, even those wishing him harm.

What is often forgotten is that the Nazarene carpenter accomplished all this against the brutality of the Roman Empire. Jesus’ 2,000-year-old lessons remain relevant today. Business, political and community leaders can be ambitious and goal-oriented but also practice the Golden Rule.

Cowley: Vice presidential debates, and frankly, the nominees themselves, matter little in the grand scheme of elections, but here’s what voters can glean:

I was pleasantly surprised by how cordial the candidates were to one another, especially Vance, Trump’s attack dog. Walz also seemed surprised by his opponent’s softening, perhaps causing his flustered performance. It wasn’t a great look juxtaposed to Vance’s polished and compassionate responses. Walz doesn’t have higher political ambition, yet Vance’s political career is unlikely to stop after this election. The debate was an opportunity to showcase what 12 years of Vance in the White House might look like.

Walz repeatedly referred to himself as “the old guy,” but he is only one year older than Harris. When age seems to be at the top of many voters’ minds, perhaps he should avoid that refrain.

The bias of liberal media is exposed when pundits say Vance won by a nose. He won by ten lengths.

Pignanelli: At least 50 million Americans and thousands of Utahns were treated to an event reflective of high-profile quality political matches years ago. This is how presidential debates once were — and should be — conducted.

Local races to watch as candidates sprint to the finish

Election Day is a month away, and most focus is on national, gubernatorial and federal races. Yet, throughout the state, candidates are waging neighborhood battles for votes for county and legislative offices. Here is a peek at some of these contests now catching the attention of political observers.

Salt Lake County mayoral contest

Jenny Wilson, a former at-large county council member, was appointed mayor upon Ben McAdams’ election to Congress and won a full term in 2020 with 52%. This popular member of a Utah legacy political family is running for a second full term and is an articulate politician who understands retail politics.

Her opponent is Erin Rider, a well-respected attorney. Rider lost to Chris Stewart in the 2022 Republican primary. She must have something going for her, as Stewart, among many other Republicans, endorsed her.

Salt Lake County Council (countywide)

Long-time Councilmember Jim Bradley is retiring. Seeking to fill his position are Republican Rachelle Morris and Democrat Natalie Pinkney. This is a very spirited race. Morris worked at Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan and is partner at a Utah venture fund. Pinkney is a member of the South Salt Lake City Council and founder of a book and publishing company.

Legislative

Analyzing legislative contests is a favorite pastime for many political operatives, as these races reveal trends, movements and issues that are not always apparent in the major contests. These hotly contested local races, especially in swing districts, are truly revealing of undercurrents and shifting political forces. Here are a few legislative elections we are watching closely:

House District 23: Democrat Brian King, who held this Salt Lake City seat for 16 years, is running for governor. Although Hoang Nguyen (D) is favored to prevail against Republican Scott Romney, some politicos believe this could be close.

House District 10: This one is a rematch between veteran and physician Rosemary Lesser (D) and Jill Koford (R). Koford lost to Lesser in 2022 by 500 votes.

House District 27: Incumbent Anthony Loubet is being challenged by Dawn Stevenson (D). This is historically a swing seat on the west side of Salt Lake County.

House District 30: Former State Representative Fred Cox is back in the fray with another run. Since leaving office, Cox was one of the original sponsors of the 2019 Utah Tax Referendum. He is facing West Valley City Councilmember Jake Fitisemanu (D) for a seat that has flipped from red to blue several times in recent history.

House District 26: Newcomer businessman and GOP activist Matt MacPherson (R) is running to defend his swing seat against challenger Jeanetta Williams. Matt won his seat in a special election when Quinn Kotter resigned after only one session. Williams is a well-known leader of the local NAACP.

House District 33: Incumbent Republican Steve Eliason has successfully defended his swing seat in Sandy since 2010. He is being challenged by Democrat Jason Barber.

State Senate 12: Two women, who have both served in the House of Representatives, are facing off: current lawmaker Judy Weeks-Rohner (R) and incumbent Karen Kwan (D).

State Senate 15: Career teacher incumbent Kathleen Riebe (D) is challenged by Scott Cuthbertson (R), President & CEO of the Economic Development Corporation of Utah.

Coattails

Political observers are debating whether the presidential race or the gubernatorial and federal contests will have any coattails for local candidates. As noted in previous columns, local Democrats faced a serious drag with Joe Biden leading the ballot. The summer pivot to Kamala Harris alleviates some of this burden, especially because Donald Trump will have limited coattails.

What about those constitutional amendments?

Most politicos expected a lively contest over Constitutional Amendments A and D, which could have impacted voter turnout. However, through concluded (D) and likely (A) judicial determinations of noncompliance with certain requirements, these propositions will appear on Utah ballots, but votes will not be tallied. That leaves us with less controversial Amendments B and C.

Amendment B increases the disbursement cap from SITLA to schools. The reasons are a bit wonky, but the bottom line is that this fund is intended to manage Utah lands for the long-term financial benefit of schoolchildren and puts more money into classrooms today.

View Comments

Amendment C enshrines in the state constitution that every county shall have an elected sheriff. You may be asking yourself, “Isn’t that what happens now?” Indeed it is.

Other notable races and ballot propositions

It’s a tough year to be an incumbent state school board member. Many lost their reelection, either in convention or the primary. Among those who remain standing, Carol Lear, Molly Hart, and Matt Hymas are facing challengers Diane Livingston, John Arthur, and Deborah Gatrell, respectively, in the general election. Randy Boothe is unopposed.

Local governments and citizens can place items on the ballot, one of which caught our eye: the Ogden Valley Incorporation question. Residents will vote if they want to form a new city from a large portion of unincorporated Ogden Valley. Supporters say it will bring local control, while critics say it could raise taxes.

Will Latter-day Saints and youth decide our next president?

By Renae Cowley & Frank Pignanelli

We review how the incredibly tight presidential race is raising awareness of these important citizens.

Kamala Harris’ campaign launched a “Latter-day Saint Advisory Committee” in Arizona. Donald Trump recently stopped in Utah for a fundraiser. Both are courting members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Could this bloc of traditionally conservative voters make a difference in the election?

Cowley: The two most famous Latter-day Saints in political history are Mitt Romney and Harry Reid, yet the only thing they had in common is where they worshipped … and perhaps a Diet Coke addiction. It is hard to code members of the church as hardline Republicans. Broadly, they oppose abortion but show compassion for immigration. They sing “Love One Another” and are turned off by Trump’s mean tweets. The modern party realignment is occurring among Latter-day Saint voters.

This election will be determined by slim margins in swing states like Arizona, which has a sizable Latter-day Saint population. Both campaigns are smart to not ignore this important voting bloc.

Pignanelli: “An advantage can be tiny, though in this election, tiny is not nothing.” —Dan Balz, Washington Post

Ah. The perennial quadrennial question of how members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (especially outside of Utah) will vote in a presidential election.

Normally, even if they voted as a bloc, church members in other states would have minimal impact. But 2024 is different. Over 400,000 adherents live in Arizona, approximately 6% of the population. Natesilver.net documents a statistical tie (48.1% Trump, 47.3% Harris) in the Grand Canyon state. Thus, Latter-day Saints could have a meaningful impact.

As a lifelong Utahn, I frequently observe differences in how local members differ in their approaches towards cultural, social and political issues than the faithful outside the state. Yet, they all share a common commitment to strong families, religious liberties, compassion and efficient governance. Candidates using this appeal would have a receptive audience amongst this group.

Typically, Latter-day Saints prefer Republicans. But again, 2024 is different. Trump won Utah but with the lowest percentage of the red states. There is no love for progressive Democrats either. Therefore, opportunities exist to persuade either side. Further, a focus on Latter-day Saints in the swing states will attract not only them but likely other active religious voters who share similar values.

The attention from both campaigns is a well-deserved recognition.

Research shows there is a massive gender gap in how Gen Z identifies politically, more divergent than any previous generation. What accounts for this divide and how will it impact elections now and in the future?

Cowley: After two decades of wussification, masculinity is having a renaissance, and the Trump/Vance ticket is taking advantage of it. Gen Z men listen to bro-style podcasts, where Trump is a frequent guest.

Abortion is a driving issue for young women, and Harris has made it a central tenet of her campaign. Her strongest appeal to Gen Z female voters is that she’s not Trump.

There is a growing cynicism of young voters, regardless of gender. Their distrust of government is having a chilling effect on their political engagement. It is in vogue for them to say they don’t follow politics, but a true flex would be getting informed, becoming involved and voting.

It’s clear both candidates are aggressively campaigning for the gender they think will win them the election. It is only a matter of time till we learn which is truly the superior sex — at least when it comes to voter turnout.

Pignanelli: A recent survey conducted by Social Sphere/Business Insider of voters under 30 in swing states revealed 59% of women preferred Harris compared to only 38% of men. Careless messaging in both campaigns is driving this division. Further, this group is participating at historically higher rates. Strategic attention is merited.

A study from last year documented that younger Latter-day Saint voters are increasingly identifying as less conservative and more independent than their parents. Is this dynamic real, and what does it mean for the upcoming elections?

Cowley: Young adults today are facing challenges their parents and predecessors did not. Social media pressures, declining self-image, mental health struggles and liberal indoctrination at many universities, and the entertainment industry is continually creating more jaw-dropping and sensational content while fanning the flames of contention. All of these things are impacting the erosion of traditional values and the development of political philosophies.

When Hollywood pushes a liberal agenda, it is not cool to be conservative. Young members of the faith are not immune from these pressures. We will see if that trend persists when they start paying more taxes, but for now, these young adults are being inundated with a radicalization of society and rebellion against their parents’ principles.

Pignanelli: Whether originating from the left or right, extreme, harsh rhetoric accompanied by disrespect to others is unsettling to the faithful — particularly those under 40 years. Data from various sources illustrate the centrist trend but does not guarantee automatic gains for Democrats. The left must adjust messaging to capture these roaming voters.