Is it too late to restore respect in American institutions?

Gen Z doesn’t trust government institutions, and Sen. John Fetterman is wearing gym clothes on the Senate floor. How do we reinstate confidence in our government systems?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

A recent comprehensive survey revealed what may not be too surprising to readers — a vast majority of Americans are tired of politics, politicians and the institutions they inhabit. Apparently, this emotion is afflicting the younger generation as well. Your columnists may be dinosaurs, but politics still invigorates us, so we are enthused to offer our perspectives on this important matter. 

Pew Research Center recently released results of a survey conducted this summer with more than 12,000 adults. Some 63% have no confidence in the American political system and are dissatisfied with the current crop of candidates. Also, 65% are exhausted with politics and a majority cannot identify important strengths of government. These views crossed all demographic lines of race, age and party affiliation. More disturbing data comes from a Gallup poll indicating that Generation Z Americans (ages 12-26) “generally lack trust” in political and societal institutions. How did we get here?

Pignanelli: “Eighty-six percent of Americans believe Republicans and Democrats are more focused on fighting each other than on solving problems.” — Pew Research  

A strange illustration of this crisis is the decision by Senate leadership to allow Sen. John Fetterman to wear shorts and hoodies on the floor of that prestigious body. Surrendering basic principles — like respectful attire — to political expediency explains the current dilemma.

Eighty percent of the survey respondents used the words “corrupt” and “divisive” to describe politics. They further believe the major issues of the day receive too little media attention, whereas hostility between the parties garners too much. Generation Z trusts scientific organizations, the military and the medical system; but little else. Further, younger citizens raised on the internet do not trust the web.

Americans are reacting appropriately to failures in the governance of the republic. Various leaders tolerating sloppy behavior — and clothing — to score meaningless public relations points purchased this current situation.

Webb: This nationwide revulsion toward government is completely understandable given the dysfunction of Congress, partisan conflicts, poor choices for president and the overall inability of the federal government to solve the nation’s serious problems.

I sound like a broken record on this, but I believe the core problem is the centralization of power and money at the federal level, creating a government so large with so many expectations that it is doomed to fail.

We now expect the federal government to take care of each citizen from cradle to grave, seeing to every need in society. In attempting to do so, the federal government has created so many programs, at such high expense, that federal debt has reached perilous levels and the federal bureaucracy is so large as to be unmanageable.

So it’s no wonder that with such dysfunction, public confidence plummets, cynicism increases, demagogues arise with simplistic solutions, partisanship intensifies and politicians brawl and blame each other.   

I worry that we’re in a downward spiral with little hope of reversal.

The only solution is to return to the constitutional principle of balanced federalism, where most of society’s problems are handled at state and local levels, with increased support from families, neighborhoods, churches and nonprofits. I don’t have a lot of hope this will occur, because it would require the dismantling of the government/bureaucracy industrial complex, which has used untold trillions of dollars to create a society highly dependent on its largesse.  

Are these trends irreversible or can reasonable respect of American institutions be restored, especially among younger citizens who will soon be leading our nation?

Pignanelli: Despite the negative attitudes, Americans are voting and participating in a system they despise. They have not given up on the country, and just want it to work better. Americans do not accept inferior government.

This is an opportunity for public affair organizations, traditional and social media, educational institutions and religious leaders to remind citizens if they communicate their desires and demand action, the politicians will follow. Complaining is not enough. Only better engagement will change the trajectory.

Webb: Given the sorry state of the presidential race and the inability of Congress to even pass a basic budget, expect things to get worse.

To what degree is this political fatigue inflicting Utah, and can we be part of the solution?

Pignanelli: Despite occasional screeching from right- and left-wing fringes, Utah enjoys nominal partisan divisiveness. There is mutual respect among elected officials of both parties. The Legislature and Gov. Spencer Cox receive high marks from the public for a well performing state government. Our society has subtle but clear requirements for proper decorum for all official meetings, from the state Capitol to city councils. (Unfortunately, such standards are ignored at party conventions.)

Utah demonstrated that if you demand respect, through results and culture, Americans will gladly return it.

Webb: Yes, Utah can be part of the solution. In fact, Utah — and other well-managed states — are the solution. If Utah was able to keep most of the federal dollars it sends to Washington (minus the amounts used for national defense and true federal responsibilities), our state needs could be met. We could balance personal responsibility with government help. We could manage our land and water, protect the environment, build needed infrastructure, and provide a sensible social safety net. We could network and collaborate with other well-managed states. It would be difficult. It would create a great deal of consternation. The state would have less federal money. But the state could do it and prosper.

What will Mitt Romney’s legacy be?

Mitt Romney is a strong conservative, but some Republicans can’t overlook his role as Donald Trump’s chief Republican critic

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The announcement by Sen. Mitt Romney that he will not seek reelection raised eyebrows throughout the state and country. Because he was such a force for mainstream politics, robust discussions are occurring about the impact of his retirement. We, of course, join in the pontificating.

Romney is one of the best-known members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is appreciated for being a great example of what the faith embodies, in addition to his success as governor of Massachusetts, and his performance as the 2012 GOP presidential nominee. Our state was grateful for his leadership of the 2002 Winter Olympics. Romney was essentially drafted to replace Sen. Orrin Hatch in 2018. But the affection of Republicans toward Romney began to wane. He was even booed at state conventions and other GOP gatherings. What caused this fallout with a favorite adopted son?

Pignanelli: “Mitt Romney was willing on an individual basis to stand up against Donald Trump, but not lead a Republican revolt against Trump.” — Geoffrey Kabaservice, The Niskanen Center 

The Utah culture has many wonderful attributes, including unwritten, but clear, rules of behavior, especially for our leaders (i.e. Do not embarrass us!).

For a half a century, the state’s federal delegation was encouraged to work behind the scenes with national liberals on important matters, but open endorsement of their agenda was forbidden. Hatch enjoyed wonderful relationships with Democrats to accomplish mutual goals, yet never wavered as a champion for conservative causes.

The principled Romney was bothered by unscrupulous conduct of other politicians, regardless of political affiliation. President Trump’s famous phone call with the Ukrainian president troubled him, thereby leading to his affirmative vote on the impeachment trial in the Senate. This initiated Romney’s problems in Utah. Some conservatives understood angst with Trump but were furious the senator voted with “them” (Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and various coastal lefties). Other Utah officials articulated concerns with candidate Trump but when he became the official warrior against the left, they publicly aligned with the president.

Romney is a strong conservative but local mores required the perception of a less cozy relationship with political opposites. 

Webb: Romney governed very much as a moderate in Massachusetts, then turned more conservative as he sought the GOP presidential nomination. After the 2016 election, Romney flirted with Trump as he was considered for secretary of state. But soon thereafter, outraged by Trump’s serious character flaws, Romney became the president’s chief critic in the Republican Party.

Politically, it was an unwise move. It made him very unpopular among the conservative GOP base in Utah. He could have simply kept his mouth shut about Trump, as so many other Republicans did (and still do). But Romney couldn’t do that. He even voted with the Democrats twice to ratify Trump’s impeachments, which was not smart, in my opinion. He voted to remove Trump from office, even though the Democrats seriously dumbed-down impeachment with rather silly charges against Trump.To many Republicans, Romney seemed to be fully supporting the Democratic agenda to persecute Trump. Much of the criticism against Trump was justified, but some was not. Romney went all-in with left-wing Democrats on Trump. He could have quietly said, when asked, “I liked many of the president’s policies. But I don’t like some of his personal character traits.” And left it at that. But he didn’t.

Romney today is a mainstream Republican conservative. He’s been critical of many of President Joe Biden’s policies and the overall liberal direction of the Democratic Party, while also being willing to work across party lines.   

Could Gov. Cox learn from Maloy’s win for his next campaign?

Celeste Maloy’s recent win in Utah’s 2nd Congressional District Republican primary election could inform future election campaigns

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Shrewd politicos continually study and analyze election data for trends, shifts among voters and tactical successes and failures. School is never out for the political class, even for old academic misfits like us. So here are some lessons we learned from the recent 2nd Congressional District Republican special primary election.

This primary election was unusual for several reasons — no immediate front-runner, limited public polling, very compressed timeline and Election Day directly following the Labor Day holiday. This provided opportunities for candidates to utilize a variety of strategies. What are the takeaways from this three-way primary race won by Celeste Maloy?

Pignanelli: “The rural vote really showed up and showed out — which was the difference. The district is shifting. This is the first member of Congress not from the Wasatch Front.” — Boyd Matheson, The Hinckley Report

This special election did provide lessons to be learned, but it is an old and trusted curriculum. Money is important, but not the guarantee of victory. Maloy’s campaign raised less than her opponents, but maximized contributions with effective messaging that compelled her rural base.

Maloy collected high-profile endorsements. But the real value was the public support of so many local elected officials that established a personal connection between her and the voters. She leveraged these connections with city, county and legislative officeholders to promote retail political engagement.

The primary voter turnout was not as great as 2022 but more than 2017. This emphasizes that especially in special elections “it’s the voters who vote.” Targeting citizens with a track record of mailing ballots is more effective than trying to move demographics with less participation.

All these are basic instructions. But in today’s world they often get lost with the shiny toys of technology. Those who remember and use them usually prevail.

Webb: Maloy’s win shows that retail, grassroots politics is still crucial in primary elections. Nothing can replace getting out and meeting voters one-on-one and in small groups. Maloy was able to come from being a complete unknown to likely winning a seat in Congress because she worked so hard at the grassroots level, and she leveraged other advantages.

Maloy was bolstered by a win among delegates at the GOP nominating convention. She became the favored candidate among GOP stalwarts and enjoyed the formal endorsement of the party. In addition, winning endorsements from many prominent Republicans at all levels, including her boss, incumbent Rep. Chris Stewart, bolstered her credibility and substance.

There have been plenty of examples where the convention winner/party-endorsed candidate has lost. But in those cases the party endorsed far-right, somewhat fringe candidates that moderate Republican voters rejected.

Maloy showed that the combination of winning the party’s endorsement, while also being a mainstream, non-crazy candidate, is a winning formula. 

History suggests the results of this special primary election should be studied by Gov. Spencer Cox (as he develops a strategy for his upcoming campaign), and by other candidates. What lessons can be applied in future campaigns?

Pignanelli: The U.S. Senate 2024 Republican primary could feature several candidates, especially with the retirement of Sen. Mitt Romney. Thus, the results are instructive to 2024 candidates. Personal engagement combined with direct emotional connection to congressional activities (not a media blast) is what the primary election offers as a successful recipe.

Opportunities in rural Utah continues to be a major focus of the Cox administration. This will be a valuable weapon in convention and primary contests against right-wing opposition.

For all candidates, the primary underscored that an understanding and willingness to resolve local issues is paramount. Proclamations of ideology are not enough to satisfy the voter appetite. (Another sign of a healthy democracy.)

Webb: It’s never a good idea to allow past campaigns to dictate future campaign strategies and tactics. The dynamics are always different. Cox will be running in a massive general election with many other candidates on the ballot, all perhaps overshadowed by what could be a wild and crazy presidential election.

Still, the lessons from the recent special primary election are instructive, especially for the large field expected in the U.S. Senate race next year. Candidates who can win at convention and have the support of the party behind them, while still being acceptable to moderate Republicans and even some independents, will have an advantage.

Does the primary special election offer any opportunities for Democrat Kathleen Riebe?

Pignanelli: Riebe will need to find messages that move her base to vote but more importantly compel independents and moderate Republicans. Maloy demonstrated you don’t need an abundance of money but a wealth of shrewd strategy to prevail.

Webb: In the final election, Maloy will be the obvious strong favorite of conservative Republicans, but she will also enjoy support from moderates. That spells big trouble for Riebe, even though she is a solid candidate.

Would Utah vote third party?

Utahns have a history of supporting third parties — could it happen again in 2024?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The No Labels movement has so far won placement on the 2024 ballot in 10 states, including Utah. Also, the Beehive State has been accommodating to third parties since territorial status. We review the impact of these alternative voices on local politics.

In addition to qualifying for ballot access in Utah, No Labels enjoys a strong connection with former Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. Adding to the intrigue, former President Donald Trump and, especially, President Joseph Biden are viewed unfavorably by a majority of Utahns. Would a No Labels ticket have a chance in Utah if Trump and Biden are the major party nominees?

Pignanelli: “70% of America, if it’s a Trump/Biden ticket, will be politically homeless. They — they won’t have any inspiration.” — Gov. Chris Sununu, New Hampshire  

The No Labels movement selected quite possibly the worst name since the nativist “Know Nothing” party of the mid-19th century. Notwithstanding a flimsy moniker, this nascent crusade is capturing national and regional attention.

Utahns have a history of supporting third parties (i.e. 1912, Progressive, 21%, Socialist, 8%; 1968, American Independent, 6.37%; 1992, Reform/Independent, 27%; 2016, Independent, 21%). Renowned political adviser Karl Rove theorized depending on who No Labels chooses to be on the ticket, that candidate could hurt or help either major party. Thus, a conceivable conjecture is a recognizable and popular conservative leading the effort could attract Utahns and draw significant support from Trump.

Many political observers dismiss the chances of No Labels. But we are in unprecedented times, which expand opportunities for outside of the mainstream. Having an undefined, and strange, brand may be the best strategy for 2024.

Webb: On paper, a moderate No Labels ticket featuring Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin and Huntsman as vice president should have a solid chance in Utah. And, I believe such a ticket would win a higher percentage of votes in Utah than in most states. Alas, it wouldn’t be enough. Despite surveys showing solid support for a third party, by election day most voters would return home to their respective parties.

I believe if the stark, unhappy choice for president is between Trump and Biden, enough Utah Republicans would hold their noses and vote for Trump to give him the state’s electoral votes. They’re not going to chance electing Biden by voting for a third party candidate. While many Utah Republicans are not Trump fans, electing Biden would be even worse for them.

The best scenario to put a non-Trump Republican in the White House is for one of his solid, conservative GOP opponents to begin to chip away at his support. Then the other GOP candidates must drop out and rally around the best Trump alternative. But it may be too late. Trump is looking strong across the country.

Still, could lightning strike and prevent a Trump nomination? Perhaps. 

Many polls indicated that Sen. Mitt Romney would face a tough Republican primary should he choose reelection next year. (A recent Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics survey does show an improved approval rating for Romney.) There has been speculation among politicos that Romney could announce as an independent and have a good chance in the general election. Is this a realistic possibility? 

Pignanelli: For several years, polling documented a significant disapproval rating for Romney among conservative Republicans. Romney enjoys stronger support among the general Utah population. If Romney chose the independent path, he would caucus with the Republicans, preventing a formal Democrat endorsement. But many unaffiliated and Democratic voters would cross the ballot for him in November. Evan McMullin was unknown, without roots or strong relationships to Utah voters, yet with Democrat and independent assistance captured 42.8% against Mike Lee. Romney, with much greater depth than McMullin, would be a formidable independent. (But this is an unlikely scenario.)

Webb: Again, this idea may look good on paper. Romney would attract strong support from Democrats and many independents. But this approach was tried just last year with McMullin opposing Lee, who wasn’t popular among moderates and Democrats. It didn’t work. Romney would certainly be a stronger independent than McMullin, but if the GOP nominee is Utah House Speaker Brad Wilson, as would be likely under this scenario, Romney would have little chance to win as an independent. That’s because Wilson is a solid mainstream conservative, is not a scary right-winger, and would be supported by most Republicans and many moderates and independents.

The United Utah Party is the state’s unique flavor of an alternate political structure, fielding legislative and congressional candidates for years. Will this organization, or another choice outside the major parties, ever make gains?

Pignanelli: Over 100 years ago, many socialist candidates were elected by Utahns to local offices. They succeeded because they were identified with specific objectives. If the major parties continue to drift, and the UUP or other entities become well known for endeavors important to Utahns, several swing seats could be won.

Webb: The small party may have an impact on the fringes. Perhaps it could be a spoiler in a very close race. 

Foxley & Pignanelli Late Summer Newsletter

Does Utah have a non-Trump favorite for president?

The surprising GOP primary debate offered a menu to many Utah Republicans seeking a new flavor of politics to consume

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Our state has experienced an unusual combination of political debates for an off-election year — presidential and congressional. Although the events received intense media coverage, there wasn’t enough explanation as to why these matches are important to Utahns. Therefore, your canny columnists cheerfully convey clarification.

Although one poll claims almost half of Utah Republicans prefer Donald Trump as the party’s nominee in 2024, other surveys place the support between 20% and 28%. The presidential primary debate was panned for several reasons, but the individuals on that stage are the alternative to the former president. Thus, since a majority of Utahns want a choice, did this debate provide a good look at the options? Is there a Utah non-Trump favorite?

Pignanelli: “This was basically a debate over who’s going to be number two, because at some point, an asteroid hits. And that’s the actual conversation.” — Sarah Isgur, ABC News   

Convinced the debate would be a snooze fest, I ensured my iPad and high-octane beverage were nearby to provide needed distractions. What an event! I never touched any of my electronic devices because I was entertained and intrigued from start to finish (I did consume my beverage, of course).

The absence of Trump allowed a reveal of the various trends and undercurrents within the Republican Party. Some national pundits criticized the lack of harmony among participants, but the disagreements demonstrated a vibrancy needed in establishing an ideology. While polls indicate little movement in the approval needle, several candidates should be appealing to Utahns.

Nikki Haley received accolades for an honest assessment of government spending, abortion restrictions and the support of Ukraine — matters important to Utahns. Ron DeSantis held his own and Tim Scott referred to his personal story, which local citizens find compelling.

The surprising primary debate offered a menu to many Utah Republicans seeking a new flavor of politics to consume.

Webb: With Trump as a no-show, viewers of the presidential debate were provided a needed opportunity to evaluate the other candidates. Ron DeSantis has the most endorsements among Utah Republican leaders, and he is likely the preferred non-Trump candidate in Utah. I also very much like Mike Pence, Nikki Haley and Tim Scott. In fact, most of the candidates on the debate stage would be better than Trump as president.

The one exception is Vivek Ramaswamy, who seems willing to allow Russia to conquer and subjugate Ukraine. If we abandon Ukraine, it gives a green light to China to invade Taiwan and then we’re in a severe international crisis. Ramaswamy seems naïve on foreign affairs and he flirts with nutty conspiracy theories. He’s glib and charismatic, but is not prepared to be president.

Meanwhile, Chris Christie, Doug Burgum and Asa Hutchinson have no chance to win and should end their campaigns.

A recent Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll revealed almost half of voters remain undecided in the 2nd Congressional District. However, Becky Edwards claimed 32% of respondents in contrast 11% for Bruce Hough and 9% for Celeste Maloy. There were 11 debates in this special election, and Edwards attended none of them. What do these results imply about these matchups?

Pignanelli: If Edwards wins or comes close, she will have dramatically altered the strategies surrounding candidate debates. Incumbents have the privilege of limiting time with challengers. But in an open seat, contenders usually use every opportunity to wrestle with colleagues. Edwards may be providing irrefutable evidence that politics is evolving and eliminating the necessity of participating in these matches. This could further illustrate the obsolescence of precinct caucuses and possibly conventions.

Webb: This survey is old enough that it should not be viewed as a snapshot of where the campaign is today. The three candidates are all solid and attractive and running smart campaigns. Anyone can win at this point and citizens of the 2nd District will be well served by any of the three.

I’m guessing voter participation will be low, and it’s very hard to determine who will vote. However, mail-in balloting makes voting easy, and it means more casual (low-information) voters may participate. Edwards’ TV ads have boosted her name recognition, which helps in polling. But Hough and Maloy are targeting their outreach more on reliable GOP voters, which I think is still the best strategy.

Will it be harder for Utah Republicans to vote in the 2024 presidential primary?

Instead of a traditional primary election, the 2024 presidential preference vote will be held at precinct caucuses

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

It’s a season of change, with Utah children back in the classroom, summer monsoons bringing cooler weather and footballs flying in high school and, soon, college stadiums. Politics, meanwhile, is getting more intense in Utah and nationally. Here are some highlights.

The Utah Republican Party announced that its 2024 presidential preference vote will not occur through a traditional primary election but rather at precinct caucuses on March 5, 2024. Chairman Robert Axson claims this process will save taxpayer dollars and promote candidate participation. How will this controversial decision impact Utah politics?

Pignanelli: “It is a characteristic of wisdom not to do desperate things.” — Henry David Thoreau   

This lifeline to the delegate convention system was tried before. In 2015, the Utah Republican Central Committee gleefully decided to conduct the 2016 presidential preference contemporaneously with the precinct caucuses. Advocates confidently proclaimed their decision would “open up the process” and “promote new innovative ways to participate.”

So, 177,204 Republicans cast a ballot in the 2016 caucuses, a sharp decrease from the 2012 presidential primary in which 241,000 participated. Trump was literally unopposed in the 2020 pandemic presidential primary, and yet, a record 344,852 returned their mail ballots. History and statistics disavow any suggestions the caucus route is beneficial.

Utah will be participating with 15 other states on Super Tuesday — March 5, 2024. Because a smaller number of caucus attendees determine the result, presidential campaigns will focus expenditures. Instead of spending resources persuading a larger audience of primary voters, targeted mailers and perhaps an airport layover visit will be the most attention our state experiences.

Granted, combining the presidential preference with the precinct caucuses keeps the heart beating within the delegate convention system, but what is the quality of that life?

Webb: Today’s Republican Party is not the “big tent” party of Ronald Reagan. Instead of making it easy for all Utah Republicans to participate in the candidate selection process, the party is making it more difficult. Instead of welcoming the votes of all Utah Republicans to determine their presidential nominee, the party is saying it wants party activists to control the process and make the decisions.

Today’s party is exclusive enough that, even if you’ve been a loyal Republican your entire life, you don’t get to vote for a presidential nominee unless you can make time to attend a party caucus at a particular place at a particular time. In our high-tech world, the act of voting doesn’t have to be that difficult.

Reagan, a true conservative, welcomed all Americans into the Republican Party. If someone agreed with him 80% of the time, he celebrated the 80%. Many of today’s far-right Republicans would kick someone out of the party over the 20% disagreement. Reagan wasn’t into litmus tests and ideological purity. He welcomed diverse people and opinions.

Luckily for Republicans, the party is so dominant in Utah that it can insult many moderate party members and still win. If political affiliation in the state were more balanced, the GOP would need all Republicans, even Reagan Republicans, to win.  

A recent survey conducted by Noble Predictive Insights (an Arizona-based pollster) captured national attention with results regarding Utah junior Sen. Mitt Romney. Only 30% of 301 registered Republican respondents support Romney’s reelection. Interestingly, Attorney General Sean Reyes captured 13%. Is this a valid analysis? Will it prompt Romney into a decision?

Pignanelli: Local politicos were intrigued by the results. The poll established “undecided” is leading. Although he has not recently hinted a possible candidacy, Reyes is a third-place contender. But conventional belief was reaffirmed that Romney suffers among segments of his party. A reelection effort mandates an intense focus on retail politics. Waiting to announce is not freezing the opposition as challengers Brad Wilson and Trent Staggs are very active. The large undecided bloc indicates an opportunity for any candidate.

Romney was wooed and essentially drafted in 2018. Utah Republicans want a return of the favor and be courted. But occasions for such political romance are closing.

Webb: Were I a candidate, potential candidate, donor or voter, I wouldn’t lose sleep over this survey. It doesn’t mean much at this point in the Senate race as Romney hasn’t said whether he’s running. Romney’s biggest danger is Utah House Speaker Brad Wilson, even though he doesn’t show well in the poll.

Gov. Spencer Cox offered a nonendorsement endorsement in the 2nd Congressional Distrct special election. While praising all three candidates he stated a preference for representation “off the Wasatch Front” which indicates Celeste Maloy. Does this help or hurt Maloy’s campaign?

Pignanelli: In the 2022 2nd District primary, 52% of the votes were from counties south of Tooele. So Maloy will try to use this compliment from the governor to solidify her rural base.

Webb: The governor’s comments do bolster Maloy’s campaign. Candidate Bruce Hough’s strong commitment to devolve power, decision-making, and resources to state levels where problems are more readily solved may prove receptive.

Will Donald Trump debate?

The first GOP presidential debate is Wednesday, Aug. 23. Whether or not Trump will be there remains in question

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

President Joseph Biden made an unexpected visit to Utah that seemed successful for both public relations and campaign purposes. On the Republican side, Donald Trump continues to lead in local polls. We look at how recent political controversies affect Utahns’ perception of these current frontrunners in the presidential race.

The first GOP presidential debate will be held next Wednesday, Aug. 23, and questions abound whether Trump will participate. Should and will Trump be on the debate stage with his challengers? Will his decision impact local preferences?

Pignanelli: “Donald Trump is now playing that game (regarding the debate). He plays misdirection all the time. ... This is about Donald Trump keeping the attention on Donald Trump, and he’s doing pretty well at it.” —Chris Christie, presidential candidate   

Our nation, and much of Western civilization, has rules (written and unwritten), long-held traditions and consistent expectations for political debates, whether between candidates or advocates of various causes. Yet, as with similar legacies, the parameters of formal verbal sparring were blown apart in recent history.

Normally, ignoring a presidential debate would be a fatal error. But Trump disregarded the event before the 2016 Iowa caucuses without enduring long-term harm, tempting a repeat next week. Incumbents are expected to limit, but not entirely restrict, debates with challengers. Trump is a quasi-incumbent with a commanding lead in the polls and mocks any strictures. Trump could decline participation, hold a rally at the same time, and still benefit from great media coverage.

Some believe Trump must participate to demonstrate respect for the party, the election process and the office. Such considerations are noteworthy but laughable when applied to him. Others believe that he has nothing to gain from exchanges with weaker contenders.

Trump’s campaign resources are dedicated to legal expenses. Megadonors have yet to contribute to Trump or others. A solid debate performance may unlock those wallets, a consideration to support debate engagement.

Utahns treasure our national traditions and will be quietly disappointed if Trump skips multiple debates. I believe the former president will confront his opponents on stage.

Webb: I can never fathom what dances around inside Trump’s skull, other than he always does whatever he deems is best for him personally. My best guess is that Trump won’t be able to abide allowing all those other Republicans to have the attention of the nation and the media focused on them without him being up on the stage with them, calling them silly names. Of course, he may decline the debate and then stage some big rally at the same time to steal the limelight.

I’m actually torn on whether I want to see Trump in the debate. It would be great to contrast his positions, answers and demeanor with the other candidates. But having him there means most of the focus and news media coverage will be on him, not spread among the other candidates.

We know Trump and his positions very well. It might be better for America if he sits out the debate and allows the nation to get acquainted with the other candidates.

Congressman Dean Phillips of Minnesota captured immediate national attention when he urged more Democrats to compete in the primaries against Biden. Will this get traction and could this affect the president’s status in Utah?

Pignanelli: Biden’s popularity across the country, even among Democrats, remains troublesome. Despite Phillips’ nice statements about the president, he indirectly raises concerns of Biden’s age and appeal to voters. But it is too late for a Democrat to launch a viable campaign.

When incumbent presidents face strong internal challenges, they often lose the general election (i.e. Herbert Hoover, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush). These machinations will undermine Biden in Utah. The 2024 candidates must factor this into their calculations.

Webb: Biden is old, unpopular and uninspiring. A number of serious political commentators don’t think he will be the Democratic nominee next year. The problem is, who else could the Democrats nominate? Vice President Kamala Harris is even less popular than Biden. The arch-liberalism of California Gov. Gavin Newsom won’t go over well in middle-class America, especially in the swing states Democrats need to win. Weak and feeble as he is, Biden may still be the Democrats’ best choice to defeat a resurgent Trump, even with all his indictments. How did we get the worst nominees imaginable in both parties?  

Will Trump make an endorsement in the 2nd Congressional District special election?

Pignanelli: Unlikely. Apparently, no requests have been made and ballots are already in the mail. But a Labor Day surprise is possible.

Webb: I honestly don’t know, but if Trump does endorse, it won’t be Becky Edwards. She’s too moderate. It could be Bruce Hough, but most likely it would be Celeste Maloy. Her current boss, Congressman Chris Stewart, has been a stalwart supporter of most of Trump’s policies, if not his flawed character.