NEWS & EVENTS
How will the Hamas attack, House chaos and concerns about Biden’s age affect Utah politics?
Who will Utah voters support in the context of a world in turmoil and the U.S. House in disarray?
By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
The once sacred rule, “All politics is local,” is becoming a canard. What happens in Washington, D.C., and occasionally elsewhere on the planet, increasingly impacts local elections in America. We consider the impact of national and international events on Utah politics.
The attack by Hamas on Israel has generated emotional responses and political activity. Meanwhile, U.S. House Republicans have been in chaos after ousting their speaker and struggling to elect a new one. Will these national and international events influence the 2nd Congressional District Special Election and municipal contests on Nov. 21, and could the impact spill over into 2024?
Pignanelli: “It was dangerous (to oust the speaker). What kind of message are we sending to our adversaries when we can’t govern, when we’re dysfunctional, when we don’t even have a speaker of the House?” — Congressman Michael McCaul, R-Texas.
For many generations, Utahns exhibited a deep affection for people of the Jewish faith in the state and throughout the world. Therefore, the condemnations from state leaders, and even average citizens, to the brutal, terroristic slaughter were direct and without equivocation.
A large majority of the Utah electorate anticipate local politicians to support Israel. Many candidates for mayor and city council offices will act accordingly. Democrats will need to establish distance from leftist congressional members and elite college activists issuing statements demeaning to Israelis. But if assistance to Israel is delayed or impacted by congressional chaos, Republicans will also feel frustration by some voters.
Troubling images will emerge as Israeli troops push through the Gaza Strip. Others throughout the country may protest such actions. But in Utah, the historic relationship with the Jewish people and Israel will remain a priority in public affairs.
Webb: Voters will have important questions for Utah candidates in upcoming elections. Utahns will determine who they support in the context of a world in turmoil and the U.S. House in disarray. Will a Utah candidate help bring sanity to national politics, and peace through strength internationally, or will the candidate create more chaos that weakens the United States?
Utahns should very much want to understand the positions of their politicians regarding the U.S. House fiasco, and the war in Israel, the war in Ukraine, and how to protect U.S. interests in a very scary world.
Republicans must be held accountable for the nasty, embarrassing, intraparty leadership brawl. Utah’s members of Congress may not be directly responsible for the fiasco, but what are they doing to prevent a similar future occurrence and to punish the renegades?
Meanwhile, isolationist Republicans ought to be defeated. This is no time to elect leaders who are soft on Russian aggression and its war crimes in Ukraine. Some Republicans can’t seem to connect Russia’s invasion in Ukraine with Hamas’ invasion of Israel, China’s intimidation of Taiwan, Iran’s warlike actions, and the menace of North Korea. They need to understand that going soft on Russia, allowing it to conquer Ukraine, will only embolden those other bad actors, increasing the likelihood of World War III.
National and international affairs are top-of-mind for voters this year and next, as they should be. Local and national candidates should respond accordingly.
President Joe Biden continues to suffer high disapproval ratings in polls conducted nationally and locally. Further, a CBS News survey revealed two-thirds of Americans do not believe Biden will finish his second term, revealing a new negative perception issue among voters. How will this impact local politics?
Pignanelli: Biden cannot catch a break. His age and frailty continue to haunt him, factors beyond any correction. Further, a recent survey documents that most Americans support Israel but disapprove of Biden’s handling of the conflict.
According to the CBS poll, Biden’s personality traits so attractive to voters in 2020 (calm, predictable) contrast with what the voters want in 2024 (tough, energetic). All this angst with the president could trickle down to local politics (as it usually does in other states). This will affect the congressional special election and those municipal races where voters have a perception of candidates’ ideologies — real or perceived.
Webb: We’re in a very perilous political period. The world is in turmoil and our two leading presidential candidates are old, unpopular and incompetent. The old world order, dominated by the United States, is being challenged by bad actors. Biden is incapable of providing the leadership needed, and Trump is so erratic and volatile as to be dangerous.
Are there any other potential late year surprises for politicos this season?
Pignanelli: If the controversy surrounding the House speaker creates issues in government funding or jeopardizing national security, the GOP will be held accountable. Democrats’ difficult Biden problems are “baked in” and unlikely to worsen. Normally, “October political surprises” must occur by now to have impact. But Utah’s elections are scheduled for Nov. 21 this year, expanding opportunities for potential trouble.
Webb: If national or international affairs cause the economy to crash, the political ramifications could be dramatic. Utah voters will look for leadership that is wise, steady, reassuring and dynamic.
Can Gov. Cox’s ‘Disagree Better’ initiative work?
Polls show citizens want more courtesy and cooperation in politics
By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
Recent political events in Washington, D.C., and in Utah demand greater scrutiny of the behavior of our elected and appointed officials and how they talk to each other and to citizens. Since your columnists are purportedly in the communications business, we have our opinions.
In light of the chaos and backbiting in Washington, including the ouster of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Gov. Spencer Cox’s “Disagree Better” initiative with the National Governors Association appears timely and is receiving more attention. Is this initiative just feel-good, fuzzy-headed wishful thinking, or is it a substantive, needed objective in today’s political climate?
Pignanelli: “The toppling of Speaker Kevin McCarthy is so ... below the country … without heightened meaning. It’s as if Julius Caesar were stabbed to death in the Forum by the Marx Brothers.” — Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal.
Advocates of the Cox initiative possess millennia of history which prove respect toward adversaries generally delivers positive results. Two recent pertinent examples surround the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. The founders hoped holders of this constitutional office would rise above political fray. Unfortunately, this intent went awry — especially by the last two occupants.
Had Nancy Pelosi created a Jan. 6 commission that was balanced with requested Republican members, the deliberations and conclusions would have survived attacks of partisanship and better served national interests. McCarthy, by demonizing Democrats before and after the government funding votes, diminished any obligation by them to retain him.
The initiative should do more than just admonish rudeness but educate voters that nastiness exhibited on television and social media accomplishes nothing. Our nation advances when respect is exchanged between friends and foes. The most successful leaders, regardless of party, are disciples of this philosophy.
Webb: My first reaction was that the Cox initiative was rather lightweight and too obvious. I thought it would be routinely ignored by the boorish, warring political factions at all levels of politics. And perhaps it will be ignored.
But upon further reflection and understanding what Cox really intends, I like the initiative a lot. It has real substance and it can make a difference. It should be studied and adopted by everyone who has strong political opinions.
Cox isn’t suggesting that we should all set aside our strong feelings, give in, hold hands and sing “Kumbaya.” To the contrary, Cox fully recognizes that deep-seated disagreements exist, that people feel their side is right, and they have no interest in surrendering.
The problem isn’t that we disagree, but it’s the way we disagree that is so toxic to our society. My wife and I sometimes disagree, but we don’t disparage each other, use harsh language, or cause permanent damage or resentment. Cox is saying that we can disagree without being offensive and without destroying relationships.
Respectful disagreement would make a big difference in politics and in all sectors of society. It would preserve relationships, reduce acrimony and tension, and ultimately solve more of the serious problems we face.
Congressman John Curtis announced he will not seek the U.S. Senate seat that will be open when Sen. Mitt Romney retires. How will this impact the Senate race? Could his decision increase the dignity of the political process?
Pignanelli: Well-informed political operatives understand Curtis would have been a formidable candidate. A tough campaigner, he is beloved in a congressional district that promised a strong performance in a GOP primary. Also, Curtis has access to national funding resources.
Thus, his decision to stay in the House was made through a sincere desire to pursue what was best for the state, and not fear. Indeed, his announcement carried in this paper was so articulate, visionary and unselfish that it rose to that ultimate of adjectives — “Lincolnesque.” All Utahns are grateful Curtis set an example of noble public service.
The campaign is now an open field for state House Speaker Brad Wilson and Mayor Trent Staggs. Other potential contenders face catch-up challenges.
Webb: Curtis is a terrific human being and an excellent member of Congress. He would make a very fine U.S. senator. But it would have been a tough battle. Wilson has run a masterful early campaign, rounding up a who’s who list of impressive supporters, most of Utah’s top Republicans, and corralling a load of money.
Had Curtis jumped in earlier, I suspect a lot of those leaders would not have endorsed Wilson so soon. But Wilson moved very quickly and is now the clear front-runner. It’s still very early in the race, and more candidates will likely emerge, but Wilson looks formidable.
Polls indicate that citizens want greater courtesy and cooperation among politicians. Is there anything they can do?
Pignanelli: Communications from campaigns and special interest groups are often caustic and denigrating toward political opponents. The wonderful and terrifying thing about democracy is when citizens despise political antics, they can blame the person looking back in the mirror. Only when voters hold candidates responsible for toxicity will the environment change.
Webb: This is a problem for political leaders, but also for political followers. It’s a problem at city council, school board and county commission meetings. It’s a particular problem on social media. If we ordinary citizens set a good example ourselves of “disagreeing better,” and expect the same from our elected officials, then our communities, states and nation would be better places to live.
Chaos in the U.S. House: The sorry state of congressional governance
After the ousting of Kevin McCarthy from his role as speaker of the House, what will the Republican Party do?
By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
Anyone watching the news recently has witnessed a terrible display of political acrimony that is an embarrassment to this country. We are not describing Republican versus Democrat but the Republican versus Republican fratricide resulting from the near shutdown of the federal government and the ousting of U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. This tumult is generating conjecture about the health of the GOP nationally and highlighting recent initiatives to alter local politics. We offer our observations.
Anyone watching cable news programs or social media the last several days has been amused, but more likely appalled, by the antics of a handful of Republican members of Congress and the ensuing tumult and confusion. Democrats watched and allowed the carnage to occur. Is this the disintegration of the Republican Party?
Pignanelli: “If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can it be otherwise in a body to which the people send one hundred and fifty lawyers, whose trade it is to question everything, yield nothing, and talk by the hour?” — Thomas Jefferson
Dozens of reality TV programs entertain millions with “impromptu coverage” of fights between families and friends. Usually, these differences are minor, but the camera incentivizes participants to amplify the emotions. Americans are now viewing a congressional version of such theater.
The main combatants — McCarthy and Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla. — are both aligned with Donald Trump. Allegiance to the former president is not at issue. Other factors are at play.
For over a decade, the demographics of both parties shifted, which created confusion and frustration among their ranks. Trump made it fashionable to challenge traditional Republican leadership without incurring ramifications. Additionally, promises by veteran leaders to control the deficits only prompted laughter and contempt from younger GOP officials. Thus, internal rebellions in Congress are not surprising.
The national Republican Party has weathered much greater challenges (i.e. Great Depression, Watergate, Great Recession), and will remain strong. But they will likely endure comedic comparisons to the Kardashians, “Real Housewives,” etc.
Webb: The Republican Party has always had factions and, even today, it’s not on the verge of self-destruction, at least in most of the country. However, some members of Congress take dissension within the party to whole new levels, forming a circular firing squad and contributing to the embarrassing dysfunction of Congress. This is proof that Washington is broken.
In the big picture, it’s critical to remember that Republicans narrowly control the House, while Democrats control the presidency and the U.S. Senate. If anything worthwhile is accomplished in Congress, it requires compromise, support from both Republicans and Democrats. McCarthy was ousted by a small faction of right-wing ideologues for the unforgivable sin of compromising a little bit with Democrats to keep the government running.
In part, GOP schisms are more prevalent today because the apparent leader of the party, Donald Trump, is so polarizing himself.
It is worthwhile to contrast the chaos in Congress with what the nation’s 50 governors are doing. Under the leadership of their chair, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, they have undertaken a major initiative to produce better policy through “healthy conflict” and by “disagreeing better.” They have adopted a “positive approach to political and social discourse.” And states, with a few exceptions, are better governed than the federal government.
Local businessman Bruce Cummings along with others have developed a nonprofit organization “People4Utah” to open the closed Republican primary elections in Utah. This organization believes that restricting participation in party nomination activities marginalizes most citizens, and is unhealthy for democracy. Do local Republicans need such a change?
Pignanelli: Republican leaders demand with compelling logic that only the party faithful should choose their nominees in the primary elections. But this reasoning also raises the important question of why taxpayers should pay for elections in which they cannot participate. (Utah’s second largest voting bloc is unaffiliated.)
Despite allegations of mischief, surveys indicate most Utahns vote for whom they consider the best person, including in the primaries. Such rational behavior oftentimes excludes the most conservative or liberal candidates, with selections toward better candidates to represent constituents. Therefore, I respectfully suggest if taxpayers are paying the freight, they can ride the train.
Webb: I’m in favor of as much participation in the political process by as many citizens as possible. I was among those who supported opening the party nomination process to allow candidates to gather signatures to get on the ballot. I also support open primary elections if parties voluntarily choose that route.
However, I think we would go too far in forcing the Republican Party to allow non-Republicans to vote in its primary elections. If someone wants to vote in a Republican primary, it’s easy enough to join the party.
Is there a potential for such disruptions among Democrats nationally or locally?
Pignanelli: Far left progressives prevailed throughout the internal struggles of the Democratic Party in prior decades. Their control was secured by subdued, effective bloodletting of moderates outside the limelight.
Webb: Democrats have their own schisms. But at this time in history, Democrats are much more unified, both nationally and in Utah.
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.
