Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Primary results and the future of Count My Vote

Well, it's a good thing this is the July 4 holiday weekend. What better way to celebrate Independence Day than to review, analyze, ponder and speculate about last week’s primary election. Your columnists are never bashful about sharing their thoughts.

Gov. Gary Herbert's victory was expected, but not his landslide triumph. Why did his win exceed even the polling numbers? Is the governor really that popular? What are experts mining from the results?

Pignanelli: “The Lord created pollsters to make astrologers look accurate.” — Gov. John Kasich

Despite all the Tuesday night chest thumping from numerous politicos (i.e. “I always knew Herbert would do really well”), no one predicted the governor would capture over 72 percent. No one.

As a disciple of their industry, I am not critical of pollsters. But Herbert’s performance demonstrates the need for surveys to further adapt to 21st-century dynamics in technology and social media in order to garner trends.

Political elites who occasionally grumble about the governor also learned another valuable lesson: Utahns like Gary Herbert. He is impervious to the bombardment of negative attack ads. Also, politicos are noting Republicans overwhelmingly overturned their delegates’ preference at the April convention.

Finally, I wish to provide a professional and high-minded response to the campaign consultants who tried to blemish Herbert by trashing lobbyists: Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah (thumbs in my ears, fingers waving, tongue out).

Webb: In retrospect, Herbert, one of Utah’s most conservative governors (while still being sensible and practical), was probably never vulnerable. He enjoys a deep reservoir of goodwill. But the 55-45 delegate vote win in convention for Jonathan Johnson was a wakeup call. Post-convention, the governor ran a strong, hardworking, positive campaign, showcasing a diversity of endorsements.

Johnson never really introduced himself to Utah voters. They mostly saw negative ads on Common Core and fundraising — not big issues to most Republican voters. Johnson couldn’t even turn hardcore conservatives against Herbert.

Besides showing that delegates are dramatically out-of-touch with most Republican voters, the election also demonstrated the clear-thinking, common sense of Republican voters.

Some primary election candidates gathered signatures to get on the ballot as allowed by Count My Vote (CMV)/SB54. How did they fare and what is CMV’s future?

Webb: Despite Republican Party lawsuits, confusion and opposition, numerous candidates gathered signatures this election cycle. The primary election showed voters don’t care how a candidate gets on the ballot. Herbert gathered signatures and it was not a factor in his primary race, despite Johnson making it a big issue in the convention and vowing to repeal SB54.

The one race where right-wing anti-CMV activists made signature-gathering a key issue was Sen. Curt Bramble’s primary race — and Bramble won. The party insiders who could see their monopoly slipping away threw everything they had at Bramble, but he pulled out a victory.

So the fear of delegates is gone. The political process is now open to a whole range of moderate Republicans who can run for office without having to pander to delegates. Legislators can support or oppose legislation without fear of upsetting delegates. Candidates can gather signatures to get on the ballot without worrying about right-wing backlash. We will now have more primaries, more choices and better public policy.

Pignanelli: I differ from LaVarr and hold the primary election was a mixed bag for CMV. Reformers were pleased SB54 author Sen. Curt Bramble defeated Chris Herrod in a tough battle — where CMV was a major issue. But many incumbents were able to fend off challengers who were on the ballot only through signatures. These results will promote a reassessment of CMV by legislators. However, some incumbents will enjoy the potential of a failsafe mechanism should their voting habits irritate delegates. The bottom line is that Tuesday's results did not offer a final resolution on the CMV tug-of-war.

What do the primary results reveal for the general election? 

Pignanelli: Most politicos correctly predicted Misty Snow would win the Democratic Party Senate primary. The country’s first transgendered nominee of a major party, she will face Sen. Mike Lee. Expect additional media attention on this race.

Many experts are predicting Donald Trump may dampen turnout by Republicans in the general election thereby offering unprecedented opportunities for Utah Democrats. Yet, despite the frustration with the presumptive nominee, Republicans participated well in their primary. But further outrageous outbursts from the billionaire could prevent replication in November. A muzzle for the top of the ticket may be the best weapon for the Utah GOP.

Webb: Misty Snow and Bernie Sanders, the new faces of the Utah Democratic Party, show how far left Utah Democrats have drifted. I’m surprised Mormon-Democrat Doug Owens could even get nominated among the wacky leftists/socialists that comprise the Utah Democratic Party.

Herbert, with such strong support, has a great opportunity in the general election. I hope he will lay out an aggressive, ambitious public policy vision and agenda that will take Utah to the next level, especially make Utah a top 10 education state. He can campaign hard on that agenda, and a big November win gives him a strong mandate to fulfill the agenda in his final term in office.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Primary election results and what politicos will be watching

Tuesday’s primary election will be historic. It is the first time candidates could choose their path to the primary ballot, either by gathering signatures or by using the caucus/convention process — or both. Further, most Utahns will be voting by mail, another first. This increases interest in primary results.

Is the primary election a major test for the new nomination process? What else will politicos be watching for in election results?

Pignanelli: "American youth attributes much more importance to arriving at driver's license age than at voting age.” — Marshall McLuhan

The fabulous news is for several hours on Wednesday, Utahns will have something to digest other than the disgusting offal of the presidential election. Political nerds — like us — eagerly await dissecting the election results. Intelligent, well-balanced humans (aka our readers) should consider the following when reviewing Tuesday’s outcomes:

The gubernatorial primary is a referendum whether Republicans want to continue the governor's leadership style or choose a different direction. Secondly, this is a choice between a candidate who obtained signatures from the new nomination process and one that stuck to the traditional delegate/convention system. Third, will mail balloting in most counties prompt an increase in turnout?

Fourth, an increase in primary participation over prior years could signal that despite frustration with Donald Trump, Republicans are willing to truck to the polls, or at least to the kitchen table, to complete the ballot. This could be a big deal.

Finally, success by Republican candidates who chose the signature process will not bring the Apocalypse. So GOP leaders must face the reality that further consternation about Count My Vote (CMV) is fruitless.

Webb: The new nomination process has already been highly successful. Even in the face of aggressive Republican Party opposition, lawsuits, and a great deal of intimidation and confusion, many dozens of candidates gathered signatures, and many of them — like Sen. Mike Lee — are already party nominees.

On Tuesday, thanks to the option to gather signatures to get on the ballot, a lot more voters will have real primary election choices, including in the 3rd Congressional District, where Chia-Chi Teng ran a feisty race against Rep. Jason Chaffetz (and spent half a million dollars of his own money to do it). Teng won’t win, but he’s given voters a choice that wouldn’t exist without the option to gather signatures.

What primary races should we be watching to see the impact of SB54/Count My Vote?

Pignanelli: The media and politicos are watching two Senate races that are a test on the CMV issue. Provo State Sen. Curt Bramble crafted the compromise legislation implementing the signature nomination process. He is facing a strong challenge from former Rep. Christopher Herrod who is leveraging Utah County Republican officials’ hatred of CMV.

The race between Rep. Richard Cunningham and Sen. Lincoln Fillmore is also on the radar. Fillmore was chosen twice by delegates to replace a vacancy in a state Senate seat and then for the primary ballot. Cunningham easily secured the petition signatures for a primary spot. So this is a classic struggle for opposing sides of the CMV issue.

Webb: The gubernatorial contest matters a great deal. Jonathan Johnson is the biggest threat to Count My Vote because he has pledged to repeal SB54 and destroy the Count My Vote movement (for which I have been a volunteer). Gov. Gary Herbert signed SB54 into law. That establishes a very clear contrast.

Utah County GOP leaders have shunned and attacked their own Republican candidates who gathered signatures, so races worth watching include: Mike Brenny (signature gatherer) vs. Cory Malloy; Dan Hemmert (signature gatherer) vs. Morgan Philpot; Xani Haynie (signature gatherer) vs. Brian Greene(incumbent); and Rick Moore (signature gatherer) vs. Marc Roberts (incumbent). Also telling will be Caitlin Gochnour (signature gatherer) vs. Jim Harvey in the Weber County Commission race.

Will the primary results offer insight into general election races in November and perhaps in future years?

Pignanelli: Democrats and Republicans will analyze turnout as a potential level of interest for the general election. Tactics used to push return of mail ballots will be examined and refined. Further, the results will provide guidance to future candidates deciding between the signature or delegate process for nomination. The methods applied — and lessons learned — in this unprecedented primary will be replicated for years.

Webb: Count My Vote has sent a clear message that mainstream Utah leaders are finally willing to put up a fight and support mainstream candidates. Win or lose, that matters in future elections. Former Gov. Mike Leavitt even campaigned door-to-door with signature-gathering candidates. Mass mailings were sent to targeted district voters.

Additionally, this election signifies a new era in Utah politics. The delegate cartel has been smashed. The party machine controlling the nomination process is overturned. No longer does a small group of delegates determine the fate of our elected leaders. Politicians can be responsible and accountable to all party voters and citizens without having to worry about a small group of powerful insiders.

This is real, fundamental political reform that will be good for future elections and especially for the making of public policy in Utah.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Updating an old column to preserve print journalism

Pignanelli & Webb: We’re worried about the decline of printed newspapers. And we’ve been told that names sell newspapers. So it’s time to update an old column in an effort to preserve print journalism, the First Amendment, the American Way, Utah’s oldest newspaper, lining for birdcages (with our photo as bull’s-eye) — and our jobs as columnists.

So, to win the name-dropping sweepstakes:

Gary Herbert: Polls show he’s cruising to the Republican nomination and re-election to a second full term. Only question is whether his primary election opponent, Jonathan Johnson, can generate the world’s greatest ground game and turn out enough people who don’t like Herbert. There aren’t very many of them.

Jonathan Johnson: Tough to run to the right of a popular conservative incumbent in a good economy.

Orrin Hatch: Speculation mounts about a 2018 run for the old political warhorse. May depend on 2016 election outcomes. Many think no way.

Mike Leavitt: Active campaigning for Count My Vote shows he has plenty of political fight left in him.

Mike Lee: His refusal to endorse Trump — brilliant or shortsighted? (But we are proud of him.)

Younger Republican prospects monitoring major race opportunities: Derek Miller, Spencer Cox, John Curtis, Sophia DiCaro, Spencer P. Eccles, Jeff Edwards, Natalie Gochnour, Justin Harding, Deidre Henderson, Matt Holland, Kirk Jowers, Dan Liljenquist, Boyd Matheson, Jason Perry, Randy Shumway, Thomas Wright, Jeremy Peterson, Mike Schultz, Dean Sanpei, John Knotwell, Keith Grover, Jon Stanard, Keven Stratton, Robert Spendlove, Steve Eliason, Kim Coleman, Mike McKell, Marc Roberts.

Jim Matheson/Pat Jones: Dream ticket for 2020 governor/lieutenant governor?

Rob Bishop: Staying his low-key self, but emerging as a significant House leader running Natural Resources. Excellent effort on the Public Lands Initiative.

Mitt Romney: By vigorously attacking Trump, he provides a lot of cover for mainstream Republicans to speak up when they disagree with the demagogue. He has a bully pulpit, so expect him to continue to be vocal.

Greg Hughes: A guy on a mission who isn’t afraid to take on big projects. But why is he supporting Trump?!?

House Majority Leader Jim Dunnigan and Whip Francis Gibson, working hard to keep their caucus harmless from a Trump implosion.

Peter Corroon: Enjoying the gift of Trump in hopes his Democratic Party can win a congressional seat and a few extra legislative seats this year.

Jon Huntsman, Jr.: Biding his time ... biding his time ... waiting to see how the political winds shift post-Trump. And maybe a cabinet position in the nearer future.

Paul Huntsman: The Huntsman no one knew. We all know him now as publisher of the Salt Lake Tribune.

James Evans: Can he make peace with the party mainstream and repair deep GOP schisms? Not likely. He continues to push party factions further apart as chief sorcerer defending the false political religion of caucus/convention.

Jason Chaffetz: Relishing his role as top congressional watchdog barking at the Obama administration — and a strong contender for the Senate in 2018 or the governorship in 2020.

Wayne Niederhauser: Cool, calm, state Senate leadership. Committed to good public policy that prepares Utah for tremendous growth.

Senate Majority Leader Ralph Okerlund, Whips Stuart Adams and Pete Knudson: Will new senators vote to change their ranks?

Chris Stewart: Still not well known, but making a name for himself in military and foreign intelligence circles. His bones are quite mainstream.

Gail Miller: Demonstrated she’s willing to mix it up in politics as a key supporter of Count My Vote, as well as engaging in tough downtown homeless issues.

Mia Love: To her credit, hasn’t showboated or taken undue advantage of myriad media opportunities. Tackles tough issues as a first-termer. But faces competitive re-election bid.

Michael Weinholtz, Jonathan Swinton, Misty Snow, Peter Clemens, Charlene Albarran, Stephen Tyron: All good Democratic knights of La Mancha tilting at gubernatorial and statewide political windmills with slight chance of success.

County officials Kerry Gibson, Mike Jensen, Aimee Newton, Richard Snelgrove and Chris Robinson are worth watching for higher political office.

Curt Bramble: Departs presidency of National Conference of State Legislatures. The next target for his energies?

Evan Vickers: The next voice of rural Utah?

Minority Leader Brian King offers a strident but articulate loyal opposition.

Doug Owens: Will the second run be the charm? Survey research shows he has a decent chance in the 4th District.

Brad Wilson: Substantive lawmaker taking on some big legislative initiatives, especially the Point of the Mountain Project. His Co-chairman Chris Conabeeadds important private-sector dimension.

Ben McAdams: Should cruise to re-election in Salt Lake County, after which speculation will mount for a 2020 gubernatorial campaign.

Scott Anderson: Tries to stay out of limelight, but tough when involved in every big thing happening.

Don Peay: Can the behind-the-scenes power broker pull it off for Trump in Utah?

There. We may have established a new “mentioning” record. Sorry if we missed anyone. If we sell a few extra papers maybe Keith McMullin, Paul Edwards, Lynn Chapman and Scott Taylor will keep this column going for a while.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Wrestling with old and familiar topics in politics

An old adage says there’s never anything new in politics. That’s true, but it doesn’t stop us from wrestling with old and familiar topics.

As anyone but a hermit knows, presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump continually says outrageous things that would doom other candidates. His questioning of a judge’s fairness because of his Mexican heritage has caused great alarm among national Republicans. How should Utah politicos deal with this potential disaster?

Pignanelli: “In this election the vote should not be for the lesser of two evils, rather a vote against the more evil of the two lessers.” — Bruce Baird, prominent Utah attorney and veteran political activist

National Republican leaders are demonstrating a unique talent when queried by the media about Trump. While excruciatingly squeezing muscles in their foreheads, eye sockets, jaws, hands and other undisclosed places, they carefully and deliberately articulate disgust with Trump’s recent infamous slander while mumbling commitment to his candidacy. This often-repeated event last week would be amusing if it wasn’t so painful to observe.

This is the Trump blunder that will not disappear — it is too outrageous. Utah Trumpeters must consider how to inform friends, neighbors and colleagues of Mexican heritage about their presidential preference without causing personal offense. Not easy.

Local Republican officials can avoid the physical torture their national colleagues are enduring, because few Utahns want them to express any sentiment for the billionaire. Further, half the membership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is Hispanic and many will hope their prominent Utah brothers and sisters construct significant distance from Trump.

So I generously offer the following solution to my GOP friends when quizzed about the “Orange One.” First perform a major eye roll followed by a loud exhale. (This is when Italian body animation really pays dividends.) Second, state with conviction you abhor almost everything about the man. Conclude with the emphatic statement that you will hold true to your conservative principles at the ballot box. If that doesn’t work, tell your audience you carry the Zika virus. They will forget everything else while running away.

Webb: Maybe it’s just a collective bad dream. Perhaps we could get in a time machine, go back 15 or 16 months, put Trump and Hillary Clinton under house arrest at one of Trump’s resorts where they would star in a special edition Bachelor/Bachelorette/Celebrity Apprentice reality TV show, and start this whole nomination thing over again (without them).

Daydreaming aside, the two terribly flawed candidates at the top of the ticket are simply going to cancel each other out as far as any impact on Utah races. In fact, their brawl is going to be so personal and dirty that we’re all going to sit back in shocked awe, eyes averted, as they crawl through the gutter slime. Utah politicians should just stay as far away as possible.

Gov. Gary Herbert is leading in the polls. However, he faces a spirited challenge from Jonathan Johnson for the Republican nomination. Does Johnson have some momentum with the primary election a little more than two weeks away?

Pignanelli: There is whispering among politicos Johnson is riding a small wave of momentum among ultraconservatives. Utah political history provides an interesting guide. Congressional Republican incumbents, who did not capture a majority in their convention, were defeated in the primary. However, the last time Utahns deprived a governor of re-election was 1956.

Webb: On paper, Herbert should easily win. The only question is how good a ground game the Johnson campaign has put together to get archconservatives to the polls in what might be a relatively low-turnout primary.

Some Republicans have told me they’ve received calls from a supposed polling firm. The caller makes negative statements about Herbert, then asks if the respondent will support Johnson. The respondent then gets follow-up communications encouraging him or her to vote for Johnson.

With Herbert’s big lead and continued popularity, he will be very difficult to beat, even if Johnson puts a lot of money into such tactics. But I expect the race will tighten, with Herbert ultimately prevailing.

The Republican Party is continuing its battle against SB 54 — the Count My Vote compromise legislation allowing candidates to gather signatures to get on the primary ballot. Could a bus be filled with those Utahns who think this is a good idea?

Pignanelli: If, and only if, every candidate who exclusively relied on signatures for placement on the primary ballot loses, will the GOP litigants enjoy any real support. Practical Utah Republicans suffer bigger concerns (aka Trump).

Webb: Some Republican Party leaders at both state and county levels are alienating good Republicans, shrinking the tent, damaging fundraising, and generally looking small-minded, elitist, exclusionary and foolish. Other than that, these Republican leaders are brilliant.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Pignanelli and Webb: Rigged election system, governor's race and Libertarians

After a week of sunshine, clear skies and warming temperatures, it can be hard for Utahns to focus on politics. Because we are one-dimensional, we insist on dragging readers back to depressing reality.

Some 59 percent of Utahns agree with Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders that the U.S. election system is “rigged,” according to a recent UtahPolicy.com poll. Is the system really rigged, or is this just a perception?

Pignanelli: “The system is rigged. It is designed to be rigged.” — Matt Dowd, ABC News

Yes, the nomination system is stacked against outsiders — but that is an important feature in American politics. Our beloved country cannot allow insurgent misfits — i.e. socialists and television reality stars — to capture the presidential nomination of major political parties.

Well, that was the hope.

Politics is just like anything else important in life — business, sports, romance, etc. Success in all these endeavors is dependent upon tenacity, timing, talent, toughness and temerity (Yes, I am proud of this alliteration.). For those who do not understand these essential requirements, the system seems fixed. But the reality is American presidential elections, including the nomination process, is a meat grinder accessible to those who possess all the necessary ingredients.

Democracy is what occurs on Election Day. Everything else is in politics is fair game for manipulation, strong-arming and patronizing. The parties have the right to construct any nonviolent, non-discriminatory, method to determine nominees. Yet, Democrats and Republicans have made the process very inclusive with primaries, especially when compared to the infamous back door dealings of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

The current system is lightly and appropriately rigged to advance insiders (i.e. Clinton, barely) but to allow clever outsiders (i.e. Obama, Trump).

Webb: Of course, in this cynical era of anger and distrust, most people agree with Trump and Sanders that the system is rigged. Yet Trump has emerged victorious, and Sanders has far exceeded expectations in the very system they criticize.

The “rigged” argument centers on how much influence “insiders” (like elected officials and party leaders) should have, versus how much the process should be democratized among all voters. The Democrats have tilted toward insider influence by giving Democratic leaders “superdelegate” status, thinking those insiders will prevent the masses from nominating a populist (like Sanders) who can’t win in the general election.

Republicans got rid of superdelegates some time ago. That gives the party base and political activists extra influence, especially in caucus states. If Republicans still had a large number of superdelegates, Trump may not be the nominee.

The crazy-quilt array of nomination processes and procedures among the various states can also be confusing, along with tortuous battles over party rules and procedures. Yes, the political process is inconsistent and rough-and-tumble. But the unprepared get weeded out.

If we were to create a sensible, simple, national primary system where the rules are the same everywhere, it would be a big blow to federalism and state control. Candidates would stop paying attention to individual states. The process isn’t perfect and could use some reforms, but it’s better than the alternatives.

The governor’s race took an interesting turn with the entry of SuperPAC FreedomWorks into the fray in behalf of Jonathan Johnson. Will this have an impact?

Pignanelli: Campaign veterans are wondering why this national organization waited until late May to launch its attacks against Gov. Gary Herbert. The GOP state convention would have been a natural launching pad for these efforts. Further, FreedomWorks has a mixed scorecard in Utah. It helped elevate Mike Lee to the U.S. Senate, but could not defeat Orrin Hatch. Politicos believe Herbert will be equally impervious to these attacks.

Webb: FreedomWorks will hurt, not help, Johnson. It will appeal only to right-wing voters already likely to vote for Johnson. Why a national conservative organization would attack one of the top two or three most conservative governors in the nation is way beyond me (unless their real goal is to raise money). Maybe they ought to find a liberal to attack. We don’t need a D.C.-based special interest group telling us how to vote in Utah.

For the first time in political history, the Libertarian Party is receiving attention as a real alternative to the mainstream candidates. Will Utahns consider a Libertarian in 2016?

Pignanelli: America’s strongest third-party has a real opportunity this election. But it needs to abandon the weird stuff to gain traction. At the national convention, delegates discussed whether America should have entered both world wars, and one speaker stripped on stage. Fortunately, the adults prevailed and selected two prominent governors for their ticket — Gary Johnson(New Mexico) and William Weld (Massachusetts). Maintaining a mature non-bizarre presence will attract a larger percentage of Americans … and Utahns.

Webb: A vote for a Libertarian candidate is a wasted vote. If I refuse to vote for Trump or Hillary Clinton, I’d at least want to write in someone I’d like to see as president, like Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan. Johnson and Weld are fringe candidates who would weaken the military and move America toward isolationism.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Suggested statements for political warriors to bring buzz

Memorial Day weekend is the traditional kickoff for candidates in primary elections to focus with intensity on targeted voters, and for other campaigns to finalize their general election strategies (actually, we just made that up, but it sounds good). Many candidates will use the same old, boring, unappealing messaging. As a public service to our political warriors engaged in election battles, we offer suggestions for statements that will surely capture attention.

Gov. Gary Herbert and Lt. Gov. Spencer Cox: "You know what? We really must be doing a great job! 8,000 billboards can't be wrong.”

GOP gubernatorial challengers Jonathan Johnson and Robyn Bagley: "Vote Johnson/Bagley. Supported by the biggest, baddest, right-wing SuperPAC in the country. Blame Freedom Works for any negative ads and increased pandering to the far-right.”

Democratic governor/lieutenant governor candidates Mike Weinholtz and Kim Bowman:“Hey, we are hip, progressive, and tech savvy — the cool candidates loved by the wine-and-cheese crowd. We’re fine being sacrificial lambs as long as it’s grass-fed.”

Third District Congressman Jason Chaffetz: “Jason Chaffetz. Fighting for Utah. Harassing Hillary. Haranguing federal bureaucrats. Shortening your wait time in TSA lines. You are welcome.”

U.S. Sen. Mike Lee: "How times change. Join the Utah political establishment in sending Mike Lee back to Washington."

Utah State Auditor John Dougall: “Re-elect Frugal Dougall in 2016. The slogan worked in 2012 and I'm too cheap to find a new one. So remember it or I’ll audit your grandmother!"

Third District GOP candidate Chia-Chi Teng: “You don’t know me, but I’m the guy running those radio ads against Chaffetz. Sure, there’s not much space to the right of Chaffetz, but I’m going to own it!”

Democratic U.S. Senate candidates Misty K. Snow and Jonathan Swinton: “Please. Please. Sure, the odds are slim against Sen. Lee. But we know at least three voters in the lower Avenues who will support a Democrat. Thank you.”

Fourth District Congresswoman Mia Love: "Mia played nice in the last election. This year, if Owens gets close, you’re going to see Mama Bear Mia!"

Fourth District Democratic congressional candidate Doug Owens: "Don't pay attention to Owens’ party affiliation. He certainly does not."

Second District Congressman Chris Stewart:"Support Chris Stewart — the congressman you don’t know. Given the unpopularity of Congress, there’s no better qualification."

Second District Democratic congressional candidate Charlene Alberran: "Charlene is a leader. Charlene is a high-tech trendsetter. Charlene was the first candidate with an electronic billboard.”

Utah Democrats: “Trump. Trump. Trump. Trump. Trump. Trump. You may not like Hillary, but she is not Trump. By the way, Trump, Trump, Trump and Trump.”

Utah Republicans: “Trump? Who’s Trump? In Utah, all politics are local."

First District Congressman Rob Bishop: "What?! There is another election? So soon? It’s time to roll out the non-campaign, raise no money, make no campaign appearances, and still win going away.”

Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams: "Mayor Gentle Ben. The safe, non-crazy, rational Democrat endorsed by Republican bigwigs. Vote for Ben because you really want to see that gubernatorial matchup in four years between McAdams and Cox!"

Salt Lake County mayor challenger David Robinson: "Dave Robinson — the efficient candidate who reused his signs, literature and buttons from his race for Salt Lake City mayor last year."

State Sen. Curt Bramble: "Vote Bramble. Without him state government will collapse and the Capitol will crumble. Do not risk it."

Former state Rep. Christopher Herrod and challenger to Bramble: "Vote against Bramble because he welcomed more Utahns into the political process by sponsoring SB54! He diminished the power of party machine insiders like me! Wait a minute, that was a great message to delegates, but maybe it needs updating.”

House Minority Leader Brian King: "Many Republicans support Democrat Brian. They have to — he is unopposed."

State Sen. Jim Dabakis: “Dabakis in 2016. Your proud progressive sticking it to Republicans, conservatives, the Deseret News, the Utah Establishment, BYU, the LDS Church and anyone else on his enemies list. He will not be silenced! And please send money.” (Note: Dabakis does not have a race this cycle, but he campaigns anyway.)

Frank Pignanelli and LaVarr Webb: "Please read Pig/Webb each week and send us suggestions for future columns. We have to up our game now that the Tribune might actually survive.”

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: The 'bathroom issue' and others affecting Utah elections

Spring seems to have finally arrived, bringing flowers, bright clothing … and new issues for politicos. We tiptoe through the political tulips.

Last week, the U.S. Justice Department ordered all public school districts to ensure a “safe and discrimination-free environment” by allowing self-identified transgender students to use whatever bathrooms and locker rooms they wish. This friendly “guidance” came with some sharp teeth: Comply or lose federal funding. A firestorm erupted across the country, with heated responses from conservative and liberal politicians. Will the “bathroom issue” impact Utah elections?

Pignanelli: “Does politics have to be injected into everything?” — Sargent Shriver

I strive to be a sunny, cheery optimist (except when deprived of wine and meatballs) and view this debate as another indication that 21st-century American society is dynamic and thriving. Strong emotions are driving vigorous discussions of constitutional rights and community values on a topic most never considered until a few months ago.

North Carolina was wrong and its insensitivity is appropriately rewarded with boycotts and protests. Other government entities witnessed the controversy, and properly approached the issue with caution.

Unfortunately, the opportunity for a "teaching moment" for the entire country was lost by the expediency of the Department of Justice action. The Obama administration should have initiated a national discussion, prompting understanding of all concerns while providing the necessary guidance to help these younger citizens. Instead, the federal government was easily painted as a cold-hearted bully imposing its will without deference to locals.

Some candidates will try to use the DOJ demand as a tool in their campaign arsenal. This too is unfortunate as transgender Utahns deserve better. The good news is that the rational response from the LDS Church and many state leaders will diminish much of the harmful rhetoric.

Webb: This directive is outrageous in many way, from obliterating any semblance of balanced federalism in this nation, to taking leave of common sense when local, case-by-case solutions can readily be found without ham-handed pressure from the feds. This is the perfect caricature of a heavy-handed, overbearing, overreaching, one-size-fits-all, top-down, bureaucratic federal government imposing a solution for a rare problem that can be solved by caring local leaders.

The issue provides Republican candidates new ammunition to fire at the federal government. To eliminate federal bribery and coercion using tax dollars, some future Republican president and Republican Congress must leave education tax dollars in the states, rather than sending the money to Washington, only to have a much diminished amount returned to the states with strings attached.

Some Republican primary candidates are facing stiff opposition because they used the Count My Vote signature-gathering process to secure a ballot spot. Will they or the caucus/convention purists prevail?

Pignanelli: For politicos, this is fascinating. The Republican primary is devoid of the motivation a presidential preference election provides, threatening a lower turnout. So the normally minimal issue of how a candidate got on the primary ballot could be significant this year, especially in Utah County, which boasts many activists (a kind description) concerned about preserving the delegate/convention system. The potential of higher voter turnout through mail in ballots in other larger counties may counter these purists.

On primary election night, the future of Count My Vote will be substantially determined by the results.

Webb: In a few cases, including the gubernatorial race, the June 28 Republican primary election is, in part, a referendum on Count My Vote. Those who hate opening the election process to all voters are frantically trying to defeat candidates who gathered signatures.

These races pit mainstream conservative candidates who want to broaden political participation against party insider candidates determined to retain political power within the party machine and the caucus/convention system. In Utah County, the Republican Party itself is trying to shrink the Republican tent by campaigning against Republican legislative candidates who didn’t come through the caucus/convention system. It is a sad commentary on today’s Republican Party that candidates who want to be accountable to all Republican voters, not just the party delegate insiders, are under attack by their own party.

In the gubernatorial primary, Jonathan Johnson has run hard against Gov. Gary Herbert because Herbert gathered signatures. Johnson is probably the single biggest long-term threat to Count My Vote. If he becomes governor, he will, no doubt, attempt to reverse all the progress Count My Vote has made to expand voter participation. He will return political control to the delegates.

Mainstream Republican voters should ask: Which candidates want to encourage broad political participation? Which candidates want to keep political power in the hands of a relatively few party insiders? Please vote for the candidates who want every vote to count.

The Legislature held a very quick special session to fund education items vetoed by the governor. Will this have any impact on the gubernatorial contest?

Pignanelli: Political insiders are weighing any strategic advantage the governor gained by demonstrating executive leadership, but possibly irritating legislators, with the vetoes. Most of the public is confused or unaware as to the controversy on the education items. Therefore, minimal impact.

Webb: The session cleaned up some disagreements between the Legislature and the executive branch, sent a lengthy resolution to the Obama administration opposing a Bears Ears national monument, and resulted in good public policy.

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Bears Ears, Donald Trump and a rocky start

So much to write about. So little space. Someone (Frank?) should lobby the Legislature to pass a law giving Pig/Webb more column inches. Here are three topics getting plenty of buzz.

Drama is brewing on public lands in Utah: Will President Obama declare a Bears Ears National Monument? Or will Rep. Rob Bishop get his Public Lands Initiative (PLI) through Congress?

Pignanelli: "The most basic decision a modern politician must make is whether to be aggressive or conciliatory." — Dick Morris

Newsflash: Presidential campaign politics impact the declaration of national monuments in Utah. In 1996, with only 24 hours notice to Utah’s governor and congressional delegation, President Bill Clintondeclared 1,880,461 acres as protected wilderness in the Grand Staircase-Escalante region. Most politicos concurred the president's hurried tactic secured environmental support in the upcoming election.

The Bears Ears designation is subject to similar forces. If Hillary Clinton remains competitive with Donald Trump in Utah, there will be less incentive to jeopardize this potential windfall. However, should Clinton’s unpopularity re-emerge, then Obama will view any action as risk-free. On the other hand (there are at least three hands in political complications), Obama cares about his legacy. Placing the controversial area in wilderness solidifies him as an environmental leader. Conversely, Obama may not want to be forever remembered for derailing an exhaustive effort to compromise on an explosive issue. The politics are conflicting.

Webb: The PLI would better protect the environment and a whole lot more land than a Bears Ears designation by the president. Bishop, Rep. Jason Chaffetz and other members of Congress need to keep working with reasonable conservation groups to get a bill that can pass Congress and be signed by the president.

This is too important to fail. If PLI falls apart and the president designates Bears Ears, it will create a firestorm of anger and blow up any semblance of federal-state cooperation on public lands. The backlash against the federal government and environmental groups will be immense and the rise of radical groups will be fueled.

Both sides should tone down the rhetoric. Some conservationists have told me they have a hard time thinking Bishop, other members of Congress, and some state leaders are negotiating in good faith when on one hand they seek compromise on PLI, but on the other they demand state takeover of most federal land and criticize every federal environmental regulation. Great distrust exists on both sides.

We need to keep working on PLI. Fight through the differences. Bishop and his colleagues have done a terrific amount of excellent work. The proposal has many elements that will benefit Utah forever. It would be a shame to see it fail.

Should Utah Republicans follow the example of former Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. and endorse Donald Trump, or play the Paul Ryan waiting game and see how Trump conducts himself?

Pignanelli: Speaker Ryan possesses integrity, deep intelligence and the character to apologize when he missteps. A person of this stature could not immediately endorse Trump. Clueless to the intellectual tradition of conservatism, Trump is equally ignorant of the many new-wave proposals promulgated by Ryan for government reform. Also, Ryan is providing protection for his House colleagues to respond to this impactful development.

Huntsman, without the shackles of office, endorsed Trump's ability to bring new voters in the party without expressing support for his bizarre platform. Huntsman could be outlining a shrewd direction for Republicans — Trump’s populism with Ryan's vision. Waiting for the development of a pragmatic course is the safest route for Utah politicians. Otherwise an immediate endorsement of Trump begs the awful question "So you support what he espouses?”

Webb: Trump is going to win the Republican nomination fair and square. He got the votes and won the delegates. But, personally, I feel no need to jump on the Trump bandwagon just because he’s the nominee. I will wait and evaluate his policy positions as he provides more details before the general election. (Assuming he is capable of articulating thoughtful policy positions.)

However, top elected officials and candidates, especially those in Congress and especially those running for re-election, are in the hot seat because their political security may be tied to his. Voters want to know if they support Trump. Candidates want to avoid offending either side. Ryan and other congressional leaders will follow Sen. Orrin Hatch in supporting Trump. They really have no choice but to endorse the party nominee.

Huntsman obviously wants to stay relevant and involved, and the Trump horse seems the best to ride (all the way to secretary of state?). Let’s see if he raises money for Trump. Huntsman has also had a positive relationship with Hillary Clinton, so he could win no matter who’s in the White House.

Salt Lake City Mayor Jackie Biskupski has had a bit of a rocky (no pun intended) start. What’s going on between her and the City Council

Pignanelli: The wrestle between the council and mayor is not surprising. She was elected with a specific mandate — redirect her office to focus on the objectives that engaged every successful metropolis for 5,000 years — providing safety, basic services and economic development. But if city leaders need a vision, I hereby present a simple goal that achieves much: remove the bicycle lanes on 300 South.

Webb: Biskupski is a bit standoffish. She has her own style. But give her some time. Let her get her people in place. She’s been in office only five months. The city needs great leadership and vision to maintain its momentum and take it to the next level. Biskupski has that potential.