NEWS & EVENTS
Mitt Romney thinks Americans are in denial. What does this mean for America — and his career?
Mitt Romney called out Americans for our lack of action on critical issues. Will his method be effective, or has he alienated too many?
By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
On July 4, the prestigious Atlantic magazine published an article, “America is in Denial,” by Mitt Romney. Because he is Utah’s junior senator, a former Republican presidential nominee and one of the better-known members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, his thought-provoking essay deserves some analysis — especially because he was probably talking about us.
Romney’s article captured plenty of local and national attention. He was critical of Americans in general, and especially partisan Democrats and Republicans, accusing pretty much all of us of being in denial with our “blithe dismissal of potentially cataclysmic threats,” including debt, immigration and global warming. Joseph Biden, Donald Trump and Congress were special targets of his wrath. He hopes for a future president who can unite the country. Until then, all of us must “grasp the mantle of leadership.” Is he correct, or a little too harsh?
Pignanelli: “Americans learn only from catastrophe and not from experience.” — Theodore Roosevelt
Romney’s admonitions mirror lectures children receive from parents: Do not procrastinate because that just makes the task harder. The senator, an accomplished former businessman and governor who never shied from challenges, lists realistic concerns that need response.
But Americans have always been in denial with a “natural inclination toward wishful thinking.” Unrealistic is a kind description of our founders who gambled that a motley crew of colonial farmers could defeat the world’s largest military and economic power. Other examples include noninterventionists in both political parties who were borderline irresponsible by ignoring foreign events that led to both world wars.
Polls indicate that most Americans comprehend the major issues that confront them and their children. But we are suspicious of officials demanding changes to our lifestyle until necessary. Understanding this national character trait, Romney correctly illustrates “a crisis can shake the public consciousness.”
History documents that once Americans decide action is needed, nothing stops us. Yet, the momentum must be organic and percolating from the average citizen. This is how all the great movements of our country succeeded (i.e. abolitionism, Prohibition, women’s suffrage, civil rights, etc.) Great leaders who can point the way out of our current mess are forthcoming, but only because hardy followers are ready.
Although Romney’s counseling is important, we must remember that all parents were once children who procrastinated.
Webb: I just hope the lawns at the various Romney mansions are brown and dead. Otherwise, someone is going to look hypocritical.
I like Sen. Romney. I think he’s mostly an effective senator who focuses on serious issues and gets things done. And I don’t mind being chewed out by him. He’s right that I don’t do enough to solve climate change, the immigration crisis and the burgeoning federal debt. After all, in the winter I feed my cows alfalfa, one of those “water-thirsty crops” Romney decries. And we get a lot of those evil “daily Amazon deliveries.” I’m glad my wife joins me in our denialship.
Romney is correct that the nation’s isn’t facing up to some serious problems. But it’s never a good idea for a politician, especially a wealthy aristocratic one, who is often called elitist, to get up on his high horse and lecture American citizens like they are naughty children. It never works.
Romney’s essay reminded me of Jimmy Carter’s famous “malaise” speech in 1979 during a serious energy crisis. Carter lamented that Americans showed a “crisis of confidence” that “strikes at the very heart and soul of our national will,” threatening to “destroy the social and political fabric of America.” He said Americans “worship self-indulgence and consumption.” He cited a litany of serious problems and asked Americans to sacrifice more.
The very next year, Carter lost in a landslide to Ronald Reagan, who saw a “shining city on a hill” instead of insurmountable problems. Today, Romney sees a “national malady of denial, deceit and distrust.”
Romney’s probably right that we won’t solve those big problems until we’re forced to. That’s sorta the way we do things, especially at the federal level. In the meantime, my pocketbook would vote for fewer of those Amazon deliveries.
Romney‘s approval rating dramatically increased in the last year. But he has yet to declare intentions for reelection. Is this article a sounding board for 2024, or the beginning of a farewell?
Pignanelli: Most Utah senators have fostered controversy in some form, and Romney is no exception. The rebound in approval ratings reflects a respect for his willingness to undertake tough decisions. Recent actions (i.e. fundraisers, this article) indicate he is in the contemplative mode, possibly weighing midterm election results.
Webb: My best guess is that Romney will seek reelection in 2024 and probably win. But he has made it much harder for himself by alienating many Utah Republicans who still like Trump. I understand Romney’s visceral dislike of Trump. I don’t like Trump either. But I do have a problem with politicians who make no effort to really understand those many millions of hardworking, patriotic, salt-of-the-earth, heartland Americans (many of my neighbors) who do support Trump.
Romney should get out in Utah’s heartland and talk to some small-town folks about why they grow alfalfa and why they support Trump. If those folks had not been ignored, misread and alienated for many years by the elitist, establishment, erudite, politically correct ruling class, Trump would never have been elected.
Misunderstanding heartland Americans is why Democrats are going to get clobbered in November. It’s why Romney will have difficulty in 2024 when he seeks reelection.
What have other members of our congressional delegation had to say about critical issues?
Pignanelli: Sen. Mike Lee is the most prolific while serving in office. He authored several well-written books regarding the Constitution, along with treatises in various publications, that impacted conservative deliberations. Chris Stewart was a well-known writer prior to public service. He and fellow members of Utah’s congressional delegation have all penned op-eds on various issues.
Webb: Utah’s other members of Congress have all written essays on various topics. But because they’re not outwardly anti-Trump, they don’t enjoy the bully media pulpit as does Romney. The traditional media love to provide a forum for Trump-hating Republicans.
On July 4, Independence Day, we celebrate the founding of our great American democracy. Is the state of our nation still celebratory?
Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
This three-day weekend we celebrate the founding of our republic 246 years ago. On July 2, 1776, the Continental Congress proclaimed independence and two days later adopted our beloved Declaration of Independence.
Since then, our nation has endured much, and today faces severe challenges. Your columnists, who have been around not quite since the founding (but close), report on the health of the good old USA in the tumultuous political year of 2022.
A very recent CBS News poll revealed 72% of Americans believe “our democracy is under threat.” This is an astounding result because a majority of every demographic shares this concern. Is the country, and our constitutional principles, in jeopardy? Should we be celebrating or grieving this Independence Day?
Pignanelli: “Democracy ... is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder; and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike.” — Plato
I hereby exercise my constitutional right to be patronizing and self-righteous. Citizens who worry our republic is in danger must spend less time absorbing nonsense from left-wing or right-wing cable television doomsayers. Instead, they should dedicate time reading a book, or at least a Wikipedia entry, on the history of this country. This activity will provide the needed perspective.
We are living in a time of extreme partisanship and societal division. There is much rancor in street protests and social media. But this is a condition that plagues every generation. Americans have a heritage of disagreement and discord, while maintaining a functioning government and durable economy. Yelling and screaming are vital signs of a healthy democracy. Quiet is the domain of authoritarian regimes.
The Jan. 6 committee hearings, just like the Watergate investigations, detail horrendous internal attacks that were thwarted from the inside. The heroes of both controversies belonged to the same party of the presidents under scrutiny.
Our republic and constitutional bedrock principles have never been stronger. Innovation and entrepreneurism continue to expand. Witnessing an obnoxious protest, or hearing a ridiculous conspiracy, provides comfort to those who understand America’s legacy and mission. Read a good history book if you have any doubt.
Webb: There is much hand-wringing and conspiracy-mongering on both the far right and the far left. But the left is almost apoplectic over the emergence of a very conservative U.S. Supreme Court and the very likely prospect of being voted out of power in November.
Our country will survive and thrive thanks to the sensible mainstream middle that will pull the political pendulum back to the center if it strays too far left or right.
The biggest danger our country faces is political overreach by victorious partisans. The Democrats, who just barely won the presidency and Congress in 2020, greedily interpreted their narrow win as a landslide mandate to fulfill every arch-liberal dream. They weren’t successful on every issue, thanks to the Senate filibuster rule, but their agenda alienated mainstream Americans and they will pay for it in November.
Then it will be the Republicans’ turn to govern, although they will be constrained for two years by a Democratic president. That may very well be their saving grace. Otherwise, they may mirror the Democrats’ playbook with an arch-conservative agenda that irritates middle America.
As a mainstream conservative, I welcome a Supreme Court with a more originalist approach to constitutional issues. I’m pleased at the prospect of Republicans in control of Congress. I’m gratified that the pendulum is swinging back. It gives me hope for a flourishing America.
However, if Republicans overreach — and there will be great temptation to do so, especially on issues like abortion and immigration — the victory will be short-lived.
Why should Utahns, especially, observe this July 4 anniversary with joy and pride?
Pignanelli: The state’s dominant political party was recently engaged in convention and primary contests for offices large and small. Accusations that some small group of individuals control politics is a fantasy. Local media is not shy in probing, and sometimes unfairly attacking, the powers that be. The minority party performs the same function and does succeed in certain regions of the state.
Our state and local governments consistently receive awards for transparent deliberations and fair elections. Democracy, along with fry sauce and Diet Coke, flourishes in Utah.
Who will win Tuesday’s primary elections in Utah?
This year, Utah’s primary races have been unusually robust. Although logic is rare in politics, a solid rationale does explain the many primaries and the emotional volatility surrounding them
Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
This year’s primary election, which ends Tuesday, has been more intense and active than most past primaries, especially in the top races. We explore why that is the case, make a few predictions and assess what comes next.
There have been more serious challenges and more turmoil in this year’s primary than most we remember. Why is that, and what does it mean about the state of politics in Utah?
Pignanelli: “The gulf that separates Republicans and Democrats sometimes obscures the divisions and diversity of views that exist within both partisan coalitions.” – Pew Foundation
Although logic is rare in politics, a solid rationale does explain the many primaries and the emotional volatility surrounding them. Many political veterans conjecture at least four major political parties exist in our country. There are classic Reagan Republicans, Trump Republicans, Progressive Democrats and slowly diminishing moderate Democrats. A recent Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll revealed among Republican respondents, 51% stated former President Donald Trump best represents them, 42% prefer affiliation with U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney and 8% chose someone else.
The primary skirmishes in Utah reflect the dynamics across the country as forces within the GOP wrangle for control. Challengers are questioning incumbents’ fealty to conservative dogma and oftentimes the former president. However, the local difference is that endorsements by the former president are not dominating political advertisements. Tuesday’s election results will determine the future of the Utah Republican Party.
A handful of Democratic primary legislative contests will also be decided on Tuesday. As in other regions, those candidates are competing for progressive support.
The nation’s 2022 congressional midterms will establish the groundwork for the 2024 presidential contests. Similarly, the upcoming Utah primaries will structure the Republican messaging and candidacies for federal, statewide, congressional and legislative offices in 2024. Hopefully, the results on Wednesday morning will make some sense.
Webb: This year’s political environment is highly volatile, and no politician feels comfortable, even longtime incumbents. With high inflation (especially gas prices), a looming recession, a housing crisis, food insecurity, war in Ukraine and political dysfunction and division, the electorate is highly restless. A lot of angry voters are out there, so it’s a dangerous time for incumbent politicians.
That’s why we’ve seen more serious challenges to Utah’s incumbent members of Congress than in many years. Some challengers are attacking from the right, and some from the left. Incumbents have been forced to raise a lot of money and, for a primary election, they are running a surprising amount of advertising.
Congressmen Blake Moore and John Curtis are fending off primary opponents who argue they are too moderate. Rep. Chris Stewart and Sen. Mike Lee are being criticized for being too far right. Most years, the incumbents would shrug off token opposition. But this year they are taking it seriously enough to air substantial advertising touting their accomplishments and conservative credentials.
Lee likely isn’t in much danger in the primary, despite two good GOP opponents in Becky Edwards and Ally Isom. But Lee needs to position himself properly for the general election against independent Evan McMullin.
Elections are approaching — how will Jan. 6 and gun legislation factor in?
The Jan. 6 Commission hearings have begun, and the Senate just proposed a bipartisan gun legislation bill. How will this affect upcoming elections?
By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
A canary in a coal mine provides an early warning of things to come — usually bad things. A flock of such birds have been flitting around in the last several weeks (with more flying in), indicating trends and influences in national and local politics. We chirp away with our opinions.
The U.S. House of Representatives “Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol” is televising the results of a yearlong investigation. Will this impact the upcoming midterm elections? How will this play out in Utah?
Pignanelli: “People are not going to go to the polls on this (Jan. 6). People are going to vote on inflation, on gas prices.” — Leigh Ann Caldwell, The Washington Post
Political pundits are regaling Americans with comparisons between this committee and the televised hearings of the 1973 Senate Watergate Committee. There are similarities, especially the focus on the potential criminal conduct of a president and his supporters. But the differences are significant as many of the targets no longer hold office.
A deeper historical analysis provides guidance. Two months before the Senate hearings, President Richard Nixon enjoyed an approval rating over 65%. By July the next year it was 24%.
But simply blaming Watergate for the free fall is incorrect. As the Senate Committee was airing proceedings, the country was entering into a crushing two-year recession and a double-digit inflation rate. Nixon already tried price controls and was unable to articulate responses acceptable to Americans. He was blamed for their misery.
In 2022, Democratic strategists are already predicting voters will have economic concerns on their mind, rather than the House committee activities. Further, there will be evidence against many Trump loyalists, but also stories of courage by Republicans refusing directives to void certification of the election. There will be no incumbents, or an entire political party, to blame.
Therefore, the Jan. 6 committee will have limited impact in the near future — except giving me fond memories as a 13-year-old watching the Senate Watergate hearing.
Webb: I have repeatedly expressed my dismay at former President Trump’s cynical claim that the 2020 election was stolen. It surely wasn’t. I also very much hope he won’t run for president again in 2024. I hope he will go away.
That said, Nancy Pelosi and her Jan. 6 investigation with its Hollywood-produced, made-for-TV documentary report is highly partisan and biased. It was tainted from the beginning when Pelosi refused to seat committee members selected by Republican leadership.
There has been no cross-examination or contrary opinions expressed in the presentations. Everything is spun in the most negative way possible for Trump and the most helpful way possible for those obsessed with hatred toward him. They’ve ended up with something like left-wing documentary maker Michael Moore would produce. It’s hardly objective.
Certainly, those who broke the law on Jan. 6 should be (and are being) arrested and held accountable. But it’s important to remember that there’s nothing illegal about stupidity, about aggressively pursuing every legal means to challenge election results. It happens all the time after elections. And, however misguided, it’s also not illegal to claim an election was stolen. It’s irrational and irresponsible, but not illegal. After all, Democratic star Stacey Abrams refused to concede the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election, even though it was clear she lost.
The bottom line is, the Democrats are in such deep trouble politically that they are desperate to change the subject from the collapsing economy, stock market crash, raging inflation and gas prices, the housing crisis, the immigration crisis, crime, and so forth.
If it can be proven that Trump actually committed a crime then, sure, prosecute him — which will prolong this circus for who knows how many more months and years. But all the focus on Trump isn’t going to solve the real issues facing voters. Democrats are going to pay a steep price in November.
Many primary and recall elections were conducted across the country in the last several weeks. What do they tell us about Utah’s upcoming primaries and the general election.
Pignanelli: The Los Angeles mayoral primary and the San Francisco district attorney recall election unequivocally demonstrated that independent and moderate Democrat voters reject policies viewed as soft on criminals. These results will spawn “law and order” messaging by GOP as an increase in crime is plaguing the nation.
Republican primaries revealed an endorsement by Trump does not guarantee victory. So Utahns should expect limited reference to the former president in advertisements.
Webb: Democrats are pinning their waning hopes on abortion, guns and Jan. 6. They are praying those issues will energize their base and make other voters forget about the real issues that voters care about. Good luck with that.
‘Teenager’ politics — an American approach that works
America brings vigor, creativity, passion and apt wariness to the global stage. We need that energy now more than ever.
By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
The Robb Elementary School tragedy in Texas continues to haunt the soul of our country. Good faith negotiations on bipartisan gun legislation seem promising. But the horrific calamity is expanding and revealing another wound — questions of American character and competence. This dynamic is being featured in political debate.
The apparent inaction of law enforcement during the 80-minute nightmare when 19 children and two teachers were murdered is a new addition to a tortuous series of U.S. debacles: The clumsy departure from Afghanistan, the baby formula fiasco, rampant inflation, chaos at the southern border, an uncertain economy and confusing COVID-19 responses. These issues are raising serious questions about American competence. Is there a deterioration of our global excellence and what can be done?
Pignanelli: “There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America.” — Bill Clinton
For 300 years Americans have been teenagers of the global community. Distrust of authority, mood swings, obsession with innovation, embrace of new cultures and ideas, emotional compassion, aggressive work ethic and drive to win are a shared heritage. These traits remain among almost 340 million.
The common denominator in the current episodes of ineffectiveness is an interaction with national or local governments. As the country has grown, so have the bureaucracies to provide needed regulations, funding mechanisms and structure. Yet, the swelling of the systems have increasingly rejected characteristics of the people who built them. This is a dangerous trend. Other civilizations were crushed because their governance could not respond to challenges.
Post-pandemic rebound of the economy, speedy development of vaccines and nonstop technological prowess provide optimism that we can alter trajectories. But societal leadership must be courageous to jettison the status quo comfort and reexamine how government is delivered, especially public safety. A failure to change and adapt causes more than economic hardship — lives can be lost.
Grandiose speeches are not needed. Instead, the White House, Congress, state governments and thousands of public entities (including the Uvalde School District) must rip open their organization to scrutinize processes and deliverables without sentiment to the past. Our history documents success with such realignments.
Teenagers can be frustrating and obnoxious. Acting like them will keep us safe and prosperous.
Webb: This is certainly not the worst of times in America. By many measures, it’s the best time in history. I enjoyed growing up in the 1960s. But at that time social unrest was dramatically worse than now; an unpopular war claimed 50,000 American lives; the standard of living was much lower; racism was prevalent with little focus on it; women had far fewer opportunities; LGBTQ people were outcasts, relegated to the fringes of society. Not much was done about homelessness. Jobs were harder to find. Crime and accidents were worse on a per-capita basis.
Today’s seemingly depressing outlook is exaggerated by social media and the instant viral posting and broadcasting to millions of people of anything bad that happens. When our multitude of screens are filled nearly every minute of every day with negative news, along with images and gossip about the rich, famous and beautiful, no wonder we’re depressed.
To be sure, America has problems that need fixing. Dramatic political divisiveness is among them. But when one side believes the solution to America’s problems is more government and more debt, I’m glad there’s another side willing to step up and fight that notion. I believe an ever-larger government taking an ever-larger role in our lives leads to a decline in family strength and a weakening of standards and values. Looking to government for every solution isn’t the answer to America’s problems.
Last week witnessed almost a dozen mass shootings in the aftermath of the elementary school horror. Will this be the year when bipartisan congressional legislation is passed to help law enforcement prevent these tragedies?
Pignanelli: Despite partisan baiting by President Joseph Biden and some lawmakers, the several changes to federal law popular with the American electorate may be enacted. These congressional leaders understand that the country wants evidence that Congress has the ability to negotiate and collaborate.
Webb: As an owner of several guns, including an AR-15, I’m an avid defender of the Second Amendment, but I’m not an absolutist. Some modest provisions to prevent gun violence make sense and don’t infringe on gun ownership. These include sensible red flag laws with due process protected. Also, gun buyers shouldn’t object to quick background checks at gun show sales and some private sales (but not between family members). Preventing gun violence will require a lot more than just focusing on guns.
How will these developments affect Utah and how can our state be a positive influence?
Pignanelli: The commitment to excellence exhibited through the “Utah Way” abounds in most of our private and public entities. Thus, how we respond to environmental, growth, economic and public safety challenges will be a path for other states and the country.
Webb: Utah has its own challenges, but compared to the federal government, we enjoy model governance. We have good people seeking real solutions, ensuring a bright future.
Opinion: School shootings, GOP debates and Evan McMullin — Utah politics are heating up
With rising summer temperatures, the Utah political climate is getting heated in the wake of mass shootings, a democratic endorsement and unconventional debates
By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
Memorial Day was the official start of the summer election season. The stormy weather we experienced last week reflected current turbulent politics. We highlight some of the issues.
Much has been written about Utah Democrats declining to nominate a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate at their state convention and instead backing independent Evan McMullin. A recent Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll indicated 36% of Utahns agreed with this decision, 44% did not and 21% did not know. Further, 50% of Democrats agreed and 36% did not. What does this indicate about the race and the Democratic Party?
Pignanelli: “In every free and deliberating society, there must be opposite parties, and one of these … must prevail over the other for a longer or shorter time.” — Thomas Jefferson
I am on a quest. When encountering a Democrat or left-leaning independent expressing support for McMullin, I ask for a reason other than he is not Mike Lee. The dozens of responses to date are devoid of any substance.
The decision to support McMullin does not match the fundamental purposes of a political party to promote candidates who support certain ideologies and policies. The common justification made by some Democrat leaders is their party cannot win the election and must work with Republicans and independents to elect a candidate that is “moderate and mainstream.”
This strategy raises many questions. Will moderate Democrats in future conventions receive similar absolutions and blessings from liberals as granted McMullin? What about Republicans that satisfy this threshold with a history of bipartisanship dealings (i.e. Gov. Spencer Cox, Sen. Mitt Romney, multiple legislators, etc.)? Is this a disguised acknowledgment the left-wing progressive policies of national Democrats are unpalatable to Utah voters?
The poll emphasizes a plurality of Utahns, including many Democrats, are suspicious of the alliance approach. This signals the McMullin coalition is weak and unlikely to succeed.
I will continue my search for that elusive rationale. Finding the Holy Grail or Montezuma’s gold may be easier.
Webb: The Democrat-McMullin embrace means most Democrats concede they can’t win a statewide race, so they hold their noses and endorse a candidate who, to them, is a little less noxious than Lee.
This is a nice test case to see if an independent candidate can win in Utah. It might provide valuable intelligence in case some other moderate politician wants to run against a conservative Republican in the future. Might this be a new route to win office?
However, it must be remembered that Democrats gave McMullin a nice boost by clearing the decks for him. McMullin won’t have to split the liberal/moderate vote with a pesky Democrat. Thus, any future moderate pursuing the independent route would also have to replicate McMullin’s success in keeping a Democrat off the ballot. So why have a Democratic Party?
It is probably all moot, anyway, because Lee will likely win handily.
The Utah Debate Commission was scheduled to conduct a number of primary election debates earlier this week, but most Republican candidates declined to participate. Instead, most will appear in GOP-sponsored debates where Republican leaders control questions and moderators. What does this mean for the primary election and the future of debates?
Pignanelli: Because Republicans dominate Utah politics, the primaries are the de facto general elections. Thus, the philosophy for candidates to engage in debates remains sound. However, the commission was established for general elections, not primaries. Intraparty contests have different dynamics, and the respective political parties should have greater influence in how these activities are conducted.
Webb: The GOP is free to hold its own debates, of course, and party leaders have a point that primary elections are intraparty affairs. Incumbent Republicans may not want to take questions from moderate or liberal moderators. They prefer throwing red meat out to the party faithful to ensure a primary win.
Still, they will certainly face tough questions from liberals and moderates in the general election, so why not get in some practice? These folks are all capable politicians and good debaters. They ought to have enough confidence to debate anytime, anywhere.
Will the tragedy in Uvalde, Texas, impact political discourse and prompt legislation?
Pignanelli: The current tenor of the responses is different. Because the November midterm elections — and control of Congress — will depend upon suburban voters, there is a greater likelihood of bipartisan actions.
Webb: I hope this act of unspeakable horror will prompt action on many levels: A recommitment to family, love and support for each other. Better mental health support and intervention. All of us watching for unstable people and reporting concerns. Hardened schools and better law enforcement training. Sensible red flag laws and strengthened background checks, making background checks practical, quick and convenient. More attention and action regarding the daily and weekly acts of violence across the country, which vastly outnumber the “mass casualty” shootings.
Violence is a symptom of a breakdown of societal values and mores. Hearts must be changed, and government doesn’t do so well at changing hearts. Government can try to deal with the consequences of societal breakdown, but it can’t solve the fundamental causes. That is the responsibility and prerogative of parents, extended families, teachers and religious institutions.
Is the 2022 election about 2020, or are we ready to look ahead?
With the upcoming Republican primaries, Utah’s Republican candidates are looking good — if they can avoid discussing 2020
By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb
Key primary elections are occurring in states across the country. Candidates and political parties are rolling out strategies and messaging. Maneuvering is also beginning for the 2024 presidential election. Because Utah doesn’t exist in a political vacuum, we take a look at the national political intrigue and what it means for our state.
Former President Donald Trump and some of the candidates he has endorsed are spending much of their energy arguing about the 2020 election, claiming the election was stolen from Trump. Is this a winning political strategy in 2022?
Pignanelli: “Mr. Trump has real influence but it is not determinative.”— Peggy Noonan, Wall Street Journal
Many polls reveal at least 75% of Americans believe the country is “on the wrong track”. This is a kind description of their anger — and who can blame them? Inflation is roaring at a 40-year high, which is only exceeded by the crime rate. National politicians initially dismissed the cost of living as “transitory” and now admit a problem without providing solutions. Congress seems more focused on holding hearings to attack Big Tech while expanding social programs, including student loan forgiveness. Immigration remains a mess. The fiasco in Afghanistan still smarts. Now millions must worry whether their infant will have enough to eat — an outrageous crisis caused by a clueless Food and Drug Administration and a sleepy administration.
Little is expected of a Republican candidate to assure victory in November — just point to President Joe Biden and do not say anything stupid.
However, to “not say anything stupid” includes omitting references to the 2020 election or making accusations that the upcoming balloting is corrupt. Americans do not want to hear this tirade because the topic demonstrates a lack of concern for the everyday difficulties they are now facing.
Once again, “message discipline” will determine success in the November elections.
Webb: Given the weakness of the Biden administration and the Democrats, Republicans should be poised for historic wins in 2022. It could be a real realignment of politics in this country. The only thing that could derail a monumental victory for conservatives is Trump and his damaging fixation on 2020 and his selfish demand that all his supporters follow him like lemmings in this political nonsense.
It’s true that Trump was badly mistreated by Democrats and most of the news media during his 2016 campaign and in his presidency. He generally put forth good policy (except immigration) and the nation blossomed economically under his leadership. So Trump should focus on those things and the Democrats’ many failings instead of continually harping on the 2020 election. It’s over. Sensible people are sick of hearing about it.
The tragedy of Trump, as I’ve written previously, is that he could be a major benefit for Republicans up and down the ticket, in all states, if he would play the role of senior statesman, promote mainstream conservative causes, bring the party together, endorse reasonable candidates and stop being self-serving.
But, alas for Republicans, Trump is Trump. No sensible GOP candidate wants the 2022 election to be about 2020.
Still for Democrats, they’re in such bad shape that even Trump dragging down some GOP candidates probably won’t save them.
The U.S. faces the prospect of having two rather old men — Biden and Trump — square off once again to become president of the United States and the leader of the free world. Is this the best our country can do?
Pignanelli: In addition to the multitude of issues plaguing the country, Biden is unable to inspire confidence when speaking. This is not a new struggle for the president, although age has increased his discombobulated speech. Biden was nominated and elected because he was perceived a moderate (bending to progressives’ demands has confused that advantage).
Trump succeeded because he tapped into a massive national frustration with the establishment, which remains his singular value.
Currently, there are no other well-known moderate Democrat or anti-establishment Republican politicians willing to challenge the progressives or Trumpistas. Hopefully, the fallout from the 2022 midterm elections creates opportunities for new faces, otherwise expect a return of the Methuselahs.
Webb: If the choice is between Biden and Trump, then shame on us. I’m an old guy myself, but I can’t think of a more depressing presidential race than these two old has-beens calling each other names for a year. It’s time for a new generation of leaders. Both parties have plenty of younger, fresher and smarter candidates than Trump and Biden. On the GOP side, I can think of a dozen excellent candidates who are just as conservative as Trump, who would govern much as Trump did, but without Trump’s toxic personality and character baggage.
What do these national political developments mean for Utah candidates and issues?
Pignanelli: Utahns do not believe the 2020 elections were stolen. So if Republican contenders ignore the topic, they can ride the wave. Otherwise, they risk a surprise.
Webb: We can be glad a majority of Utahns are sensible, mainstream Republicans and Democrats. But GOP candidates must carefully navigate the Trump nonsense or risk alienating his base. If you want to see a GOP candidate squirm, just ask if the 2020 election was stolen.