Primary election will reveal a great deal about politics in Utah

Tuesday’s Republican primary election is shattering records for dollars spent and numbers of candidates competing. While the key objective is to choose party nominees for the November general election, other dynamics will be revealed with the results. We use our crystal ball.

Utah is a deeply red state. But the signature-gathering and convention process has revealed large fissures and fractures among Utah Republicans. What’s at stake for the GOP on Tuesday?

Pignanelli: “The primary is a uniquely American innovation with roots to early colonial New England and the era of the writing of the U.S. Constitution.” — Clay Jenkinson, Governing Magazine

Mystics, psychics and other seers examine “tells” in their subjects to predict the future. The trajectory of the Utah GOP may be gleaned from outcomes on Tuesday.

If few convention-winning candidates secure a spot on the November ballot, GOP leaders will question the roles of caucus-elected delegates. Further erosion of their power by the legislature may occur, while keeping some features of the existing system.

Open alignment with MAGA and direct or implied endorsements from former President Donald Trump will also be scrutinized. Other factors determining the fate of the GOP include incumbency, populism versus mainstream conservatism and open alignment with the “America First” movement. Political soothsayers will be watching.

Webb: As an essentially one-party state, we’ve always had divisions within the dominant party. The far-right and mainstream factions of the GOP have clashed off and on for many decades. Tension within a party, or among levels and branches of government, isn’t necessarily bad. The checks and balances usually produce compromise and, ultimately, better outcomes.

Today, however, an intense battle rages for the soul of the Utah Republican Party. Stark differences exist between the two factions, although both are plenty conservative. Sen. Mike Lee is overtly attempting to take control of the party and elect ultra-MAGA candidates.

The battle will continue on into the future, but Tuesday’s primary will begin to answer this big question: Is Utah a traditionally conservative state, or is it becoming an ultra-MAGA state?

Personally, as one who identifies mostly with the mainstream wing of the party, I hope and expect that the more centrist candidates will prevail. That’s critically important to preserve the United States’ role in the world. I believe far-right, isolationist politicians who oppose, for example, aid to Ukraine, would take the country in a very dangerous and vulnerable direction.

I believe a majority of Utah Republicans usually align with the mainstream. And, thankfully, the ability to gather signatures to get on the primary ballot has leveled the playing field so mainstream signature gatherers and far-right convention winners can compete fairly. Voters in many races have a real choice on Tuesday.

In the last several election cycles, Utahns have been mailing in their ballots later and almost on the eve of Election Day. How is this changing campaign tactics? Could this have an impact on the primary elections?

Pignanelli: For years, a third of ballots were returned within three days of receiving them. Now the largest tranche of ballots is submitted in the last three days before the election. Prior to “Vote by Mail,” some campaigns would release a hit piece against opponents just days before an election, leaving little time for responses. Mailing ballots essentially eliminated such “October surprises.” Because voters are holding ballots longer, a resurgence of these last-minute tactics is occurring. Also, delayed ballot returns cause more targeted mail, prolonged ad buys and phone calls nagging procrastinating voters — all costing bigger bucks.

Webb: Many casual voters don’t pay much attention to elections until they get their ballot in the mail. At that point, they begin to investigate the candidates, which takes longer in a multiple-candidate race. So candidates must campaign intensely and make their closing pitches right up to Election Day. Some contests will be very close, so fighting for every last vote will make the difference.

It’s mainstream vs. extreme MAGA in GOP primary races

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Mail-in ballots for the June 25 primary election are already in voters’ hands, even while debates and polls are heating up the highly contested races. The latest developments:

By our column deadline, three important primary election debates had occurred, each broadcast on TV and radio and covered extensively by the news media. The largest clashes in each debate erupted between incumbent members of Congress, all mainstream conservatives, and their mostly ultra-MAGA challengers. Were any of the incumbents (Blake Moore in CD1; Celeste Maloy in CD3; or John Curtis, a representative running for the U.S. Senate) seriously damaged in the debates?

Pignanelli: “Trump has had a roller-coaster relationship with Utah Republicans dating to his 2016 race. GOP operatives say his standing with primary voters is strong, but not as high as in other ruby-red states.” — Al Weaver, The Hill

Report ad

The first rule of political debates is to do no harm ... to yourself. The second is that incumbents and/or perceived front-runners must be prepared for the most attacks. Under these traditional guidelines, all the experienced contenders fared well. They successfully navigated the treacherous waters of praising Trump’s policies while avoiding overt support of him. Such delicacy reveals an understanding of Utah’s complicated relationship with the former president. The MAGA challengers were energetic pugilists, but the punches thrown rarely connected.

Webb: Republican primary voters have clear choices in these races. Do they want to elect far-right obstructionists who prefer dysfunction and gridlock over compromise and problem-solving? Or do they want to elect solid, mainstream conservatives who seek conservative solutions that can win approval in a divided government?

In general, the far-right challengers, particularly Trent Staggs in the Senate race and Colby Jenkins in CD1, want to join the small band of congressional saboteurs (like Reps. Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene) who, if they don’t get 100% of what they want, will shut down the government and rebel against their own leadership.

In a divided government, purist, uncompromising, unrealistic demands produce failure. They are the do-nothing caucus.

In the CD1 debate, I was especially disappointed that Jenkins, who is challenging Maloy, appeared willing to make Congress subservient to the executive branch. Jenkins’ response to nearly every question was this: Elect Donald Trump and he will solve all the nation’s problems. His worship of Trump as the country’s savior was almost embarrassing.

In reality, Congress should vigorously defend its own role and push back against the extreme overreach displayed by both Trump and Pres. Biden in issuing dozens of executive orders and agency regulations usurping congressional authority. Unfortunately, the gridlock in Congress preferred by the do-nothing caucus will produce even more executive orders and agency overreach, and further diminish the constitutional role of the legislative branch.

In the Senate race, I believe both Curtis and former Utah House Speaker Brad Wilson would govern conservatively and effectively. Staggs or Jason Walton would ratchet up congressional dysfunction.

A recent Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics survey reveals the following support levels in the gubernatorial primary among likely Republican voters: Gov. Spencer Cox, 62%; Phil Lyman, 25%; undecided, 12%. In the U.S. Senate race the same poll shows John Curtis at 34% support; Trent Staggs, 16%; Brad Wilson, 12%; Jason Walton, 4%; and undecided, 33%. Any surprises?

Pignanelli: Handcarts in the Pioneer Day Parade would be a bigger surprise than the poll results for the governor’s race. Utahns want governors to be inspirational, not confrontational. The Senate survey confirms prior discussions in this column that Curtis was leading, and Staggs was surging. The polls reaffirm once again that television commercial bombardment or lawn signs do not garner support in 21st-century politics.

Webb: Cox and Curtis were far better known going into the race, so it’s unsurprising they’re ahead. Cox will win handily. Curtis is clearly the frontrunner, but he needs to win a good share of undecided voters.

Last week, the Salt Lake County GOP sent voters a “2024 Primary Ballot Candidate Guide.” The mailer lists only candidates who received at least 40% delegate support at the conventions. Controversy immediately erupted as to whether this was an official endorsement by the party for a few candidates and implied disapproval of otherwise faithful Republican contenders. Could this deliver another blow against the caucus system?

Pignanelli: Candidates who receive over 60% in their respective convention contests should be highlighted. This is an important achievement in intraparty politics. But long-time activists who supported fellow Republicans with time and resources, and are now on the primary ballot themselves, should not be ignored in an official promotional mailer.

Apparently, county Republican Party leaders need a refresher on their roles. They should not be using taxpayer-funded primary elections to promote an agenda other than a platform or endorse certain Republican candidates over others that are equally qualified. They have abandoned the priorities of convening well-run caucuses, followed by a civil and expeditious convention where neighborhood designees carry out the election preferences of their fellow Republican neighbors.

Webb: To Salt Lake County GOP leaders, you’re a second-class Republican if you didn’t attend your party caucus. They don’t want the vast majority of good, solid Republicans who didn’t become state or county delegates to determine party nominees. They cater to the whims of the tiny number of delegates. They are accelerating the demise of the caucus/convention system.

The twists and turns of the presidential election

Republican LaVarr Webb and Democrat Frank Pignanelli comment on Donald Trump’s guilty verdict and other factors potentially influencing the presidential race

The election year activities of local politicians have consumed us for months, but recent developments in the presidential race clearly require a diversion in our commentary.

In the “hush money” trial, a Manhattan jury found former President Donald Trump guilty of falsifying business records to influence the 2016 election. Meanwhile, Trump’s most persistent opponent, Nikki Haley, announced she will vote for Trump because even though she disagrees with him on many issues, he’s better than incumbent President Joe Biden. How will these contrasting events impact Utah and the presidential race?

Pignanelli: “When voters go to the polls, they will not think about Trump’s or Hunter Biden’s trials — they will deliberate about inflation, maybe foreign policy. This verdict is not on their radar.” — Julia Manchester, The Hill

The smallest unit of measurement used in science is the “Planck Length.” This tiny metric describes the infinitesimally minor impact of the jurors’ decision in the presidential election.

Not since 1892 have two former presidents competed in the general election. Consequently, Americans know the candidates and the complexity of the recent court deliberations will not budge solidified opinions. Any concerns with the felony convictions that polls are currently signaling will soon dissipate. The tiny sliver of voters in battleground states who will determine the race care about issues other than affairs with adult film stars and technical violations of federal election laws. Therefore, one Planck Length is a generous concession.

The Haley nonendorsement endorsement was predictable, as there is not a world in which she would have voted for Biden. Well liked in Utah, she may help Trump’s image.

“Planck Length” will be useful in November to describe the minute difference in the election results.

Webb: Most Republicans, including many moderate and mainstream Republicans who don’t like Trump (like me), believe the trial was unfair from its beginning and was “legal and political malpractice,” in the words of The Wall Street Journal editorial board (which is frequently critical of Trump).

The upshot is that some GOP moderates are more likely to vote for Trump today than they were before the trial. It’s tough to make a martyr out of someone who has absolutely no shame, but the Democrats, the prosecutors, the judge and the jurors have managed to do so in this case. The whole sordid episode is shaping up as a net win for Trump.

I still don’t like Donald Trump, but I also dislike how unfairly he has been treated, over and over again, by the Democrats, the traditional news media and the Washington establishment. It all makes me more likely to hold my nose and vote for him. I refuse to throw away my vote on a write-in or third party candidate, so the choice is between Trump or Biden (who I think has been a terrible president). It’s a depressing dilemma. Who to vote for when the only two real choices are nearly equally distasteful?

Trump has been attempting to reach out beyond his traditional base. He held a rally in the Bronx in New York City. He spoke at the Libertarian National Convention. He has been seeking support among Black and Hispanic voters. Will he be successful?

Pignanelli: Polling is indicating movement toward Trump in various demographics. Inflation has hit minority groups the hardest, for which Biden is receiving blame. Because Trump’s base forgives any statement or action he undertakes, then it is shrewd maneuvering to test these waters. Trump has nothing to lose to foster the lack of confidence in Biden by these voters. Also, other demographics suspicious of him (i.e., suburban women) may appreciate his willingness to expand support.

Webb: If the polls are correct, Trump is, indeed, making inroads among some traditional Democratic groups. He only needs a few percentage points to give him a real boost in the election. That such a flawed Republican could appeal to average citizens, even Democrats, demonstrates how badly the Democratic Party has misread the national mood and the desires of voters.

Trump is expected to select a vice presidential running mate in the next several weeks. Will it make a difference for Utah voters?

Pignanelli: Utah is a red state and the ultimate outcome is unlikely to change regardless of who Trump chooses. But there will be deep interest in how key voter demographics respond. Sen. Tim Scott is popular in Utah. Because of the controversy surrounding the verdict, many local politicos are conjecturing a female running mate. It would be historic for all three major presidential candidates to have a woman on their tickets. Will there be a new social media movement, e.g., #PickHer?

Webb: Running mates seldom make much difference, but if Trump selects a more mainstream Republican, rather than a right-wing firebrand, it could help a bit among moderate voters. The bigger question is, what intelligent Republican with a modicum of self-respect would aspire to be vice president to Donald Trump — the man who demands absolute fealty but, on any whim, is disloyal himself? It can only end badly. Just ask Mike Pence.

In multicandidate races, how can hopefuls differentiate themselves?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

The June 25 primary election is fast approaching. The stakes are obviously high, but the unique characteristics of this event have broad implications beyond just finalizing nominees.

The primary contest for U.S. Senate, with four candidates, and the two gubernatorial contenders are obviously attracting the most attention. But also on the ballot are three candidates for attorney general, five for the 3rd Congressional District and two each in the 1st and 2nd congressional districts. And some legislative races are also in play. How should a down-ballot candidate confront these unique challenges?

Pignanelli: “Every great political campaign rewrites the rules; devising a new way to win is what gives campaigns a comparative advantage against their foes.” — John Podhoretz

This primary is the ultimate cage match. Over two dozen contestants will be battling against an opponent(s) but also deflecting errant swings from combatants in other races.

All candidates strive to distinguish themselves from the field. But, spoiler alert: Pouring more resources in TV commercials bashing Biden, screaming about immigration or walking through nature will not achieve that goal. Down-ballot contenders should utilize inexpensive geo-fenced social media ads and good old-fashioned shoe leather. They cannot compete with the massive war chests of statewide hopefuls vying for voter attention and must focus their efforts on hyper-local outreach of high-likely voters. Tactics identifying voters and understanding participating demographics will be crucial.

The winners of this upcoming cage match are breeding needed campaign operatives who understand 21st-century technology and dynamics.

Webb: Way back in 1992 (yes, ancient history), when I ran Mike Leavitt’s first campaign for governor, we confronted this issue: How does a little-known candidate with limited resources run a statewide primary race against a much better-known opponent? How can we differentiate ourselves by connecting with voters at a very local level and show that we care about their particular issues?

One strategy was to visit cities, towns and small counties all across Utah, arranging in advance an interview with the local radio station and local newspaper. So we would hit a town with Leavitt carrying one of those old “brick” cell phones. He would walk down Main Street with a local mayor, legislator or other leader.

He would get on the phone interview with the local radio station, talk about local issues and say something like: “Yeah, it’s great to be in Richfield. I’m here with (local leader) and we’re about to visit with the folks in Bob’s Barber Shop and Fred’s Drug Store. I’m hearing folks here are concerned about (list issues). As governor, I’m going to work hard on (local issues) with (local leaders). I know they’re important here in Sevier County.” And so on.

We might spend only an hour in a county or community, and hit four or five communities in a day. But by leveraging precious time, most everyone in the county knew that Leavitt was there and cared about their issues. Grassroots politicking, even in a statewide race. Today’s communications channels are different, but local engagement is key. With social media, it’s actually easier.

The primary election to determine the Republican nominee to replace Rep. John Curtis will have five names on the ballot. (Mike Kennedy, JR Bird, John Dougall, Case Lawrence and Stewart Peay.) Thus, the plurality percentage to win could be the lowest in history. What strategies do politicos expect in this contest?

Pignanelli: All these hopefuls possess strong and varied backgrounds. But politicos are sensing that Kennedy is maintaining a slight lead over Lawrence (with the others trailing), while a huge undecided remains.

This contest will be won on three tried and true political principals: name ID, name ID and name ID. The gubernatorial and Senate contests are sucking most of the political oxygen and many voters will have taxed their enthusiasm for carefully vetting each candidate via an internet search. The path to victory is voters recognizing a name and possibly correlating that into some amount of trust for the candidate. Again, this will require creative tactics and messaging.

Webb: Nothing replaces long hours and very hard work. Walking neighborhoods can be dramatically leveraged by focused communications to all voters in the community before and after the walk. “I’m coming. I want to hear from you.” “I was there; this is what I heard you’re concerned about.”

Coalitions and mini-campaigns can be developed within dozens of interest groups and geographic areas. Well-known chairs within each interest group or geographic region can be given the charge and resources to run campaigns, including social media, within their coalitions or communities.

Does this flurry of candidates foster possible changes to the convention/delegate and signature-gathering process?

Pignanelli: Especially in the 3rd Congressional District with five candidates on the ballot, this question is relevant. More importantly, what, if anything, can be done? Some legislators are already weighing changes to Utah’s election system. Possible solutions include raising the signature threshold, eliminating the convention process, statewide ranked choice voting or implementing a runoff cycle. Each of these possibilities will appease certain constituencies while other special interests will sharpen their pitchforks.

Webb: The top vote-getter tends to be the best candidate even with a relatively low percentage of votes. I would be fine with a runoff election between the top two if no candidate gets above, say, 35%. It would cost a little money, but democracy is worth it.

Will endorsements make a difference in Republican primary?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Spring has finally arrived and the primary election is a month from now, June 25. With Republicans dominant in statewide and congressional races, the primary is where Utahns will likely elect their next U.S. senator and U.S. House members. So, while Utahns are enjoying the weather, politicos are wagging tongues about polls, advertising, debates and endorsements. We join in the frolicking.

Rep. John Curtis released an internal poll showing him with a substantial lead in the U.S. Senate race. Yet the other three candidates are undaunted, running aggressively with varying tactics. What’s the skinny?

Pignanelli: “Changing media behavior may be testing the efficacy of political advertising.” — Nick Corasaniti, New York Times.

My generation and older (aka those who still watch network television) are witnessing the last gasp of 20th-century tactics. Political television commercials are increasingly ineffective, and the current ads are virtually indistinguishable (immigration, anti-President Joe Biden, guns, etc.) In this vacuum of innovation, a preexisting base of support becomes paramount.

In a September 2023 internal poll, Curtis led the pack. Similar results were revealed in an external January survey. Even a discount of Curtis’ recent poll still gives him a strong margin. The other contingent are core former President Donald Trump supporters, which Trent Staggs owns. Thus, the millions spent have not moved the needle. Observers are conjecturing this is essentially a two-person race with four contenders, so the winner only needs about 35%, certainly achievable by Curtis.

Another question haunting political observers is why Brad Wilson has not gained traction with his impressive legislative career and expending millions. The remaining month provides time for trajectories to change, but campaign operatives must understand most voters are not watching, or are bored with, television commercials. Welcome to the 21st century.

Webb: Curtis is clearly ahead, but the large number of undecided voters means Wilson or Staggs has a chance against Curtis in the campaign’s final weeks. Social media and traditional advertising is important in a primary, but grassroots field work is even more valuable.

The Staggs endorsement is a test of Trump’s strength among Utah Republican voters. Staggs is an all-in, ultra-MAGA mini-Trump. Republicans who idolize Trump will likely vote for Staggs. Wilson, who is a terrific person and politician, is in a difficult spot because Staggs has the Trump devotees, while the better-known Curtis enjoys solid mainstream support.

Ultimately, the winning candidate will effectively target definite voters, communicate frequently with them in ways that connect on a personal level and then get them to actually vote.

Endorsements seemed to a play a critical role in the GOP convention battles. Trump’s endorsement of Staggs was clearly helpful in convention. Sen. Mike Lee’s backing of Colby Jenkins over Rep. Celeste Maloy was golden for Jenkins in the 3rd District race. Will Lee or Gov. Spencer Cox influence voters in the Senate race? Do blessings from high-profile officials matter as much in a primary?

Pignanelli: Endorsements are only as good as the approval rating of the endorser and must convey to voters something about the candidate they do not already know. Especially effective are third-party expressions of support from business and community leaders for local-office candidates. The angst among those candidates who are not beneficiaries of a famous politician is understandable, but easily remedied with a strategic focus on messaging and social media while avoiding excessive television commercials (see above).

Webb: Endorsements won’t play as big a role in the primary as they did in the state convention. Lee is playing a risky game by snubbing his colleague Maloy and endorsing Jenkins. There’s no guarantee Jenkins will win in November. Maloy is a fighter and an excellent grassroots candidate. She may long remember Lee’s surprise slap in the face.

Early on, before Curtis got in the Senate race, Cox endorsed Wilson. But it’s unlikely Cox will be highly vocal because he also appears to like Curtis. However, if Trump acolyte Staggs appears to be coming on strong, it could motivate Cox to get more involved in the Senate race.

The Trump and Biden campaigns rejected the official Presidential Debate Commission’s debate plans, and instead developed their own debate calendar and venues. This eliminates Salt Lake City/University of Utah as host for the October match. Should Utahns be upset?

Pignanelli: Many insiders agree, the main reason why sworn enemies Biden and Trump would agree on anything of this magnitude is to keep Robert F. Kennedy Jr. off the stage — a cynical ploy. As a loyal Utahn of Italian and Irish heritage, I will carry this grudge against both for a long time.

Webb: It is unfortunate we won’t host a big presidential debate in Utah, but I’m not much concerned about the Debate Commission snub. More important is seeing that the rules and procedures are fair for both candidates in upcoming debates. Some commentators think Trump got snookered by Biden by instantly agreeing to debates and rules proposed by Biden. A few additional debates would be nice, but Biden is unlikely to agree to more than two.

3 political leaders who taught important lessons

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Pignanelli & Webb: “Leaders don’t create followers, they create more leaders.” — Tom Peters. This week, the University of Utah hosted a public memorial for former Salt Lake City Mayor Ted Wilson. But we also remember the lives of two other prominent politicians, Congressman Chris Cannon and State Sen. Richard Carling. Your columnists knew all three very well and we will miss them. Their political careers are inspirational and the challenges they faced are instructional.

Ted Wilson: Salt Lake City Mayor 1976-1985; candidate for U.S. Senate 1982; candidate for governor 1988. Wilson was a popular mayor and well-respected director of the Hinckley Institute of Politics. The early polls indicated he would win the governor’s race in 1988 but he was bested by incumbent Gov. Norm Bangerter in a three-way race that included Independent Merrill Cook.

Wilson was exactly the leader Salt Lake City needed in the late 1970s and 1980s. His charisma and personality not only invigorated Utahns but prompted companies and organizations across the country to consider doing business here.

He suffered some minor hiccups (like Main Street beautification) but also won significant victories (preventing terrible destruction from the 1983 floods and changing the form of government to ensure better representation). Utah’s capital still enjoys the benefits of his vision.

Wilson was a popular candidate for governor in 1988, at one point enjoying a near 30-point lead in the polls. Democrats were also resurgent that year, capturing positions in the Legislature, attorney general, county offices and even in Congress. But as November approached, the Bangerter campaign (led by Frank’s former business partner Doug Foxley) and independent candidate Cook (who criticized tax increases initiated by Bangerter) developed credible messaging.

Unfortunately for Wilson, his campaign did not adequately counter Bangerter’s end-of-campaign momentum. Utahns continued to admire the former mayor even after he lost. Indeed, many of Bangerter’s campaign operatives became his friends and supported his other endeavors.

Wilson’s leadership is also reflected by his success and mentorship at the Hinckley Institute of Politics, and his appointment to a cabinet position by Republican Gov. Gary Herbert.

Chris Cannon: U.S. House of Representatives, 3rd District, 1997-2009. Cannon was a successful lawyer, businessman and venture capitalist who was elected to Congress in 1996. He was defeated in the 2008 GOP primary by Jason Chaffetz.

A one-time roommate of LaVarr’s during a Washington, D.C., internship, Cannon was a creative intellectual who could juggle a number of complicated issues and ideas simultaneously. He helped revitalize Geneva Steel and created numerous jobs and opportunities for Utah County residents. As a congressman, Cannon was a conservative but successfully worked across the aisle and cleared obstacles so new technologies could blossom. His tech insights helped produce a high-tech boom in the state. A conversation with Cannon was often a wild amusement ride that went unpredictable places on sophisticated topics. He was a master of the details.

But 21st-century politics were evolving. Candidates needed proficiency in social media, brief talking points and red meat for conservative Republicans. Chaffetz was a charismatic candidate who knew how to excite the base. He understood policy substance, utilized new technologies, while promising change. These are the skills that primary voters selected despite their affection for Cannon.

Richard Carling: Elected to the Utah House of Representatives in 1966, representing the downtown Salt Lake City area. Elected to the Utah Senate in 1976. Lost reelection in 1990 after 24 years of service. A successful attorney, Carling was famous for his obsession with running (155 marathon races and 39 consecutive Boston Marathons). As Utah was beginning to expand over half a century ago, visionary lawmakers were needed to fund public education, universities and social programs. Carling and a group of other senators are beloved by old timers like us for their willingness to work together, across the aisle, and establish the foundation for which we enjoy today.

Carling was a true gentleman who treated people kindly. This explains why in his final election, Dick enjoyed the endorsement of many traditional liberal organizations. But politics was changing in Salt Lake City. The capital city was becoming more Democratic as the rest of the state became more Republican. This demographic shift impacted Carling’s reelection effort against Robert Steiner (who ran a great retail political campaign). Carling will always be remembered as one of Utah’s greatest competitive runners. LaVarr and Frank each relished many opportunities trying to keep up with him on runs up City Creek Canyon where he was the local hero to many who enjoyed his company.

Are there common character traits among these beloved community leaders that can serve as inspiration for future generations? They each taught how to win magnanimously, and how to lose gracefully. They will be remembered for how they spread the credit, treated everyone with dignity and respect regardless of party affiliation or personal characteristics, and how to enjoy time spent in public service. They inspired people who are making a difference today who will hopefully carry on these traditions.

Will pro-Palestine protests at universities impact politics this year?

A pro-Palestine college student protest at the University of Utah was short-lived due to the decisive action of University President Taylor Randall. Will Randall’s action bring praise or criticism from Utahns?

By Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Although LaVarr was in high school and Frank was an eighth grader in 1968, we recall the anti-war protests troubling the country that ultimately influenced elections that year. Thus, we have opinions about recent activities throughout the nation and in Utah.

For weeks, pro-Palestine college student protests and counter-protests have popped up around the country, including at the University of Utah. But unlike on many campuses, the local disruption was short-lived due to the decisive action of University President Taylor Randall. In response, over 160 faculty members signed a letter to “vehemently object” to the use of force by law enforcement. Will Randall’s action bring praise or criticism from Utahns?

Pignanelli: “There is one glaring similarity between (Vietnam Era) protests and now: the protesters’ ideological and behavioral excesses undermine the very causes for which they fight.”—Max Boot, Washington Post

uccessful dean of the business college, Randall was a well-respected academic upon elevation to president. He immediately enjoyed strong support from Mainstreet, the state Capitol and religious leaders. Every reaction by Randall to a challenge (including this one) has only bolstered his golden reputation.

On behalf of thousands who are alumni, donors, parents and family members of students, season-ticket holders and other supporters of our flagship institution, I hereby praise and express gratitude to Randall. He prevented the outrageous disasters we experienced with the 2011 “Occupy Salt Lake City” encampments. My sympathies are shared with fellow Utahns — and by most Americans. (Eighty percent of Americans side with Israel against Hamas, as revealed by a survey conducted by Harvard University and Harris Insights and Analytics.) Indeed, even the usually left-leaning “Saturday Night Live” program questioned the students’ objectives in a humorous sketch. Faculty members have the right to express opinions, but they are in stark contrast to the community who built the institution that employs them.

Randall exemplifies that a local raised in this magnificent state can possess the leadership qualities necessary for a globally recognized university.

Webb: Protesting is fine, a great American tradition. Go ahead and hold up signs, march and chant. But don’t prevent other students from going to class or to other activities. Don’t block roads. Don’t disrupt the lives of people who don’t share your views. If you violate laws, you should be arrested. Use of law enforcement by the university administration was certainly appropriate.

We need to keep things in perspective. These demonstrations are quite tame compared to the anti-war protests in the 1960s and ′70s. It’s really a small number of students protesting now, and in some cases, they are egged on by professional agitators. It’s understandable to be concerned about the welfare of Gaza civilians. It’s not OK, in my opinion, to support Hamas, a murderous terrorist organization with the same goal as the Nazis in World War II.

Do these exercises of the First Amendment (whether peaceful or violent) affect upcoming elections and public policy?

Pignanelli: If these protests continue, there may be resolutions adopted by the Legislature and various local government entities expressing gratitude to Randall and frustration with these activities. A solid majority of Utahns voted for the Lyndon Johnson/Hubert Humphrey ticket in 1964. By 1968, there was intense frustration with the chaos on campuses and the streets. This propelled Utahns’ support of Richard Nixon over Humphrey by an even larger margin. If demonstrations continue through the summer, a similar momentum will appear in the presidential election and other contests.

Webb: I do remember 1968 from the perspective of a high school kid. Today, by comparison, we live in an era of peace, prosperity, equality and opportunity. In 1968, anti-war demonstrations ripped the country apart. Race relations also reached a boiling point after Martin Luther King was assassinated in April. An avowed segregationist, George Wallace, was a serious candidate for president. (DEI is a minor controversy, by comparison.)

In June, Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated. A real war was raging, with 500,000 U.S. soldiers fighting, and 1,000 of them being killed each month in Vietnam. All of this produced violent demonstrations across the country. This era also saw the rise of the hippie “free love” culture and the Black Power movement.

All of this emotion and tumult exploded at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, with demonstrators hurling bottles, rocks and broken glass. Chicago police brutally responded with clubs and tear gas. The convention debacle badly damaged Humphrey and he never recovered.

It’s unlikely anything on the scale of 1968 will occur at this year’s Democratic Convention in Chicago. But anything ugly could hurt Biden and the Democrats among the party’s base voters.

With higher education currently in the crosshairs of national and local officials, will President Randall’s actions, and those of his colleagues, impact future policy decisions?

Pignanelli: The disparity between faculty and the surrounding community will not be lost on policymakers. This may propel legislation on various issues. But Randall can influence deliberations away from antagonism and towards productive — and needed — reform measures.

Webb: Higher education faces major challenges with declining numbers of college students, high student debt and questions about the relevance of a liberal arts education in today’s workplace. It is time for reckoning and reform in the ivory towers of academia.

Wild and crazy state GOP convention

Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb

Utah political pundits and commentators have been abuzz with analysis and conjecture regarding last Saturday’s political conventions. We also can’t resist sharing our wise perceptions (aka ramblings from two old guys) of these important events.

The state Republican Convention was a 16-hour grueling test of survival for delegates, activists and especially the candidates. Among key outcomes: Senate candidate Trent Staggs captured 70% of the delegate vote, and Gov. Spencer Cox garnered only 32% against Phil Lyman’s 68%. What lessons or trends can be gleaned from this springtime political fest?

Pignanelli: “A political convention is just not a place where you come away with any trace of faith in human nature.” — Murray Kempton.

Many Utahns were rolling eyes in response to the convention delegates’ antics. Yet, regardless of the demonstrations and outcomes, these politicos were given valuable insight into electioneering developments.

First, high-paid consultants refused to acknowledge a national trend that was obvious in other federal races for a decade. Bombarding voters with TV ads, especially within that narrow slice of 4,000 delegates, was a waste of resources. The commercials aired by Senate candidates contained identical messaging (i.e., “tough on immigration, Biden, inflation, etc.”). But they all lacked creativity. Staggs shrewdly avoided this trap and won.

The convention also reflected the internal struggles confronting the GOP in other states and nationally between traditional, mainstream Republicans and Trumpistas. The latter prevailed last Saturday.

The delegates established a four-way primary for Senate and a five-way contest for the 3rd Congressional District. So, the successful candidates who achieve around 35 to 40% will win. This dynamic creates an advantage for contenders with a strong base — Curtis and Staggs. Cookie-cutter TV ads will again be useless.

Recent polling indicates that Cox will perform well in the primary.

History documents that convention results are rarely mirrored in a primary result. The recent sacrifice of delegates will be soon forgotten, except as future argument points among insiders.

Webb: The lesson is, if you want to win at the State Republican convention, lick Donald Trump’s boots, make silly demands like “defund the U.N.!” (Trent Staggs), and align with do-nothing obstructionists like Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz.

Don’t propose anything that might actually have a chance of passing Congress and being signed by the president. Just make simplistic demands that push the nation’s most serious problems off into the future.

My biggest concern is that some of these candidates, if they win, would push our nation closer to World War III with their embrace of Vladimir Putin and hostility toward our allies. Utah doesn’t need another isolationist in Congress.

It’s obvious that Lyman will be soundly defeated by Gov. Cox in the primary election. Staggs has a better chance in the primary if the right wing coalesces around him, while the mainstream vote is split between John Curtis and Brad Wilson. I think Staggs still loses, but it might be close.

In my years of involvement in politics, I’m perhaps most proud of helping a terrific group of people, including Mike Leavitt, Gail Miller, Rich McKeown and others, establish the signature-gathering path for candidates to get on the primary election ballot. Utah would be in a terrible place politically if delegates alone controlled the nomination process.

The media has extensively covered the boos and catcalls that Gov. Cox endured during his convention speeches. Also, many incumbents were defeated or forced into primaries. What is the cause, and remedy, of this hostility?

Pignanelli: The outrageous overt expressions of nastiness by convention partisans against their own is a result of extremism fueled by consolidating power into small, elite groups. Since the introduction of signature gathering, delegates are desperately clinging to any ounce of power that remains on convention day. Last week’s antics ensure more candidates will gather signatures as an insurance policy and strategic campaign decision to avoid delegates’ unpredictable behavior. This will result in further dilution of delegate influence while producing crowded primary ballots.

Webb: Politics is a rough-and-tumble sport. But that doesn’t mean delegates should descend into ugly mob behavior in the emotion of a political convention. A lot of them were probably embarrassed the next morning. Cox joins an all-star lineup of fine politicians who have been booed at state Republican conventions. In fact, if you’re not booed by this crowd, something must be wrong with you. Were he at that podium, Ronald Reagan himself would have been booed.

Also last Saturday, Democrats hosted a rather subdued state convention. Anything noticeable from the minority party?

Pignanelli: Some pundits criticized Democrats for not fostering more candidates and primaries. This is a silly observation. They fulfilled their mission of providing a full slate for major offices with little internal turmoil.

Webb: For the most part, the Democrats nominated solid, moderate candidates who have no chance to win the major races. But it’s good to have competition on the general election ballot.