Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The only game in town

Opinion

Sen. Mike Lee

Normally, Sen. Mike Lee would sail to reelection in conservative Utah. But things might be different this year.

Pool/Getty Images

Goldstone’s most recent book is "On Account of Race: The Supreme Court, White Supremacy, and the Ravaging of African American Voting Rights."

There is an old bit of folklore in which Canada Bill Jones, a 19th century gambler, was asked why he was playing in a game he knew was crooked. “Because it’s the only game in town,” he was said to reply. The same response might be elicited today from Democrats in Utah, and possibly in Wyoming.

In Utah, faced with the almost certain reelection of Sen. Mike Lee, an election-denying, Trump-worshiping, conspiracy-promoting archconservative, Democrats chose not to put forward their own candidate but rather endorse another conservative, Evan McMullin, for the seat. In a state that Donald Trump carried by 20 points, even Lee’s texts to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows encouraging the overturn of the 2020 presidential election would not persuade freedom-loving, rule-of-law Utah Republicans to vote for a Democrat.

McMullin, however, just might be a different story. A former CIA officer and one-time Republican who mounted a quixotic, independent anti-Trump presidential campaign in 2016, McMullin got less than 1 percent of the vote nationally, but more than 20 percent in Utah. Unlike Lee, he has come out favoring voting rights legislation, opposing partisan gerrymandering, toughening ethics rules, endorsing clean air and water legislation, and eliminating dark money in politics. In accepting the Democratic endorsement, McMullin said, “I’m humbled and grateful to the Democratic delegates today for their decision to support this growing cross-partisan coalition. Today, and moving forward, this coalition represents a majority of Utahns who want to replace Senator Mike Lee. He is a threat to the republic and consistently fails to represent our interests and our values.”


But McMullin is no liberal — he might not even qualify as a centrist. He favors beefed-up military spending, reduced spending in other government sectors, balanced budget legislation and increased border security. He was unabashedly anti-abortion but has moderated that position by admitting that the repeal of Roe v. Wade would spark a health care crisis.

In fact, since his acceptance of Democratic support in April, many of McMullin’s more conservative positions have softened. But that, after all, is the point. Although many of McMullin’s priorities will remain anathema to the left, especially the far left, in running a campaign that is coalition-based, he must respect the needs of all its members. That means that if McMullin enters the Senate, a door that was regularly slammed in the face of Democrats will now be open. Lee, on other hand, is beholden only to the extreme right.

Even with Democratic support, McMullin faces a difficult campaign — but not an impossible one. Although the 877,000 Republican registered voters dwarf the 234,000 for Democrats, almost 475,000 Utah voters are registered as non-aligned. If McMullin can peel away even a fifth of the registered Republicans, persuade Democrats to vigorously back him, and win a decent chunk of independents, he has a chance for a major upset. At the very least, he has forced Lee to run a genuine campaign in which at some point he will be forced to answer for his post-election behavior, including texts to Meadows favoring the submission of alternate slates of pro-Trump electors on Jan. 6, 2021.

To date, Lee has been able to oil his way by with not very persuasive denials to friendly media outlets. “At no point in any of those [tweets] was I engaging in advocacy,” Lee protested to the Deseret News. “I wasn't in any way encouraging them to [submit alternate slates of electors]. I just asked them a yes or no question.” If, however, the race polls closely enough that Lee is forced to agree to debates, McMullin will be far less accepting of a statement that has been refuted by Lee’s own communications with a fellow conspirator.

In Wyoming, another previously Darth Vader-esque conservative, Rep. Liz Cheney, is facing likely defeat in the Republican primary to retain her seat. In the latest polls, Cheney trails Trump-backed Harriet Hageman by more than 20 points. Hageman has made certain there can be no doubt as to her subservience to the idolatry-demanding Trump. “He was the greatest president of my lifetime, and I am proud to have been able to renominate him in 2020. And I’m proud to strongly support him today.”

Her other positions are less clear other than vague assurances that she, not Cheney, is the true conservative in the race. But positions are not important — the lead entry on her website is simply “Donate Now to Defeat Liz Cheney.”

Cheney, as unlikely a hero to the left as is possible to imagine, has been actively soliciting Democrats to switch party registration to vote for her in the August primary. If that does not work, she may well run in November as an independent. (In 2010, Lisa Murkowski lost a primary to a Tea Party Republican but won the general election with a write-campaign.) Unlike in Utah, Wyoming’s Democrats, who have even a larger registration deficit, are not flocking to Cheney’s side. Wyoming Democratic Party spokesman Dean Ferguson condemned Cheney for consistently voting with Trump. “She doesn’t share our values,” he harrumphed.

For Cheney to win, she will need a larger segment of Republican voters than McMullin and an extremely robust turnout among Democrats, who often do not even bother to put up candidates for state office. Ferguson does not seem to have grasped that a principled conservative congresswoman with whom he shares little ideological ground is better than one with no real principles and a similar ideological disconnect.

Whether McMullin and Cheney win, they have introduced an interesting wrinkle to the political process. In deep-red states such Alabama or Mississippi, Democrats have no hope of one of their candidates defeating even the most extreme Republicans. But in each of those states, as well as a number of others, including Mitch McConnell’s Kentucky, Democratic and Republican voter registration is a good deal closer – and in some cases, as in Kentucky, almost identical.

Many Democrats will blanch at the prospect of voting for a conservative, but it will be a good deal easier to bridge the ideological divide in Congress if the first steps are taken before elections.


Read More

A male senior stands in the shadow of a Social Security card with bite missing.

Social Security faces automatic cuts in 2032 and Medicare in 2033. New polling suggests that gives Democrats a powerful election issue. Here’s the case.

DNY59 / Getty Images

Will the Debt Crisis Engineered by Republicans Succeed in Cutting Social Security and Medicare?

Overview

The Republican Party’s long game to reduce administrative state entitlement spending centers on creating a debt crisis to provide an excuse for limiting such spending. It may soon pay off. That strategy involved a quarter-century of engineered tax cuts responsible for the stunning rise in sovereign U.S. debt, threatening an eventual economic crisis.

Social Security benefits are projected under current law to be automatically cut in 2032. And Medicare benefits are projected to be automatically cut in 2033. Congressional Republicans intend for those automatic cuts to occur, opposing new taxes to prevent cuts. And they are using the ballooning national debt as an excuse to also oppose new general revenue spending to prevent benefit cuts.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner at the White House.

Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner in the East Room of the White House on September 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

When Leaders Disagree, Ceremony Plays an Important Role

When Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived at the White House on 24 September, the U.S. welcomed him with an elaborate display of ceremony. The Army Herald Trumpets sounded a fanfare, the Chinese and American national anthems were played, and the Old Guard Fife and Drum Corps performed. A military review was followed by a flyover involving a B-2 bomber and four F-22 fighter jets, according to the White House. It was an extraordinary production for two countries that still disagree on some of the most important issues in international politics.

Talks between President Donald Trump and Xi touched on trade, artificial intelligence and Taiwan. The visit was marked by warm words and some signs of cooperation, but it did not erase the fundamental competition between the United States and China. So why was all this ceremony staged? It is tempting to dismiss political pomp as mere window dressing: an expensive historical relic surrounding the serious business taking place behind closed doors. As a music historian, however, I think this misunderstands what ceremony does. Ceremony can become particularly valuable when words alone are not enough.

Keep ReadingShow less
Americans Voting in an Election

Americans Voting in an Election

Getty Images

Voting Is Not Just a Privilege It Is Every Citizens’ Responsibility

Despite the consistent determinations that US elections are secure across the country and there is virtually no evidence of non-citizens voting, in reports released as recently as September 2026; President Trump has doubled down on his claims that voter fraud is a major problem in America and on October 20th, he announced a new $25 Million Fraud Whistleblower program to be administered by the Department of Justice.

This announcement achieves a variety of the president’s goals: (i) It intentionally perpetuates the misinformation, that voter fraud is a serious problem in the United States; (ii) it undermines the trust in the voting systems, as well as in the states administering the elections; (iii) it fosters distrust amongst neighbors, who are more likely to suspect people of color and report them for a reward. This has the concomitant benefit of (iv) intimidating people who are in fear of going to the polls and (v) It gives the illusion that the federal government is prepared to give away more free money (along with the Tariff rebate checks, the Trump Accounts, the DOGE dividend, the direct payments for healthcare and the $5,000 for supporting GOP midterm candidates.)

Keep ReadingShow less
Capitol building with American flag behind it

Political Polarization and Extremism

Getty Images

Both Parties Have Forgotten How to Lose: It’s Time for Guardrails

On November 3 Americans vote in the midterm elections, and the most important question may be whether the losers accept the result. A Pew survey this summer found that just 55 percent of Americans are confident the midterms will be run fairly and accurately, down from 64 percent in 2022. The partisan detail is more revealing. Since 2024, Republican confidence has risen and Democratic confidence has fallen from 77 percent to 58 percent. Trust in the referee now depends on who holds power.

Democracy rests on a kind of sportsmanship agreement. The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr put it well: man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but his inclination to injustice makes it necessary. B. R. Ambedkar, the chief architect of India’s constitution, called democracy a method of bringing revolutionary change without bloodshed. Both understood that the system works only if the losing side agrees to try again next time instead of burning down the field. Americans in both parties are forgetting how to do that.

Keep ReadingShow less