Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
As the co-publisher of The Fulcrum it is my responsibility to adhere to the principles of our daily publication.
Our mission states we are “a platform where insiders and outsiders to politics are informed, meet, talk, and act to repair our democracy and make it live and work in our everyday lives.”
We approach all our news stories with an open and skeptical mind, and with a determination, through research and critical thinking, to acquaint our readers with a wide range of viewpoints.
As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in the opinion pieces we choose to publish.
And while many publications endorse candidates, The Fulcrum has never done so.
With the above in mind it is with great caution and forethought that I announce my personal support for the election of Utah’s Evan McMullin to the Senate. This is not a change in policy for The Fulcrum, which continues to focus on coverage of solutions to the problems plaguing our nations without endorsing any specific ideas or people.
Few deny that our political system is broken. The crippling partisanship and grinding gridlock in Congress that frustrate and anger most Americans must come to an end. However, election after election we vote for candidates who put political parties over the needs of our country. Does anyone really believe virtually every candidate’s promises that they will solve our problems and deliver real solutions to our nation’s problems? To believe so is the definition of insanity. Something must change in the type of people we elect.
Political leadership must change. The sound bite nature of media coverage must change. The very nature of the national dialogue must change. The behavior that people accept from our leaders must change.
And that is why I am supporting Evan McMullin for Senate.
McMullin is a former Republican, now a declared independent and fully backed by the Democratic Party. He says uniting voters across the spectrum is the only way to unseat the incumbent,Trump ally Mike Lee.
"People are sick of the divisiveness," McMullin told People. "We've got mounting challenges in Utah — inflation is worse here than almost anywhere else, air quality is a real challenge especially during the summer, we're running out of water in a historic drought, we've got high cost of health care and on and on. Politics of division and extremism just don't solve them, and people are tired of it."
Our nation is at a crossroads. Now more than ever, when we are locked into a divisive political battle between left and right, we can – and we must – come together to support one thing that unites us all: a belief in the freedom of people to determine their own destiny.
I believe Evan McMullin embodies these principles.
MuMullin is looking for votes from what he calls "principled Republicans," as well as Democrats and, of course, independents. This is not the typical way candidates seek election. McMullin says: "We're building a coalition of Utahns who have not been well represented in Utah or national politics for decades."
He continues: "We listen to each other. That's what's happening here that I don't think is happening anywhere else in the country, but it needs to. Our country will not survive if we don't build a new, sustainable coalition to defend our democracy. Even if it is Pollyanna-ish, it's what we have to do."Typically independent candidates do not succeed because finding a coalition of conservatives, moderates and liberals is a difficult task indeed. "It doesn't mean there aren't tough conversations. We don't agree on everything, and that's okay," McMullin says. He looks for moderate solutions that most people support. He explains, for example, he's a gun owner who believes in "sensible reform." People can enjoy their Second Amendment right and laws can protect against gun violence. "It's not an either-or."
McMullin’s campaign is focused on the vast middle that he believes represents America. While he admits we all don’t agree on the issues "we agree on standing up to the extremes."
Our country needs bold leadership. We need leadership that is direct and honest in public statements and puts ethical commitments above partisan or career objectives. I believe McMullin embodies this principle.
Our country needs leaders who respect all persons, including opponents, and are willing to engage constructively. I believe McMullin embodies this principle.
Our country needs leaders who take full accountability for actions through a willingness to amend one’s positions, learning from one's mistakes, thus resulting in a more constructive approach to problem identification and solutions. I believe McMullin embodies this principle.
Our country needs leaders who always remain open to learning new information and seeking it out through supporting research and analysis that actively broaden one’s horizons. I believe McMullin embodies this principle.
Our country needs leaders who are willing to demonstrate bold leadership by taking political risks if necessary to advance controversial policies, particularly those likely to bring long-term benefits. I believe McMullin embodies this principle.
Only with leaders like Evan McMullin can we defeat the tribalism that separates us as a nation and build bridges and alliances beyond one’s constituency. By adhering to the principles that I believe guide McMullin, and leaders like him, we can build trust and understanding as a nation. "We are at a real crossroads in American history when we have to get back to basics. This coalition is defending what matters most in America and without that we won't solve any other problems in our country," he asserts. "Every generation or two there is a realignment in American politics," McMullin says. "And we need that right now to stand up to those who threaten our democracy.”
I agree.
Ben Droz
Ben Droz
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally at Pinnacle Bank Expo Center on the Nebraska State Fairgrounds on October 05, 2026 in Grand Island, Nebraska.
The President Invited Iran to Bomb My Home
I was driving home to San Diego from Los Angeles on Monday night when I heard that the President of the United States had offered both cities up to Iran as bomb targets. At a rally in Nebraska, defending his war, Trump told the crowd, “let [Iran] take out Los Angeles, let ‘em take out San Diego.” It was, he said, “a very small price to pay.”
I was coming from a Bernie Sanders rally for Proposition 40, the one-time tax on California billionaires that would send 90% of its revenue to healthcare. We desperately need it to pass because, in order to give tax breaks to billionaires, Trump signed a law that will strip health coverage from 10 million Americans; this tax will make sure we can still cover Californians. Call me crazy, but I think taxing billionaires one time so we can make sure kids in California get to see a doctor is a very small price to pay. I also think that even if Trump were joking, it is indefensible to make jokes about the potential destruction of so many lives. Human life is never a small price to pay. Human life is priceless.
Plus, the reality is: here in San Diego, we’re already paying the price for Trump’s actions, and it’s not small at all. He has gutted FEMA, tried to kill climate resiliency programs, and destroyed public health standards, while his signature law is set to cut off health insurance and food support for hundreds of thousands of San Diegans. Like plenty of American cities, San Diego is already busy finding local solutions to respond to the problems this president has recklessly created.
Not to mention, at least 19 American service members have been killed in this war already. Human rights monitors have documented more than 3,600 dead in Iran by April alone. Here at home, gas is sitting just pennies below its all-time record. Taxpayers have already spent more than $45 billion on the war, while Trump’s oil and gas portfolio has grown by roughly $15.5 million this year alone. Of course anything is a “small price” to someone paying free.99 for this war, and profiting from it. Meanwhile, We the People are paying twice: first for the war, and then for the consequences of that war. But now he wants San Diego to pay a third time, flippantly offering us up to Iran.
It is worth noticing which cities he thought to name. Were San Diego and Los Angeles strategically chosen to signify something to his audience, or were they simply the first cities that came to mind as expendable places? Either way, the effect is to normalize—-and to gauge a crowd’s reaction to–the idea of massive violence in major California cities, suitable targets because of their perceived liberal lean. So what if Iran needs to bomb a little bit of America before the war can be over? Who cares, says Trump, if they target Los Angeles and San Diego?
By the way, why didn’t he offer up San Francisco, the free-love hippie-town MAGA loves to hate (and also my birthplace)? Could it be because that’s where the tech titans live? The same ones who joined Trump for Xi Jinping’s state dinner, a guest list worth a combined $2.4 trillion?
San Diego may have fewer billionaires, but it is home to more than 115,000 active-duty service members and 230,000 veterans. One in six active-duty sailors–in the entire Navy–is stationed here. So is one in four Marines. You cannot throw a rock in this county without hitting a military family: brats and spouses and veterans are among us. I got out of the Navy last year after ten years, and eight of those were here in San Diego. When Trump says “let ‘em take out San Diego,” he’s talking about the backbone of the United States military. He’s also talking about the people fighting his war.
San Diego has not been watching this war from the sidelines. Today, the USS Abraham Lincoln returns to North Island after an almost yearlong deployment to the Middle East that featured food shortages, broken toilets, and mold in the showers after 286 days at sea without a single port call. Eight sailors in the Lincoln’s strike group attempted suicide, but in August, when a reporter asked whether the deployment had gone on too long, Trump said “not nearly long enough.” Now he has told a crowd in Nebraska that we should let Iran take out the city those sailors call home. These are sociopathic sentiments.
Last week at Quantico, Pete Hegseth closed his address to the force by telling them, “President Trump has your back and so do I.” To the contrary, President Trump has put one of the biggest military towns in the country forward as a target for our adversaries. With friends like these, the “domestic” in “against all enemies, foreign and domestic” starts to sound a lot less hypothetical.
San Diego is home to Naval Air Station North Island, Naval Base San Diego, Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, the Point Loma submarine base, Camp Pendleton, and Miramar (and I have been permanently stationed at or trained at all of them). If Iran bombed San Diego and Los Angeles, aside from the devastating loss of life, it would cripple an immense share of our national security readiness.
And for what, exactly? Trump says the war is “essentially almost over with.” This is the same man who claimed in June 2025 that Iran’s nuclear program had been “obliterated,” then launched a war over it anyway on February 28. More than seven months later, he wants us to believe two things at once: that we’ve basically won, and that we might need to sacrifice an American city or two to finish winning. If the war is almost over, why does anybody need to take out San Diego?
I wonder if Trump’s endorsed candidate for California’s 48th District here in San Diego County will respond to these remarks. He recently said “no pain, no gain,” when referring to the gas prices San Diegans are paying. Jim Desmond, would you apply that same mindset if we were bombed? Or do you have the moral courage to stand up for the people you’re running to represent?
Last November, six Democratic members of Congress, all veterans, including Senator Mark Kelly, recorded a video reminding troops of their duty to disobey unlawful orders, restating the law that says so. Trump called it “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH,” and then his Justice Department went looking for an indictment, which a grand jury refused. The president treated reading the law out loud to the troops as a capital offense, but then he himself invited a foreign enemy to destroy two American cities, possibly as a punchline. Is anyone calling the latter sedition? Who is demanding accountability?
Calling our lives a small price to pay affirms a moral bankruptcy, as well as an obvious dereliction of duty to the office he holds. While we can’t impeach him or invoke the 25th Amendment ourselves, we must stop being so quiet about what we’re paying already. We can make our voices heard by calling our representatives, writing op-eds, knocking doors, phone banking, and voting in defiance of the man who threatens the safety of our city. Ballots are already arriving in mailboxes. Vote, and vote yes on 40 (and no on 41 and 42).
Trump has been harming our cities for a while, but now he is inviting our military adversaries to join him in the harm. If we have any self-respect as Americans, we must not tolerate our leaders disregarding the dignity of lives in this way. We must fight for our home.
Julie Roland was a Naval Officer for ten years, deploying to both the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf as a helicopter pilot before separating in June 2025 as a Lieutenant Commander. She has a law degree from the University of San Diego, a Master of Laws from Columbia University, and is a member of the Truman National Security Project.