Evan McMullin’s independent campaign for the U.S. Senate fits into a broader context. It could usher in a new politics featuring coalitions of diverse voters who cooperate to elect nonpartisan office holders. Before you jump to the comments section, hear me out.
The world is reordering.
What remains of the postwar liberal order is being burned down, mainly by China. In the democracies, far-right parties have been taking sledgehammers to structures, accelerating the erosion of norms and rules. These forces of disorder are giving rise to new order building by those who still want rules-based systems and liberal democracy. Uncertainty and opportunity can combine to create new political arrangements that, until recently, were considered unthinkable.
Last October, for example, the Czech Republic was rocked when center-left and center-right parties united to win control of parliament from the far-right party headed by Andrej Babis, a populist billionaire who had been prime minister for nearly a decade. In the past, opposition parties had splintered the vote, but they set aside their differences to drive out a leader they believed had degraded the country’s historical path from post-communist to Western democracy.
In June, Israeli politicians assembled the most diverse national unity government in Israel’s 75-year history. It stretches from Jewish settler parties on the right to liberal parties on the left and includes an Islamist Israeli Arab party — the first ever. “Key Israeli politicians swallowed their pride,” Tom Friedman wrote in The New York Times, “softened policy edges and came together” for the good of the country. Here again unity was powered by broad agreement that the longtime far right office holder (Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu) had harmed the rule of law.
The existential threat that Donald Trump and his supporters now pose to our democracy should compel us to also consider new political arrangements. January 6 and the right’s continued embrace of Trump’s Big Lie are five-alarm fires that demand our immediate attention. McMullin’s independent campaign seems to be motivated by the same concerns.
Incumbent Sen. Mike Lee is the Trump-endorsed candidate in this race. That means he will probably win at the Republican Party convention. Anticipating this, Becky Edwards is trying to trigger a primary challenge through the signature route. Let’s assume that happens. I still think Lee wins the primary. That would be good news for McMullin. He wants to run against a far-right Lee rather than a moderate Edwards, who would make it harder for McMullin to strip away the disaffected Republicans he needs to win the general election.
I spoke to Kael Weston, who is the likely Democratic candidate unless delegates to the party convention choose “Nobody” to run against Lee. Weston believes he can win a three-way contest: Edwards and McMullin divide the Republican vote, and Weston conquers with a plurality made up of mainly Democrats and independents. But Edwards is unlikely to successfully primary Lee from his left. In recent polling, 57% of Republicans said they approve of Lee’s job performance.
For McMullin to win, Democrats — binders of them — must vote for him, and he must pick up independents and a healthy number of disaffected Republicans, leaving Lee with the hard-core Trump voters. McMullin is betting on the skepticism many Utah Republicans still harbor about Trump.
The key to threading the needle — as McMullin must to win — is a broad, informal unity vehicle that enables Utah Republicans to leave the Trump cult without having to become something they will never be (Democrats). The Czech and Israeli examples show that unity happens when there is a common opponent — in this case, far-right populism — and a shared mission — to make basic functions of government work again and safeguard democracy.
McMullin isn’t a “re-branded Republican,” as Weston recently argued to Tribune columnist Robert Gehrke because there is no more GOP. There is only the party of Trump, whom McMullin has opposed since 2016. I reviewed his tweets and retweets since he declared in October. He can be short on specifics, but he supports progress on issues such as climate change, voting rights, health care, immigration, vaccinations, the ERA, marriage equality and the filibuster. He opposes the death penalty and gerrymanders.
Crucially, he gets January 6 right: It was an “insurrection.” He objected when the RNC said those who attacked the Capitol were engaged in “legitimate political discourse.” He doesn’t take any PAC (special interest) money. If elected, he says he will not caucus with either party, to maintain his independence.
Based on this review, I’d say McMullin is a centrist who leans right. I reached out to the United Utah Party, which is not running a candidate in this race. Hillary Stirling, chair of the UUP, said they support McMullin. “There is consensus within the UUP that Evan would represent all of Utah far better than the incumbent does.”
Altogether, delegates to the Democratic convention should decline to run a candidate for U.S. senator, thus clearing the field for Democrats to vote for McMullin in the general election. This is in our self-interest: Some say in government is better than no say. And no say is the long-standing Democratic condition in Utah. In an evenly divided Senate, McMullin’s independent status could give him greater influence, amplifying our voices even more.
We live in unusual times, which can give rise to unusual cooperation. If Utah Democrats, independents, and disaffected Republicans were to unite to support McMullin’s bid, that could be enough to unseat Lee. Utah would send out into the world a loud message of change. And our broken two-party political system might never be the same again.
One can hope.
David Burns
David Burns has degrees in history and law. He resides in Salt Lake City.