This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Utah has the opportunity to lead the nation once again. In the face of candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Utah could choose an alternative that could possibly change the course of politics for a generation. Utah could achieve consensus on an alternative to Trump and Clinton, set the example, announce it to the nation and invite every other state to do the same. At most, we could regain our national identity and sanity. At least, the true spirit of freedom can rest on this exceptional state.
Now is the time for Utahns to choose freedom, prudence and accountability to our rising generations over cynicism and partisan party politics. The two-party system has served us well, and will again but only if we choose freedom over partisanship. To choose an alternative to Trump and Clinton is not to choose a third party. It's a way of righting the ship of politics. It would be an unavoidable reminder to Republican and Democratic parties that Utahns, speaking in behalf of the American people, still regard character over cynicism.
To choose an alternative we must first set aside several fallacies about election politics. First, we must set aside the fallacy that a vote for anyone other than Trump is a vote for Clinton. Literally, only a vote for Clinton is a vote for Clinton. This fallacy assumes that Trump is better than Clinton, assumes that political parties have inherent virtue that transcends any candidate's failings, assumes hatred and fear are our guiding stars in casting a vote and assumes that your vote belongs to other people — all dangerous assumptions.
Second, we deceive ourselves with the "lesser of two evils" fallacy. One conservative pundit, in an uncomfortable defense of Trump, actually likened supporting Trump over Clinton to America choosing Stalin over Hitler in World War II — Stalin, like Trump, being the acceptable choice of evils. Of course, there was an alternative voiced most assertively at that time by General George Patton — both men are unacceptable tyrants and both need to go. These historically disappointing choices lead many people to think that all we have is a choice between the lesser of two evils, so pick your poison. Yes, Hitler was responsible for the deaths of at least six million people. But we tend to forget that, our "friend" Stalin was subsequently responsible for the deaths of 60 million people. Was he the lesser of two evils? And why can't we stand to say both are evil and unacceptable?
Third, the "we'll lose the Supreme Court" argument is a fallacy. We don't lose the Supreme Court, one way or the other, because of the next president. We lose the Supreme Court by constitutional default when the American people and their elected representatives in Congress abrogate their duties. Imagine the depths of conservative despair when Donald Trump is their only hope for affirming Supreme Court decisions. Instead of pinning their hopes on a character such as Trump, clear-minded conservatives would do better to rest their efforts on advancing separation of powers and the legitimate role of Congress, both in confirming court nominees and in limiting the jurisdiction of the court. Are we to be blackmailed into supporting Trump just because we lack the vision to approach the perceived problem constitutionally? One short day after Trump's conservative legal apologists created a list of acceptable potential court nominees, Trump dismissed the list as simply suggestions.
On this single issue, Supreme Court nominees, the rush to Trump reveals the abject failure of the conservative movement in America. Instead, these "losers," as Trump likes to say, place all of their hope for a better America on him. Only conservative "losers" would construct a political scenario where Donald Trump is the savior of threatened sacred constitutional rights.
Trump has successfully rewired the political judgment of Republican and many otherwise conservative leaders but there remain many rational and reasonable Americans, especially in Utah, who still see things clearly. There still are many intelligent Americans, in both parties and among independents, who see Trump and Clinton for who they are. A majority of primary voters in Utah certainly saw Trump for who he is.
Utah has one more opportunity to lead the nation. We led the nation in immigration policy. We lead the nation in family prosperity. We lead the nation in having the largest middle class. Utah is exceptional in a wide category of economic and social measurements. We displayed our political exceptionalism when we gave Trump a third place finish — his most resounding primary defeat. Now is the time to take this exceptionalism one step further.
Even if the #neverTrump movement manages to come up with a viable alternative to Trump and Clinton, Utah should lead the way. Utah can lead the way. We can choose to get behind a consensus candidate or write in an alternative, be it a chosen son such as Mitt Romney or Mike Lee or be it anyone else. Political parties do not own our votes. Our votes are our own. A vote is a sacred sign of our personal integrity. It's time for Utah to be exceptional once again.
Paul Mero is president and CEO of Next Generation Freedom Fund, a newly formed public policy group.