logo
How the Utah GOP convention will decide the fate of party unity

How the Utah GOP convention will decide the fate of party unity

Yahoo16-05-2025
Utah Republican Party delegates will decide Saturday if the state GOP will launch a war against elected officials, election outcomes and the primary process.
The local party volunteers will vote on an amendment that would change party rules to expel candidates who use signatures to get on the ballot.
They will also vote on how the next party chair should advance the decade-old project to remove the signature option completely.
For many of the 4,000 state delegates, the race for party chair between incumbent Rob Axson and former lawmaker Phil Lyman signifies much more than the typical partisan spat.
It represents a fundamental disagreement about whether the state's trajectory demands radical disruption of the status quo or continued collaboration with leaders across the Republican Party spectrum.
Both candidates have expressed support for President Donald Trump while touting their MAGA bonafides but offer different visions for the best strategy to keep Utah red.
Mediating party member disagreements, partnering with the Legislature and launching record-breaking fundraising and get-out-the-vote operations have been the hallmarks of Axson's two years in office that he promises to repeat if reelected.
Alleging unsubstantiated corruption, rooting out the influence of so-called RINOs and rejecting compromise defined Lyman's recent gubernatorial campaign which he has morphed into a bid for chair as he prepares to run for governor again in 2028.
Hanging over Saturday's vote is Trump's endorsement of Axson which has been framed by some as a vindication of Axson's leadership and by others as proof of establishment subterfuge.
Regardless of who they support, the delegates who spoke with the Deseret News agree that the outcome of the party chair election will shape the future of the Utah Republican Party for the next two years and the character of Utah conservatism beyond that.
Since 2014, Republicans have fought over the passage of SB54.
The infamous law was — according to the policymakers involved — an effort to prevent the elimination of Utah's unique caucus convention system.
It combined the convention candidate nomination process with a signature-gathering path to qualify for primary elections in order to stave off a ballot initiative that threatened to take primaries out of party hands completely.
Multiple GOP chairs have since sought to repeal the law through legislative action and legal challenges, arguing that it violates the party's right of association and enables big-money candidates.
Axson and Lyman both want to return candidate selection to party insiders. But delegates view the two prospective chairs as diverging on what they are willing to do to make this happen.
'The selection process is at the heart of this chairman's race,' said Don Guymon, the chair of the Davis County Republican Party. 'Who's best (positioned) to see if we can repeal SB54 is probably one of the central questions of the election.'
While Axson has said that legislators must reverse the policy which courts have upheld on several occasions, Lyman has said he will do whatever it takes to block the path of candidates who gather signatures.
On Tuesday, Lyman said he would fight back against policies the GOP disagrees with, including the dual-pathway primary system, through 'nullification,' a theory that argues that an authority can ignore laws it deems to be unconstitutional.
'The GOP is the 800-pound gorilla in the room but we refuse to flex our muscle,' Lyman said. 'I'm done with the notion that we are weak.'
Following the chair election, delegates are scheduled to vote on a proposed amendment to the GOP party constitution that would revoke the party membership for one year of any candidate who pursues signature qualification.
Taylor Morgan, executive director of Count My Vote, the group partially responsible for the state's signature primary path, told the Deseret News the party has tried SB54 workarounds like this before to no avail.
'It's a shameful and desperate attempt to prop up the party's failing caucuses and conventions,' Morgan said. 'Count My Vote remains committed to our mission and is prepared to take action to ensure that all Utah voters will continue to have a voice in our elections.'
If the party moves forward with these limitations on signature gathering it could spell the end of its official party status in general elections and the end of the convention nominating process, according to Stan Lockhart, former GOP chair from 2007-2009.
SB54 outlines that for a party to officially nominate someone to the general election it must allow candidates to qualify for a primary through both party conventions and gathering signatures.
Lockhart recognizes that Lyman's 'more militant' style resonates with some delegates. But he said it is much easier to claim something is unconstitutional during a campaign than it is to actually go against court rulings.
'You can win the battle and lose the war,' Lockhart said. 'If you go down the Phil Lyman route, I believe that will trigger a new initiative, then the Republican Party has to bet on the fact that the voters are going to want less of a say in elections, not more of a say, in order to keep the caucus convention system.'
Lyman and his wing of the party view SB54 as a symptom of a much broader problem that they believe has brought the state to the precipice of permanently losing what makes it great.
At the center of this diagnosis is what Lyman has called 'the establishment,' or the cast of elected officials he claims have allowed 'liberal' policies on immigration, spending, elections and DEI to infiltrate the state.
Lyman did not respond to multiple requests for an interview.
Sophie Anderson, a state delegate from Davis County and one of Lyman's most dedicated supporters, said everything about the race for chair comes down to the establishment vs. anti-establishment dichotomy.
'That's what this race is about,' Anderson said. 'Do we want the status quo establishment candidate? Or do we want the anti-establishment breaking through the barriers that will eventually revive our party in Phil Lyman?'
Even Axson's endorsement from Trump — which precipitated endorsements from convention favorites Sen. Mike Lee, Rep. Burgess Owens and state lawmakers — is simply evidence that 'the establishment is terrified of a Phil Lyman GOP chairmanship,' according to Anderson.
But Axson, having spent his career working for Lee and advocating for conservative policies as an activist, said it was 'laughable to be called 'establishment.''
The contentious nature of the chair election is representative of 'undercurrents that have been there for a long time' in the party, according to Axson, but he said the healthy debate ends as soon as delegates resort to 'name calling.'
Axson said his endorsement from Trump, which came amid several state chair and congressional endorsements, showed that the president recognized his track record of blowing past party fundraising records and sending money and volunteers to help Trump and other candidates win elections in Arizona and Nevada.
'I think it goes to show the power of being collaborative as a team to try to get past the finish line,' Axson said. 'My focus is for the Utah Republican Party to win by elevating and growing its strength and relevance to benefit our state for years to come. This is not a placeholder as I run for other office.'
Don Willie, founder of the political consulting firm Epicenter Strategies, said Utah's senior senator 'obviously ... played a critical role' in Axson's endorsement from Trump.
Willie, who has worked closely with GOP national committeeman Brad Bonham for years, said the endorsement will have a 'big impact' on delegates because it bursts the assumption that Lyman is the default 'MAGA candidate' and highlights Axson's relationship with national players.
Michelle Tanner, a state delegate and St. George city councilwoman, said the endorsement speaks to Axson's broad support from the grassroots on up to the White House.
But more than that, Tanner said, it shows he can build lasting coalitions with an actual resume of party victories that benefit the party as a whole, not just one faction.
'We can't truly have the best things rise to the top if we can't feel comfortable having that open dialogue and knowing that we have a leader of our party who is not out there burning bridges but is out there learning how to build more bridges,' Tanner said. 'We want our movement to be growing, not dwindling down to a select few narrow viewpoints.'
Alexis Ence, a member of the GOP's governing body, the State Central Committee, said both Axson and Lyman are both authentic conservatives. The distinction comes down to the role of a leader.
Despite his personal views, a football coach's job is to resolve problems behind the scenes and not to 'trash players publicly' because that 'damages the whole team,' Ence said.
Carolina Herrin, a state delegate with multiple other positions within the party, said Axson has followed through with his promise of 'putting Utah on the map.'
Herrin supports Axson for reelection because she thinks the party should maintain this momentum which she fears would be lost under a chair with Lyman's approach to party politics.
'We need someone who is able to work at all levels with every type of individual and not pick and choose who they feel is more conservative than others,' Herrin said.
Mackey Smith, a central committee member and the former chair for Utah Young Republicans, said he has heard from many delegates who supported Lyman for governor but do not want him elected as chair.
While Lyman's rhetoric is in line with what many delegates are hungry for, Smith said, there is a recognition that to bring about desired changes the chair needs a working relationship with the Legislature like Axson has.
Yemi Arunsi, a state delegate and former Davis County chair, said Axson has gone the extra mile in providing support for local parties and candidates.
Arunsi called Axson's endorsement from Trump a 'game changer' for the party that reveals how Utah's influence has grown within the national GOP under Axson.
This growth, according to Arunsi, is attributed to an approach that welcomes a diverse group of Republicans.
'Whomever it is in the leadership position, if that individual is not ready to to bring the party together, then I think we will start seeing an exit of Republicans that support the party,' Arunsi said.
On Saturday, party delegates will hear remarks from Axson and Lyman, as well as candidates for GOP secretary, before a leadership vote.
Delegates will meet at the Utah Valley University's UCCU Center where there will also be a U.S. Senate panel with Lee and Sen. John Curtis, and a U.S. House panel with Owens and Reps. Blake Moore, Celeste Maloy and Mike Kennedy.
Additionally, there will be a statewide officials panel with Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, Attorney General Derek Brown, Auditor Tina Cannon, Treasurer Marlo Oaks, Senate President Stuart Adams and House Speaker Mike Schultz.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Who really suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome?
Who really suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome?

Boston Globe

timean hour ago

  • Boston Globe

Who really suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome?

Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Two decades on, Krauthammer's coinage has been appropriated, rebranded, and defined down — way down. 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' is now flung at anyone who objects to President Trump's conduct or opposes his policies. The term is no longer reserved for over-the-top expressions of revulsion — like actor Robert De Niro using a televised appearance at the Tony Awards to Advertisement No — today 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' is used as an all-purpose put-down to deride any Trump critics, including those who stick to serious, fact-based analysis. I've lost count of all the times I've been Advertisement A woman seen at the Iowa State Fairgrounds on July 3, when President Trump was speaking there. Scott Olson/Getty The word 'syndrome' notwithstanding, this is merely political trash talk, popularized by Trump and his allies as a way to wave off criticism without having to engage it. Instead of refuting arguments or defending policy, the magic letters 'TDS' turn disagreement into proof of mental defect. Yet if 'derangement' means the loss of proportion and judgment Krauthammer was getting at, then the most severe cases aren't among Trump's critics. They're in the ranks of his most ardent loyalists. The real Trump Derangement Syndrome shows up in three telltale symptoms. First is the cult-like worship that treats Trump as infallible — his acolytes profess adoration not only for what he does, but for whatever could flow from him. Emblematic of that mindset are the Advertisement Second is the abandonment of principles that once seemed non-negotiable. Conservatives and Republicans who used to champion free trade A man with a MAGA tattoo on his stomach attended a rally at Macomb Community College in Warren, Mich., to mark President Trump's 100th day in office on April 29. EMILY ELCONIN/NYT Third is the unsettling delight so many supporters take in Trump's most outrageous behavior — a kind of giddy worship that equates offensiveness with authenticity. Such brazenness has been a hallmark of his political career — from mocking John McCain's Vietnam War heroism to charging undocumented immigrants with ' Advertisement Meanwhile, they reflexively use 'TDS!' as a go-to put-down for anything from mild disagreement to serious moral critique, framing opposition not as argument but as pathology — an easy, cheap discredit. Yes, plenty of Trump-haters go overboard — but in MAGA circles, the 'TDS' tag is sprayed far wider, hitting thoughtful critics just as readily as the genuinely unhinged. What is truly alarming is how some have sought to legalize that insult by casting dissent as disease. In Minnesota this spring, five Republican senators proposed a bill that would Krauthammer's original point in 2003 was that derangement is the breakdown of proportion and prudence. That breakdown isn't found among critics who quote Trump accurately and challenge his claims. The most alarming political derangement today affects those who cannot conceive that there are legitimate reasons to be appalled by the president, and so explain anti-Trump dissent as a sign of mental weakness. If reason is the measure, then those who shout 'TDS!' the loudest are the ones most in need of treatment. Jeff Jacoby can be reached at

Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?
Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?

Boston Globe

timean hour ago

  • Boston Globe

Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?

David Bumcrot Belmont Heather Mac Donald cites several shooting incidents in Washington, D.C., including two heinous crimes involving the shooting deaths of innocent young children. Nowhere does she mention how Republicans block every effort at enacting gun-control legislation. Also left out is the number of convicted felons that President Trump has pardoned. Let's stop pretending this isn't just Trump's attempt to initiate martial law. Advertisement Robyn King Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Ipswich In Trump's political theater, Washington becomes a prop President Trump's National Guard deployment to Washington, D.C. is less about public safety and more about political theater. D.C.'s violent crime rates have fallen sharply since 2023. Cherry-picking a few brutal crimes to paint the city as in crisis ignores the data and serves a narrative, not the truth. If homicide rates alone justified military involvement, other US cities — some worse off than D.C. — would already be occupied by federal troops. The National Guard's limited 'command presence' won't fix longstanding issues of gun violence, juvenile crime, or car theft. Lasting reductions come from targeted policing, intelligence-driven enforcement, and community partnerships — not a 30-day show of force. Advertisement Worse, the move undermines D.C.'s elected leadership and sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach. Washington's majority-minority residents have endured decades of over-policing. Imposing military oversight without an emergency inflames mistrust, chills cooperation with police, and treats citizens like subjects. Real safety is built, not staged. This deployment is a political stunt masquerading as crime control — and Washington deserves better than to be used as a prop in someone else's campaign. Paul Swindlehurst Londonderry, N.H. For this administration, an easy distraction It seems our president has found the secret for making the Jeffrey Epstein controversy go away: Invade Washington, D.C. It's amazing how short the media's attention span is. They are so easily distracted by the next outrageous thing President Trump and his representatives do or say. There is no follow-up, no accountability — essentially just narration and public relations. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon was so right: 'Flood the zone,' and you can do anything. Patricia Fabbri Lynnfield

Over 300 protests held Saturday against Trump redistricting push
Over 300 protests held Saturday against Trump redistricting push

USA Today

time5 hours ago

  • USA Today

Over 300 protests held Saturday against Trump redistricting push

Pro-democracy activists and labor groups held hundreds of rallies and other events across the United States on Saturday, Aug. 16, protesting the Trump administration's push for Texas to redraw its congressional map in favor of Republicans. Former Congressman Beto O'Rourke was among those who spoke on Saturday in Texas, from which dozens of Democratic state lawmakers fled to deny Republicans the quorum needed to vote on a redistricting plan that President Donald Trump had demanded. "They do this because they are afraid," O'Rourke told an audience on Saturday, speaking of those attempting redistricting. "They fear this power they see here today." More: Obama calls Texas GOP redistricting an 'assault' on democracy Drucilla Tigner, executive director of pro-democracy coalition Texas For All, told Reuters pro-democracy and labor groups held over 300 events attended by tens of thousands of people in 44 states and Washington, D.C. Many of the more than 50 Texas Democrats who fled the state have been staying in Illinois, also the site of protests on Saturday. The Texas lawmakers in Illinois are out of reach of civil arrest warrants that could be acted on within Texas. The Texas Democrats kept the map from coming to a vote during a special session Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called that ended Friday. Abbott immediately called a second special session. Abbott said that redistricting plans, legislation to increase flash flood safety in the wake of deadly July flooding, and other legislative work remain undone because Democrats are absent. California's Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom on Thursday, Aug. 14 unveiled a redistricting plan in his state that he says would give Democrats there five more Congressional seats, possibly offsetting any Republican gains in Texas. The Texas House Democrats said in a written statement on Thursday that they will only return to Texas if their state's special legislation is ended and once California's redistricting maps are introduced.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store