The “independent” gambit
Imagine you’re an Idaho Democrat. For whatever reason, you live in one of the reddest states in the nation. Despite drawing enthusiastic crowds for abortion or AOC in the big cities, you know that, realistically, most voters in the state will select the Republican candidate without a second thought.
In the last legislative session, you controlled a total of 15 seats out of 105. You haven’t elected a Democratic United States senator since Frank Church was defeated in 1980, and outside of a single term by Walt Minnick from 2008–2010, you haven’t had Democratic representation in the U.S. House of Representatives in more than thirty years. The last time Idaho had a Democratic governor was 1994, the last time the state voted for a Democratic presidential candidate was 1964, and the last time Democrats controlled the Legislature was 1960.
According to the latest numbers from the Secretary of State’s office, there are more than a million registered voters in Idaho. Of those, nearly 63% are affiliated with the Idaho GOP, while less than 12% are registered Democrats.
If you’re an Idaho Dem, that has to be pretty bleak.
But wait! Twenty-four percent of voters are unaffiliated with either party. That’s more than twice the number of registered Democrats in the state. What if… what if you could find a candidate who held a solid proportion of Democratic policy positions but without the blue label? Maybe—just maybe—you could win the Democrats, win the unaffiliated voters, and pull just enough Republicans to reach the finish line, especially in a midterm year when you expect Republican turnout to be down.
That seems to be the strategy this year, doesn’t it?
I wrote in The Hill earlier this month about how Democrats in Idaho, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Montana are publicly supporting supposedly independent candidates for U.S. Senate races. In all but one of those states—Montana—Democratic Party leaders successfully pushed their own nominees off the ballot.
You already know the story of Idaho Democrats throwing their support to Todd Achilles, who, despite filing as an independent candidate against incumbent Republican Sen. Jim Risch, was a Democratic state legislator just over a year ago. But this strategy appears to be growing here in Idaho.
Up in District 1, Democrats usually don’t even bother running. When Scott Herndon defeated incumbent Sen. Jim Woodward in 2022, the left side of the electorate supported Steve Johnson as an independent write-in candidate. When Woodward defeated Herndon in 2024, an independent named Dan Rose ran in the general election. Now that Herndon has once again defeated Woodward, Steve Johnson is back, once again running as an independent.
Over in District 24, Rep. Clint Hostetler survived a brutal primary that saw both of his seatmates ousted—Rep. Steve Miller as well as fellow member of the Gang of 8, Sen. Glenneda Zuiderveld. No Democrat filed for this race in a heavily red district, but the party appeared to have a card hidden up its sleeve in “independent” candidate Kevin Moxley.
According to Sunshine, Moxley created his campaign committee in January 2025, filing as an unaffiliated candidate. However, in July of that year, the Twin Falls Democratic Central Committee gave Moxley $500, while prominent Democrats, including state chairwoman Lauren Necochea and former congressman Larry LaRocco, donated to his campaign as well.
Yet the connections between Kevin Moxley and the Democratic Party go much deeper.
Sen. Zuiderveld recently posted a screenshot of the National Democratic Training Committee highlighting Moxley’s participation in one of its training events. Moxley’s social media post boasts that, following his training with the Democrats, he had filed for an EIN and signed up to run for the Idaho Legislature. He also said he had met with Idaho Democratic Party staff, presumably to discuss his campaign strategy:
Also in the summer of 2025, Moxley co-founded Indivisible Twin Falls County, the organization that sponsored the “No Kings” protests against President Donald Trump. Speakers at the June 2025 protest included David Roth, who would go on to win the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate before being cast aside in favor of Todd Achilles, and Terri Pickens, the eventual Democratic nominee for governor.
Federal Election Commission records show that Moxley has made consistent donations to Democratic candidates and organizations for years, including Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, the Progressive Turnout Project, the Democratic National Committee, and the Idaho Democratic Party. Moxley appears to still contribute regularly to the Idaho Democrats, with the most recent recorded transaction coming in August of this year. He also contributed to Democratic congressional candidates Kaylee Peterson and Ellie Gilbreath earlier this year.
As of today, Moxley’s website emphasizes his veteran status, his support for the Second Amendment, and his independence from partisan politics. Yet a screenshot from April 2025 shows that his campaign originally promoted positions more closely associated with the Democratic left: support for LGBTQ+ policies, diversity, equity, and inclusion programs at public colleges and universities, and opposition to enforcing immigration laws.
The evidence points to Moxley having longstanding ties to Democratic candidates, organizations, donors, and policy priorities, even as his current campaign emphasizes independence, gun rights, agriculture, and other themes more likely to appeal to Republican voters. It seems clear to me that Kevin Moxley is a progressive Democrat who, like Todd Achilles, is trying to rebrand as a gun-toting farm-supporting independent.
The Idaho Dairy Industry PAC, which supported Alexandra Caval against Rep. Hostetler in the Republican primary, has thrown its support behind Moxley, donating the maximum of $1,000 to his campaign. Moxley also received a $1,000 check from the Political Action Committee for Education (PACE), the Idaho teachers union PAC.
While PACE typically donates to Democrats or more moderate Republicans, the Dairy Industry PAC is influential in Republican politics, especially in southern and eastern Idaho. Dairy industry lobbying groups have also fought strenuously against stricter enforcement of immigration law. Idaho Dairymen’s Association lobbyist Bob Naerebout has said that as much as 70% of the industry’s workforce could potentially fail an I-9 audit, meaning aggressive enforcement could severely disrupt the industry.
Yet there’s even stronger evidence of Republicans quietly supporting Moxley’s campaign against a conservative Republican incumbent. Rep. Hostetler defeated incumbent Rep. Chenele Dixon in 2024, and Moxley’s Sunshine report shows a $100 donation from Michael Dixon, Chenele’s husband.
As I wrote yesterday, we seem to have discarded the old concept of party loyalty and embraced a new, short-sighted, self-serving vision of what political parties are for. Democrats are happy to cast aside their own nominees for progressive independents they deem more electable, while some Republicans are just as willing to support progressive independents against conservative Republicans—even when those supposed independents take the opposite position on nearly every issue that matters to Republican voters.
Rep. Hostetler was nominated by the same Republican voters who rejected Sen. Zuiderveld and Rep. Miller. But for some people and organizations, that isn’t good enough, so they’re throwing their resources behind an independent candidate whose earlier campaign messaging closely tracked Democratic priorities.
Idaho is a partisan state, so it’s likely that most voters, whether in Magic Valley legislative races or statewide races for the U.S. Senate, will choose the Republican candidate without a second thought. But this November will provide interesting data about how far that partisan support goes. Will the gambit of running independent candidates succeed in peeling off Republican support? Or is Idaho simply a red state through and through?
I’ll let you know on November 4.
Feature image created with ChatGPT.
Little and Simpson want Space Force to come to Idaho
This August, we both had the opportunity to join Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Director John Wagner in welcoming NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman to Idaho Falls.
Administrator Isaacman’s visit was part of his nationwide effort to see firsthand the people and institutions that are shaping America’s future in space. His stop in Idaho highlighted something we already know well — some of the nation’s most consequential work in space is happening right here at home.
That is why Idaho should be part of the conversation about where the United States Space Academy takes shape.
Part 2 of Michael McGowan’s analysis of conservatism
There is a mass of Loony Leftist Lemmings charging toward a cliff edge. They strive to drive all to the dive…into Chaos. They can’t help themselves. The human race has an instinctual desire for Unity. The Old-School “traditional” Conservatives stand in front of the lemmings. They see that such a headlong rush is ill-advised. They think their job is to slow things down and put some order into the business. But their back is to the cliff edge, and that they cannot see. Even less do they see the jagged rocks hundreds of feet below.
What they don’t get is that the destination has to change. Otherwise, sooner or later, the result will be the same: a massive mess of shredded flesh and shattered bones. And they will be at the bottom.
The job of Conservatives must no longer be to merely slow the rush to ruin, but to reverse it — and hard. This means a redefinition of what it means to be a Conservative. According to the criteria I gave in my last article, this New School will clearly identify what Conservatives should be conserving. This object of our conservation will be a thing of permanent value; in fact the very glue that holds any society together.
What is this social glue? It is Natural Law.
Press release
Sen. Blaylock explains why she will vote no on Prop 1
Sen. Camille Blaylock wrote a great Substack newsletter this week walking through current Idaho law, what Prop 1 would change, and why she will be voting no:
My beliefs about life began long before I ever thought I would hold public office. They began with a pregnancy test and a tiny little girl I somehow knew before I ever met her.
Those convictions are mine, and I’ve never hidden them. But being pro-life doesn’t give me permission to be sloppy with facts. If you are pro-choice.. you don’t get a pass either.
Proposition 1 is too consequential for that.
Have you been catching the Daily Minute? It’s an exclusive publication of the Gem State Chronicle summing up what you need to know, published most every weekday. You can subscribe on YouTube, Facebook, X, and even TikTok!
As always, thank you to sponsors Lynn Bradescu’s Boise Realty, Money Metals, and New Saint Andrews College. Thank you also to all the paid subscribers who make it possible for me to do what I do, as well as all the readers who are constantly encouraging me to keep it up. I appreciate you all!