Evolution does not need defended, the creationist position is the one that needs defended. Try to make the politician take a absurd stand, or a stand against creationist dogma.

Evolutionary theory has successfully explained and predicted natural phenomena. What part of the creationist theory does the candidate propose to replace the explanation of continental drift, that the fossil record of organic life matches the geological record of non organic activity, etc?

The politician must defend their position. Evolution and natural selection are tools which work, which predict, which are utilitarian. Creationism is a charming story. Just getting people to sort evolution and creationism into those two categories would be a victory.