Thornburgh is a former CEO of the Committee of Seventy and current chair of that organization’s Ballot PA campaign to repeal closed primaries in Pennsylvania. Opdycke is the president of Open Primaries.
The American electorate is more “anti-party” than at any time since Adams and Jefferson inaugurated America’s first major political feud. According to Gallup, independents now comprise 42 percent of all voters. In states that require party registration, 49 percent of young voters choose “no party affiliation” when they register. One in two veterans identifies as a political independent.
This trend is accelerating in red, blue and purple states. And independents are swinging national outcomes; Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Joe Biden all owe their victories to surges of support from independents. In Pennsylvania, for example, exit polls suggest that the votes of independents swung 15 percent from 2016 to 2020, from Trump +7 to Biden +8. That likely provided the margin of victory in each race.
Yet according to analyst Charlie Cook, fewer than 16 percent of congressional races will be competitive in November 2022, the winner having been decided in a primary. More than 40 percent of state legislators will run unopposed in 2022. In Pennsylvania 80 percent to 90 percent of all legislative races are essentially decided before voters cast a single ballot in November.
More uncertainty, an electorate ready to swing, and yet little general election competition. All the more reason we need to scrap closed partisan primaries and enact open primaries that let all voters participate. If the primaries are where the action is, let all voters vote.
The rise of independent voters is real, and it is challenging the playbooks of both parties.
Democrat Chloe Maxmin discussed this in a recent editorial for The New York Times. Maxim ran and won as a “Green New Deal” Democrat in a rural Maine district that voted overwhelmingly for Trump in 2016 and 2020. She did it by ignoring the advice of national Democratic consultants to double down on her base and instead actually talked to the thousands of independents who live in her district. “Over the past decade, many Democrats seem to have stopped trying to persuade people who disagreed with them, counting instead on demographic shifts they believed would carry them to victory — if only they could turn out their core supporters.”
The Democratic National Committee playbook (the one Maxim and her team threw in the garbage) ignores voters who are not party members. Instead, candidates run tired plays that use analytics and algorithms to find independents who look like Democrats and then market to them as if they are Democrats. They ignore the fact that millions of Americans are exhausted by the grim red team/blue team battles and are asserting “I don’t want to be a part of your party.” Ignoring that fact, most campaigns are still run and won as if it is 1952 and 90 percent of Americans are proud members of one party or the other.
The Republicans play a different version of head-in-the sand politics. They trot out tired tropes about socialism and the culture monster under the bed to whip up their base. New American Voices co-founder Minh-Thu Pham described in The Washington Post what this looks like among first generation citizens, huge numbers of whom are registered as independents. “Armed with efficient ways to spread untruths, antidemocratic forces are taking advantage of immigrants who have limited access to reliable information in their primary languages and are prone to being swayed by narratives that inflame underlying fears based on homeland politics.”
One party takes independents for granted, and the other manipulates fears and misconceptions. Add to that closed primaries, and you have a recipe for a toxic stew of massive voter discontent and disenfranchisement.
At some point, political consultants will reconsider these tired tactics and adopt a more inclusive and creative approach towards independent voters. But to accelerate that move in the short term, it’s past time to repeal closed primaries, which bar independents from casting a ballot in round one, the only round that matters. That's what we're aiming to do in Pennsylvania right now.
Ballot PA is our campaign to repeal closed primaries in Pennsylvania. We’ve built a broad coalition of veterans, business groups, young voters, Democratic and Republican legislative allies, and bill sponsors. Steelers great Rocky Bleier and two former party chairs serve as our statewide spokespeople. Even 74 percent of hard-core partisan voters support the idea, and virtually every media outlet in the state has endorsed the proposal. We’re hoping to follow the lead of states like Maine and Colorado, which share our pragmatic approach to politics and have ended closed primaries in the last few years. We're not the only ones, as leaders in a dozen other states are looking seriously at options for primary reform.
As our two former party chairs point out, when parties give up their extra-constitutional control of voters and open the door to independents, it can actually work to their advantage. Ending closed primaries can help either party win elections and grow their ranks. More independent voters create more party paths to victory in the primary and the general election. Voters wary of being conscripted into a party just to cast a vote that matters will appreciate the “try before you buy” opportunity an open primary affords them.
But it’s only one step. Yes, we need to repeal every law that prevents all voters from voting in every election. But we also need candidates and political leaders who have the vision to see the opportunity independent voters offer them, not only to win but to govern. We need fresh party leaders who are ready, willing and able to break with tired partisan norms and engage with “free agent” voters – independents – who don’t subscribe to either party’s playbook.



















A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.