"I do love a locker room. It smells like potential."
— Coach Ted Lasso (the beloved protagonist of Apple TV's latest breakout hit)
Ted Lasso's rapid ascent and positive infusion into our cultural zeitgeist solidified something I already knew: That coaches are an often unsung force for good, and we ought to be doing more to recognize their unique power and influence in positively shaping lives.
As a former collegiate athlete, I've long known the power of coaches, but my current enthusiasm is tied to a more recent journey of discovery and transformation alongside my own personal Ted Lasso, my friend and colleague Eric Reveno, who coaches the men's basketball team at Georgia Tech.
Like Lasso, Coach Rev looks at a locker room and sees potential in his players — not just as competitors, but as compassionate, caring and capable community members and community leaders. In the past year, Coach Rev added a new element to his coaching focus: civics.
In June 2020, following the murder of George Floyd and the public outcry for social justice reform, Coach Rev embarked on a personal mission to help his players register to vote. But his efforts didn't end with his own team. Coach Rev became the driving force behind #AllVoteNoPlay, an initiative that urged athletics to take election day off from practice or games so players could vote and volunteer. With support from the National Association of Basketball Coaches and the ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge, over 1,100 coaches ultimately signed the #AllVoteNoPlay pledge. The call to action was so meaningful to players that the student-run NCAA Student Athletic Committee leadership team unanimously passed legislation to make #AllVoteNoPlay an annual tradition.
Coach Rev and I met last year while I was working on my own personal mission to change the way we engage young people in the voting process. I saw a future marred by an increasingly divisive, expensive and alienating political process that didn't support a healthy, robust democracy. As a designer, educator and futurist, I was curious how practices of design, empathy, and imagination might transform the experience of voting. Together with colleagues, I created Vote by Design, a program focused on turning "apathy" into civic agency through experiential learning and practice. Our aim is to help young voters develop the confidence and capacity to approach voting as a lifelong skill that could be nurtured through intentional practice. Seeking ways to support his new #AllVoteNoPlay initiative, Rev brought Vote by Design to his students. We instantly bonded in our shared belief that young people need and deserve to be not just informed, but empowered to participate more fully in shaping the future they're going to inherit.
2020 itself was a singular moment in time, and when the immediacy of a highly charged presidential election cycle faded, a new set of questions emerged: How do we ensure that young people continue to learn and engage in our democracy? Who can help them understand their central role in shaping the future? Who, in the lives of young people, holds the position of trust and mentorship to deliver the necessary messages about civic participation without being dismissed as "boring", "preachy" or what "others do."
The answer is clear. As Rev said to me: "It's time for coaches to teach civics."
The need to educate young people about their personal power and agency in every moment of civic life — from helping a neighbor, to voting for town council, to casting that biggest of all ballots every four years. Research shows that civic awareness and engagement not only help young people find their voice in their own communities, but also increase their success and satisfaction in life. Civically empowered and educated youth are more likely to finish their education, are better prepared for future careers, show greater empathy and tolerance for differing viewpoints, and are more likely to give back to their communities through volunteerism later in life. And the students themselves are asking for more voice and action, as evidenced by the 75 percent of NCAA-surveyed athletes who expressed interest in more civic engagement.
But these outcomes don't just happen. The research tells us they're created through practice and active learning. Tufts University's Center for Information and Research on Civic Engagement calls it a posture of "growing voters."And that's where coaches come back into play. Who knows more about setting up intentional practice to build core muscles and develop necessary skills than coaches?
Coach Rev and I have spent the past several months working to create the practice plan that will help coaches translate their skills as natural leaders in the locker room, to natural leaders in civic engagement. Our work is based on the belief that "civic conditioning" can be just as powerful as "strength conditioning."
This year, when #AllVoteNoPlay comes around on Nov. 2, we're ready to help coaches across the country turn the day off from sports into a day on for civic practice.
Working closely with a community of coaches, student-athletes and some of the best minds in the civic learning space, we've created the #AllVoteNoPlay Coaches' Playbook, a nonpartisan, hands-on approach to "civic conditioning" for Nov. 2 and beyond.
According to Rev, "Drills are where the magic happens." Our vision for #AllVoteNoPlay is not to recreate traditional civics classes, but instead to offer simple, accessible, meaningful "civic drills" that inspire coaches and athletes to learn, engage and gather for community-building experiences. Our aim is to ignite the confidence within athletes that they — as individuals and as teammates — have a voice, choices, the agency to act and the power to make an impact in moments both small and large.
So this Nov. 2, we're spreading those messages across the entire NCAA. Every coach, every team, regardless of sport or division, can take part in #AllVoteNoPlay. It's as easy as choosing a civic drill and trying it with your team. Gathering for a team barbecue and movie night, taking an online quiz or engaging in a game of "civic tag" may not seem like a life-changing effort, but Rev and I believe in the power of these micromoments to start building the civic muscles athletes will need for a lifetime of good citizenship and community leadership.
We look at a locker room and see potential.
And I hope that this is just the first of many #AllVoteNoPlay Days ON, rather than days OFF, where coaches seize their moment and realize that potential.




















image of U.S. President Donald Trump is displayed on a digital billboard in Times Square in New York on April 8, 2026.
Trump is stuck between two realities. Neither serves the American people
Normally, I worry that events may overtake a column. But not so with the Iran war.
I don’t worry about running afoul of a headline or Truth Social post from the president because what is said about the situation is no longer very relevant to the reality.
On April 8, Nick Catoggio, my Dispatch colleague, dubbed an earlier stoppage with Iran “Schrödinger’s ceasefire.” This was a reference to the famous thought experiment by the physicist Erwin Schrödinger, who was trying to explain the weirdness of “superpositionality” in quantum physics. A cat in a box is both dead and alive at the same time until you open the box. Schrödinger meant to illustrate the absurdity of the idea that particles aren’t any one thing, but a “cloud of probabilities.”
The Trump administration is stuck in a word cloud of probabilities of his own making. The war is over. The war is on. The war isn’t a war. We have a deal, but we don’t have a deal, but we’re about to have a deal. We destroyed Iran’s military. No, we left it intact. We want regime change. No we don’t. We already accomplished it. We “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program a year ago. We had to go to war in February to prevent nuclear war. The Strait of Hormuz is open, closed, or something in-between. No deal without “unconditional surrender.” Let’s make a deal!
This everything-all-at-once vibe can be disorienting, particularly since most Americans didn’t have a war with Iran on their bingo cards until the shooting had already started. President Trump didn’t prepare the country or consult with Congress beforehand because he thought it would all be a smashing success in a matter of weeks.
The miscalculation that started it all: killing Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and much of Iran’s senior leadership, on the first day of the war. To “the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand,” Trump announced on Feb. 28. “When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations.”
I support regime change in Iran and shed no tears for Khamenei or his goons. But when you start a war by killing the regime’s top leaders, it’s not unreasonable for the remaining ones to conclude that you really intend regime change.
Khamenei was a murderous fanatic, but he was a fairly cautious one. He liked to threaten closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking our regional allies, but he was reluctant to actually do it, fearing it would invite a regime change war. The mullahs and IRGC goons believed, not unreasonably, that if they lost their grip on power, they’d be lynched by the Iranian people they’ve brutalized for decades.
By starting with a regime change war, Trump removed any reason for the regime not to go for broke. When you have nothing to lose — particularly when you are a millenarian religious fanatic — a Persian Alamo strategy makes a lot of sense.
So Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz and attacked its neighbors.
But it turns out this wasn’t the Alamo. In the contest of wills, Trump blinked. The Iranian regime’s tolerance for punishment proved — so far — to be greater than Trump’s and that of our gulf allies. Militarily we could finish the job, but that would require ground troops and much greater economic turmoil. In a conflict Trump launched unilaterally without the prior support of Congress, NATO or the American people, Trump doesn’t have the political capital for that.
But that’s only half the problem. Trump wants the war over, but he doesn’t want to pay — militarily, economically, politically — what that would cost. So he wants to make a deal that ends it. But there is no deal available that wouldn’t come at an equally undesirable cost. Any deal that looks like what President Obama struck with the Iranians would be too embarrassing to bear. But the Iranians are convinced that they can get just such a deal, and they’re willing to drag things out as long as it takes.
The result: Trump’s in a box of his own making. He thinks he can talk his way out by simply asserting a reality that doesn’t exist. When the financial markets get nervous, he announces a breakthrough that is, at best, a possibility. When the Iranians agree to a deal that looks similar to one Obama might negotiate, Trump goes back to his threats.
It can’t go on forever. But I’m sure it’ll last until long after this column is forgotten.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.