Todd Connor and Eric Bronner are Navy veterans and co-founders of Veterans for Political Innovation.
Alaska is a unique state in many ways, including one that may surprise you: Alaska leads the way for election innovation. That’s right: while many states in the lower 48 are stuck with toxic, partisan politics and party-base controlled elections, thanks to the voters, Alaska is doing something different. In the 2020 general election, voters approved an initiative to establish a Nonpartisan Pick One Primary Election system and a top four Ranked Choice Voting General Election system. To see how this system works, you can watch this short video from the Alaska Department of Elections.
This new system, called “Final Four Voting,” empowers registered independents to fully participate in the primary election, instead of just registered Democrats and Republicans. That’s important because according to Gallup’s March 2023 survey, across the U.S. 49 percent consider themselves independent. We suspect the numbers in Alaska are higher.
Of particular interest to us, as military veterans, is that for many years now, close to 50 percent of military veterans have identified as independent (or nonpartisan, unaffiliated) voters. Military veterans want someone in office who is qualified, will do the job, think for themselves and get things done. We prefer work horses over show horses, and that’s exactly what the Alaska election model incentivizes.
A new report from the McKinley Research Group (MRG) finds that Alaskans are generally satisfied with their new nonpartisan voting system. Most voters surveyed found that the new elections were simple, fair, and easy. A majority feel like their choices are better in the general election and that their vote matters more, compared to previous elections. Read a complete breakdown of MRG's findings here.
We’re launching the Alaska Task Force of Veterans for Political Innovation – a non-partisan effort led by military veterans – to get the U.S. out of the toxic political rut we witness every single day in Washington, D.C. We think other states ought to pay attention to what Alaska has done – we think the Alaska election model is the best path to preserving our Republic as we know it. If you want to learn more about our efforts we invite you to us for a happy hour on May 25th at Odd Man Rush Brewing in Eagle River. You can RSVP here.
Together, we can make the last frontier the first frontier for a new, more functional political paradigm. Indeed, Alaska is leading our nation when it comes to powerful, nonpartisan political reforms.
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.