Griffiths is the national editor of Independent Voter News, where a version of this story first appeared.
California voters have a chance to make history this year by electing independent leaders to the state’s top executive offices for the first time in modern history. Among these independents is a gay, tough-on-crime, former Republican who supports abortion rights and is running for attorney general.
And then there's No Party Preference gubernatorial candidate Michael Shellenberger, who has tremendous financial backing and could beat out a weak Republican field with a message that targets Democrats’ handling of homelessness. If he is able to advance to November, the former Democrat could bring in support from across the political spectrum and give the incumbent, Democrat Gavin Newsom, a much more formidable challenge than he faced against his staunchly conservative opponent in the recall.
But the contest that may present the more probable path to a political upheaval going into the June 7 primary is not for the governor’s seat. It is the race for attorney general.
Sacramento District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert is running for attorney general as an NPP candidate, and unlike any independent candidate before her, she has garnered near-universal backing from California’s top law enforcement organizations. In other words, she may not have the power of the party institutions, but she has critical support in a race where crime is as big an issue as ever.
Schubert changed her affiliation from Republican to independent in 2018 and is prominently known throughout California for prosecuting the Golden State Killer. She is running against two Republicans and Democratic incumbent Rob Bonta.
Why could Schubert's matchup with Bonta present a serious challenge that a Republican challenger cannot offer?
Well, it’s California. With abortion rights taking center-stage following the leaked draft of a potential Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson, being anti-abortion (or a Republican for that matter) will be a non-starter with the California electorate. But Schubert, like Bonta, is supports abortion rights. She’s also gay.
These two factors could give disgruntled Democrats and left-leaning independents who fear of the Republican Party’s positions on social issues a viable alternative.
Under California’s nonpartisan top-two primary, the general election will be a one-on-one race between Bonta and one other challenger. Bonta knows that his path to victory against a Republican will be a much easier one, and is spending money to make sure Republicans vote for the most anti-abortion Republican in the race.
Against a Republican, Bonta would be able to duck widespread concerns over a rise in crime observed by most California voters, and his support for Proposition 47, which a majority of voters want to change. Proposition 47 reduced the threshold for some drug and theft offenses to misdemeanors, including more than doubling the amount stolen to charge a person with felony theft.
In its endorsement of Schubert, the San Diego Union Tribune writes:
“Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert would be a far more formidable rival. She’s a Republican-turned-independent, pro-choice, even-keeled disdainer of Donald Trump who was the first gay person elected to countywide office in Sacramento. In interviews, she’s wondered what’s progressive about telling people “that domestic violence is a nonviolent crime.” But she’s hardly a law-and-order caricature. She faults the state for inadequate rehabilitation funding to help offenders rebound. In our Q&A, she praised state laws limiting officers’ use of force and promoting transparency.”
Could Schubert, who believes Californians have grown “ sick of politics ” become the first NPP candidate to be elected attorney general?
In a head-to-head race against a Democrat who has been an advocate for far-left policies and prosecutors that have become increasingly unpopular, we might find out this November.
If Schubert can pull off a top-two finish on June 7, her nonpartisan approach to prosecution and law could help her win over Democrats dissatisfied with Bonta, Republicans who like her aggressive approach to violent crime, and independents who are just fed up with partisans on both sides of the isle.
An independent has already come close to winning a statewide election in California under the state’s nonpartisan top-two primary. Republican-turned-independent Steve Poizner nearly beat Democrat Ricardo Lara for insurance commissioner in 2018 in the midst of a blue wave. But he did not have the kind of institutional support that Schubert has garnered, the independent resume -- nor the timing.
Political analysts predict a red wave this year. But in California, Schubert could represent a shifting tide that brings in a wave of independence.
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.