The movement to weaken the major parties' hold on primaries, the de facto elections in much of this politically polarized nation, has been dealt a fresh setback in Utah.
Gov. Spencer Cox is expected to sign legislation, which won final passage this week from his fellow Republicans in dominant control of the Legislature, to prevent Utahns from switching parties within three months of a primary.
The stated goal is to sharply limit "party raiding" by Democrats interested in setting the shade of red for the state's map by voting in GOP primaries — assuming their motivation will only be disrupting the opposing party's genuine desires, not shaping the state's power structure. But good-government advocates argue primaries should be open to all, on the theory that governments will be more consensus-driven and productive if candidates have to appeal to people of all stripes in their nominating campaigns, not just their bases on the hard left or hard right.
The bill wouldn't affect the Democrats, because in Utah their primaries are already open to all registered voters.
The Senate cleared the measure 22-3 on Wednesday. The House had passed it 41-30 last month. It would bar anyone who changes partisan registration after March 31 from voting in that year's primaries, normally at the end of June. In a partial victory for open primary advocates, the original bill was amended to allow independents to align with one of the big parties until the last minute, but it would inhibit members of minor parties.
Sponsors said they were spurred to action by last year's hard-fought GOP primary for governor. Jon Huntsman, who had been ambassador to Russia and China and ran for president in 2012, actively recruited voters of all stripes to help him reclaim the governorship but lost the nomination to Cox, then the lieutenant governor, by 6,300 votes. (Cox won in the fall by 2-to-1.)
Republican conservatives asserted that Democrats flooding to the more moderate Huntsman had almost cost the party it's more ideologically appropriate choice. But a study by Princeton's Electoral Innovation Lab concluded that unaffiliated voters were the vast majority of the tens of thousands who joined the GOP in time to vote in the closed primary.
The term "party raiding" was coined by the majority in a 1973 Supreme Court case affirming the constitutionality of closed primary systems.
The United Utah Party lambasted the Legislature for "working overtime to satisfy partisan interests instead of the will of the electorate," adding: "As undemocratic as that is, it's made worse by the fact that the Republican primaries are funded by all taxpayers in Utah, not just the Republican ones."
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.