This is the second installment of an ongoing Q&A series.
As Democrats take power in Washington, if only tenuously, many democracy reform groups see a potential path toward making the American political system work better. In this installment, Corey Goldstone, communications manager for the Campaign Legal Center, answers our questions about 2020 accomplishments and plans for the year ahead. His organization works to achieve voting, campaign finance and redistricting reforms through litigation. Goldstone's responses have been edited for clarity and length.
First, let's briefly recap 2020. What was your biggest triumph last year?
The Campaign Legal Center successfully advocated for nonpartisan voting reforms to encourage broader participation and a more inclusive democracy. As a result, America turned out to vote in record numbers in 2020. Braving the dual challenges of a viral pandemic and civil unrest, hardworking election officials stood shoulder to shoulder to finish the vote count and certify the results, despite intense pressure from Donald Trump to circumvent election procedures.
Major legal victories in our voting rights litigation paved the way for safe and secure access to absentee voting and a higher degree of confidence that states would not reject ballots for arbitrary reasons like handwriting in voter signatures.
CLC also played a leading role — along with our partners in the National Task Force on Election Crises — in educating lawmakers, the media and the public about the limited role of state legislatures and the vice president in the vote certification process.
And your biggest setback?
Trump was an existential threat to democracy in 2020. He used his megaphone in 2020 to convince many of his supporters that the election was stolen, despite all evidence to the contrary. In the final weeks before the election, only 37 percent of Americans expressed confidence that the election would be held fairly. Countering cynicism and conspiracy theories with facts has become increasingly challenging.
While it's a relief that a violent attempt to prevent the counting of the Electoral College votes in our presidential election failed, the fact it was encouraged by the president and attempted by the crowds he summoned to Washington reflects a deeper decay in public confidence in our democracy.
What is one learning experience you took from 2020?
We have a resilient system of safeguards in place in which ballots are validated and counted. Our elections are highly decentralized and election administrators are qualified officials who take their jobs seriously. We have a duty as Americans to accept the results of elections, even if the candidate we supported does not win. Many officials in key positions resisted pressure from Trump and recognized their obligation to the country.
Now let's look ahead. What issues will your organization prioritize in 2021?
We need to advance voting rights, strengthen ethics laws, curtail partisan gerrymandering and decrease the influence of wealthy special interests in our political system. These are reforms that an overwhelming majority of Americans — across the political spectrum — view as popular.
The vote certification process was abused by bad-faith partisans to the point where the country narrowly avoided a constitutional crisis. The Electoral Count Act should be substantially revised to provide constraints on the permissible grounds for objecting to a state's appointment of presidential electors or the votes cast by those electors.
How will Democratic control of the federal government change the ways you work toward your goals?
If passed, HR 1 would enact one of the most comprehensive improvements our democracy has seen in decades.
What do you think will be your biggest challenge moving forward? And how do you plan to tackle it?
The splintering of American media consumption makes it challenging to educate the public about election mechanics to foster trust in the process. We need to make sure we are talking to voters that distrust mainstream media.
Finish the sentence. In two years, American democracy will ...
be more transparent, inclusive and accountable to the people.
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.