In this episode, Chad Peace and Cara McCormick unpack the viral exchange between CBS’s Julie Watts and gubernatorial candidate Katie Porter - a clip that sparked headlines but also exposes how California’s limiting election rules shape campaign incentives. What did the interview actually show, and why did it touch such a nerve? Chad and Cara use the moment to explore coalition-building in a “top two” primary world - one that they both have had extensive experience navigating in their own political careers.

They then zoom out to the 2026 field: Toni Atkins has exited the race while Ian Calderon has jumped in - moves that underscore how dynamic the contest remains and how strategies shift when everyone appears on a single primary ballot. What does that mean for independents and crossover voters in June - and for consensus-building in November?

Next, Chad and Cara break down how California’s nonpartisan “top two” actually works, the tradeoffs voters experience, and why some reformers favor a Final Five (open top-five primary + ranked-choice general) to reward broader appeal. They compare California’s system to Alaska’s top-four + RCV model to show how different rules nudge different candidate behavior - and voter power. 

Finally, they connect the dots to a national court fight unfolding now: the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections case on whether a federal candidate has standing to challenge counting mail ballots that arrive after Election Day. It’s a narrow procedural question with wide implications for trust in the process. Chad and Cara explain what the justices are weighing and why it matters to independents - without choosing sides. 

If you’re tired of echo chambers, this episode delivers context over outrage - true to the Independent Voter Podcast’s mission to challenge partisan binaries and elevate reforms that put voters first.

Listen to more episodes and join the conversation at IVN.us and olasmedia.com.

‍