![]() |
| Sheriff Chad Bianco (R-CA) |
California, due to term limits, will be electing a new governor in 2026 as incumbent Gov. Gavin Newsom will retire (and almost certainly in the process immediately start running for president in early 2027). Given the state is one of the bluest in the nation, and Donald Trump's approval ratings are in the toilet, it would be a safe assumption to presume that Newsom will be succeeded by a fellow Democrat. But California has a unique jungle primary system, one that allows an open-party primary where all candidates run, and the top two (without ranked-choice voting taking place) advance to the general election.
This has caused some consternation in the past, in particular in 2012. That year, in a seat that was drawn to favor the Democrats (it was a mild blue district), the Democrats received collectively 48.5% of the vote, but given there were four Democrats running to the Republicans' two, Pete Aguilar, the Democratic frontrunner, came in third, and both the Republicans advanced in a district that Barack Obama would carry. Two years later, Aguilar would stage a comeback, being one of only three Democrats to flip a seat in the otherwise red wave slaughter of 2014, and has held the seat ever since. But it was a cautionary tale for the Democrats-the jungle primary process could easily backfire if too many Democrats ran, even in a blue constituency.
That is what appears to be happening in the governor's race this year. The Republicans have two major candidates: Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and political commentator Steve Hilton. Meanwhile the Democrats have over 20 candidates, eight of which (Xavier Becerra, Matt Mahan, Katie Porter, Tom Steyer, Eric Swalwell, Tony Thurmond, Antonio Villaraigosa, & Betty Yee) have all held major office in the past 15 years. Polling has shown a pretty consistent story-with eight major Democrats in the race, the Top 2 spots have gone very consistently to Bianco & Hilton. Bianco & Hilton in most cases barely get more than 14-16% of the vote a piece, but with Democrats struggling to hit the 15% marker, if you go solely by polling, the two Republicans are the frontrunners to be the next nominee.
![]() |
| Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA) |
Which is why a recent move to have a debate seemed like a great idea. All three (plus the Republicans) had qualified, and voters (a consequential quarter of which are undecided) could hear from the candidates, and help a frontrunner emerge depending on who did the best. But that was cancelled, and for really eye-rolling reasons. Porter, Steyer & Swalwell (along with Bianco & Hilton) are all white, which is not the case for all five of the remaining major party Democrats. If this was based off of just picking candidates, it would be a bad look, but these candidates are hardly without resources (Yee, Thurmond, & Becerra have all held statewide office, Villaraigosa & Mahan have been major city mayors). If they can't connect enough to get at least 10% of the vote in an electorate as diverse as California's the debate committee (who was very forthright in who should be included based on polling) shouldn't be blamed. That the losing candidates made this about race (when it wasn't-it was very much about who was the most likely to become governor based on polling) feels really stupid & disingenuous. In the same way that Jasmine Crockett called out people who criticized her campaign as discriminating against a Black woman, this isn't about discrimination-it's about who pollsters have shown can win. And none of these candidates can win.
And it's not like the powers-that-be didn't want a diverse candidate. Democrats begged former Vice President Kamala Harris or Senator Alex Padilla to come in and clean up this race, but they refused. But at this point, without a debate, it's time they come in to clean up regardless (along with Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, & Gavin Newsom). We are getting darn close to the end of this primary, given how much of California's electorate votes by mail (the primary is June 2nd). At this point, it's not obvious that any of the also-ran Democrats have enough sense to get out of a race where they are going to get less than 5% of the vote and look like fools. Republicans seem to be loving this, and so far Donald Trump's team has had the good sense to ensure he won't endorse or point out the scam so that Hilton & Bianco continue to do roughly evenly with voters (though one wonders if the move by the Department of Justice to go after Swalwell might backfire in the way Trump's threats helped Adam Schiff in 2024). The Democratic powers-that-be need to step in and help the Democrats in this race know who the frontrunner is (even if they have to pick between Porter, Swalwell, or Steyer themselves and make up a frontrunner), because there's an increasingly strong possibility that California is about to have a Republican governor if they don't.


2 comments:
Nice piece, John. Like you wrote, I really wish that Harris had jumped into this race (I didn't think Padilla would, but if he had better instincts like Amy Klobuchar, he would've) as that would've saved us so many problems. Instead, we're stuck here. It kind of reminds me of why I was worried about Kamala Harris years ago. Sometimes, her political instincts just aren't what they should be. Nancy Pelosi needs to get in there and be the shrewd politician that she is.
Also, if the Republicans do pick this seat up, I think it's game over for Newsom. He is not my preferred pick as is, but such a colossal flub-up would and should banish his chances of capturing the presidency.
Padilla is relatively young, and I think the "is he going to run for Governor?" question in some ways was the same answer to "is he ever going to consider running for president?" and we got that answer this cycle. If he was going to do one, he was probably going to do the other.
Oh, I agree-Newsom (and to a lesser degree Harris) will have severe egg on their faces if they lose. I cannot believe that Trump endorsed here though...it was one of the worst unforced errors I've seen in a very long time.
What's surprising to me is that Pelosi ALWAYS endorses her caucus members, and she only has one currently in the race (Swalwell). That she hasn't kind of makes me wonder if there's a feud there that hasn't leaked to the public.
Post a Comment