Too many Democrats in California governor’s race? That’s a great thing
-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
After months of fretting, California Democratic leaders are now truly freaking out about too many of their own running for governor, potentially allowing two MAGA Republicans to advance to the general election.
Someone find me the world’s smallest violin.
It’s the latest mess created by a party that has held supermajorities in the state Legislature and the governor’s mansion for most of the last 15 years, yet has done little to make life better for its constituents while blaming President Trump for everything.
What does it say about them that no Democratic candidate of color is considered a favorite to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom, when whites are only a third of California’s population? That a party casting itself as the champion of the working poor against Trump’s oligarchic reign isn’t telling a billionaire like Tom Steyer — who spent $341 million of his own money on a failed 2020 presidential run — to bow out and throw his support and moolah behind someone else, just because he’s polling in the top five?
A big field of candidates makes it possible for a Republican to be elected governor. California’s Democratic Party leader told unviable candidates to bow out.
California voters have made the state Republican Party as relevant as the Angels in baseball — yet under Democratic rule, life keeps getting harder for too many. Especially galling is how the state Democratic Party has done next to nothing to help Latinos become household names who can win.
Three Latinos with distinguished resumes — former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and State Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond — are running for governor, yet they stand as much a chance of moving on to the general election as Alfred E. Neuman.
Latinos are a plurality of California’s population and the bedrock of the Democratic Party. Yet there’s a good chance that after November, no Latino will hold a statewide elected position for the first time since 2014.
Yes, Alex Padilla is our senior U.S. senator. But enough California Latino voters became disillusioned with the Democratic platform that Trump made large gains among them in 2024, and Latino GOP legislative candidates stormed Sacramento like never before.
So excuse my schadenfreude upon hearing earlier this week that California Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks wants low-polling candidates to drop out of the governor’s race, claiming in an open letter that their continued presence will “imperil” democracy.
Candidates are definitely choosing — to spite Hicks. We all should. He could have made his move long ago, as the top Democrat in the state. Instead, waiting until just before the candidate filing deadline is more amateur than a Little League game.
Worse, his move reeks of el dedazo, the kingmaking process under Mexico’s long-ruling Partido Revolucionario Institucional that translates as “the finger point,” because that’s how undemocratic it was.
“El dedazo is not appropriate in California,” Becerra told me, referring not to Hicks but to other Democrats who have suggested that he and others withdraw. “And I suspect that very few voters in California think that a variety of choices [for governor] is not a good thing.”
As of this columna’s publication, not only has no Democratic candidate dropped out, but most are officially filing papers to jump in. Thurmond even posted a video on social media implying that Hicks’ request is racist because almost all the potential spoilers are people of color, while the top three Democratic hopefuls — Rep. Eric Swalwell, Steyer and former Rep. Katie Porter — are white.
“To me, this act doesn’t reflect the Democratic Party of 2026,” Thurmond thundered. “Aren’t we supposed to be the party who embraces democracy?”
Hicks’ move and the embarrassing aftermath reminds me of Will Rogers’ famous quip that Democrats are members of no organized political party — even if I do understand why Hicks and other Dems are so nervous.
No Democrat is towering over the field, which is why party leaders and activists futilely tried to recruit big names like Padilla and former Vice President Kamala Harris. Those who are running are nice enough. But politically, they’re carbon copies of each other. As a group, they’re as inspiring as printer paper.
The subsequent free-for-all has allowed Republicans Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco to occupy two of the top three slots in the latest Public Policy Institute of California poll alongside Porter, with Swalwell and Steyer close behind.
No other candidate polled higher than 5%, but together, the rest of them added up to 30%. Factor in the 10% of voters who are undecided, and that’s a significant slab of the potential electorate. If just two Democrats drop out, that would almost certainly stop both Hilton and Bianco from advancing.
The jig is up for Democrats lagging in the race for governor
A Republican governor for California in the Trump era would be embarrassing, terrible and a political self-own without precedent. It would make previous California political earthquakes where conservatives pounced on liberal cluelessness, like Prop. 13, Prop. 187 and the Gray Davis recall, seem as innocuous as a bounce house.
But telling candidates to kill their campaigns to make it easier for people who supposedly have a better chance is the type of least-worst choice that Democratic leaders have forced upon party faithful for too long.
They need a rude awakening. Making them sweat about a gubernatorial primary is a start. That’s why I’m glad Hicks’ plea is going nowhere. If people want to scatter their votes, it’s not only their choice — it’s democracy.
When I asked Becerra if he or his fellow underdog Dems should accept responsibility if a Republican becomes California’s next governor, he brushed off the question.
“That’s more than speculative — it’s not going to happen,” he said, predicting that undecided voters will “crystallize” soon to make the issue moot. He once again joked that there are “too many dedazos in the air.”
Villaraigosa’s answer was more damning: “It would be a collective responsibility that as a party, we failed to convince the electorate.”
Watch out, Rusty — here come your Dems!
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
The crowded Democratic field in California’s governor’s race represents a positive expression of democracy, with voters rather than party leaders determining outcomes through the ballot. Candidates are exercising their right to run, and telling them to withdraw undermines democratic principles and the freedom of choice that should define elections.
Party leadership’s attempt to pressure candidates to drop out mirrors “el dedazo,” the undemocratic kingmaking process used by Mexico’s long-ruling party, and represents an inappropriate intervention that should be rejected regardless of strategic concerns. The argument that candidates should sacrifice their campaigns for party advantage represents a “least-worst choice” that Democratic leaders have imposed on voters for too long.
The real Democratic failure lies not in having multiple candidates but in the party’s decades-long inability to develop Latino leaders as household names and frontrunners. With Latinos comprising a plurality of California’s population, the absence of a leading candidate of color reflects broader institutional shortcomings rather than problems created by an open field.
The Democratic Party has failed to hold its supermajorities accountable for improving constituents’ lives while blaming external factors, and the current crisis over primary dynamics exemplifies continued institutional dysfunction. A billionaire investor like Tom Steyer should not be a top contender when party resources could instead support candidates from underrepresented communities.
Different views on the topic
California’s top-two primary system creates a genuine mathematical risk that vote-splitting among multiple Democratic candidates could allow the two leading Republicans to advance to the general election, effectively locking out Democrats despite their substantial voter registration advantage statewide[3][4]. Statistical models have shown this scenario could occur with probabilities ranging from 10 to 28 percent depending on candidate consolidation[4].
Party leaders have legitimate concerns about preventing a Republican governor during the Trump administration, when Democratic leadership is critical both for state governance and national politics[3]. The cost of inaction could be substantial enough to justify urging candidates to assess their viability before the filing deadline[3].
Democratic consolidation could happen naturally if candidates with minimal polling support withdraw voluntarily, as has occurred in previous election cycles[4]. Half of likely voters remain inattentive to the race at this stage, meaning lower-polling candidates still retain potential pathways to growth if the field narrows organically[4].
Even with concerns about the party’s approach, the race features viable top-tier candidates with distinct profiles and accomplishments, including several with national profiles and substantial fundraising capacity[2]. Multiple candidates among the leading contenders represent diverse backgrounds and experiences capable of addressing California’s major challenges[1].
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
The latest effort is coming from the L.A. County Board of Supervisors. They just announced a $3 million program in conjunction with some nonprofits groups to test and clean the soil at homes still standing in the areas impacted by the Eaton Fire.
The Hillside Strangler murders terrorized Los Angeles in the late 1970s. The killers were a pair of sadistic cousins. One confessed. The other was set to stand trial—until L.A. prosecutors flinched.
Hosts Fidel Martínez and Suzy Exposito sit down with Dr. Vanessa J. Díaz, professor of Chicano and Latino Studies at Loyola Marymount University and co-author of P FKN R: How Bad Bunny Became the Global Voice of Puerto Rican Resistance.
