As pointed out earlier in this thread, there is going to be a Democratic candidate on the ballot. There’s no reasonable chance for there not to be. You shouldn’t be concerned about that at least.
Polling has shown the top two candidates have been Hilton and Bianco, both Republicans, so it is a possibility there will not be a Democrat on the general election ballot.
The good news is it appears Steyer and Becerra have been doing better in recent polls but the large number of Democrats running in the primary is splitting the vote so the GOP is doing better than would be normal in CA.
I don’t think that polling is realistic.
There’s lots of time before the election and a few Democrats will almost certainly drop out, and support will coalesce behind one or two of the others.
Steyer is now barely above Bianco in 2nd place; Becerra has shot up to 4th place; Porter is holding steady in 5th place. This is based on the link I posted way up-thread, a poll aggregator called racetothewh dot com.
I was going to say that it would be an interesting exercise, if (emphasis on the hypothetical) the Democrats were locked out, to see if the state’s D voters could rally around one write-in candidate, and, with the Republican vote split, win the general election.
It’d almost be worth it just to make it clear to the powers that be that the jungle primary system they have is not a good one. And they should adopt a better one, possibly like the one Alaska has. Did not someone point out the hazard before they adopted this system?
WA has had the same system for longer than CA has, and it’s worked out fine here. I don’t recall any major races where the general didn’t wind up being one Republican vs. one Democrat.
OTOH, CA has had major races between two Democrats - when Kamala Harris ran for Senate in 2016, her opponent in the general was another Dem.
Yeah, I’ve liked the primary in WA also.
That’s kind of inherent in the election of any executive in a non-parliamentary system. All executives campaign on what they’re going to do, even though they can do almost none of it without the cooperation of the legislature. And they kind of have to campaign on that, because otherwise, there’s not really anything they can say.
I disagree. First, it’s one thing to make promises that can be achieved through leadership and arm twisting, it’s another to make promises for things that are, for all intents and purposes, impossible. Charge and convict ICE agents (and their federal office holder leaders) with state crimes for violating state laws in California? That’s the most obvious one from Steyer that comes to mind.
I don’t think executive-position campaigning has always been this way, I think it’s an infection from Trump. He has gotten away with promising everything, including things over which he has no control and little influence, and no-one holds him accountable. It’s a vicious promise inflation that destroys trust (such as it ever was), and I see that strongest, among the candidates for Governor, with Steyer.
But that’s something that a governor can do. In fact, that’s something the executive can do even without the other branches cooperating (well, the charging, at least: The convicting is up to juries serving in the judicial branch).
Possible. As long as their crimes were committed outside of their official duties. In fact one ICE agent is being indicted for such. But that would be rare.
Only in that case I mentioned above. Unfortunately the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause makes this unlikely in most cases-
Ranked choice seems awfully complicated. If he loses, el donald would take advantage of the difficulty his cult would have understanding the mathematics to scream that it is rigged.
But he would scream that in any case, even when he wins.
Yes. Then (as we saw in 2016), he just bitches and moans that he would’ve won even more bigly, had it not been for Massive Voter Fraud and Other Really Bad Stuff by Teh Libs!
Well PG&E has launched a $10 million PAC to oppose Tom Steyer, so I guess I have to increase my consideration for him now.
And who decides whether a particular action is within the course of their official duties? A court, trying them for criminal offenses. Charging them for their crimes is an essential first step, and I wouldn’t support any candidate who wasn’t willing to take even that minimal step.
Points for Steyer here, that’s for sure. I’ve seen the ads for “California is not for sale” and they are very dirty ads.
CNN: Why Xavier Becerra is rising in the California governor’s race
YouTube ad report: The once constant barrage of pro-Steyer ads have now flipped into a relentless flood of anti-Steyer ads. It’s almost like now that he has a small lead Steyer is backing down on the ad buys and those opposed to him are going all in to try and short-circuit it.
Meanwhile the next largest slate of ads I’ve been seeing is pro-Matt Mahan ads. Apparently he has relatively low name recognition in the race. Looks like he is making a last minute bid to turn that around.