by Edward Ring
California’s donor class is misreading a volatile governor’s race, where Republican viability, Democratic fragmentation, and ideological fatigue are reshaping the field.
In less than two weeks, by law, a ballot must be in the mail and on its way to every registered voter in California. Some counties mail ballots before the May 4 deadline. This means that within days, voters in California will begin returning completed ballots, locking in their choice for who will be the next governor.
Meanwhile, in the state’s so-called “Jungle Primary,” where all voters, regardless of their party affiliation, select their choice from a single list of candidates, the race for the top two spots remains completely up for grabs. Eric Swalwell may be gone, but plenty of other Democrat candidates are still in the race. The latest poll on April 19 showed Tom Steyer at 16 percent, with Xavier Becerra and Katie Porter both at 10 percent, Matt Mahan at 4 percent, and Betty Yee at 2 percent. Kevin Wen, CEO of the polling organization Kreate Strategies, accurately summed up the result of frontrunner Swalwell’s dropping out, saying, “The field reflects redistribution without consolidation.” Fully 23 percent of California’s voters remain undecided.
If anything appears likely in the California governor’s race, it’s that Republican Steve Hilton will collect enough votes to finish in one of the top two spots, where he will oppose a Democrat on the November ballot. Having always run slightly ahead of Republican rival Chad Bianco, Hilton now polls at 18 percent, pulling away from Bianco, who is down to 14 percent. Trump’s recent endorsement of Hilton carries with it two messages. First, it was never realistic to expect the Democrat field to remain so split that two Republicans could earn the top two spots in the primary. Second, of the two Republican candidates, Hilton has the best chance of beating a Democrat in November.
These two factors were always true. Despite the Democrats’ failure to coalesce behind one candidate, the chances that they are going to permit multiple viable campaigns to split the vote so much that two Republicans could end up #1 and #2 in the primary outcome have always been about zero. Swalwell is the first casualty, but he won’t be the last. The danger was, and remains, the opposite. Steyer, with virtually unlimited funds and a formidable campaign staff, is going to probably buy his way to a top spot. If only one other Democrat were to pull away from the pack, and the Republican vote had remained equally split between Hilton and Bianco, Californians would be choosing between two Democrats in November to be their next governor.
One potential spoiler in the contest between Democrats is San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan. He is attracting million-dollar–or–more donations from wealthy individuals who could be reasonably stereotyped as business-friendly moderate Democrats. They include Sergey Brin, Rick Caruso, Reed Hastings, Steve Huffman, Michael Moritz, Neil Mehta, and others. These names are recognized by anyone familiar with California politics and business, and they run the gamut from left of center to right of center. And as for Mahan’s appeal? They believe it is impossible for a Republican to win in California. Period. That’s it. That is the only reason they support Mahan.
This is a self-defeating, self-fulfilling misconception. The reason a Republican like Steve Hilton is fighting an uphill battle to be competitive in November is because donors who have chosen Mahan as their preferred candidate have chosen Mahan as their preferred candidate. It is a tautology. It is only true because they’ve chosen to make it true. It is the political equivalent of the theory in quantum physics that the observer creates reality.
The political reality that California’s centrist billionaire donors are ignoring is blatantly obvious. The chances that they can propel Matt Mahan into a top two finish, when voting starts in less than two weeks, and Mahan is only polling at 4 percent, are lower, lower than the chances that Steve Hilton, who is almost certain to be on the ballot in November, can actually beat his Democrat opponent.
There is nothing about Matt Mahan that makes him an appealing practical choice apart from the fact that he is (1) not a Republican, and (2) not as bad as every other Democrat. This is a lousy reason to burn through tens of millions of dollars. Mahan is not going to get the nod from Democratic voters. And any rational pro-business donor, whether they’re right of center or left of center, ought to be disgusted with Mahan, who talks like a moderate, but—following the Spanberger strategy—will govern like a hack. Consider his record.
Matt Mahan’s tenure as San Jose’s mayor has seen him do nothing to replace the city’s homeless industrial complex, a corrupt ecosystem of grifters who have squandered billions on “permanent supportive housing” when congregate shelters that mandate sobriety and treatment are a far more effective and far less expensive solution. Mahan has done nothing to dismantle the inept transportation agencies that are doubling down on spending for intercity and light rail at a time when ridership is in terminal decline and new vehicle technologies are fast rendering these legacy projects obsolete. And Mahan has shown no ability to stand up to the city’s powerful public sector unions and has supported every proposed tax increase, even as the city fails to improve services at any level. Mahan even supports a national wealth tax, although he’s savvy enough to stay neutral on the proposed state wealth tax.
In short, Matt Mahan is both a fraud and a candidate with no hope of winning the primary. Steyer is going to buy one of the top two spots, and there are too many other determined Democrats in contention to give Mahan any chance of overtaking Steve Hilton for the other top spot.
What Mahan’s well heeled supporters lack is something completely out of character for people with such obvious competence. These are not risk averse individuals. These are people who have created billion dollar companies from scratch, people who can’t imagine failure. These are visionaries whose innovations are the reason California—despite all the havoc created by the very Democrats among whom they have deluded themselves into thinking Mahan is an exception—continues to change the world. So why can’t they see the virtues of a Republican like Steve Hilton?
There is not one issue on which Hilton has taken a position that is disagreeable to California’s business community. Moreover, there is a sea change occurring in California’s political culture that is being led by the fact that high tech entrepreneurs are broadening their scope. Their investments and their focus have moved from chips and software and social media to transforming industry. Early examples of this are Elon Musk with Tesla and SpaceX, along with Palmer Luckey with Anduril. These men are no longer techies; they are industrialists, and they are defining and ensuring American economic leadership in the 21st century. Culturally, they are the precise opposite of the hidebound bureaucrats, consultants, attorneys, and activist NGOs that have skimmed the wealth from and scammed the taxpayers of California for decades, tying positive development up in knots and making the state unaffordable in the process.
The people backing Matt Mahan ought to know better. Because these are people who are accustomed to moving from project concept to product launch in 18 months, not 18 years. From data centers to housing developments, California’s new generation of builders coming out of the tech industry are not going to accept timelines denominated in decades and project costs that are heavier on process compliance than direct construction expenses. They need a governor who will change the rules, vetoing more bad laws from the state legislature, and using the power of the governor’s office to replace members of oversight boards, fire heads of state agencies, and issue aggressive executive orders to cleanse and deregulate a bloated and destructive system.
California’s voters get the message. They are not only living the nightmare, they are also hearing it every day on the commercials that Tom Steyer is spending tens of millions on to saturate the airwaves and the internet. Affordability! Competition! End corruption! But Tom Steyer is also a fraud. If Steyer were not a fraud, he would be getting millions of dollars from California’s politically moderate billionaires, instead of Mahan. Tom Steyer epitomizes everything wrong with California. He is a fanatic whose idea of abundance requires destroying California’s energy industry, mandating only infill housing, and rationing water instead of investing in more water supply infrastructure. He is an oligarch who will see to it that this “abundance” strategy only involves huge, politically connected corporations. And yet he is promising anything and everything to California’s public sector unions, ensuring that whatever vitality is left in California’s economy will accrue to the public sector, further impoverishing California’s small businesses and low- and middle-income households.
Perhaps the only thing Mahan’s supporters have gotten right is that Mahan would do less harm than Steyer. That’s scant comfort to California’s millions of residents who deserve better.
Steve Hilton, on the other hand, is a moderate Republican with policy ideas that embrace an authentic abundance agenda. Making California affordable again requires deregulation so businesses can compete with each other on price and performance. At the same time, tax revenues need to reprioritize funding practical infrastructure, because these investments will decrease the cost of energy, water, and transportation for everyone. With these two objectives fulfilled—deregulation and practical infrastructure investment—fewer people are dependent on government, and the money then saved can be redirected to infrastructure or returned to the taxpayers.
This is the virtuous political and economic cycle that breaks California’s current spiraling descent into insolvency, failed institutions, and chaos. Steve Hilton understands this thoroughly. Matt Mahan does not.
Electing a Republican in California is not impossible. With effectively no donor support, in 2022, Republican candidate Brian Dahle captured 41 percent of the vote. Steve Hilton is a candidate with more charisma, bringing a moderate but forceful policy agenda. To win, he only needs to swing another 5 percent from blue to red. But to do that, he needs money.
Industrialists in the Silicon Valley should recognize by now that their interests coincide with every Californian who has ever made so much as a scratch in the ground, from the oil in Kern County to the vineyards in the Delta. Once this primary is in the books, and Hilton faces Steyer for governor, California’s politically moderate billionaires are invited to take a hard look at what they’re going to do next.
Edward Ring
Source: https://amgreatness.com/2026/04/22/steve-hilton-can-win-in-november/
No comments:
Post a Comment