There will be 61 names of would-be governors on the June 2 primary election ballot, but the top two finishers will — as certainly as anything can be in politics — come from the six who participated Wednesday evening in the first statewide televised debate.
Former Congressman Eric Swalwell’s scandal-ridden departure this month shook up the field and seemingly lifted former Attorney General (and ex-Biden cabinet member) Xavier Becerra into contention after months in the low single digits.
However, no one has achieved support anything close to what would be needed to claim one of the top two finishes, probably in the mid-20% range, and a spot on the November ballot.
The debate, staged by the Nexstar string of television stations in San Francisco, was a chance for them to shine.
None did — if shining means presenting a compelling case that he or she is what California needs to confront the existential issues that will determine whether the state can once again be a unique place where people can see their ambitions become reality.
Those issues include housing shortages, rampant homelessness, the nation’s highest levels of unemployment and poverty, uncertain water supplies, soaring utility costs, shamefully low academic achievement in public schools and a state budget in chronic deficit.
The topics posed by the debate moderators touched on only a couple of those issues, and then too briefly to be significant. Otherwise, the questions dealt with, at best, peripheral matters that may be trendy on social media but have little or nothing to do with governing the nation’s most populous and complex state.
Really folks, do we yearn to know what streaming program the candidates have most recently watched?
The potential for voters to learn more about what the candidates would do as governor was also undermined because only the first hour of the debate was broadcast on old-fashioned television. Viewers had to switch to their computers to see the last half hour.
Given all of that, what could one have gleaned from watching?
Recommended for you
For one thing, the four Democrats are not inclined to criticize outgoing Gov. Gavin Newsom on one of the truly relevant issues, having the nation’s highest numbers of homeless people.
Asked to give Newsom letter grades on homelessness, none offered anything lower than a B, even though the problem is at least as severe as it was when Newsom took office in 2019. The two Republicans, of course, gave him Fs.
We got only brief sound bites on what the six would do themselves to reduce homelessness.
The related issue of housing, both supply and cost, got a little more attention, but mostly it boiled down to six promises of making it easier for developers to build, which has been Newsom’s approach but has not noticeably affected either housing production or cost.
That was about it on the big issues. There was nothing on water, one brief response to one viewer-generated question about academic achievement and some sound bites about the costs and availability of home insurance.
We did, however, get relatively lengthy responses about gas taxes, charging fees on zero emission vehicles, whether truck drivers should be able to read English and whether young children should be barred from using social media — again, trendy issues but not the serious ones that will face the next governor.
From a purely political standpoint, none of the sextet scored some point that will reverberate enough to change the dynamics of the campaign. Neither did anyone commit an injurious gaffe.
Maybe the next televised debate, scheduled for next Tuesday, will be meatier and more illuminating. It could hardly be less so.
Dan Walters has been a journalist for more than 60 years, spending all but a few of those years working for California newspapers. He began his professional career in 1960, at age 16, at the Humboldt Times. CalMatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics. He can be reached at dan@calmatters.org.
No one needs hard questions or answers when running for Governor in CA. The sheep do not care and know little to nothing. They will look for the letter D and put a check next it. The best hope is that sheep are not able to collude and agree on one D and they end up splitting the vote and two R's slip through. The corrupt democrats of CA were afraid of having one D go head to head with one R so they changed the rules, kind of like their gerrymandering.
But if two R's makes it through the primary, the sheep will only be left scratching their heads, and raising their hands and asking a poll worker for help, "I don't see the letter D anywhere, what do I do?" Even with this happy ending scenario, the CA Democrat Senate will continue to spend on social issues and manage to do nothing except drive millionaires, billionaires and revenue out of the state.
Thanks for your column today, Mr. Walters, and for noticing the debate bypassed serious issues. I’d posit that these televised debates are more an effort to give softball questions to “protect” Democrat candidates who continue to have nothing to offer. Democrat candidates can check off a box and say they participated even though they have no idea how to tackle serious issues. I’m surprised candidates weren’t asked what their favorite ice cream flavor was. The bottom line is that the debate gives many reasons folks should vote for anyone except Democrats.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(2) comments
No one needs hard questions or answers when running for Governor in CA. The sheep do not care and know little to nothing. They will look for the letter D and put a check next it. The best hope is that sheep are not able to collude and agree on one D and they end up splitting the vote and two R's slip through. The corrupt democrats of CA were afraid of having one D go head to head with one R so they changed the rules, kind of like their gerrymandering.
But if two R's makes it through the primary, the sheep will only be left scratching their heads, and raising their hands and asking a poll worker for help, "I don't see the letter D anywhere, what do I do?" Even with this happy ending scenario, the CA Democrat Senate will continue to spend on social issues and manage to do nothing except drive millionaires, billionaires and revenue out of the state.
Thanks for your column today, Mr. Walters, and for noticing the debate bypassed serious issues. I’d posit that these televised debates are more an effort to give softball questions to “protect” Democrat candidates who continue to have nothing to offer. Democrat candidates can check off a box and say they participated even though they have no idea how to tackle serious issues. I’m surprised candidates weren’t asked what their favorite ice cream flavor was. The bottom line is that the debate gives many reasons folks should vote for anyone except Democrats.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.