Getty Images Democrats already had a lot to worry about in the 2026 California governor's race, an election they would typically expect to win easily: Too many candidates. Low name recognition. Voter apathy. Then on Sunday, their leading candidate, Representative Eric Swalwell, faced with allegations of sexual assault and misconduct, dropped out of the contest, even as he denied the accusations. His exit threw the Democrats into further chaos and left the party facing a previously unthinkable possibility: could Republicans shut them entirely out of the general election in one of the bluest states in the US? "This would be an unforced error of historic proportions if Democrats fail to coordinate so badly that a Republican wins in a state where Donald Trump's approval rating is a little less than 30%," said Eric Schickler, a political science professor at the University of California, Berkeley. The San Francisco Chronicle and CNN last week published allegations by several women about Swalwell's conduct, leading his most prominent backers to abandon him. On Monday, Swalwell announced he would resign from Congress, hours after the US House of Representatives Ethics Committee opened an investigation. Swalwell has apologised for the "mistakes in judgement I've made in my past" but vowed to "fight the serious, false allegations that have been made". But Democrats' problems in California began long before those accusations became public. A muddled Democratic field in the world's fifth-largest economy --------------------------------------------------------------- Sitting Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom cannot run again due to term limit rules, and other politicians with statewide name recognition – such as former Vice-President Kamala Harris – declined to run. Eight serious but lesser-known candidates have struggled gain traction in California's enormous and expensive media market. In March, an opinion poll by University of California Berkeley's Institute of Governmental Studies caused a political earthquake, suggesting that two Republican candidates were garnering the most support among voters as the packed field of Democrats had splintered their base. Thanks to the California's primary system - which allows the top two vote-winners to compete in the general election regardless of party - such a result in June could mean there aren't any Democrats on the gubernatorial ballot in November, in a state that hasn't had a Republican governor since Arnold Schwarzenegger left office in 2011. The outcome of the race could have implications for Democrats beyond California's borders. The state is the fifth-largest economy in the world, and its environmental, consumer and tech policies often inspire regulations nationwide. Swalwell had started to gain momentum in recent weeks, breaking out from the Democratic pack. State Democrats had hoped he could surge enough to guarantee them a spot in the general election. But with Swalwell gone, it's not clear which candidate could absorb his momentum. "This is the most unsettled race for California governor I've ever seen," said Garry South, a long-time Democratic strategist who has managed four gubernatorial campaigns in the state. "The Democratic field was already pretty muddled, even after Swalwell took a small lead," he said. "Now, it's just an outright morass." Getty Images The two candidates best positioned to capture Swalwell's voters, and give the Democrats a chance to compete in the general election, are former Congresswoman Katie Porter and billionaire climate advocate Tom Steyer. Still, neither are a sure bet. Porter has previously faced reports from Politico that she allegedly mistreated staff, after which she said she would "be more intentional in showing gratitude to my staff". Steyer has spent $89m (£65.89m) on advertisements, according to the San Francisco Chronicle, but not yet seen a corresponding surge in opinion polls. Yet they have already begun to carve out a space away from the other Democratic candidates, including former US Heath and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and former State Controller Betty Yee. But none has what Democratic political experts said this race needs: star power. Voters have struggled to distinguish the Democratic candidates and their policies from each other. "I don't even know half the people running," said Joko Tamura, 58. Tamura, who lives in Santa Monica, identifies as a Democrat and plans to vote this year, naming homelessness and the high cost of living as her two key policy concerns. She has heard of Steyer and Porter, but feels she does not have enough information to pick a favourite. San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images Jacob Casey, a 42-year-old doctor, has a busy schedule that has made it hard for him to tune into the race. At some point before the 2 June primary, "I assume somebody will stick out," Casey said. "I haven't seen a primary election for governor with this level of indecision, and lack of voter enthusiasm, with less than two months to go before voting starts to take place," said Mark DiCamillo, who lead the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll that shocked Democrats last month. "Voters really don't have a clear picture (of) any one of the candidates," DiCamillo told the BBC. No front-runner has emerged --------------------------- As Swalwell's candidacy stalled, Porter has tried to fill the vacuum by leaning into economic messaging, focusing on one of the state's most intractable issues – soaring housing costs – in social media posts over the weekend. "By fast-tracking approvals and clearing away regulatory hurdles, we can lower construction costs and build the diverse housing our workforce needs to thrive," she wrote. Steyer has also jumped into the void, releasing a social media video on Sunday detailing his plan to "make California more affordable for you". While campaigning last week at a gas station in downtown Los Angeles, where the cheapest petrol was $8.29 (£6.14) per gallon (3.79 litres), Steyer also hit out at the president. "The working people of California are paying for Donald Trump's war in Iran," Steyer said. Such a pitch might eventually appeal to undecided Los Angeles voter Leila Salem, 28, who identifies as an independent and is staunchly opposed to the war. The willingness to challenge Trump's actions in Iran could "definitely" sway Salem's vote for governor, but she still has more research to do, she told the BBC. Getty Images Even as the Democrats struggle, California Republicans are dealing with their own frustrations. The two leading Republican candidates are former Fox News host and one-time David Cameron adviser Steve Hilton, and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco. The March Berkeley poll indicated that Republican voters were evenly split between the two, and in a state where Democratic voters outnumber Republicans by a 2-1 ratio, locking Democrats out of the general election could be the party's only conceivable path to victory in November. Many political observers expected that Trump's endorsement of Hilton last week would change the calculus, sending Republican voters to Hilton and causing Bianco to slip behind at least one of the Democrats in opinion polling. But neither Hilton nor Bianco garnered enough support to win the endorsement at the California Republican Party's convention last weekend, indicating the two candidates remain competitive among the state party's base. "I think it's fair for Democrats to be concerned now because their presumptive front-runner has now imploded," said Wesley Hussey, a political science professor at Sacramento State University. But if a large share of Swalwell's supporters move to back Steyer or Porter – or even a last-minute surprise candidate - the state could see a traditional Democrat-versus-Republican general election after all, Hussey said. "It's going to take a few days for the dust to settle" in this new version of the race, he said.

Six candidates vying to become the next governor of California sparred on Wednesday in the first debate since the already topsy-turvy race was plunged into upheaval by the sudden collapse of former congressman Eric Swalwell’s campaign after [sexual assault and misconduct allegations](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/14/eric-swalwell-sexual-assault-accusation). With a clear frontrunner still yet to emerge, the unusually wide-open race to replace the outgoing governor, Gavin Newsom, in the heavily Democratic state has left nearly a [quarter](https://emersoncollegepolling.com/california-2026-poll-april/) of voters undecided ahead of the 2 June primary. While sharp contrasts emerged over how to address some of the state’s biggest anxieties – from the high cost of living and housing affordability, to homelessness and the looming threat of artificial intelligence – the evening probably did little to settle the race with less than two weeks before ballots begin arriving in voters’ mailboxes. The primetime showdown, hosted by Nexstar Media Group in San Francisco, featured two [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) – Steve Hilton, the former Fox News host and director of strategy to former UK prime minister David Cameron, and Chad Bianco, the sheriff of Riverside county – and the four leading Democrats: billionaire Tom Steyer, former health secretary Xavier Becerra, former congresswoman Katie Porter and the San Jose mayor, Matt Mahan. The [Democrats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) largely agreed on policy, but jostled with one another over the best way to bring down high prices and challenge Donald Trump. The Republicans, meanwhile, blamed the state’s woes on 16 years of “failed” Democratic governance. “The system is not working,” said Hilton, who has consistently led in polling and recently earned Trump’s endorsement. Asked about Newsom’s handling of the state’s long-running homelessness crisis, most of the Democrats on stage gave him a passing grade. Porter gave him a “B” and credited the governor with recognizing the role of housing as a root cause, drawing a retort from Hilton, who quipped: “Wow. I’d love to take your class, Katie, if you get a B for what Gavin Newsom’s done on homelessness.” He said he would give Newsom an “F”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/23/leading-california-governor-candidates-spar-in-first-debate-as-topsy-turvy-race-heats-up#img-2) Katie Porter after the California gubernatorial debate in San Francisco. Photograph: Fred Greaves/Reuters With the exception of a few sharp jabs, the debate lacked a standout moment that could jolt the contest or crown a frontrunner. But it offered a platform for the candidate to introduce themselves to Californians who are beginning to tune in. “We need someone who knows how to govern in a crisis, not someone who’s going to need training wheels the moment they walk into the governor’s office,” Becerra said, touting his record of clashing with Trump during his time as the California attorney general. Both Becerra and Mahan were late additions to the debate stage, having seen their support rise after the implosion of Swalwell’s gubernatorial campaign. Steyer, who has leaned on his personal fortune to blanket the airwaves and push himself to the top of the Democratic pack, has angled for the progressive mantle, casting himself as “the billionaire who wants to tax other billionaires”. Porter, a protege of the progressive senator Elizabeth Warren, argued that she uniquely understood the financial strain millions of Californians faced. “I’m not like them,” she said. “I’m like you – a mom fighting for a better future for California.” As they angled to distinguish themselves, several of the Democrats took shots at Steyer, who has led the Democratic pack. Mahan remarked that the “only housing Tom Steyer’s built has been private prisons and ICE detention centers,” repeating criticism of Steyer’s past business interests and investments. Steyer has expressed remorse over his former hedge fund’s past investments. On stage on Wednesday, Steyer reminded voters that he was the only billionaire on the ballot, but that billionaires were spending heavily to defeat him, including many Silicon Valley leaders who are backing Mahan. During the hour-long exchange, the candidates were pressed on some of the major issues facing their campaigns. Porter addressed a contentious exchange, captured on video, with a staffer, acknowledging that it was “not the right way to treat someone”. “I work hard with my team to deliver for Californians,” she said. Mahan defended his tech ties and his record, arguing that as mayor of the largest city in Silicon Valley he would bring a unique understanding of the promise and peril of artificial intelligence to regulatory debates. He vowed to be an independent voice in Sacramento, playing up his readiness to “take on the establishment within my own party”. Becerra was asked whether he should have done more as chair of the Democratic caucus to address “rumors” about Swalwell’s behavior. “Rumors are not facts,” he said. He applauded the women who came forward and shared their stories. “Today Eric Swalwell was facing accountability,” he said. Swalwell, who [resigned from Congress last week](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/13/house-ethics-committee-eric-swalwell-investigation), has vigorously denied the assault allegations. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/23/leading-california-governor-candidates-spar-in-first-debate-as-topsy-turvy-race-heats-up#img-3) Former Fox News host and political strategist Steve Hilton has received Donald Trump’s endorsement. Photograph: Fred Greaves/Reuters Bianco, questioned about his recent decision to seize more than half a million ballots cast in a November special election from county election officials, insisted the inquiry was a “very, very basic, normal investigation”. Since the state supreme court intervened to halt his investigation, Bianco claimed: “We’re never going to know if our elections are secure.” Hilton, meanwhile, insisted Trump’s endorsement was a strength, even though nearly two-thirds of Californians disapprove of the president. “It will benefit every Californian to have a governor who is a partner on these issues with the president and his team,” he contended. The state’s next governor confronts an increasingly pessimistic electorate, concerned about affordability and bracing for a worse economic future, according to the [Public Policy Institute of California.](https://www.ppic.org/blog/what-californias-next-governor-needs-to-know-about-californians-mood/) “We have the highest cost of living in the country because we have had one-party Democrat, progressive rule for decades that is destroying the state,” Bianco said. But despite the malaise, a Republican candidate still faces a massive uphill battle in a state where they are outnumbered by Democrats two to one. The recent upheaval in the race did little to ease Democrats’ fears that a failure to consolidate the field might produce the once-unthinkable prospect of two Republicans advancing to the November general election in the country’s largest blue state. Under California’s “jungle primary” system, the top two vote-getters advance to the November election, regardless of party. Bianco, when asked if he would support Hilton in a general election match-up against a Democrat, said he would not because he believed they would both advance. All of the other candidates said they would support the nominee from their party. The state party chair, Rusty Hicks, has been urging low-polling Democrats to exit the race, even though at this late stage their names will still appear on the June ballot, as will Swalwell’s. On Monday, Betty Yee, a former state controller, suspended her campaign for governor and endorsed Steyer. The former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and state superintendent of public instruction, Tony Thurmond, both Democrats, failed to qualify for the Wednesday night debate.

Seven of the leading contenders in [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california)’s unexpectedly dramatic race for governor will meet on a debate stage Tuesday night, a high-stakes showdown arriving just as voters begin casting ballots in the state’s nonpartisan primary. The debate, hosted by CNN and kicking off at 6pm PT, comes as the volatile contest to succeed the outgoing Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, begins to take clearer shape weeks after one of the leading candidates, former Democratic congressman Eric Swalwell, suddenly withdrew amid sexual assault and harassment allegations, which he strongly denies. Millions of voters across the state have already received their mail-in ballots before the 2 June primary, leaving precious little time for lower-polling [Democrats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) to break through. After Swalwell’s exit, Xavier Becerra, the former secretary of health and human services under Joe Biden, has surged to the top of the crowded Democratic field, a remarkable turnaround after months languishing at the bottom of polls. A recent survey conducted by the [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california) Democratic party showed Becerra tied at 18% with Republican Steve Hilton, the former Fox News host and director of strategy to former UK prime minister David Cameron. They were trailed by Chad Bianco, the Republican sheriff of Riverside county; billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer; former California congresswoman Katie Porter; Matt Mahan, San Jose’s mayor; and former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. In a sign the contest was starting to settle and Californians were tuning in, the survey found that the number of undecided voters had shrunk considerably, falling from 24% in March to 14%. Becerra’s unexpected rise has helped ease panic among Democrats that a fractured field might allow two [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) to slip through to the November general election in the country’s biggest and most influential blue state. Under the state’s so-called “jungle primary”, the top two vote-getters advance regardless of party. His momentum has been met with a barrage of attacks from his chief Democratic rivals, but he has so far dodged major hits in a pair of relatively polite debates last month. Becerra and Steyer arrive on the debate stage in Los Angeles touting endorsements from two larger-than-life California icons: the labor activist Dolores Huerta recently announced her support for Becerra, while the former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown lent his Bay Area political clout to Steyer. On Monday, the powerful SEIU California hedged its bets by endorsing both Steyer and Becerra. The union had previously rescinded its endorsement of Swalwell after the allegations against him. Becerra’s sudden contention makes him a prime target on Tuesday night, and his rivals are expected to scrutinize his record, including his handling of migrant children as Biden’s HHS secretary. And despite casting himself as an early leader in the anti-Trump resistance while serving as California attorney general during the president’s first term, he faces some skepticism from liberals over his more moderate positions and understated approach. Steyer, meanwhile, has sought to rally progressives behind his campaign, casting himself as a “class traitor” whom other billionaires are trying to defeat. In a pre-debate memo, Steyer’s campaign argued he remained the strongest Democrat in the race and the only candidate willing to take on corporate interests, though questions linger about his wealth and his past investments in coal and private prisons. Steyer has spent more than $130m of his own fortune on his gubernatorial bid, yet has remained relatively stagnant in recent polls. The jockeying on Tuesday night comes one week after a chaotic forum where the eight candidates frequently interrupted one another and clashed over the major issues from immigration enforcement, wildfire response and the state’s high cost of living in California, the world’s fourth largest economy. Those themes are again expected to dominate the evening’s discussion, as candidates confront voter concerns over affordability, homelessness, insurance shortages and a projected state budget shortfall.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- One tech investor called him “the only sane” Democrat in the race for [California governor](https://apnews.com/article/who-running-california-governor-candidates-primary-election-5f78b04bfaecf2f15aee9298b06e5849). Others have dumped millions to boost his campaign, even paying for a Super Bowl ad to introduce him to voters. He’s against a proposed [billionaires’ tax](https://apnews.com/article/california-billionaire-tax-09ef038f86019d4c62b76aeff707158d) that has the state’s wealthiest residents threatening an exodus. San Jose [Mayor Matt Mahan](https://apnews.com/article/california-governor-race-matt-mahan-219b8085a1f1f6400f6f0f13707274b4) is tech’s favorite candidate to be the next leader of California. The 43-year-old former tech executive jumped into the [crowded race](https://apnews.com/article/california-governor-democrats-gavin-newsom-republicans-porter-7138e44bd9f4d474910e111aea13d8c4) in January, touting himself as a pragmatic problem-solver. A moderate Democrat, Mahan has built his statewide profile mainly by criticizing Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature's response to homelessness and crime. His centrist message has appealed to tech leaders who want a business-friendly governor to succeed Newsom, a longtime tech ally who’s terming out. In just three months, Mahan has raised more than any of his rivals, many of whom have been running for more than a year. ( [Billionaire Tom Steyer](https://apnews.com/article/california-governor-race-tom-steyer-billionaire-climate-896584d46f8082f1ee9ce02b85634c04) is largely self-funding his campaign.) During a Tuesday [night debate on CNN](https://apnews.com/article/california-governor-debate-healthcare-tax-cnn-f88d189f91f1ed7e415438227e3f3ac1), he criticized his rivals as career politicians while crafting himself as the candidate with practical solutions to the state’s challenges. “We don’t need MAGA values, but we also don’t need more of the same,” Mahan said, referring to President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement supported by Republican rivals Chad Bianco and [Steve Hilton](https://apnews.com/article/california-governor-donald-trump-endorsement-steve-hilton-0c3b0f4752466e3fd12463cbb49c079d), whom Trump has endorsed. But Mahan doesn’t appear to have yet gained the momentum he expected or the widespread name recognition to beat his rivals — and he’s running out of time to win over voters ahead of the June 2 primary. His ties to tech are of particular concern to labor unions and a segment of Democratic voters who question whether he’ll stand up to the industry. “People do not want somebody who is a puppet of these big tech billionaires, of these AI billionaires — and that’s who he has always been,” said Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, president of the California Labor Federation, which has endorsed Steyer, former U.S. Rep. [Katie Porter](https://apnews.com/article/california-governor-2026-katie-porter-kamala-harris-ad1fadd10a0f32ef36f75aa3f14c82d6) and former Los Angeles Mayor [Antonio Villaraigosa](https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-california-los-angeles-gavin-newsom-antonio-villaraigosa-349ef986e647edec3a152406474eec18). Mahan said he's the only candidate who has experience with the behemoth industry, pointing to a coalition he created in San Jose where more than 900 public agencies work together to explore responsible ways to implement artificial intelligence in government. In Tuesday's debate, he said he supports taxing AI companies to fund workforce development. “Voters can see past the kind of, you know, shallow connection that because I’m the mayor of the largest city in Silicon Valley, that might mean that I’m not willing to regulate tech,” Mahan told The Associated Press. "It’s actually been quite the opposite.” Observers note California is known for leading the way on policies aimed at both boosting and reining in its home-grown tech industry. “If they can ensure that they get a governor in California who’s weak on tech accountability, then that can save them a lot of money across the states,” J.B. Branch of Public Citizen, a progressive consumer rights advocacy group, said of the Silicon Valley leaders supporting Mahan. Across politics, the tech industry is flexing its political muscle as public skepticism about [social media](https://apnews.com/hub/social-media) and [artificial intelligence](https://apnews.com/hub/artificial-intelligence) rises. Independent groups backed by tech companies and billionaires have already committed at least $40 million to influence California legislative races. Political committees backing Mahan have raised more than $25 million, including donations from Google co-founder Sergey Brin, venture capitalist Michael Moritz and Reddit CEO Steve Huffman. Some donors, like Brin and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, are hedging their bets — they also gave to Hilton, the former Fox News host. Mahan is “focused on actually solving problems — building more housing, improving public safety and making it possible for people to live and work here again,” Garry Tan, who leads a startup accelerator that helped launch companies like Airbnb and DoorDash, said through a spokesperson. [  ](https://abcnews.com/International/live-updates/iran-live-updates-ukmto-reports-attacks-2-ships/?id=132626582) [  ](https://abcnews.com/US/driver-arrested-after-hit-kid-bike-police/story?id=132678195) [  ](https://abcnews.com/International/live-updates/iran-live-updates-rubio-dismisses-iran-peace-proposal/?id=132444768) A Harvard graduate, Mahan was classmates with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who he's said [persuaded him to go into tech](https://www.kqed.org/news/11962814/matt-mahan-on-zuckerbergs-advice-and-homeless-housing-in-san-jose) instead of law school. Mahan was part of the team that built an early Facebook app called Causes that allowed users to promote nonprofit organizations. He then co-founded Brigade, a nonpartisan online voter network. But that's not at the center of Mahan's campaign. He's focused instead on his upbringing as the son of a postal worker and a schoolteacher. He's the only major Democrat who wants to suspend the state's gas tax. He defeated a labor-backed candidate for mayor in 2022 after serving two years on the city council. As mayor, he convinced council members to direct more city money toward short-term housing to get homeless people off the streets and made them eligible for [arrest](https://apnews.com/article/san-jose-homeless-shelter-arrests-dc558aa848621a8d4c8eb34c5a961cc4) for rejecting shelters. Both efforts faced fierce opposition, but San Jose last year saw a drop in the number of people without access to shelters, according to county data. He bucked Newsom in 2024 by backing [a tough-on-crime ballot measure](https://apnews.com/article/california-ballot-propositions-2024-election-7e6c94f6d4d1f5660af1e4f326bd03ff). Mahan has since tamped down his criticism, saying the governor has focused on the right issues. Mahan has committed to not raising taxes to fix budget holes — including with a one-time tax on billionaires that most of his rivals are also against. He wants to incentivize elected state officials and appointees by tying future pay raises to improvements on issues like unemployment rates and homelessness. “Raising taxes isn’t always the answer, Tom,” he pointedly said Tuesday when Steyer pitched a plan to make corporations pay more in property taxes. Mahan raised more than $13 million in 11 weeks, allowing him to launch television ads to reach voters in some of the most expensive markets in the country. Two independent expenditure groups have spent more than $18 million to boost him. As of last month, only about 730 donations given to Mahan’s campaign were less than $250, indicating limited grassroots support. In contrast, almost all of Porter’s 46,000 donations were under that amount, as were about 5,600 of those to former state attorney general Xavier Becerra. Still, voters' support for the other Democratic candidates "is very soft" Mahan said of his chance. “Even if people are leaning a certain way, they’re still persuadable.” Tech moguls’ support of Mahan’s candidacy and his plans to regulate them were among the most popular topics during a recent “Ask Me Anything” session Mahan hosted on Reddit, where people can ask questions anonymously. Several people asked when Mahan would drop out to prevent a catastrophic scenario for Democrats where [two Republicans could advance](https://apnews.com/article/california-governor-democrats-gavin-newsom-republicans-porter-7138e44bd9f4d474910e111aea13d8c4) to the November election. One asked which Democrat he would endorse after exiting the race. “I plan to win!” he responded.

May 8, 2026 11:00 AM California gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer is proposing a new jobs guarantee for workers displaced by artificial intelligence.  Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images Billionaire California gubernatorial candidate [Tom Steyer](https://www.wired.com/2017/03/tom-steyer-interview/) is rolling out a new proposal that would guarantee jobs with benefits for [workers displaced](https://www.wired.com/story/all-my-employees-are-ai-agents-so-are-my-executives/) by [artificial intelligence](https://www.wired.com/story/using-ai-negative-impact-thinking-problem-solving-study/). He’s the first state-wide candidate to make such a pledge. The plan, which builds on a broader AI policy framework Steyer [released in March](https://www.tomsteyer.com/api/media/file/TomsAIPlan.pdf), promises to make California “the first major economy in the world” to ensure “good-paying” jobs to workers impacted by AI. To do so, Steyer tells WIRED he plans to build off a previous proposal to introduce a “token tax” which would tax big tech companies “a fraction of a cent for every unit of data processed” for AI. The funding generated by that tax would go to what Steyer has called the Golden State Sovereign Wealth Fund, with some of that money being earmarked for jobs building housing, health care, and modernizing California’s energy infrastructure. “The aim of the initiative will be to strengthen the foundation of the state’s economy, invest in our communities, and create beautiful, vibrant public spaces,” states a campaign memo viewed by WIRED. “To support these efforts, Tom will also invest heavily in training and apprenticeship programs across the state.” The new plan also intends to expand unemployment insurance and establish a new agency called the AI Worker Protection Administration that would include union leaders, academics, and technologists that would adopt rules to protect workers’ rights, the memo says. “People all over this state are terrified that AI is going to hollow out this whole economy and they’re going to lose their jobs. Young people are worried they’ll never get a job,” Steyer tells WIRED. “We believe this can be an amazing transformational technology in many ways, but we’re not in the business of leaving people in California behind.” Steyer’s job guarantee comes as lawmakers across the state and federal levels—and even some AI executives—scramble to address the ramifications of widespread AI adoption across the US workforce. In New Jersey, state senator Troy Singleton recently put out a bill that would require companies that replace workers with AI to contribute to a fund that would [pay to retrain](https://www.troysingleton.com/ai_could_disrupt_millions_of_jobs_lawmakers_are_preparing) those workers. In Congress, there are [a handful of proposals](https://www.nextgov.com/policy/2026/02/tech-bills-week-ai-science-challenge-protecting-copyright-content-and-more/411437/) for grants and tax credits for companies to provide AI training to existing employees. Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, has previously suggested the concept of a token tax that is now being proposed by Steyer. “Obviously, that’s not in my economic interest,” Amodei [told Axios last year](https://www.axios.com/2025/05/28/ai-jobs-white-collar-unemployment-anthropic). “But I think that would be a reasonable solution to the problem.” In April, OpenAI proposed a similar [public wealth fund](https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/561e7512-253e-424b-9734-ef4098440601/Industrial%20Policy%20for%20the%20Intelligence%20Age.pdf) to what Steyer has rolled out. Steyer’s announcement comes days after Democratic primary opponent Xavier Becerra—former Health and Human Services secretary under president Joe Biden—offered his [own AI plan](https://www.xavierbecerra2026.com/priorities/ai/). In that proposal, Becerra calls for “workforce investment and transition support” but doesn’t provide a specific funding mechanism. “Displacement without support is abandonment,” Becerra said in [a Monday memo](https://www.xavierbecerra2026.com/priorities/ai/) outlining his plan. “I will work with the Legislature, the California public education system and industry partners to build accessible, stackable workforce programs that prepare Californians for the AI economy and support workers navigating role changes.” Over the past few months, the White House has threatened to go after states that choose to regulate AI. In December, President Donald Trump [signed an executive order](https://www.wired.com/story/trump-signs-executive-order-ai-state-laws/) that could revoke federal broadband funding from states that approve “onerous” AI laws. This is happening in local races as well: In New York, a super PAC backed by a number of Silicon Valley powerhouses, including OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman, has [targeted Alex Bores](https://www.wired.com/story/alex-bores-andreessen-horowitz-super-pac-ai-regulation-new-york/), a Manhattan congressional candidate who has made AI regulation the centerpiece of his campaign. “Not regulating AI doesn’t seem remotely reasonable,” Steyer says. “But if California wants to lead, we’ve got to have a vision for the future that includes something that is not just about letting entrepreneurs get rich at the expense of everybody else.”

Two years later, Acemoglu’s measured take has not caught on. Chatter about an AI jobs apocalypse pops up everywhere from Senator Bernie Sanders’s rallies to conversations I overhear in line at the grocery store. Some previously skeptical economists have gotten more [open](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/03/business/economists-once-dismissed-the-ai-job-threat-but-not-anymore.html) to the idea that something seismic could be coming with AI. A California gubernatorial candidate [said](https://www.tomsteyer.com/press/tom-steyer-unveils-a-jobs-guarantee-for-the-ai-era-plan) last week that he wants to tax corporate AI use and pay victims of “AI-driven layoffs.” On the one hand, the data is still on Acemoglu’s side; studies repeatedly find that AI is not affecting employment rates or layoffs. But the technology has advanced quite a bit since his cautious predictions. I spoke with him to understand if any of the latest developments in AI have changed his thesis, and to find out what does worry him these days if not imminent AGI. One of the biggest technical leaps in AI since Acemoglu’s paper has been agentic AI, or tools that can go beyond chatbots and operate on their own to complete the goal you give them. Because they can work independently rather than just answering questions, companies are increasingly pitching agents as a one-to-many replacement for human workers. “I think that’s just a losing proposition,” Acemoglu says. He thinks agents are better thought of as tools to augment particular pieces of someone’s work than something malleable enough to handle a person’s whole job. One reason has to do with all the various tasks that go into a job, something Acemoglu has been researching in his work on AI [since](https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w24196/w24196.pdf) 2018. For example, an x-ray technician juggles 30 different tasks, from taking down patient histories to organizing archives of mammogram images. A worker can naturally switch between formats, databases, and working styles to do this, Acemoglu says, but how many individual tools or protocols would an AI require to do the same? Whether or not agents will supercharge AI’s impact on jobs will come down to whether they can eventually handle the orchestration between tasks that humans do naturally. AI companies are in heated competition to prove that their AI agents can work independently for ever longer periods without making mistakes, sometimes [exaggerating](https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/02/05/1132254/this-is-the-most-misunderstood-graph-in-ai/) the results—but Acemoglu says many jobs will be spared from an AI takeover if agents can’t fluidly switch between tasks. For years Big Tech has been offering staggering salaries to recruit AI researchers. But I asked Acemoglu about a different hiring spree I’ve noticed: AI companies are all building in-house economics teams. OpenAI hired Ronnie Chatterji from Duke University in 2024 to be its chief economist and [announced](https://openai.com/global-affairs/new-economic-analysis/) last year that Chatterji will work with Jason Furman—Harvard economist and former advisor to Barack Obama—to research AI and jobs. Anthropic has [convened](https://www.anthropic.com/news/introducing-the-anthropic-economic-advisory-council) a group of 10 leading economists to do similar work. And just last week, Google DeepMind announced it had hired Alex Imas, an economist from the University of Chicago, to be its “director of AGI economics.”

Dana Williamson, a top [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california) political strategist with ties to the state’s governor, [Gavin Newsom](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/gavin-newsom), and gubernatorial hopeful [Xavier Becerra](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/19/xavier-becerra-california-governor-interview), pleaded guilty on Thursday to fraud charges, an admission that is poised to fuel other candidates’ attacks in the race. Federal authorities say Williamson conspired to steal $225,000 from a dormant campaign account belonging to Becerra, who was [not named](https://www.justice.gov/usao-edca/media/1440761/dl?inline) in the plea deal, and divert the money to his chief of staff, Sean McCluskie. The funds were disguised as pay to McCluskie’s spouse for nonexistent work. McCluskie [reportedly](https://www.kcra.com/article/dana-williamson-possible-plea-deal-federal-prosecutors/71143610) took a pay cut to join Becerra when he became the US secretary of health and human services in 2021. McCluskie took a plea deal last December. Becerra has maintained he did not know about the scheme, but his opponents have sought to link him to the corruption investigation. “We know that Xavier Becerra likely broke state law, and now he’s at the center of an ongoing criminal investigation,” billionaire Tom Steyer, one of Becerra’s top rivals in the governor’s race, said in a statement after Williamson’s guilty plea. “Democrats cannot afford to wake up on June 3 and discover we’ve got a criminal on our hands. Xavier Becerra should not be our governor, and we can’t risk having him as our nominee.” Katie Porter, the former congresswoman also running for governor, [said](https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/11/politics/video/inside-politics-katie-porter-california-governors-primary-race) earlier this week that Becerra’s proximity to the scandal made him “too big of a risk” for voters. “My opponents have spent millions spreading lies to purposefully mislead voters. Today confirms what I have said from day one: I did nothing wrong. Case closed,” Becerra [wrote](https://x.com/XavierBecerra/status/2055014962054258811) Thursday on X, in reference to [court](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/05/14/dana-williamson-plea-deal-corruption-case-00920078) documents indicating that Williamson and McCluskie hid the plan from him. Williamson wielded considerable influence in Sacramento politics. She served as chief of staff to Newsom and cabinet secretary for Newsom’s predecessor, Jerry Brown. Williamson also pleaded guilty to making false statements about the campaign fund scheme and filing false tax returns, in which she claimed roughly $1.7m in personal expenses as business deductions, according to law enforcement officials. A court date regarding her sentencing has been set for July. Williamson is facing up to 38 years in prison.

Left activists who love Sen. Bernie Sanders have this year flocked to a surprising new champion: hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer. * Tom Steyer, JB Pritzker, Ro Khanna, and Saikat Chakrabarti are all very wealthy candidates or politicians who have been surprisingly successful at winning praise from the left, given the general suspicion of billionaires and fear of big money in politics. * Each has a different story of how, exactly, they built these bridges — Steyer is making big promise, Pritzker pushed through a progressive governance agenda, and Khanna and Chakrabarti have longtime ties to Bernie Sanders-world. * But the commonality is that progressive activists are optimistic these candidates will feel more beholden to them — and less beholden to the traditional Democratic establishment and business interests. In his campaign for California governor, Steyer has racked up the endorsements of [Our Revolution](https://ourrevolution.com/our-revolution-endorses-tom-steyer-for-california-governor/) (a group founded by Sanders 2016 campaign notables) and the [California Nurses Association](https://www.nationalnursesunited.org/press/california-nurses-association-endorses-tom-steyer-for-governor-of-california) (the state’s leading champions of single-payer healthcare). And earlier this month, even the Democratic Socialists of America’s California chapter [praised Steyer](https://www.californiadsa.org/voterguide) as “most progressive of the current viable candidates for governor” — and advised against making a further-left protest vote. Though all tout Steyer’s positions on the issues, the optics of the anti-billionaire left backing a candidate who has spent $132 million of his own money to saturate the state’s airwaves with his ads may seem strange. Yet Steyer isn’t the only example of a very wealthy pol who’s won at least some left enthusiasm: * Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a billionaire from his family’s Hyatt hotel empire, [impressed some](https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2022/07/is-j-b-pritzker-the-democrats-only-hope-for-2024) left writers [and posters](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/05/trailer-nationalize-this-race-democrats-run-abortion-special-elections/) with his progressive achievements once in office — and may run for president in 2028. * Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), who per financial disclosures has an [estimated median net worth](https://www.notus.org/capitol-gains/california-delegation-net-worth-stocks) of $232.7 million (largely [his wife’s money in a trust](https://x.com/RoKhanna/status/2034740521134891249)), is [frequently mentioned](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2028-election/bernie-sanders-lane-2028-aoc-ro-khanna-rcna343290) as a potential presidential contender in the “Bernie lane” for 2028. * Saikat Chakrabarti — who got quite wealthy through his work for the financial payments startup Stripe — is [cultivating left support](https://sfstandard.com/2026/05/07/saikat-rally-piker-congress-race/) in a primary campaign to succeed Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives. Wealthy politicians who can plow millions into their political runs are hardly new, of course, with plenty of current examples in each party, as well as independents like the late [Ross Perot](https://www.vox.com/2024-elections/23998347/ross-perot-rfj-jr-third-party-indepdendent-2024). Today’s progressives frequently trace their roots to Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was himself a scion of one of the most well-connected families of its era. But the rise of this specific class of left-leaning ultra-wealthy candidates is noteworthy, because it comes after years of Democratic alarm over the influence of megadonors on elections in the _Citizens United_ era — and over how billionaires have increasingly imposed their will on the [government](https://www.vox.com/politics/410893/elon-musk-doge-failed-cabinet-spending) and [society more broadly](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/395646/trump-inauguration-broligarchs-musk-zuckerberg-bezos-thiel). (Hence the “[Fighting Oligarchy](https://www.vox.com/politics/410415/america-oligarchy-economics-donald-trump-democracy)” rallies from Sanders and US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez around the country last year.) In conversations about this broader topic with left activists, I heard some mixed feelings about backing wealthy candidates, especially prolific self-funders like Steyer — but also a general sentiment that, if they’re saying the right things on the issues and making the right enemies, they could be worth supporting. “Every billionaire is a policy failure,” said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution. “That being said, we have to operate in the world that we’re in. And in this world we happen to have a billionaire candidate who is ideologically aligned with our organization and our policy priorities.” Others on the left have gone even further, and questioned whether the left’s anti-billionaire rhetoric itself has been flawed. “The fact that the DSA and many progressives in California are coalescing around Steyer underscores the problem with casting billionaires, per se, as the enemy,” Katrina vanden Heuvel, editorial director and publisher of The Nation, [wrote on X](https://x.com/KatrinaNation/status/2053275621325709616). “This frame doesn’t fare well in the real world, where some billionaires are very much part of the problem, while others are part of the solution.” The candidates in question don’t hide from their wealth, nor do the progressives and socialists backing them pretend these tensions aren’t there. But each one has found their own individual way to address concerns — and an audience willing to hear them out. Here’s what the modern playbook looks like for a progressive tycoon seeking elected office. A hedge fund billionaire who started his career at Goldman Sachs, Steyer isn’t exactly new to left causes — he’s been a [major funder of climate change activism](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/16/the-president-and-the-pipeline) going back to the Obama-era fight to block the Keystone XL pipeline. Then, during Donald Trump’s first term, he spent millions on a push to get the president impeached, and then more than a quarter-billion dollars on his own [quixotic presidential bid](https://www.vox.com/2019/8/9/20758861/tom-steyer-2020-president-money-wealth) (his best showing was 11 percent in South Carolina). But the open-seat California governor’s race provided a new opportunity. Steyer’s outreach to the left began with his choice of campaign consultants, as he signed on [Fight Agency,](https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/27/fight-agency-consultants-democrats-00200636) the buzzy firm launched in January 2025 that’s behind left insurgent candidates such as Graham Platner in Maine and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Any consulting firm would typically love to land a big-spending self-funder, but Steyer was off-brand for Fight. Initially, its co-founder Rebecca Katz said she told Steyer’s team all the reasons she’d never work for a billionaire — but they said Steyer still wanted to meet with her, and she agreed. After talking to her for an hour, he won her over. “Being a billionaire, he’s not the messenger I would’ve expected, but there was no one else saying what he was saying.” — Rebecca Katz, Fight Agency co-founder “I said, ‘My first question for you is: Should billionaires exist?’ He said: ‘Yes, but we should tax the hell out of them,’” Katz told me. “He wanted to change the way things are done and wanted to disrupt the system. He talked a lot about costs, the systems that were rigged from the inside, and the urgency of the moment. Being a billionaire, he’s not the messenger I would’ve expected, but there was no one else saying what he was saying.” Steyer then set about wooing other left groups, and two of his positions mattered most of all. One was a controversial wealth tax proposal going up for a statewide vote this year, a onetime tax of 5 percent of the wealth of residents with over $1 billion in assets. Gov. Gavin Newsom strongly [opposes the proposal](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/13/us/newsom-billionaire-tax-california.html) due to fears it would drive investment out of California. Most Democrats in the race have declined to support it, [worrying it is badly designed](https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-playbook/2026/01/16/gov-field-isnt-buying-the-wealth-tax-00733083) despite sympathy for its aims. But even though Steyer has [expressed some reservations](https://tomsteyer.substack.com/p/its-time-for-corporations-and-billionaires) about the wealth tax proposal, he’s also said [he’d vote for it](https://x.com/TomSteyer/status/2052113912640774200) — and [posed for pictures](https://x.com/TomSteyer/status/2047032543866704051) wearing a hat with the label “class traitor.” “I understand it’s not the perfect measure, and that Steyer has said that,” Geevarghese, Our Revolution’s executive director, said. “But he’s willing to endorse it, he’s willing to support it, he agrees with the principle that extreme wealth should be significantly taxed.” The second key issue is Steyer’s support for [single-payer healthcare](https://www.tomsteyer.com/issues/healthcare) in California, which was crucial in winning him the nurses union endorsement. This is a promise that has frequently been made by California politicians, including Newsom — but it keeps not getting done. Leftists blame this failure on the Democratic establishment being captive to the insurance industry. Of course, there are other obstacles as well — politicians may fear disrupting voters’ current care, and no one seems to know how the cash-strapped state will pay for it (or get the Trump administration’s permission, [which they’d need](https://kffhealthnews.org/health-care-costs/california-governor-race-single-payer-healthcare-becerra-cma-steyer/)). Steyer hasn’t put forth a serious proposal on paying for it — “God is going to be in the details,” he [recently told](https://kffhealthnews.org/health-care-costs/california-governor-race-single-payer-healthcare-becerra-cma-steyer/) KFF Health News — but he has promised to get single-payer done more consistently and unambiguously than his rivals in the race. Both the wealth tax proposal and statewide single-payer tend to get the sideeye from wonks, who suspect they’re pandering promises that will work out very poorly in practice. But many on the left view such commitments as a promising sign that Steyer will break with the party’s establishment and the conventional wisdom about how things are typically done. And, indeed, the evident reluctance of state party bigwigs to back Steyer — many initially were leaning toward [Eric Swalwell](https://www.vox.com/politics/485545/eric-swalwell-downfall-scandal-california-governor-race), who dropped out over sexual misconduct allegations, and now seem to have switched to back former Health Secretary Xavier Becerra — is a draw in and of itself, as is the financial independence that lets Steyer avoid fundraising from moneyed interests. This is central to Steyer’s pitch. “I’m the only person running for governor who’s taking them on,” he told my colleague Zack Beauchamp in [a recent interview](https://www.vox.com/politics/487199/tom-steyer-interview-arrest-stephen-miller). “I’m the only person they’re worried about. I’m the only person they’re spending a nickel against and they’re spending tens of millions of dollars to stop because they think they run the state.” It is quite possible that all Steyer’s millions in spending and his left activist support will be for naught. [Recent polls](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/polls/california-us-house-11-polls-2026.html) have mostly shown Steyer behind Becerra and one or two Republican candidates (California’s primary advances the top two finishers, regardless of party, to the general election). But the race remains close, and perhaps, if a billionaire spends enough money and wins enough hearts, he’ll be able to achieve his dream. Four years before Steyer’s governor bid, it was another billionaire winning strange new respect from the left: Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker. Pritzker was surely not the left’s candidate when he first ran for governor in 2018; progressive support in the Democratic primary went to second-place finisher Daniel Biss, who ran on a [“middle-class governor” platform](https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/february-2018/does-daniel-biss-have-a-shot-against-jb-pritzker/) that called out his opponent’s wealth. But in his first term, Pritzker passed a series of progressive bills — a minimum wage hike, marijuana legalization, and pro-choice and pro-union laws, among many others — that summed to an impressive record of achievement. “Pritzker has been signing bill after bill, and many of them are exactly what progressives want,” Nathan J. Robinson, a prominent socialist commentator, [wrote in Current Affairs](https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2022/07/is-j-b-pritzker-the-democrats-only-hope-for-2024) in 2022. So during a period of frustration with President Joe Biden’s struggles to pass his agenda, Pritzker started to look pretty good to some. Online, a memeified version of Pritzker as a badass progressive hero was embraced — with some amount of irony — by accounts such as “[Socialists for Pritzker](https://x.com/PritzkerForPrez).” Writing in Jacobin magazine, Ben Burgis pointed out that this was all a bit strange because [Pritzker was](https://jacobin.com/2022/08/jb-pritzker-illinois-governor-democrats-socialism) a “thoroughly mainstream Democrat” — but argued that he contrasted with the party’s national leaders because he “actually followed through.” (Though perhaps the difference is more that Pritzker, unlike Biden, had supermajorities in both chambers of the state legislature.) The physicality and personal charisma of Pritzker — who is overweight and happy to call attention to that by, for instance, making “Think Big” his campaign slogan — was also part of the appeal for some. “JB Pritzker is a unicorn for the Democratic Party in 3 ways: he is enormous, doesn’t come off as particularly intellectual, and has good instincts. you really never get all 3 in a Dem,” [Felix Biederman](https://x.com/ByYourLogic/status/1542011577385095168), co-host of the Chapo Trap House podcast, tweeted in 2022. But the interest is also mutual. Pritzker has said he takes pride in winning over Sanders supporters in his state— and he’s well aware he’ll have to find ways to address their skepticism in the future. In an interview with The Atlantic, he called his personal fortune [an “obstacle” to overcome](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/03/democratic-party-elections-future/685759/) should he run for president 2028. The enthusiasm for Pritzker may have been situational; it’s not clear it would carry over to a potential 2028 campaign, where the left could have other champions. Ocasio-Cortez is the first name on everyone’s lips there, but there’s also been chatter around another longtime Sanders backer — Rep. Ro Khanna. Khanna busted into Congress by challenging an aging Democrat, Mike Honda — unsuccessfully in 2014, and successfully in 2016 — for a Silicon Valley House seat. But he earned his anti-establishment cred early by endorsing Sanders over Hillary Clinton, and then by co-chairing Sanders’s presidential campaign in 2020. Khanna is also, it turns out, quite rich — through [his wife](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/30/fashion/weddings/ritu-ahuja-and-rohit-khanna.html), whose immigrant father started an auto transmission business in Ohio. However, Khanna [has publicly stressed](https://x.com/RoKhanna/status/2001632302833766671) that the wealth that shows up on his financial disclosure forms is “my wife’s money from prior to marriage over which I literally have no say or claim,” and that it is largely held in [an independent trust](https://x.com/RoKhanna/status/2034740521134891249). (Khanna also differs from the other politicians mentioned in this article in that he does not self-fund his campaigns.) Initially, Khanna didn’t shy away from his connection to his wealthy district’s elites. And for a time, he seemed to be pulling off the delicate balancing act of cultivating support from both Bernieworld and the tech industry, including a [longtime relationship with Musk](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/02/democracy-overstepping-musk-khanna/681612/), by emphasizing a more pro-growth and futurist approach to progressivism. But the California wealth tax initiative this cycle finally [forced him to pick a side](https://www.fastcompany.com/91517645/ro-khanna-silicon-valley-billionaire-tax) — and he backed the tax, [stoking fury](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/07/us/politics/ro-khanna-california-wealth-tax.html) among wealthy tech donors and earning him a Democratic challenger, [Ethan Agarwal](https://www.businessinsider.com/ro-khanna-ethan-agarwal-primary-silicon-valley-2026-3). In office, Khanna has shown a knack for putting himself at the forefront of major national topics, such as by co-authoring the bill [to release the Epstein files](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/dec/28/ro-khanna-epstein-files-act-bipartisan). Khanna is weighing a 2028 presidential run, and according to [NBC News’s Natasha Korecki](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2028-election/bernie-sanders-lane-2028-aoc-ro-khanna-rcna343290), he [has lined up support](https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5822819-khanna-2028-white-house-bid/) from some key Sanders campaign figures and may run even if AOC runs too. Not far away from Khanna’s district, another quite wealthy candidate is hoping support from the left can carry him into Congress. Saikat Chakrabarti, a software engineer whose early work at the payment startup Stripe helped make him a centimillionaire, is running for Pelosi’s open House seat in San Francisco. “I experienced that lottery economy, that the startup economy really is,” Chakrabati [said on a podcast last year](https://theintercept.com/2025/11/14/podcast-pelosi-saikat-chakrabarti/). “It’s this system where you can just hit it big if you just happen to be in the right place at the right time.” Like Khanna, Chakrabarti has longtime ties to Bernieworld — he worked on Sanders’s 2016 campaign, and in 2017 co-founded Justice Democrats to back further left candidates in Democratic primaries. Four of the candidates he backed, once elected, would become the initial members of “The Squad” — including AOC, who Chakrabarti worked for as chief of staff. (He left after a few months, [reportedly because](https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/02/aoc-staff-saikat-chakrabarti-climate-1445478) his public criticism of moderate Democrats caused controversy.) Now, Chakrabarti [is campaigning](https://sfstandard.com/2026/05/07/saikat-rally-piker-congress-race/) with streamer and leftist influencer Hasan Piker, heaping criticism on the Democratic establishment, promising a “[political revolution](https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/revolution-progressive-democrats-change-party-070933691.html),” and [saying](https://sfstandard.com/2026/05/07/win-chakrabarti-commits-spending-has-sf-congressional-race/?utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwY2xjawRwOJFleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicmlkETFtZzRqbkhFZ2tjVjNzNmVDc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHkEW_Ytb8FmAjsQ9AxMRRIHK6E3N6oqSsbL5mxdCZhO0fROIsmt2UwjQQvFp_aem_kS6dcf1nFuOYRGO_Et-_-Q) he’ll spend whatever it takes to win. Recent [polls have shown](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/polls/california-us-house-11-polls-2026.html) him behind the frontrunner, state Sen. Scott Wiener, but if he wins second place in next month’s primary he and Wiener will face off in November’s general election. Each of the above politicians are different in their own way, with different paths to relevance on the left. Steyer’s a longtime donor to progressive causes, Pritzker’s a larger-than-life personality who emphasizes his competence, Khanna’s a policy wonk with a knack for media, and Chakrabarti was an [early organizer for “The Squad”](https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/10/30/saikat-chakrabarti-nancy-pelosi-democratic-party-00624012) before it existed. There’s no one quality that unites them — except that each has an enormous net worth. But one thing that struck me in talking to their supporters was how some of their arguments for the virtues of a candidate like Steyer — that his wealth in this case helps make him independent of the establishment and big donors, and more willing to take on the system — resemble those arguments made for a certain other billionaire: Donald Trump. So long as our campaign finance system remains broken, the fantasy of a billionaire savior will remain a tempting one. Nobody would mistake Trump for a Sanders-style critic of money in politics. But in his 2016 primary campaign, the only one that he (mostly) [self-financed](https://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/20/trump-forgives-nearly-50-million-in-loans-to-campaign.html), he and his supporters [frequently argued](https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/donald-trump-republican-party/) his money gave him the unique ability to take on both the party establishment and special interest groups. Trump himself argued his opponents were all bought off by the [top party donors](https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/11/04/donald-trump-is-said-to-have-reached-out-to-the-megadonor-sheldon-adelson/) (many of whom he later embraced) and that his wealth gave him a unique perspective on how elites held down the working class. There’s a perverse logic that in our current legal environment, where individual donors and industries are allowed to spend [hundreds of millions of dollars](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/technology/andreessen-horowitz-politics.html) to influence races, turning a megadonor into a candidate makes a certain kind of sense. If he can spend his own money, at least he’s not pandering to get money from everyone else! Yet progressives don’t want a billionaire in office who’s truly empowered and independent from special interests — they want one very dependent on the right kind of special interest groups, that is to say, on themselves. “You do have to think about who that candidate will be beholden to if they enter office,” American Prospect editor David Dayen [said on a recent podcast](https://newrepublic.com/article/210059/inside-california-wild-unpredictable-governor-race). “Certainly if Steyer wins, he would have to thank the teachers union, progressive groups, and the kinds of organizations that have traditionally been the most progressive in California. I think that means something — that he would come in on the backs of those interests, and be more likely and willing to take on special interests who attacked him the entire campaign.” Here, too, there’s a similarity to 2016 Trump, whose biography and lack of credibility with movement conservatives spurred him to make extravagant promises — like that he’d choose his Supreme Court nominees [from a prereleased list](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-expands-list-of-possible-supreme-court-picks/) — to win them over. Similarly, the bet from some progressives is that these wealthy candidates will feel that, to make amends for their wealth, they’ll have to work even harder to prove their left bona fides. After all, there are worse things than having a billionaire owe you a favor. Whether Democratic voters will actually be won over by this logic is of course a different question, which will depend on the dynamics of each particular election. But so long as our campaign finance system remains broken, the fantasy of a billionaire savior will remain a tempting one. See More:

Sparring on the debate stage, well-timed statements addressing the slightest misstep by an opponent and countless social media jabs: election season is heating up in California’s major primaries. With the primary election less than three weeks away, the gubernatorial and mayoral races have taken a fiery turn as candidates undergo last-ditch efforts to convince voters of their governance chops. The governor’s race, which was thrown for a loop after the Democratic frontrunner [Eric Swalwell](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/14/california-governor-race-eric-swalwell-resigns)’s bid sank under a groundswell of sexual assault allegations – which he has denied – remains a crowded contest. Now, the latest polls indicate that Xavier Becerra, the former US secretary of health and human services, is in the lead, followed by Steve Hilton, a Trump-backed conservative media pundit, and billionaire philanthropist Tom Steyer. Among the other high-profile governor hopefuls are the Riverside county sheriff, Chad Bianco, former US representative Katie Porter and San Jose mayor, Matt Mahan. In Los Angeles, the incumbent mayor, [Karen Bass](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/karen-bass), has topped polls, but challenger and former MTV reality-TV star Spencer Pratt has made significant gains as of late. Pratt, who lost his home in the Palisades fire, has made a populist pitch to Angelenos unhappy with Bass’s leadership. Here’s a look at the lines of attack that have emerged in the final weeks of the campaign. Pratt has leaned into the firebrand persona he first cemented as a villain on The Hills in the mid-2000s. He’s cast himself as the anti-establishment antidote to the problems ailing the city, repeatedly characterizing Los Angeles as lawless and broken, and rebuking Bass’s efforts to improve homelessness and wildfire recovery. In a Tuesday [post](https://x.com/spencerpratt/status/2054297463264305582) on X, he accused Bass of “paying street ops … to keep addicts high so her NGO friends can continue to profit off their misery and steal their Medicare $$”. He did not provide evidence of the allegations. Pratt also leveled personal attacks in a recent video where he claimed to be at the homes of Bass and another candidate, Nithya Raman. He insinuated that they enjoyed well-to-do lives, as others, including him, suffered. In the [video](https://x.com/spencerpratt/status/2049497051793412557), Pratt stood in front of a trailer on his charred property in the Palisades saying: “This is where I live.” That last detail appears to have backfired. TMZ [reported](https://www.tmz.com/2026/05/13/spencer-pratt-staying-at-bel-air-hotel/) he has been staying at a five-star hotel in Bel Air, not in the trailer. In a conversation with the tabloid, Pratt gave conflicting answers about his residence. “I don’t live at the Hotel Bel-Air. I don’t live in the Airstream \[trailer\]. I don’t live in Santa Barbara. I don’t have a house. They burned it down,” he said, referring to the city’s political leaders. But, he also said, in reference to his property: “This is where I live. This is where they burned my house down.” He added that he had stayed in the hotel due to security concerns. In the governor’s race, Porter suggested, without evidence, that legal trouble may await Becerra, the former US secretary of health and human services. His former adviser, Dana Williamson, [pleaded](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/14/dana-williamson-california-democrat-strategist-fraud) guilty on Thursday to corruption and fraud charges after federal authorities say she helped skim $225,000 from an inactive campaign account to divert the funds to another top Becerra staffer. Porter voiced concern about the uncertainty and risks of nominating Becerra, given the investigation. Becerra has denied any criminal wrongdoing. Still, the claims have picked up traction after Williamson’s court admission. In the last gubernatorial debate on Thursday before the 2 June primary, both Hilton and Porter took aim at Becerra. “You shouldn’t be in this race. You should be preparing your criminal defense,” Hilton said. “Democrats cannot afford to wake up on June 3 and discover we’ve got a criminal on our hands,” Steyer had said in a Thursday statement. Becerra countered: “The US attorney has said no candidate, including me, running for governor has been implicated in this case.” Steyer has also pressed Becerra over a recent local news appearance, saying his opponent was unwilling to answer tough questions. The former representative had [gone viral](https://www.instagram.com/reels/DYPnShOkTOn/) for asking a KTLA reporter: “This is not a gotcha piece, right?” After the incident, Bianco suggested on [X](https://x.com/ChadBianco) that Becerra was hiding something: “The media has given \[him\] a free pass for so long, but he’s got enough skeletons he’s still afraid.” Skepticism swirls around the pro-working-class billionaire ---------------------------------------------------------- Steyer continues to play defense, fending off his critics in the race who question how a billionaire could relate to the cost-of-living crisis. His largely self-funded campaign has [spent](https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/04/california-governor-race-financials/) roughly $132m. Still, as the bio of Steyer’s campaign account on X [says](https://x.com/TomHQ), he views himself to be a “class traitor” of sorts. His critics aren’t buying it. Porter described him as “a billionaire who got rich off polluters and ICE prisons and is now using that money to fund this election”, at an April debate, referring to Steyer’s previous investments. Becerra also recently posted a [video](https://www.instagram.com/reel/DX-laVyiOA_/), alluding to how much Steyer has spent on advertising. Against a green vista, a call-to-action appeared: “You have the power to put an end to the Tom Steyer ads.” Steve Hilton’s taco gaffe ------------------------- The leading [Republican](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/11/california-governor-candidate-mocked-street-taco) in the race, who has been endorsed by Trump, caught [fierce online blowback](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/11/california-governor-candidate-mocked-street-taco) for saying he got a “street taco” from the Del Taco fast-food chain. Bianco and the former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa both seized the opportunity to film videos eating soft tortilla tacos, more consistent with street tacos from an authentic local taqueria. Bianco, for his part, took a thinly veiled shot at Hilton’s British origins, saying he was [eating tacos](https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1932762070777756) in honor of Hilton’s fifth anniversary of becoming a US citizen.

Tom Steyer has built his campaign for governor of California around affordability – and taxing the uber-wealthy. It is perhaps an unusual message for a candidate with an [estimated](https://www.forbes.com/profile/thomas-steyer/) net worth of $2.4bn. But the hedge fund founder-turned climate activist and liberal mega-donor is pitching himself as a different kind of billionaire: one who wants people like him to pay far more in taxes. As early voting ballots trickle in for the 2 June primary, Steyer – a [leading](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/polls/california-governor-election-polls-2026.html) candidate in the unsettled contest – is racing to convince Californians that his elect-the-rich-guy-to-eat-the-rich candidacy isn’t a contradiction. “People are very skeptical of billionaires,” Steyer, wearing a beige baseball cap with the words “class traitor” embroidered on it, told a small group of reporters at a campaign event in East LA on Wednesday. “I’m skeptical of billionaires because we’ve seen so many billionaires being selfish and arrogant.” Steyer’s campaign arrives at a particularly combustible political moment in the US, shaped by a surge in anti-elite populism, widening income inequality and growing suspicion of billionaire power across both parties. A [survey](https://theharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Americans-and-Billionaires-Survey-October-2025-Year-3-November-2025.pdf) conducted last year by the Harris Poll found that the share of Americans who said billionaires threaten American democracy rose to 53%, up 7 points from 2024. At the same time, nearly eight in 10 respondents said they were more likely to support a billionaire who “challenges unjust systems”. Since Donald Trump’s return to office, millions have flocked to hear Senator Bernie Sanders excoriate the 1% on his cross-country Fighting Oligarchy tour. In New York, the city’s new democratic socialist mayor, Zohran Mamdani, celebrated tax day by filming a video outside billionaire Ken Griffin’s [$238m Manhattan](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/24/nyregion/238-million-penthouse-sale.html) penthouse to promote a tax proposal on luxury second homes. Earlier this month protests erupted over the involvement of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos’s involvement in this year’s Met Gala. “You can’t earn a billion dollars,” Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York [said](https://open.spotify.com/episode/6ElwahgBlO1xnJFqWUoMdX?si=4e193cf753614110&utm_medium=share&utm_source=linktree&nd=1&dlsi=da286a13cf73457b) in a podcast interview earlier this month, setting off a [heated](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/05/07/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-is-wrong-about-billionaires/) debate. Anti-rich sentiment is especially pronounced in the Golden State, which boasts the world’s fourth largest economy and more billionaires than any other US state. Yet [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california) faces a deep affordability crisis, leaving many voters searching for a governor who will do more than take on the billionaire in the White House. They want someone who will “upend the system”, said Lorena Gonzalez, president of the powerful California Federation of Labor Unions. A decade after Trump, a billionaire real estate mogul, proved he could harness working-class discontent, Democrats see a chance to rebuild their frayed coalition and win back the voters squeezed by the rising cost of rent, utilities and groceries**.** Ahead of the November midterm elections, Democrats are hammering Trump over his coziness with Silicon Valley billionaires and his preoccupation with building a ballroom at the White House, evidence, they say, that the president’s party has abandoned working class voters in favor of a new gilded-age oligarchy. “There’s no question that we think working people represent working people best,” said Gonzalez, whose union issued a multi-candidate endorsement of Steyer, former congresswoman Katie Porter and former LA mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. But, she continued, “if there is a billionaire who says, ‘I will take on this entire system, shit, all right, let’s see.” Steyer is not the only Democrat testing the party’s appetite for a populist from the 1%. In Illinois, Governor JB Pritzker, a scion of the Pritzker family that founded the Hyatt hotel chain, is running for a third term – and widely believed to be considering a presidential bid in 2028. Other wealthy progressives include Saikat Chakrabarti, a centimillionaire tech entrepreneur and former chief of staff to Ocasio-Cortez who is self-funding [his anti-establishment bid](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/12/chakrabarti-aoc-pelosis-trump-ballroom) to succeed retiring former House speaker Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/17/tom-steyer-billionaire-candidate-democrats#img-2) Saikat Chakrabarti, left, a centimillionaire tech entrepreneur and former chief of staff to AOC is running for Nancy Pelosi’s seat. Photograph: Pablo Martínez Monsiváis/AP Wealthy Democrats are hardly a new phenomenon. From Franklin Roosevelt’s patrician roots to John F Kennedy’s vast family fortune, the party has a history of elevating affluent political leaders who framed their privilege as a responsibility to serve the public. As [Cas Mudde](https://www.theguardian.com/profile/cas-mudde), a leading scholar of populism, noted by email, “socialists have long been led by ‘class traitors’ (eg Friedrich Engels) or have supported rich politicians and intellectuals (for example Bernie Sanders and Noam Chomsky)”. In progressive San Francisco, Mayor Daniel Lurie, a moderate Democrat and heir to the Levi Strauss fortune, governs with a technocratic style reminiscent of Mike Bloomberg, the billionaire who served three terms as New York’s mayor – and residents love it. A recent poll showed [74%](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/03/us/san-francisco-mayor-daniel-lurie.html) approval of his job performance. Across the country, however, Democrats are confronting a rising anti-establishment backlash, with the party’s rank-and-file, still seething from the party’s 2024 losses to Trump, embracing the economic populism of candidates like oyster farmer Graham Platner in Maine and seminarian James Talarico in Texas. Amid a volatile job market and escalating inflation, voters want leaders who understand their economic struggles. In California, with the nation’s [highest cost of living](https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/cost-living-electricity-california-21360801.php?fbclid=IwY2xjawR1f45leHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFOM2ppQThqdmRIdXQ0SU9Oc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHuvWBAoUb845L0yo7tu-lnpOwKH89xb_FfK2yUfIbrBeq_iPa-OSUeVIQ20j_aem_qPPT2eQsXs0c2_OodRgzew&utm_campaign=mrf-facebook-SFChronicle&mrfcid=2026042569ecca6461162f69ee4517c0) and gas prices [topping](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/01/gas-price-california-iran-war) $6 per gallon amid the Iran war, that demand is particularly urgent. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/17/tom-steyer-billionaire-candidate-democrats#img-3) Democratic Senate candidate for Texas, James Talarico, speaks during his primary election night party in Austin, Texas, on 4 March 2026. Photograph: Joel Angel Juarez/Reuters Perhaps then it is a sign of the times that if Steyer advances to the November general election, Californians would likely have the chance to elect a billionaire for governor and [impose](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/27/california-billionaire-tax) a first-of-its-kind wealth tax on the state’s richest residents. Steyer has said he would vote for the so-called “billionaire” tax that has drawn the ire of some of the state’s richest tech leaders. That, in part, has helped Steyer consolidate support among progressives in the state, including Representative Ro Khanna, whose Silicon Valley-based district is the wealthiest in the country. He also earned the somewhat begrudging endorsement of the California Democratic Socialists (DSA) of America, which wrote that Steyer was “somehow” the most progressive candidate in the race “despite being a billionaire” who earned his wealth through the “exploitation of the working class”. In the governor’s race, Democrats briefly fretted a lock-out scenario, in which two Republicans would advance to the general election – a quirk of the state’s nonpartisan primary system. Surveying the field of Democratic aspirants, many on the left saw few better options. “We fundamentally believe billionaires are a policy failure,” said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of the Bernie Sanders-founded Our Revolution, whose endorsement helped [cement](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/tom-steyer-unexpected-alliance-progressives-california-governor-race-rcna342878) Steyer as the leading progressive in the race. “But in this case, he is the person most aligned with our values.” Steyer’s spending has [dwarfed](https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/04/california-governor-race-financials/) his rivals. Since launching his campaign seven months ago, he has spent more than $[132m](https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/04/california-governor-race-financials/) – and counting – of his own money to saturate the California airwaves and [pay](https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2026-05-15/steyer-campaign-pays-influencers-their-posts-dont-always-make-that-clear) social media influencers, some of whom have [failed to disclose](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/05/15/tom-steyers-influencer-campaign-triggers-california-investigation-over-undisclosed-posts/) the payments. His opponents have tried to make his accumulation of wealth a vulnerability. At a debate last month, Porter, one of Steyer’s Democratic rivals for governor, attacked him over investments made by the hedge fund he founded and stepped back from in 2012. Steyer, she said, was a “billionaire who got rich off polluters and ICE prisons and is now using that money to fund this election”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/17/tom-steyer-billionaire-candidate-democrats#img-4) A campaign bus for California gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer is parked in the lot of Pan Pacific Park before a campaign event in Los Angeles, on 7 May 2026. Photograph: Jae C Hong/AP Funding his own campaign, Steyer counters he “can’t be bought” – an echo of Trump’s appeal in 2016, when he cast his Republican rivals as beholden to a corrupt political system. On the campaign trail, Steyer reminds voters that while he is the only billionaire on the state ballot he is “not the only billionaire in this race”, pointing to the corporations and tech executives spending against his campaign. “If the teachers and the nurses and the cafeteria workers and the hotel workers and the people who work in schools stand up for me, that’s my crew,” Steyer said in East LA. “If the working people of this state understand that I am for them 100% then I’ve done my job.” Self-funders have a long record of losing, as Steyer knows personally after an unsuccessful run for the White House in 2020. Bloomberg also ran for president that year, spending $1bn and winning only one primary contest: the Democratic caucus in American Samoa. “If you have a vast amount of personal wealth, you have cleared one of the biggest hurdles that candidates often are worried about, which is, how will I fund my campaign?” said [Michael Beckel,](https://issueone.org/team/michael-beckel/) the director of money and politics reform at Issue One, a nonpartisan political advocacy group. “But at the end of the day … voters must also like a politician’s platform and ideas.” At Steyer’s campaign event on Wednesday night – a stop on his “A California You Can Afford” tour, featuring “free” tacos and face painting – there were signs his “tax me more” pitch was resonating. “Honestly, if it takes a billionaire who wants to be taxed more and wants to use that money to help people, then at this point, he’s our guy,” said Duane Paul Murphy, a 30-year-old who lives in the San Fernando Valley. Carla Ramirez, 66, who came from the Antelope Valley with her husband, liked much of what she heard Steyer say. Deeply alarmed by the concentration of wealth in America, she wants the state’s next governor to enact bold change, like the kind she sees Mamdani setting in motion as mayor of New York. “Right now, our country is run by billionaires,” Ramirez sighed. By the evening’s end, she still wasn’t sure **–** at least not yet **–** if California should be run by one, too.

May 19, 2026 6:30 AM The hedge fund billionaire turned gubernatorial candidate wants to tax California’s ultrawealthy, regulate AI, and keep Silicon Valley happy at the same time. Good luck with that.  Photo-Illustration: WIRED Staff; Getty Images For those concerned about the influence of Big Tech and billionaires on California’s future, [Tom Steyer](https://www.wired.com/story/tom-steyer-proposes-jobs-guarantee-to-protect-california-workers-from-ai/) looks like an obvious choice. A billionaire who amassed his fortune after founding Farallon Capital Management, one of the world’s biggest hedge funds, Steyer quit the firm in 2012 and turned to philanthropy, political advocacy, and climate activism, among other pursuits. Now, he’s jostling for position among a handful of Democratic and GOP candidates looking to advance from a June primary and then win the California governorship this November. Ahead of the midterms, I’m talking to candidates relevant to WIRED’s interests: A few weeks ago [I spoke with Alex Bores](https://www.wired.com/story/the-big-interview-podcast-new-york-state-representative-alex-bores/), a candidate for New York’s 12th Congressional District, whose history as a [Palantir](https://www.wired.com/tag/palantir/) employee and stance on AI regulation has attracted the ire of Silicon Valley–backed super PACs. Steyer felt like the next obvious choice for a conversation: He’s running to lead a state where issues like AI, immigration enforcement, and climate change, among other core WIRED subjects, are paramount. Steyer’s posture in the race is also unique. He’s been described as a “class traitor” for ostensibly eschewing his fellow elites, voiced support for California’s controversial Billionaire Tax Act—which has everyone from Sergey Brin to Peter Thiel either making moves to or threatening to flee the state—and campaigned hard on affordability, climate policy, and the promise that he’s immune to corporate influence. (As a billionaire spending more than $130 million on his own gubernatorial campaign, I certainly hope he would be.) As I said, for some Democratic voters, Tom Steyer seems to check a lot of boxes. Then he starts talking. Steyer is adept, as politicians usually are, at toeing the line. But the line, in politics generally and California specifically, seems to be the problem: Steyer, or whomever is elected to the governorship this November, will be walking an exceedingly thin one. Taxing California’s billionaires without alienating them. Getting a grip on the state’s AI development without throttling it (or, again, alienating the billionaires building it). I could feel Steyer’s reluctance to come down too firmly or dig in too deeply on issues, maybe to avoid alienating any potential voting block. Which made me wonder: Can Tom Steyer be a pro-billionaire governor who also taxes the hell out of them? Can he rave about the “mind-blowingly amazing” advances in AI while bringing the industry to heel? Can he learn the name of WIRED’s global editorial director (me) before she interviews him? The third question is answered in the interview. The former two will be formidable challenges for anyone elected to California’s governorship—and I didn’t leave our conversation convinced that Steyer’s posture is a particularly coherent one. The minimum requirement for a California governor might be the ability to use Google. _This interview has been edited for length and clarity._ **KATIE DRUMMOND: Welcome, Tom, thank you for joining us on _The Big Interview_.** **TOM STEYER:** Kate \[sic\], thank you for having me. **So, you’re a billionaire. You made your money in the hedge fund world. But now, in the last decade-plus, you’ve become a climate activist. Tell us about that transformation.** When I was growing up, when I got free time, either from school or work, I tried to go to wild places and get outdoor jobs. I worked as a ranch hand, I worked picking fruit. Before I went to business school, I spent the summer in Alaska, and I went to Alaska because I wanted to see what North America looked like before Europeans showed up. I wanted to see the animals, I wanted to see the birds, I wanted to see the fish, I wanted to look at Denali. I wanted to see what it looked like, vast untracked North America, rich and fertile. In 2006, I wanted my wife and four kids, none of whom had ever been there, to see it too. So we went up there for a week. I had a whole bunch of plans of what we could see, but what we could see was Alaska was melting. It was really obvious. It's one thing to read about it on a page when you're working away and thinking about a thousand things, but it's another thing to physically see where there used to be a mountain of ice and now it's a valley. **At what point, though, do you say, “I am going to say goodbye to running a hedge fund. I'm going to turn my back on this career, and I'm going to do something totally different. And a big part of that is going to be climate activism”? How did that happen?** Well, I didn't just leave specifically to do climate. You know, it was funny. I was talking to one of my best friends this morning, and he was saying, “Well, the whole point of life is to have a positive impact.” **I would hope so, yeah.** I got very, very scared that I was going to have a life of no meaning. That's actually what it was. It wasn't that I felt like, “Oh, my God, I'm going to die and I've had no meaning.” It's like I've amassed a whole bunch of, you know, numbers on a spreadsheet, but who cares? Nobody, including me. I felt somewhat desperate to get out and push for things that had meaning, including climate. I always thought climate was this huge opportunity for us. **A financial opportunity?** An opportunity for America to be America. **I see, I see.** To lead the world, do the right thing, save the world, build businesses around it. But I wasn't trying to build businesses. I was basically trying to give everybody else a chance to say, "Wow." It's sort of like the fascists show up and America stands up to them, and it turns out to be great for us. I thought it would be good for us, but I also thought that's how we express ourselves as a nation, by standing up for what's right and succeeding and showing the world how it's done. So I thought, "Here's a great example. There's something clearly wrong here. We can do the tech. We can do the finance. We can do the global leadership. Let's do it, man. Let’s be Americans." **I want to move on to talking about your run for governor of California, but climate is a big piece of that. Obviously, Trump is in office. What kind of power does the governor's seat give you vis-à-vis climate policy, knowing that Donald Trump is the president of the United States?** I think it gives us a chance to show what success looks like. I think what Donald Trump is doing, he's showing the world what failure looks like. He's so scared of failure, and he's failing on an absolutely gargantuan scale. But success looks like moving rapidly to sustainable clean energy that's cheaper, proving to the world that doing this is actually the way to succeed economically as well as doing the right thing. We build a bunch of companies around it. We get some great technologies going, all of which are happening, all of which are within our grasp. It's kind of like the president is desperately fighting to keep us on whale oil. I mean, it's nuts. **Your commitment to being a “good billionaire” is laudable, I think. But your critics have questioned some of Farallon Capital Management, your former hedge fund's, past investments. The New York Times [published a piece](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/05/us/tom-steyer-california-governor-coal.html) earlier this month questioning whether you still have financial ties to investments that include fossil fuels. I want to hear from you more fully on this, and I know that our listeners do too. What can you tell voters about the status of your investments vis-à-vis that hedge fund?** The thing that I have left at Farallon is some residual buildings, investing in real estate. I divested from all the oil and gas from there in 2012. That's one of the reasons I left. I didn't feel that I could change that organization. People had signed up, hundreds of people had signed up to run an organization a certain way, and I had moved on. And, you know, I was the head of it, so you'd think I could just be like, "This is what we're doing." But that's not really how organizations work in my mind, and I'm not that person anyway. So I was like, "No, anything that's left there, you have to get me out of anything related to fossil fuels and a number of other things. I just can't have it." And that happened 14 years ago. The reason I left was I didn't feel that I could be there and do what I'm doing now without people thinking I was a hypocrite. **What do you think about the fact that you built your wealth in that world? How do you grapple with that? How would you urge voters to think about it?** I think about it pretty simply, which is this: I worked in finance. I went to Stanford Business School. All of those worlds are premised on the idea, which I accepted, that basically the way that progress happens is through a combination of capitalism and democracy. **Mm-hmm.** Therefore capitalism is an engine. You know, Warren Buffett will say this better than I have. He said, basically, capitalism has produced all the material advantage that people have got from all over the world. It is the driving force for a more productive economy and one which produces goods and services at a level that is never before seen in the history of the world, and it is a huge force for good. And I accepted that. It was kind of like that was the mantra. What happened was, as I was there and started to examine it and think more independently, I thought, "OK, that's true in a lot of ways." It is true in a lot of ways, I haven't rejected it, but it's also the case that it's not always true. When it isn't true, it can be spectacularly not true. So I felt like, OK, it's no longer a blanket cover for everything. In fact, I felt like I had to lead my life differently, and I had to invest differently, and I had to change because I came to a realization that the basic premise that it's all good is not true. Therefore, I didn't want to live that way, and I wanted to change the way I invested. I did want to completely change what I was doing, so it wasn't just about investing. I very much wanted to do that, but I also felt like the investing itself, I wasn't as OK with, for the reason you just said. Like, doesn't that seem hypocritical, Tom? It's like, yeah, it does. **It absolutely does.** I was like, “OK, it's gotta stop.” It took me a long time to get out of there. Every single person in that firm was the primary breadwinner for their family. Every single person. And we had the trust of hundreds of pension funds, endowments, and foundations, and I just didn't feel like we could leave them in the lurch. I felt like it's really important to get this transition to happen right, and it took a long time. But the idea that I haven't made that transition is a decade and a half out of date. **You know, a lot of progressives, and I think some of the voters you're trying to court, don't think that billionaires should exist in the first place. That becoming a billionaire in and of itself is immoral, that there is not an ethical route to being a billionaire and sustaining that level of wealth. What do you say to that?** Look, California is about innovation and ideas. It's about imagining and creating the future. That's what we do. That's what this state is about. Frankly, that's what WIRED magazine is covering. **It is.** People who come up with an idea that's never been thought of before and changed the world. That's much more possible now for a whole bunch of reasons involving software, information technology, the ability to expand infinitely. So if you say to me, "If someone comes up with an idea that can be turned into a business that can change the world, that can actually do immense good, should we just put a lid on that? Should we not give the incentive there?" I have a different attitude. My attitude is this: There's a reason people come to California to build a business, because we have the ecosystem to build a business. Most of what that entails is a bunch of people fighting to build a system over a thousand years that involves rule of law, democracy, freedom. Now, if you look at California, this state runs because of very hardworking, very skilled people who are paid not very much at all. **Mm-hmm.** So when someone says to me, “I'm going to come to California, I'm going to build a business,” great. “It's going to change the world,” great. “And then I'm going to try and rip those people off, not be a good citizen, not pay my fair share, do everything I can to basically extract from that system what it has without being a part of that system,” that offends me. **The extraction you're referring to, is that how you see the current ecosystem in California now? Do you think there is exploitation happening?** No. I think that to a large extent, people come here, they build these great businesses, and mostly they stay, they pay their taxes, they're good citizens, they do a whole bunch of things. There are a bunch of people who don't do that. They come and they're worried that, in fact, they never have to share anything that they made. “It's all mine.” It is not all yours, by the way. You came here because there was a system that let you succeed. You could have gone to 190 other countries. You could have gone to 49 other states, but you came here for a good reason, ’cause this is the best place to start and build a business. So you should be part of that ecosystem, and you should take pride. You might call it shared prosperity. You should take pride in the prosperity that you're creating, and you should take pride in sharing it, because this whole system doesn't work with the kind of inequality that we're seeing. I mean, I know you know this, but the inequality is more than the Gilded Age. Being in San Francisco, for me, for the last 10 years has been a very strange experience. I mean, it is visceral. You can see it when you walk down the street. **One of the issues that you’re being asked to chime in on and that potentially, as governor, you would inherit is the California Billionaire Tax Act. Which is what you were just talking about in terms of shared prosperity. You've said you're in favor of it. You've also said it doesn't go far enough. Tell me more about that, because this is not the most popular idea among some of the prominent billionaires who currently call California home.** Look, I said if it’s on the ballot I will vote for it, and I said it doesn't go far enough. It's a one-time tax. It takes the money, and it puts it into a very specific use that doesn't specifically include education, and one of the things that I'm saying is we need to be much better at education in the state of California. We really need to refocus on it, because we used to be the best education state. To a very large extent, there are issues with the way that bill is written and designed that I think are very imperfect, but the basic point is this: We have the highest percentage of people in poverty in the United States of America. We have the greatest inequality. We have an incredibly high average income, but that average includes some off-the-charts incomes. The majority of Californians are really struggling to make ends meet. I mean, millions of people are giving up their health care insurance so they can make rent. People who have worked, been fully employed for 20 years, living in their cars. I mean, that doesn't make any sense. What I'm talking about is, how do we redress this? You know, part of that is we need to have a sense from everybody of shared prosperity. Am I against billionaires? No. I want people to come here and change the world, and there's some stuff going on that is absolutely mind-blowingly great, honestly. I want us to be the generator of ideas and innovation that changes the future for everyone in the state, builds great companies, and changes the world. I just want it to be done in the context of a system that doesn't forget our teachers, doesn't forget the nurses, doesn't forget the people who are working in the schools, doesn't forget the custodians. You know, there's a sense that somehow these people are ripping off the system. That is the absolute opposite of the truth. These are the people who make the system run, and they are really at their wits' end, and that's why I'm running. If you think that this extraordinarily unequal system, which is getting more unequal all the time, should go on exactly as it is, there are a lot of people to vote for, and there are people out there who are saying, "I'm for oil companies. I believe in the electric monopolies." But if you believe it's impossible for most people to afford California and that we need to stand up for working people, then honestly I'm the only game in town. I find that ironic, but it happens to be true. **I mean, look, it's a tough equation for anyone to solve in the sense that, yes, it is very important that San Francisco and California remain engines of innovation, right? That the people leading these companies stay, that the companies themselves stay.** **We've seen some technology companies that have relocated out of California. I can't imagine that’s something you would want to see continue. So many of the people who are opposed to this act say that California will lose its edge when it comes to innovation and invention because people will go elsewhere.** **How do you preserve that, while also creating a more egalitarian order in California? I don't envy anyone trying to solve that dilemma, but do you worry about losing the companies?** I want to make sure that we remain the center of innovation. I want to make sure that we remain the place where the companies that are changing the world are begun and grow and stay. Absolutely. In my mind, the reason that California is what it is—and you work at WIRED magazine, Kate \[sic\], so I'm sure … **I run WIRED magazine, Tom.** You do? **I sure do.** I didn't know that. Do you know Katrina Heron? **The only other woman who's ever run it?** Old friend of mine. **Oh, wow.** You didn't know that. **No, I didn't know she was your friend, but I know that she is the only other woman other than me who's ever run it in 33 years.** She's an old friend. Um, but that's beside the point. I remember back in the tech wreck of 2000, 2002, I was talking to an old friend of mine who's a venture capitalist. I was like, “Roger, you know, this looks bad.” And he goes, “What do you mean?” I go, “This looks bad. I mean, all these stocks are down 90 percent. These companies are going out of business.” And he goes, “Doesn't look bad.” I said, “You don't think so?” He goes, “No. There are incredible companies being built right now, and those companies are going to change the world.” And of course, he was right. He said, “And they're all in the Bay Area. So let's be clear. The stocks come and go, but the technology, the innovation, the real creativity happens here.” And I said, “Well, why is that?” He said, “Take a look. It's not happening anywhere else.” I said, “Tell me why.” And he said, “You wanna start a tech company in the Bay Area, you have your choice of CFOs, you have your choice of CTOs, you have your choice of all the different things. Anyplace else, you don't. So this is the place where there's actually the human capital.” That's the key part of this. You can’t build these companies, because companies are built around people. As long as we have the ecosystem of people, that's really the secret sauce, and that's why I'm such a maniac about making sure we have this great higher education system. That's why I'm a big believer. I think immigrants have built California. I love immigration to California. I want people to come here who want to work their tails off and really change the world. **On the subject of immigrants, you have publicly called for major ICE reforms. California, of course, is a sanctuary state, so that puts you, potentially, right at the center of a fight with the federal government, coming back again to President Trump. How do you make sure California maintains its sanctuary status if you're elected governor?** I think we enforce our state laws. We have to prosecute people who racially profile in the state of California. It is illegal. We have to prosecute people who use violence against the people of California, including the people who send them to do violence. We have to inspect the detention centers because clearly they're closed for a reason. People need to be represented. The job of the governor of California at some level is standing between violence and danger and unfairness and the people of California. You know, if you look at the electric monopolies that charge us twice as much as the rest of the United States pays for electricity. Someone has to stand up for the Californians in that fight, someone who's in a position of power. And certainly with ICE, I do think it's a criminal organization. I think it was designed to be criminal. There is no other reason for them to be wearing face masks. There is no other reason for them to be carrying ARs. And they feel they can do it with impunity. It's very clear that the agents in Minnesota don't think they're ever going to go to jail for shooting Americans. **How much can you prosecute ICE agents, for example, while Trump is still in office and the agency is still intact?** I believe that the next president, whoever he or she may be, will be centered enough to recognize that you're not supposed to have a violent, masked, assault-rifle-armed secret police going around the United States with impunity. **You would think so.** That seems to me to be an absolutely clear point, that only despotic regimes do that stuff. And the idea that we should somehow negotiate with that or cooperate with that, I pushed really hard for us to be a sanctuary state. That no police officer is supposed to cooperate with ICE except with regard to violent criminals. What they are doing is clearly wrong. We've moved to a place in our political discourse where the willingness to stand up and say, “No, this is just completely wrong” is much reduced. There are so many things that are wrong that people just now accept. I don't want to do that. That is not what California stands for. **I want to make sure we talk about AI, which is obviously a huge topic for us here at WIRED, and I think certainly for the current governor of California and whoever comes next will be a major issue to get right. I'm curious about how you see the governor's role in creating safeguards around AI to protect creators, for one, but to also protect jobs in the state.** Well, let me say this: AI obviously has some stuff going on with it, which I'm sure you're familiar with, which is incredibly, mind-blowingly great. **Highly consequential, yeah.** I think the outcome will either be incredibly important or staggeringly important. That's the range. And it's kinda like nobody really knows which of those two things it will be, but it will be one of those two things. But I think it's really important to have safeguards around this, in multiple ways. The obvious one is for kids. We need safeguards that are for kids, because its ability to seduce kids into things that are not good for them … I try not to even think about it because it can go to some places that are pretty amazing, and not in a good way. Testing the models before they're released. I think we went through this whole thing with this model from Anthropic, where it's like they said, “We're going to do a very limited release ’cause this is too powerful. If we give this right out right now, then people with malign intent can use it to do things.” And we know that, so it's important to make sure that it's controlled in that way, but also not to release models that have not been tested, we can't be sure work, blah, blah. So that's two. And then I think the most important part about this is we don't know what the impact of this will be on employment. **Right.** So I've said, “Look, I want AI to be a tool for workers, not a replacement for workers.” But I'm aware, and I think anyone who reads the papers knows, I say to everybody, “It's not like AI is coming. AI's here.” **Mm-hmm.** It's sort of like saying, you know, “Let's wait till the 21st century and see what happens.” We're in 2026, dude. We're _in_ the 21st century. And what I've said is, we need to make sure that we are protecting workers, and our campaign has made a guarantee that every worker displaced by AI, we will succeed in getting a well-paid job with benefits. People need to know that, because let me give you the alternative: all the people who are not saying that and who have vague policies of, “We'll see what happens,” which is honestly what the other people are doing. **The other people, meaning your opponents?** Right. If you look at Xavier Becerra's policy, it's like we know there'll be job displacement, but we'll see what happens and respond to it, which is a big nothingburger in my mind. In the 1970s and ’80s the traditional Midwestern businesses, including cars, suddenly got foreign competition and suddenly had technological changes, and it hollowed out those cities, and they've never come back. I think there were promises from politicians about what they'd do about it, but it didn't happen. So I believe we need to be ahead of that, prepared with the ability to get people into new jobs with training, specific jobs. There are a lot of jobs in California, and we need to get people into those jobs and do it in a way so that when you sign up, you have a training program, and at the end of it is actually a job with an actual wage in an actual place. That is something I think is going to be a critical part for the next governor. How big a part depends on whether it's amazingly big or astonishingly big. **And if you're curious for more about that, [WIRED actually covered](https://www.wired.com/story/tom-steyer-proposes-jobs-guarantee-to-protect-california-workers-from-ai/) the proposal. I'm curious about California in the context of the national conversation around AI. To what extent is the way California handles AI, and the way an incoming governor decides to regulate the industry and the technology, a road map for the rest of the country?** I want California to be a road map for the rest of the country because I disagree so strongly with what's going on in Washington, DC. I want us to succeed substantively in everything, in all the things I'm talking about in terms of better education, cheaper houses, cheaper electricity, making polluters pay, so that actually this becomes a great place to live for everybody and everybody can afford it. I care about California. I want us to succeed, but I also want to show the world we don't have to be despotic people who take pride in their cruelty in the United States of America. That's not what our country stands for. We can succeed at a level in terms of creating a better society that people apparently don't think is possible, and it is absolutely possible, and that's exactly why I'm running for governor, to say, “We can create this society right now.” **Tom, I want to end with a little game, if you're up for it. The game is called Control, Alt, Delete, and we play it with every guest. I want to know what piece of technology would you love to control? What piece would you love to alt, so alter or change? And what would you love to delete? What would you love to vanquish from the Earth if given the opportunity?** So two of them are easy. I wanna think about one of them. So delete. I want to end the ability to transport liquified natural gas. **That is very specific. Please explain that one a little bit more.** Well, you know, natural gas is a gas. So traditionally, it has been a local thing. In the United States, the cost of natural gas is somewhere around $3.85 for a thousand cubic feet, just to put it in context. In Europe, it's probably $17. Same thing. It's a local market. They don't have it, we have a lot of it, and there's a move to basically build huge terminals, build special ships to turn natural gas into a liquid, and put it onto a ship. It's a whole complicated technology, and people are spending tens of billions of dollars on it. LNG is dirtier than coal. **Where do you want that money going instead?** I want it to go into the stuff that is cheaper, faster, and better. I want it to go into clean electricity, battery development. I want it to go into pushing us toward all the uses of electricity that we can use it for. If you take a look at where we are in the natural world, it’s critical that we get rid of the idea that fossil fuels are cheap. Fossil fuels aren't cheap. Fossil fuels, without any cost for old-fashioned particulate pollution or climate change, are much more expensive than clean energy. The one I'd alt—I think we need to have a relationship with AI where we make sure that as it explodes that it's done in a way so that we don't get the second-order effects that can be really dramatically terrible. Everyone's like, “Oh, no, no, you're going to stifle it.” **The innovation question, the race against China question, how do you respond to that when you talk about guardrails and regulation?** We're not going to stifle it. I'm a very practical person. Let's take a look at what happened with social media. We didn't do anything, and take a look at where we are and take a look at where the kids are. I'm old enough to remember when the Democrats told Wall Street they could police themselves. It was sort of like, “Really? That's your idea?” So the idea that things that have immense impact can be controlled by the people whose total focus is their bottom line seems to me to be like, “OK, so you're saying the government doesn't exist.” Obviously we need to watch out for negative outcomes and avoid them for the people of California and the United States. It doesn't mean stifling innovation. It means having rules to protect people from really dangerous things. **All right. So I believe you said you would delete liquid …** LNG. **LNG. You would alt the AI regulatory environment. What are we controlling? Other than the state of California, I guess.** No one, it'll never be one person controlling it. I think the one that we should control is—and there's such a fine line between control and alt—but I think that, in finance, we should control the way crypto is used. **Oh, interesting. Tell me more.** I just think that this is a technology, which I'm fine with, but I just think it's one of those things where we need to make sure that there are things to protect people who are investing in these tokens. I think the industry agrees with that. They've spent a long time saying, “Stop trying to outlaw us. Give us regulations so that we can build our businesses.” Which I'm totally fine with, and that's what I would describe as control. I think control's the wrong word because you never control something. You basically have regulations that make sense and protect unsophisticated people from damage. **But you could. You could be controlling all the meme coins in the world if you wanted to, in this thought exercise.** _Well, you know, you should understand that I'm going to control them and just take a very small fee every time they trade. Oh, there's someone already doing that. I didn't realize that_ … That was a joke. **We will make sure it registers as a joke. Thank you so much for your time.** How to Listen ------------- You can always listen to this week's podcast through the audio player on this page, but if you want to subscribe for free to get every episode, here's how: If you're on an iPhone or iPad, open the app called Podcasts, or just tap [this link](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/uncanny-valley-wired/id266391367). You can also download an app like Overcast or Pocket Casts and search for “Uncanny Valley.” We’re on [Spotify](https://open.spotify.com/show/11hUjoJv4FxFnw9r0mHIsC) too.

May 20, 2026 11:00 AM With Trump nemesis Thomas Massie vanquished, Republican strategists are now eyeing races in Texas, California, and Maine.  Photo-illustration: WIRED Staff; Getty Images Trumpworld is now turning its attention to the next set of primaries that could have a big impact on November’s [midterm elections](https://www.wired.com/story/conspiracy-theory-qr-codes-georgia-midterms/). So today it’s all eyes on the upcoming [primary races](https://www.wired.com/story/this-essential-section-of-a-government-agency-has-been-decimated/) Republican strategists tell me are next on the priority list for the White House: Texas, California, and Maine. Showdown in Texas ----------------- President Donald Trump made a last-minute endorsement on Tuesday in the Senate primary runoff in Texas, throwing his support behind attorney general Ken Paxton over incumbent John Cornyn. Trump’s political strategists are already getting ready for any fallout. The primary is on May 26 and the president’s decision to make an endorsement just a week beforehand caught some of his own aides by surprise, sources familiar with the dynamics inside the White House told WIRED. But on [Truth Social](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/116602192066577324%20The%20Highly%20Respected%20Attorney%20General%20of%20Texas,%20Ken%20Paxton,%20an%20America%20First%20Patriot,%20and%20someone%20who%20has%20always%20been%20extremely%20loyal%20to%20me%20and%20our%20AMAZING%20MAGA%20MOVEMENT,%20is%20running%20for%20the%20United%20States%20Senate,%20to%20represent%20a%20place%20I%20love%20and%20WON,%20BIG,%20three%20times,%20with%206.4%20Million%20Votes%20in%202024%20(The%20Most%20Votes%20in%20the%20History%20of%20the%20State,%20BY%20FAR)!%20%20I%20know%20Ken%20well,%20have%20seen%20him%20tested%20at%20the%20highest%20and%20most%20difficult%20levels,%20and%20he%20is%20a%20WINNER!%20Ken%20is%20a%20Strong%20Supporter%20of%20TERMINATING%20THE%20FILIBUSTER%20and,%20very%20importantly,%20THE%20SAVE%20AMERICA%20ACT,%20something%20which%20polls%20at%2087%25,%20including%20Dumocrats,%20and%20yet%20can%E2%80%99t%20seem%20to%20get%20approved.%20Perhaps%20Ken%20can%20help%20move%20these%20important%20elements%20of%20Government%20forward%20because%20with%20the%20Filibuster,%20as%20an%20example,%20the%20Democrats%20will%20terminate%20it%20on%20their%20First%20Day%20in%20Office,%20giving%20us%20two%20extra%20States,%20D.C.%20and%20Puerto%20Rico,%20and%20a%20greatly%20enlarged%20Supreme%20Court%20of%20the%20United%20States,%20probably%20going%20with%20their%20Dream%20Number%20of%2021%20Justices%20from%20the%209%20that%20we%20currently%20have%20%E2%80%94%20And%20these%20new%20Justices%20will%20be%20Radical%20Left%20Lunatics!%20Two%20years%20ago,%20our%20Country%20was%20DEAD%20%E2%80%94%20Now%20we%20have%20the%20%E2%80%9CHOTTEST%E2%80%9D%20Country%20anywhere%20in%20the%20World%20%E2%80%94%20And%20I%20want%20to%20keep%20it%20that%20way.%20Ken%20Paxton%20will%20help%20me%20do%20that,%20MAKING%20AMERICA%20BIGGER,%20BETTER,%20AND%20STRONGER%20THAN%20EVER%20BEFORE!%20%20Ken%20is%20a%20true%20MAGA%20Warrior%20who%20has%20ALWAYS%20delivered%20for%20Texas,%20and%20will%20continue%20to%20do%20so%20in%20the%20United%20States%20Senate.%20He%20will%20tirelessly%20fight%20to%20continue%20the%20Great%20Growth%20of%20our%20Economy,%20Cut%20Taxes%20and%20Regulations%20(I%20just%20delivered%20the%20Largest%20Tax%20and%20Regulation%20Cuts%20in%20American%20History!),%20and%20Advance%20MADE%20IN%20THE%20U.S.A.,%20Unleash%20American%20Energy%20DOMINANCE,%20Champion%20Texas%20Oil%20&%20Gas,%20Advocate%20for%20our%20Amazing%20Farmers%20and%20Ranchers,%20Promote%20School%20Choice,%20Keep%20our%20Border%20SECURE,%20Stop%20Migrant%20Crime,%20Support%20our%20Incredible%20Military/Veterans,%20Safeguard%20our%20Elections,%20and%20Protect%20our%20always%20under%20siege%20Second%20Amendment.%20%20John%20Cornyn%20is%20a%20good%20man,%20and%20I%20worked%20well%20with%20him,%20but%20he%20was%20not%20supportive%20of%20me%20when%20times%20were%20tough%20and,%20despite%20having%20the%20Most%20Successful%20Economy%20in%20the%20History%20of%20our%20Country%20during%20my%20First%20Term%20and,%20with%20all%20of%20the%20many%20other%20things%20that%20I%20accomplished%20(Secure%20Border,%20Military%20Dominance,%20Space%20Force,%20All%20Time%20High%20Stock%20Markets%20and%20401(k)s,%20Record%20Job%20and%20Economic%20Growth,%20and%20so%20many%20other%20things%20that%20would%20be%20impossible%20to%20readily%20list!),%20which%20are%20considered%20by%20many%20to%20be%20legendary,%20John%20was%20very%20late%20in%20backing%20me%20in%20what%20turned%20out%20to%20be%20a%20Historic%20Run%20for%20the%20Republican%20Nomination,%20and%20then,%20the%20Presidency,%20itself,%20both%20of%20which%20were%20Landslide%20Victories%20and,%20more%20importantly,%20gave%20us%20the%20Country%20that%20we%20have%20today%20%E2%80%94%20THE%20GOLDEN%20AGE%20OF%20AMERICA%20(and%20when%20we%20finish%20up%20with%20Iran,%20which%20will%20not%20be%20allowed%20to%20have%20a%20Nuclear%20Weapon,%20you%20will%20see%20numbers%20that%20have%20never%20been%20generated%20by%20our%20Country%20before!),%20as%20opposed%20to%20the%20DISASTER%20of%20the%20previous%20Administration.%20%20Ken%20Paxton%20has%20gone%20through%20a%20lot,%20in%20many%20cases,%20very%20unfairly,%20but%20he%20is%20a%20Fighter,%20and%20knows%20how%20to%20WIN.%20Our%20Country%20needs%20Fighters,%20and%20also%20Loyalty%20to%20the%20Cause%20of%20Greatness.%20We%20can%20never%20allow%20what%20happened%20to%20the%20United%20States%20of%20America%20during%20the%20Corrupt%20Biden%20Administration,%20to%20happen%20again.%20In%20Texas%20alone,%20just%20look%20at%20the%20Border,%20with%20the%20Highest%20Level%20Criminals%20allowed%20to%20run%20through%20your%20State,%20totally%20unvetted%20and%20unchecked,%20through%20an%20Open%20Border%20Policy%20that%20was%20a%20Laughingstock%20all%20over%20the%20World.%20I%20came%20in,%20and%20fixed%20it,%20IMMEDIATELY.%20I%20will%20not%20permit%20those%20dark%20and%20dangerous%20days%20to%20come%20back!%20WE%20HAVE%20ALREADY%20MADE%20AMERICA%20GREAT%20AGAIN,%20BUT%20NOW,%20WE%20WANT%20TO%20MAKE%20OUR%20NATION%20BETTER%20THAN%20EVER%20BEFORE.%20Therefore,%20Ken%20Paxton%20has%20my%20Complete%20and%20Total%20Endorsement%20to%20be%20the%20next%20United%20States%20Senator%20from%20the%20Great%20State%20of%20Texas%20%E2%80%93%20KEN%20PAXTON%20WILL%20NEVER%20LET%20YOU%20DOWN!%20%20DONALD%20J.%20TRUMP,%20PRESIDENT%20OF%20THE%20UNITED%20STATES%20OF%20AMERICA), Trump said he was backing Paxton because the candidate has “gone through a lot.” Indeed Paxton has. In 2023, he [faced impeachment](https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/27/ken-paxton-texas-house-impeachment-vote/) charges; he [took a plea deal in 2024](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/26/texas-ag-ken-paxton-fraud) and paid roughly $300,000 in restitution—without admitting guilt—to avoid a felony securities fraud trial. And in 2025, he was [accused of adultery by his wife](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/18/us/politics/ken-paxton-texas-senate-race.html), who filed for divorce on “biblical grounds.” He also faced a yearslong [federal grand jury investigation](https://www.ap.org/news-highlights/spotlights/2025/justice-department-declined-to-prosecute-texas-ag-paxton-in-final-weeks-of-bidens-term-ap-sources/) into his alleged misuse of office, which the DOJ closed without charges in the last weeks of Joe Biden's presidency. Paxton’s baggage means that should he defeat Cornyn, as many in Washington now expect following Trump’s endorsement, it will come with consequences for Republicans later in the midterms, and for the White House as it deals with Congress. Chief among the concerns is whether Paxton’s history and his framing as the MAGA candidate might be too objectionable to voters in the general election in November, making Democrats more energized because they see Paxton as easier to beat than Cornyn. As a result, if the Democratic candidate James Talarico can emulate Beto O’Rourke in 2018 and post big fundraising numbers from small-dollar donors, Republicans would need to respond by spending more themselves—money that could have been used for vulnerable Republicans in other races. Meanwhile, the White House will now have to focus on whether Trump’s endorsement will upend dynamics in the Senate for the next six months until the midterms, two longtime Republican campaign strategists told WIRED. Senator Bill Cassidy, apparently furious with Trump after losing his primary in Louisiana last week, has already started [making clear his opposition](https://x.com/aidnmclaughlin/status/2056804807696916690?s=20) to the president’s legislative priorities. The fear is that Cornyn may soon feel the same way. “It is short-sighted thinking,” says one Republican strategist who worked on the Trump 2024 campaign and spoke on the condition of anonymity. “Cornyn has been a reliable vote on big issues and now Trump risks battles in the Senate.” The problem with the slim 53-47 Senate majority is that it would only take two disaffected Republicans, in addition to Cassidy and Cornyn, to vote with Democrats to block Trump from using congressional funds to pay for his ballroom or further military action in Iran. Finally, Trumpworld is watching the possible fallout inside Trump’s orbit if Paxton wins. Trump’s 2024 campaign co-chief Chris LaCivita and 2024 pollster Tony Fabrizio both work on Cornyn’s campaign. Within minutes of Trump’s Paxton endorsement, LaCivita’s longtime nemesis Corey Lewandowski [posted on X](https://x.com/CLewandowski_/status/2056777717501018241?s=20) declaring the Cornyn campaign to be dead. The White House declined to comment on the races they were following, and referred WIRED to the president's Paxton endorsement. Curiosity in California ----------------------- As the White House tracks the final week of campaigning in Texas, some campaign strategists in Trumpworld tell WIRED that they are also keeping an eye on what happens in the primary for the California gubernatorial race set for June 2. The interest in the race has been mostly academic, because they expect the seat to remain solidly Democratic. But California uses a primary system where the two top candidates—regardless of their party—will advance to the general election in November. Trump’s strategists are looking to see whether the fragmented Democratic field, which has no candidate endorsed by the current governor Gavin Newsom or former vice president Kamala Harris, might allow Republican Steve Hilton to advance to the general election. “Maybe Steve Hilton can pull it off because he’s a moderate and the Dems are all duds,” says one Trump 2024 strategist. The frontrunner Democrats have weathered torrid campaigns. President Joe Biden’s former Health and Human Services secretary Xavier Becerra had to disavow prior praise for the Church of Scientology, former congresswoman Katie Porter was caught on camera berating an aide to “Get out of my fucking shot!” during a taped meeting, and [billionaire Tom Steyer](https://www.wired.com/story/the-big-interview-podcast-tom-steyer/) paid for campaign boosts from influencers who did not properly disclose they were paid. Senate Majority in Maine ------------------------ Two Republican campaign strategists tell WIRED that they are also looking at the Democratic primary for senate in Maine because of the potential implications for the Senate majority. The primary is scheduled for June 9. Their expectation is that Graham Platner will almost certainly win the Democratic primary to face incumbent senator Susan Collins, whose seat the GOP will likely need to retain for Republicans to keep the majority. While Platner’s margin of victory won’t really provide insight into how he performs in the general election since his opponent, governor Janet Mills, dropped out, Trumpworld will closely be tracking the results anyways, the strategists say. _This is an edition of [**Hugo Lowell’s**](https://www.wired.com/author/hugo-lowell/) [**Inner Loop newsletter**](https://www.wired.com/newsletter?sourceCode=editarticle). Read previous newsletters [**here.**](https://www.wired.com/tag/inner-loop/)_

California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office is warning people to avoid buying gas from Chevron stations over Memorial Day weekend because of the high price at the pump SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- California Gov. Gavin Newsom is in a spat with a major oil company over who is to blame for the state's high gas prices, with the Democratic governor's office urging drivers not to fill up at Chevron stations over Memorial Day weekend. “Pro tip: unbranded gas comes from the same refineries, storage tanks, and pipelines, and it meets the same state standards to keep your engine running clean,” Newsom’s office posted Thursday on X. “Big Oil is already making billions off Trump’s Iran War; don’t let them rip you off even more by overpaying for the brand name.” Newsom’s office cited an analysis by a group within the state's energy commission, which oversees the oil and gas industry, that found that Chevron averaged more than 60 to 80 cents per gallon above unbranded alternatives. Memorial Day weekend is one of the busiest travel times of the year. The call-out by the governor's office follows Chevron posting signs at California gas stations blaming the state's climate policies for the high cost of gas. The average price of gas in California sat at $6.14 per gallon on Thursday, about $1.58 higher than the national average, according to the American Automobile Association. The state taxes consumers about 70 cents per gallon of gas, according to the state’s energy commission. That is the highest gas tax in the country. “California politicians are choosing foreign oil and fuels over local jobs and lower costs,” the signs read. They feature a QR code that directs to a Chevron webpage asking people to “speak up for affordable, reliable energy.” It is not clear when Chevron put the signs up, but spokesman Ross Allen said they are part of a campaign the company launched three years ago to inform drivers on the price impacts of California policies. “We've been very vocal about the importance of customer education in California so that our drivers and our consumers understand where their tax dollars are going,” Allen said. There are hundreds of Chevron gas stations operating in California, and most of them are operated independently and set their own prices, he said. [  ](https://abcnews.com/International/live-updates/iran-live-updates-saudi-arabia-uae-condemn-fresh/?id=133061203) [  ](https://abcnews.com/US/nascar-champion-kyle-busch-dies-age-41-sudden/story?id=133203673) [  ](https://abcnews.com/International/live-updates/hantavirus-live-updates-mv-hondius-canary-islands/?id=132746955) Chevron has also become a point of contention in the governor’s race, with billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer criticizing former federal health secretary Xavier Becerra for accepting campaign contributions from the company. Steyer and Becerra are both Democrats. Prices at the pump [have swelled](https://apnews.com/article/gasoline-oil-war-iran-strait-of-hormuz-0e5b61be4a4c8a8a077ed5ff6f84c0ce) nationwide since the Iran war began, launching a global energy crisis. The price of crude oil, which is the main ingredient in gasoline, has climbed during the war because the [Strait of Hormuz](https://apnews.com/hub/strait-of-hormuz), the narrow passage of the Persian Gulf through which a fifth of the world’s crude oil normally passes, has effectively been shut. Oil tankers have been stranded there unable to deliver crude. Newsom, who often touts the state's status as a global climate leader, has passed policies in recent years aimed at cracking down on oil company profits and reducing gas prices. He [signed a law in 2023](https://apnews.com/article/california-oil-company-profits-penalty-bill-7092c33a80bcab63658e118bbcbabf11) allowing the state's energy commission to penalize oil companies for excess profits, declaring the state had “finally beat big oil.” But regulators [voted last year](https://apnews.com/article/oil-gas-newsom-profits-prices-california-435d63922284a93130c40bac9558f093) to hold off on plans to penalize businesses until 2030 and prioritize other efforts to protect consumers at the pump. The postponement came after two oil refineries that accounted for roughly 18% of the state's refining capacity announced their plans to close, reigniting debate over the price impacts of the state's ambitious climate policies. Newsom signed another law in 2024 giving the commission the authority to require refineries to keep a certain amount of fuel on hand. The goal is to try to [keep prices from increasing suddenly](https://apnews.com/article/california-gas-price-gov-newsom-spike-1bf913e3cc0b478af557dab034e0435e) when refineries go offline for maintenance. But that regulation has also stalled.

Xavier Becerra arrived at Dulan’s on Crenshaw grinning like a man who couldn’t believe his luck. Joining him at the south Los Angeles soul food restaurant on a Tuesday morning in the final stretch of a volatile primary contest to be California’s next governor was Jasmine Crockett, the firebrand Texas Democrat, who had flown in to endorse his campaign. “We had to go search for one of the best fighters in the world,” Becerra said of Crockett, as he addressed a crowd of Black community leaders and union workers gathered for a buffet breakfast, “and make sure she could come in and inspire us.” Supporters pressed closer, leaning over plates of eggs and grits with their phones raise, to record the congresswoman, as she urged Californians to choose “credentials” over “gimmicks” in the race to succeed the term-limited [Gavin Newsom](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/gavin-newsom). There were murmurs of agreement, followed by loud cheering when Rex Richardson, the mayor of Long Beach, predicted that California was on the verge of a “Becerra era”. “I think the voters are waking up,” he said. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/23/california-governors-race-democratic-party#img-2) Jasmine Crockett introduces Xavier Becerra during a breakfast at Dulan’s on Crenshaw in Los Angeles last week. Photograph: Christina House/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images For [Democrats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) tuning in around the US, the race to lead the most populous state in the country, the home of Hollywood and Silicon Valley, and the world’s fourth-largest economy, has been, simply put, uninspiring. California is, after all, a state that has elected actual movie stars to the governor’s mansion – most recently Arnold Schwarzenegger – but this year’s campaign has lacked main-character energy. It’s felt like watching a “minor league baseball game when you thought you had a ticket to the World Series”, one national strategist quipped. How did Democrats get here? A Kamala Harris-sized hole in the field, top party figures passing on a run, and allegations of sexual abuse all converged in what has been an unusually helter-skelter, somewhat head-scratching, unquestionably high-stakes battle for the governorship. Beneath the drama are the more fundamental questions Democrats have yet to answer, said Mike Madrid, a former political director of the California Republican party who is now a prominent anti-Trump [commentator](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-latino-vote/id1613279254). “The Democratic party is really struggling to figure out who it is and what it is,” Madrid said. “In the Trump era, especially in a state as blue as California, the tip of the resistance, the party has defined itself almost entirely on what it is against and not what it’s for. And now that it’s got this choice to make, it doesn’t know what to do.” Until recently, few would have predicted that, with days left before the 2 June primary, Becerra stands a chance to advance to the November general election. Just weeks ago, he was stuck at 3% in the polls, one of the more than half-dozen Democrats being urged to [drop out](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/03/california-governor-democrats-gavin-newsom) and make room for a more viable contender. Becerra, like most of his Democratic rivals, ignored those calls. Now, as ballots trickle in, he is locked in a fierce three-way contest with billionaire investor turned liberal mega-donor Tom Steyer, [the top choice of progressives](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/17/tom-steyer-billionaire-candidate-democrats), and [British-born Fox News personality](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/02/steve-hilton-california-governor-race) Steve Hilton, a Republican endorsed by Donald Trump. Under California’s quirky primary system, the top two vote-getters advance, regardless of party. “There’s simply no precedent in modern California political history for a field this big or this amorphous,” said Dan Schnur, who teaches political communications at the University of Southern California, the University of California, Berkeley and Pepperdine. High-profile California Democrats such as Newsom, Harris and the former House speaker Nancy Pelosi have so far not made endorsements in the race, while labor and other powerful forces in state politics have split among the candidates. Political fortunes could still change, again. Many Democrats are holding onto their ballots in hopes that the field will settle, as the attack ads fly. Steyer, Becerra argues, is trying to “buy his way” into the governor’s mansion while making progressive policy promises he simply cannot keep. Steyer, meanwhile, accuses Becerra of being a “career politician” whose experience is riddled with management failures and policy inconsistencies. “This race isn’t over,” Rusty Hicks, chair of the state Democratic party, said recently, acknowledging the “twists and turns” of a primary election he described as “in many ways, crazy”. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/23/california-governors-race-democratic-party#img-3) Tom Steyer in Los Angeles earlier this month. Photograph: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images When the contest first [kicked off](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/24/eleni-kounalakis-campaign-california-governor-2026-00093381), Joe Biden was president and Dianne Feinstein, the late California senator, was still serving in Washington. Then Donald Trump defeated Kamala Harris, and her return to California raised hopes that she might run to lead her home state. She formally [ruled out](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/30/kamala-harris-california-governor-race-election) the possibility last July. Democrats scrambled for an alternative, seeking to recruit the US senator Alex Padilla, who declined. Attorney general Rob Bonta also passed. The field grew, but no one with Harris’s profile ever jumped in. Left was a roster of Democrats [with strong résumés but little star power](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/14/california-governor-race-eric-swalwell-resigns). In addition to Becerra and Steyer, it included: the congressman Eric Swalwell; the former congresswoman Katie Porter; the San Jose mayor, Matt Mahan, the former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa; the former state controller Betty Yee; the state superintendent of public instruction Tony Thurmond – and more still, none with more than 20% of the electorate’s support. Earlier this year, [panic](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/22/california-democratic-convention-trump) began to set in. Surveys consistently showed two Republicans, Hilton and Riverside county sheriff Chad Bianco, leading the race, raising the possibility, remote as it always was, that Democrats might be locked out entirely of the general election in November. “We do have to just make sure that we don’t shoot ourselves in the foot, so to speak,” Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, said in February, on the sidelines of the [state party convention in San Francisco](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/22/california-democratic-convention-trump), where delegates deadlocked over an endorsement. As pressure to consolidate the field intensified, Swalwell began to rack up endorsements and edge ahead – until several women came forward with [shocking accusations](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/16/eric-swalwell-department-of-justice-investigation), alleging sexual misconduct and assault. Swalwell denied the allegations, but ended his campaign and [resigned from Congress](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/13/house-ethics-committee-eric-swalwell-investigation). [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/23/california-governors-race-democratic-party#img-4) Eric Swalwell speaks to reporters in San Francisco in November last year. Swalwell suspended his campaign and resigned from the House in April. Photograph: Jeff Chiu/AP As Swalwell imploded, [the race fractured](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/14/california-governor-race-eric-swalwell-resigns), again. Steyer began to scoop up progressive support: the Bernie Sanders-aligned Our Revolution and even a tepid recommendation from the California Democratic Socialists of America. Hilton, with Trump’s backing, has rallied Republicans behind his appeal for “some fresh thinking after 16 years of one-party rule”. “I had a fever dream that in California, socialists were supporting a billionaire and Maga was supporting an immigrant,” Jodi Hicks, CEO of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, which has endorsed Becerra, wrote in a [widely shared](https://x.com/jodihicks/status/2053939691616186642) X post. The Golden state has long functioned as a kind of vanguard for liberal governance: a place that welcomes progressive taxation, climate action, immigrant protections and LGBTQ+ rights alongside a culture of celebrity and innovation. But an affordability crisis, the sky-high cost of housing, a hostile federal government and worsening natural disasters have infused the race with a more existential question: is the California dream broken? Amid the tumult, and the Democratic candidates’ competing answers to that question, Republicans have sensed an opening. California can be “golden again”, Hilton declares in one of his ads, urging voters to turn the page on “years of Democrat failure”. Images of Newsom, Harris and the mayor of Los Angeles, Democrat Karen Bass, flash across the screen. In Los Angeles, former reality TV villain Spencer Pratt, a [Republican](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/21/spencer-pratt-los-angeles-mayor-trump) who lost his home in the Palisades fire last year, is [attempting to unseat Bass](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/16/spencer-pratt-los-angeles-mayor) by tapping into the furious anti-establishment current that propelled Trump to the White House and Zohran Mamdani to the New York City mayor’s office. Most observers believe Pratt remains a longshot, but his sudden contention, they say, reflects deep discontent with the current state of affairs. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/23/california-governors-race-democratic-party#img-5) Katie Porter at a debate in the race for governor of California hosted by the San Francisco Examiner. Photograph: Carlos Barría/Reuters “California suffers from the same problems as the rest of the country, only more so, because of its size and its dynamism,” said Miriam Pawel, a journalist and author who has written extensively about the state’s politics, history and culture. If 2025 was any indication, Californians are unlikely to see electing Republican leaders – particularly ones Trump finds agreeable – as the solution. In November, voters [overwhelmingly](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/04/california-prop-50-voting-result) approved Prop 50, which asked residents to redraw the state’s congressional map to advantage Democrats – a response to a Trump-sought gerrymander in Texas. Democrats enter this year’s midterm elections with considerable strength, according to recent polling, even as they remain deeply frustrated with their party and divided over its path forward. Voters don’t want business as usual, argued Lorena Gonzalez, president of the powerful California Federation of Labor Unions, which issued a multi-candidate endorsement of Steyer, Porter and Villaraigosa. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/23/california-governors-race-democratic-party#img-6) Candidates Matt Mahan and Steve Hilton at the San Francisco Examiner and CBS debate. Photograph: Carlos Barría/Reuters “If we don’t take on the current economic system, we are going to continue to see wealth inequality \[grow\] in ways that are just astounding,” Gonzalez said. “We have to do it in California,” she added, “so the rest of the nation can see that it’s possible.” At a Steyer event in east Los Angeles, Ruby Ortega, a 50-year-old veteran who now works as a healthcare aide, said she was struggling to pay rent and put gas in her car. “Things need to change,” she said. “I’m tired of it. How are we supposed to live like this?” Ortega, who wore a cross around her neck, said she remained undecided. She liked Steyer’s plan to make the wealthy pay more, but was also drawn to Becerra’s record of taking on the Trump administration as attorney general – yes, she’d heard about the [122](https://www.instagram.com/p/DXzsTXTkZbJ/) lawsuits he filed against the federal government in Trump’s first term. Steyer’s supporters say this moment calls for the kind of economic populism he has embraced, zipping across the state on his “A California you can afford” bus tour. Casting his wealth as an assurance that he “can’t be bought”, Steyer has spent more than $190m of his personal fortune on his campaign so far, much of it to blanket the airwaves with commercials. “We don’t have the luxury of returning to the status quo,” said Yee, the former state controller, who suspended her campaign for governor and endorsed Steyer. Over the course of more than a dozen, often unwieldy, debates and forums, the Democrats all mostly agreed that big changes were needed in Sacramento – and Washington. And with Newsom already looking ahead to the 2028 presidential race, many believe it will be up to his successor to deliver them. “If the next governor doesn’t challenge the status quo in Sacramento to deliver dramatically better outcomes, we are going to lose the trust of the electorate and end up with a Republican governor in eight years,” Mahan, the San Jose mayor, said during an interview at a coffee shop in West Hollywood. “Maybe four.” Mahan is offering a centrist approach he says has worked to reduce homelessness and increase affordable housing in San Jose, which, he proudly remind voters, is the largest city in Silicon Valley and the third-largest in the state. Despite a burst of early support from tech leaders and businessmen, like Google co-founder Sergey Brin and billionaire real estate developer Rick Caruso, Mahan has struggled to break out. But he continues to make his case, arguing that he is the best Democratic alternative for voters still in search of “someone who will be a fixer of our problems here in California”. In an unusual move, plenty of California Democrats are waiting to return their ballots, holding out for more clarity – and more polling – before they vote. It’s a strategy born of caution, said Greg Bergantz, a leader with the group Indivisible El Dorado. “I want everyone to vote,” he said, but he hoped Democrats would be strategic about it. Though the chances of both Republican candidates advancing had all-but evaporated, Bergantz said he preferred to wait for the final batch of “gold-standard” polls to be released before he makes a final decision. “Things are in topsy-turvy right now,” he said. “And we don’t want to do anything that’s going to make Trump happy.” [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/23/california-governors-race-democratic-party#img-7) A campaign bus for California gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer is parked in the lot of Pan Pacific Park in Los Angeles. Photograph: Jae C Hong/AP While many feel the race has failed to inspire, some observers have argued the campaign is more a return to the norm for a state that has also embraced technocrats and workhorses. “I think Californians want a governor whose name they don’t remember,” Madrid said. It’s one explanation for Becerra’s unlikely ascent. An experienced Democrat with a compelling biography, he is, by his own admission, “not the slickest” candidate to ever run for public office. Garry South, who helped elect Gray Davis in the state’s last truly competitive Democratic primary for governor in 1998, said California voters often reach for the steady choice. “When people are considering who they want to be governor of the biggest state, there is a certain amount of pragmatism that sets in,” he said. South saw echoes of the 1998 campaign, recalling that Davis was a politician whose first name, some joked, matched his personality. Yet he surprised the pundits and won. “Boring and dull are in,” Davis spokesperson Michael Bustamante [told](https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1999/06/07/after-six-years-in-suspended-animation-and-with-an-election-right-around-the-corner-al-gore-shows-no-sign-of-stirring-from-the-big-sleepy/56855b81-b100-462c-bcc7-b03967752757/) the Washington Post in 1999. “Just look at Gray Davis.” Bustamante is now working for Becerra’s campaign, and was on hand Tuesday for the breakfast at Dulan’s, where Crockett, the Texas congresswoman, argued passionately that the governor’s race was bigger than California. “I remember a presidential election where people wanted to talk about everything but qualifications,” she said. “And now our democracy hangs by a thread.”

Californians are frustrated and underwhelmed heading into Tuesday’s primary election, where voters will eliminate all but two candidates in the volatile race for governor, the messy battle for [Los Angeles](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/los-angeles) mayor and a series of congressional contests that could determine control of the US House in November. With days left before the 2 June primary, there is little sign of the clarity that typically emerges in the closing stretch of a contested California campaign season. The race to succeed term-limited Democratic governor [Gavin Newsom](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/gavin-newsom) appears to have settled into a tight three-way contest among Democrats Xavier Becerra and Tom Steyer and Republican Steve Hilton, while voters in Los Angeles remain divided over whether to stand by embattled mayor [Karen Bass](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/karen-bass) or entertain a challenger. At the federal level, a handful of newly redrawn congressional districts have intensified intra-party fights in some of the nation’s most consequential races. In a state where Democrats hold a roughly two-to-one advantage over Republicans in voter registration, the uncertainty is striking. [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) lost by more than 20 percentage points in the 2024 presidential election and no Republican has won statewide office since Republican governor [Arnold Schwarzenegger](https://www.theguardian.com/film/arnold-schwarzenegger)’s 2006 re-election. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/30/california-turbulent-elections#img-2) Xavier Becerra takes a selfie with supporters after a campaign stop in Culver City, California, on 21 May. Photograph: Gina Ferazzi/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images While Democratic officials in deep-blue [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california) grapple with a crippling cost-of-living crisis, they are also under pressure from their voters to take a harder line against the Trump administration. “About half of Californians feel that the state is going in the wrong direction,” said Mark Baldassare, the survey director at the nonpartisan [Public Policy Institute of California](https://www.google.com/search?q=Public+Policy+Institute+of+California&oq=Public+Policy+Institute+of+California&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQRRg8MgYIAhBFGDwyBggDEEUYPdIBBjk3ajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) (PPIC). But, he said, their dissatisfaction with the state of affairs in California is “overshadowed by a greater unhappiness about the state of the nation right now”. Three-quarters of Californians say the nation is headed in the wrong direction, according to the [latest PPIC survey](https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-may-2026/), the highest share since 2003, when pollsters first asked the question, while only about 30% of likely voters approve of Trump’s job performance. Concerns that the Trump administration might [attempt to interfere](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/28/california-law-shield-elections-federal-interference) in the state’s elections have alarmed Democratic voters, already worried that Republican redistricting efforts would push congressional control out of reach. Yet with the president’s approval rating falling and inflation rising, amid an unpopular war with Iran, Democrats nationally enter the midterm elections with considerable strength, tipped to win control of the House and potentially retake the Senate. Under California’s quirky nonpartisan primary system, all candidates regardless of party appear on the same ballot and only the top two vote-getters advance to November. None of the Democratic candidates have consolidated the field, raising fears among Democrats that two [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) could squeak through to the November general election – a possibility pollsters and political observers say is increasingly remote. Unpersuaded, many Democrats are holding on to their ballots, waiting for any late-breaking developments before making a final decision. The most recent PPIC survey found Becerra, the former health and human services secretary, leading the race with 23%, followed by Hilton, the British-born former Fox News personality who has been endorsed by Trump, with 20%, and Steyer, the billionaire environmental activist who is the choice of progressives, with 15%. Republican Riverside county sheriff Chad Bianco and former US congresswoman Katie Porter also reached doubled digits. [The Berkeley IGS Poll](https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5s8858hd), released on Friday, similarly put Becerra, Hilton and Steyer at the front of the pack. Becerra’s unexpected rise followed the rapid implosion of Democratic congressman Eric Swalwell’s campaign for governor amid sexual assault and harassment allegations that he has denied. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/30/california-turbulent-elections#img-3) Tom Steyer with union workers at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood on 18 May. Photograph: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images “Six weeks ago, no one was looking at Xavier Becerra,” said Sara Sadhwani, a political science professor at Pomona College, who co-hosted one of the gubernatorial debates. “Now he’s the Democratic frontrunner.” The mud-slinging has intensified in the final weeks, as the Democrats try to ensure their place in the top two. Becerra has argued he is the only candidate with the experience to solve California’s most intractable problems, while Steyer made the case that he is the only one with solutions big and bold enough to bring about the kind of structural change voters say they want. Hilton, meanwhile, has blamed the state’s woes on 16 years of what he calls “failed” Democratic governance and has argued that it is time for a change in political leadership. “In another moment, a moderate Republican maybe could have launched a more meaningful campaign against the Democrats,” Sadhwani said. But, pointing to Trump’s strong disapproval in the state, she doubted Californians were in the mood to put his preferred candidate in charge of the most populous US state. “I don’t see a future in which Steve Hilton becomes the governor of the state,” she said. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/30/california-turbulent-elections#img-4) Steve Hilton before a press conference in San Jose on 26 May. Photograph: Manuel Orbegozo/Reuters Discontent with the status quo is shaping the race for mayor of the US’s second-biggest city. In Los Angeles, Bass, the incumbent Democrat, is trying to overcome frustration over persistent homelessness, affordability and her handling of last year’s devastating fires. Opposition to Bass has splintered among her leading challengers: progressive LA councilmember Nithya Raman, and [reality TV star Spencer Pratt](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/16/spencer-pratt-los-angeles-mayor), a victim of the Palisades fire whose bombastic [social media-driven campaign](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/06/spencer-pratt-los-angeles-campaign-video) has attracted attention far beyond the city limits. Sadhwani said Pratt embodies the changing political landscape that has rewarded anti-establishment outsiders “who understand the new media environment that we’re living in, and they’ve been able to capitalize on it”. Democrats’ battle for the House could hinge on California --------------------------------------------------------- The battle for California’s 52 congressional districts may carry the biggest national consequences. Democrats need only a handful of seats to reclaim the House for the final two years of Trump’s second term. Approved overwhelmingly by voters last year, Proposition 50 allowed California to redraw its congressional lines in response to a broader redistricting war sparked by Republican efforts in other states. The redrawn districts created as many as five new opportunities for Democrats, while scrambling the political calculations for several Republican incumbents, including congressman Kevin Kiley, who [left the party](https://x.com/CNN/status/2031113333114348026) and registered as an independent as he faces a tough re-election, and late congressman Doug LaMalfa, whose [death earlier this year](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/08/mike-mcguire-democrat-rural-california) set off a fierce contest to succeed him in his newly redrawn district. One of the most closely watched races will take place in the central valley, where Republican congressman David Valadao is defending his seat, which now leans slightly Democratic. The Democrats vying to replace him represent the ideological span of the party, with Bernie Sanders-endorsed political newcomer Randy Villegas facing off against Jasmeet Bains, a moderate state assembly member who is running with the backing of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The district remains one of Democrats’ top pickup opportunities. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/30/california-turbulent-elections#img-5) Left: Randy Villegas, who’s running for California’s 22nd congressional district. Right: Dr Jasmeet Bains, the first Sikh American to be elected to the California legislature. Composite: Los Angeles Times via Getty Images/Reuters The redistricting fight has also produced a contentious Republican-on-Republican showdown in Orange county, where longtime GOP congressman Ken Calvert and fellow Republican congresswoman Young Kim have been drawn into the same reconfigured 40th district, setting up a bitter battle to advance. The opportunity to flip as many as five Republican-held House seats in California has become all the more crucial for Democrats following a US supreme court decision [undermining the Voting Rights Act](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/29/supreme-court-louisiana-congressional-map-case-ruling). The ruling last month has had a cascading effect as Republican-led states across the south race to redraw their maps, unraveling majority-Black districts. In progressive San Francisco, the bruising race to succeed retiring former House speaker Nancy Pelosi has become a fulcrum for the many internal fights animating the party – on ideology, economic populism, how to take on Trump and whether Israel committed a genocide in Gaza. Amid the turmoil, Pelosi has [endorsed](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/18/nancy-pelosi-endorses-connie-chan-congress) [Connie Chan](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/20/connie-chan-congressional-run), a San Francisco supervisor, who is running against Scott Wiener, a Democratic state senator known for championing legislation to ramp up housing production and enshrining LGBTQ+ rights, and Saikat Chakrabarti, a former tech executive who served as Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s first chief of staff. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/30/california-turbulent-elections#img-6) From left: candidates for San Francisco’s congressional district 11 seat Saikat Chakrabarti, Connie Chan and Scott Wiener in San Francisco, on 31 March. Photograph: San Francisco Chronicle/Hearst Newspapers/Getty Images The uncertainty surrounding the contests at every level have created a political environment unlike any the Golden state has seen in years, experts say. “There’s chaos in the Democratic party and a lack of direction, and we see that reflected in these candidates in many ways,” Sadhwani said. Though California is expected to remain firmly Democratic and deeply resistant to Trump, the elections on Tuesday may serve as an early barometer for the party amid the noisy debate over how it moves forward. “If it’s a Xavier Becerra and a Karen Bass, it says a lot about the establishment – and maybe our politics haven’t shifted as much as we thought,” Sadhwani said. “If it’s a [Tom Steyer](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/tom-steyer) and a Nithya Raman, maybe we’re making a real leftward turn here – and people are just fed up with the establishment.”

Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog. **Californians go to the polls today in the first round of voting for a new governor, with a tight three-way race for two run-off spots.** The golden state will also vote on House districts for the first time since it approved Proposition 50 – its response to Texas redrawing its congressional lines to create five Republican leaning districts at the behest of President Trump - in November last year. **Iowa, Montana, New Jersey, [South Dakota](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/south-dakota) and New Mexico also hold elections on Tuesday.** Focussing on California, the state’s governor primary pits all candidates against each other, regardless of party, with the top two advancing to November’s general election to replace the term-limited Gavin Newsom, AFP reports. More than 60 names appear on the lengthy ballot papers that have been mailed out to all registered voters in the heavily Democratic state of 40m people. The latest polls show a three-way split, with former president Joe Biden’s health secretary Xavier Becerra in the lead. In the battle for second place and the chance to take on Becerra in November are Democrat Tom Steyer and Donald Trump-backed Republican Steve Hilton. Incumbent Newsom is believed to have his eyes on the White House in 2028, following in the footsteps of Ronald Reagan, who occupied the governor’s mansion from 1967 to 1975.  Tom Steyer speaks at a rally at Los Angeles Trade Technical College on Sunday, May 31, 2026. Photograph: Jackson Tammariello/ZUMA Press Wire/Shutterstock It comes as voters in Los Angeles will also vote in the city’s mayoral primary. Incumbent Karen Bass, who is making her case for a second term, facing a challenge from the left by her former ally on the city council Nithya Raman - and another from the right by reality TV star Spencer Pratt. If anyone secures 50% of the votes on Tuesday, they win outright, whie anything less means the top two candidates go through to the 3 November general election. In other developments: * **Democrats in the US Senate vowed to force [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) to vote on a $1.8bn “Maga slush fund” established as part of a resolution of Donald Trump’s long-shot lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service.** The US president has described the secretive and loosely controlled “anti-weaponization fund” as a means of paying the victims of politicized prosecutions. * **Tina Peters, the former clerk convicted of participating in a scheme to chase election conspiracy theories promulgated by Donald Trump, was released from prison on Monday** after the president successfully pressured Colorado’s Democratic governor into commuting her sentence. * **On Monday afternoon, over an hour south of Newark, a few dozen protesters outside the New Jersey state legislature in Trenton condemned Democratic governor Mikie Sherrill’s decision to send in the state police to Delaney Hall**, the Newark immigration detention center that has seen more than a week of chaotic and often violent clashes. * **Transgender troops can remain in the US military, but the armed services can continue to block their enlistment**, an appeals court ruled on Monday in a split decision with potentially significant consequences for the Trump administration’s anti-diversity agenda. [Share](mailto:?subject=Voters%20cast%20ballots%20in%20several%20states%20as%20California%20governor%20primary%20goes%20down%20to%20the%20wire%20–%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/jun/02/donald-trump-primaries-midterms-california-governor-iran-latest-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-6a1ea11a8f08e5ef3290f24f#block-6a1ea11a8f08e5ef3290f24f)  Oliver Wainwright **The Egyptians had their pyramids. The Anglo-Saxons had their barrows. And the Americans have their presidential libraries – the chief difference being that the leaders the US venerates are usually still alive at the opening.** Lacking a royal family or a state religion, the US presidency has swelled to fill the void, transforming over the decades into a national personality cult, complete with its own secular temples to these powerful men. The latest pharaonic edifice is about to open on Chicago’s south side, where it looms on the skyline as a [towering totem to the 44th president, Barack Obama](https://www.obama.org/). He might have seemed humble in office, but in his post-presidential, Netflix-producing afterlife, Obama has erected the largest, costliest and most audacious complex of them all. Behold the $850m Obamalisk – or, as it sometimes feels morbidly like, the Obamausoleum. Previous presidential libraries have taken many forms, reflecting the values of their creators. Franklin D Roosevelt began the tradition in 1940, [building a library in Dutch colonial style](https://www.fdrlibrary.org/) alongside his grave in upstate New York, which he hoped would be swarmed with “an appalling number of sightseers”. Since then, every president has followed suit in their quest for immortality, dreaming up ever larger museums and archives, conceived as hallowed places of pilgrimage. Lyndon B Johnson [commissioned a brutalist hulk for Austin, Texas](https://www.lbjlibrary.org/), a fitting symbol, its architect Gordon Bunshaft remarked, for “an aggressive … big man”. Ronald Reagan opted for a [sprawling California hacienda](https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/), with a dedicated hangar for Air Force One, while Bill Clinton conjured a [cantilevered metallic box in Arkansas](https://www.clintonlibrary.gov/about-us/about-building) – a literal interpretation of his promise to “build a bridge to the 21st century”. So, how to symbolise hope, justice, equality and all the other bygone values that Obama championed in his meteoric ascent to the White House? How to commemorate the first Black president in history, in whom so much transformational faith was vested, at a time when so many of his achievements are being relentlessly rolled back? [Share](mailto:?subject=Voters%20cast%20ballots%20in%20several%20states%20as%20California%20governor%20primary%20goes%20down%20to%20the%20wire%20–%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/jun/02/donald-trump-primaries-midterms-california-governor-iran-latest-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-6a1ec1348f088d87ce8fab36#block-6a1ec1348f088d87ce8fab36) **Secretary of state Marco Rubio is set to face a litany of questions Tuesday about the Trump administration’s fragile or stalling diplomatic efforts around the world when he appears for back-to-back hearings on Capitol Hill for the first time since the Iran war began.** The Republican former senator will sit before House and Senate committees to make the State Department’s annual budget request, AP reported. But the focus is likely to shift quickly to the already unsteady ceasefire between Washington and Tehran, which has been further tested in recent days by back-and-forth attacks. Cabinet members, including Rubio, have defended president Donald Trump’s decision to launch the conflict despite promises over the years not to engage in “forever wars” in the Middle East. [Share](mailto:?subject=Voters%20cast%20ballots%20in%20several%20states%20as%20California%20governor%20primary%20goes%20down%20to%20the%20wire%20–%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/jun/02/donald-trump-primaries-midterms-california-governor-iran-latest-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-6a1ebcc28f082ffc2d6f2896#block-6a1ebcc28f082ffc2d6f2896)  Jason Wilson **Dozens of members of [Congress](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-congress) and Capitol Hill staffers have enjoyed lavish gifted travel to [Israel](https://www.theguardian.com/world/israel) funded by an Aipac affiliate since 7 October 2023, amid Israel’s expanding wars on its neighbors and despite plummeting levels of support among Americans for the country’s policies, a Guardian analysis has found.** Congressional ethics filings and other public records show the trips, led by the American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF), revolved around one-sided briefings on Middle East politics and Israeli domestic and foreign policy. Lawmakers and their staffers from both parties met Israeli officials, military contractors and civil society figures, including [Benjamin Netanyahu](https://www.theguardian.com/world/benjamin-netanyahu) and advocates for the annexation of the West Bank and the displacement of Palestinians from Jerusalem. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee ([Aipac](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/16/congress-election-pro-israel-lobby-aipac)) and other pro-Israel groups have sponsored such trips for years, and both Democratic and Republican lawmakers have joined. But the continued participation of Democratic lawmakers and their staff on recent trips is particularly noteworthy given how much [sympathy](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/dec/01/ritchie-torres-democrats-israel) for Israel has ebbed among Democratic voters, and the pains that some Democratic politicians have recently taken to distance themselves from the lobby group. A recent poll found that eight in 10 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have an [unfavorable](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/17/slump-in-voters-support-for-israel-shakes-us-consensus-over-military-aid) view of Israel, along with six in 10 Americans broadly. The congressional ethics filings show that members of Congress and their staffers were hosted at luxurious hotels, dined at top-tier restaurants and received briefings in at least one West Bank settlement. While one of the trips referenced in this story has previously been reported in broad terms, the Guardian is revealing details relating to itineraries, costs and other trips for the first time. [Share](mailto:?subject=Voters%20cast%20ballots%20in%20several%20states%20as%20California%20governor%20primary%20goes%20down%20to%20the%20wire%20–%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/jun/02/donald-trump-primaries-midterms-california-governor-iran-latest-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-6a1eb8778f082ffc2d6f284a#block-6a1eb8778f082ffc2d6f284a) Cecilia Nowell **Journalists may no longer enter the Pentagon’s press office, which has been designated as a classified space amid growing moves to restrict press access to the defense department.** “This is the most transparent war department in history. No amount of spin from the Fake News media will change that,” Jose Valdez, the acting defense department press secretary, said in a social media post. “The Pentagon Press Office has been redesignated as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility due to speechwriters from the Office of the Secretary of War sharing the facility.” Valdez added that, because speechwriters handle classified material, “journalists will no longer be permitted to enter the office space”. The move was [first reported by the Washington Post](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/06/01/pentagon-bans-journalists-press-office-designating-it-classified-space/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwY2xjawSK8EZleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEezu7nHuSZhrPtBUdsOJgNbcdULJ05Gq96RnEEYCP8KE7JukBuXN7WTL2y740_aem_zZbsHvzV3vSjeusGpxgQyA), and later confirmed by Valdez on social media. The defense department, which the Trump administration prefers to call the war department, began rolling out [new restrictions to press access](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/20/pentagon-journalists-restrictions-pledge) in September, when the military demanded journalists pledge not to gather any information – including unclassified documents – that had not been authorized for release or else risk revocation of their press passes. Credentialed journalists have long had broad access to the Pentagon, but after the defense department announced sweeping restrictions to their work in October, many longtime reporters [refused to agree](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/15/pentagon-press-reporting-policy) and began turning over their press passes. That month, the department [announced](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/22/pentagon-press-corps) a “next generation of the Pentagon press corps” featuring 60 journalists from far-right outlets. The New York Times sued the Pentagon over those policies, which designated journalists as “security risks”, and a federal judge [found in the Times’s favor in March](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/20/us-judge-blocks-pentagon-policy). [Share](mailto:?subject=Voters%20cast%20ballots%20in%20several%20states%20as%20California%20governor%20primary%20goes%20down%20to%20the%20wire%20–%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/jun/02/donald-trump-primaries-midterms-california-governor-iran-latest-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-6a1eb5378f088d87ce8faab3#block-6a1eb5378f088d87ce8faab3)  George Chidi **Donald Trump is reconsidering whether to keep pressing for a $1.8bn fund to compensate his allies, a person familiar with his thinking said on Monday, as the justice department paused the program to comply with a court order.** Trump’s “anti-weaponization” fund has faced legal setbacks since it was announced two weeks ago. The idea has also faced a mounting political backlash from [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) concerned by a lack of oversight and the possibility of payouts to participants in the January 6 2021 riot at the US Capitol. Some [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) are pressing the White House to commit to giving up on the fund. “I do think the best way to handle it is if the administration decides to shut \[the fund\] down themselves,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters. [Democrats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) in the US Senate had vowed to force [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) to vote on what they deride as a $1.8bn “Maga slush fund” established as part of a resolution of Donald Trump’s long-shot lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service. The [US president](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) has described the secretive and loosely controlled fund as a means of paying the victims of politicized prosecutions. [Members of his own party](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/21/senate-republicans-to-ditch-trump-ballroom-funding) are among those who have expressed alarm. The terms of the fund do not require the disclosure of how much is paid to whom. Administration officials have said payees could include pardoned January 6 rioters. [Share](mailto:?subject=Voters%20cast%20ballots%20in%20several%20states%20as%20California%20governor%20primary%20goes%20down%20to%20the%20wire%20–%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/jun/02/donald-trump-primaries-midterms-california-governor-iran-latest-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-6a1eada48f088f4650a0f1e0#block-6a1eada48f088f4650a0f1e0) Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog. **Californians go to the polls today in the first round of voting for a new governor, with a tight three-way race for two run-off spots.** The golden state will also vote on House districts for the first time since it approved Proposition 50 – its response to Texas redrawing its congressional lines to create five Republican leaning districts at the behest of President Trump - in November last year. **Iowa, Montana, New Jersey, [South Dakota](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/south-dakota) and New Mexico also hold elections on Tuesday.** Focussing on California, the state’s governor primary pits all candidates against each other, regardless of party, with the top two advancing to November’s general election to replace the term-limited Gavin Newsom, AFP reports. More than 60 names appear on the lengthy ballot papers that have been mailed out to all registered voters in the heavily Democratic state of 40m people. The latest polls show a three-way split, with former president Joe Biden’s health secretary Xavier Becerra in the lead. In the battle for second place and the chance to take on Becerra in November are Democrat Tom Steyer and Donald Trump-backed Republican Steve Hilton. Incumbent Newsom is believed to have his eyes on the White House in 2028, following in the footsteps of Ronald Reagan, who occupied the governor’s mansion from 1967 to 1975. [](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/jun/02/donald-trump-primaries-midterms-california-governor-iran-latest-news-updates#img-2) Tom Steyer speaks at a rally at Los Angeles Trade Technical College on Sunday, May 31, 2026. Photograph: Jackson Tammariello/ZUMA Press Wire/Shutterstock It comes as voters in Los Angeles will also vote in the city’s mayoral primary. Incumbent Karen Bass, who is making her case for a second term, facing a challenge from the left by her former ally on the city council Nithya Raman - and another from the right by reality TV star Spencer Pratt. If anyone secures 50% of the votes on Tuesday, they win outright, whie anything less means the top two candidates go through to the 3 November general election. In other developments: * **Democrats in the US Senate vowed to force [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) to vote on a $1.8bn “Maga slush fund” established as part of a resolution of Donald Trump’s long-shot lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service.** The US president has described the secretive and loosely controlled “anti-weaponization fund” as a means of paying the victims of politicized prosecutions. * **Tina Peters, the former clerk convicted of participating in a scheme to chase election conspiracy theories promulgated by Donald Trump, was released from prison on Monday** after the president successfully pressured Colorado’s Democratic governor into commuting her sentence. * **On Monday afternoon, over an hour south of Newark, a few dozen protesters outside the New Jersey state legislature in Trenton condemned Democratic governor Mikie Sherrill’s decision to send in the state police to Delaney Hall**, the Newark immigration detention center that has seen more than a week of chaotic and often violent clashes. * **Transgender troops can remain in the US military, but the armed services can continue to block their enlistment**, an appeals court ruled on Monday in a split decision with potentially significant consequences for the Trump administration’s anti-diversity agenda. [Share](mailto:?subject=Voters%20cast%20ballots%20in%20several%20states%20as%20California%20governor%20primary%20goes%20down%20to%20the%20wire%20–%20live&body=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2026/jun/02/donald-trump-primaries-midterms-california-governor-iran-latest-news-updates?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with%3Ablock-6a1ea11a8f08e5ef3290f24f#block-6a1ea11a8f08e5ef3290f24f) Updated at 07.09 EDT

 Six states — California, Iowa, Montana, New Jersey, South Dakota and New Mexico — hold elections on Tuesday. Most of the attention is on California and Iowa, where there are competitive primaries for governor. In both states, the Democratic Party also sees a road map to control of Congress in the fall. In California's unique primary system, voters send the top two vote-getters to November's general election, regardless of candidates' political parties. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is term limited, and California voters will also pick who should move on to the general election in five new Democratic-leaning congressional districts. In Iowa, Democratic voters will choose a candidate in a key Senate race — the Republican in the race is already the de facto nominee. In order to win a majority in the Senate, Democrats must pick up four seats, forcing the party to win in Republican-leaning states like Iowa. For governor, the race is the first good chance Democrats have to win the office in years, but Republicans still need to select their nominee. Here are key races to follow: _Or skip to specific races:_ [California governor](https://www.npr.org/2026//2026/06/02/g-s1-124482/primary-day-california-iowa#calgov) | [California U.S. House](https://www.npr.org/2026//2026/06/02/g-s1-124482/primary-day-california-iowa#calhouse) | [Iowa governor](https://www.npr.org/2026//2026/06/02/g-s1-124482/primary-day-california-iowa#iowagov) | [Iowa U.S. Senate](https://www.npr.org/2026//2026/06/02/g-s1-124482/primary-day-california-iowa#iowasenate) | [New Jersey and Montana](https://www.npr.org/2026//2026/06/02/g-s1-124482/primary-day-california-iowa#njmt) _You can also check out_ [_June 2 voter resources from the NPR network_](https://www.npr.org/2026//2026/06/02/g-s1-124482/primary-day-california-iowa#voterresource)_._ ### California decides top two gubernatorial contenders It's been a chaotic scramble to pick the next leader of the country's largest state. After three prominent Democrats — former Vice President Kamala Harris, Sen. Alex Padilla and state Attorney General Rob Bonta — decided not to run, Democratic voters haven't had a clear front-runner for the first time in decades. Voters have more than 60 candidates to choose from, but only a fraction of those are considered serious contenders. Only the top two vote-getters will move on to the general election in November.  The race got a shakeup when former Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, the presumed favorite, [dropped out of the race](https://www.capradio.org/articles/2026/04/14/californias-race-for-governor-is-in-for-a-major-shakeup-following-swalwells-exit/) after he was accused of sexual misconduct by several women. Most recently, polls show the contest could be between two Democrats — the Health and Human Services secretary under former President Joe Biden, [Xavier Becerra](https://www.kqed.org/news/12074132/xavier-becerra-on-why-his-upbringing-and-career-give-him-an-edge-over-other-gubernatorial-candidates), and billionaire philanthropist [Tom Steyer](https://www.kqed.org/news/12085540/tom-steyer-vows-to-challenge-corporate-power-and-protect-workers-from-ai-at-kqed-town-hall). Before Becerra was appointed to Biden's Cabinet, he served 12 terms in Congress and was elected as the California attorney general in 2016. He's considered by many as the candidate with the strongest political background. Becerra's pitch is that he is a proven leader who can hold his own and protect California from President Trump. Steyer has forked over more than [$213 million of his own fortune on the race](https://www.kqed.org/news/12085276/becerra-hilton-lead-in-california-governors-race-poll-ahead-of-june-primary) and is also financially backed by Our Revolution, a group aligned with Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. Steyer's platform is centered on taking a stand against special-interest groups in politics. Polling just a few points behind Becerra and Steyer is [Republican Steve Hilton](https://www.kqed.org/news/12071133/former-fox-news-host-steve-hilton-lays-out-vision-for-california-governorship). The former Fox News host was [endorsed by President Trump in April](https://www.kqed.org/news/12078793/trump-endorses-steve-hilton-for-california-governor-giving-gop-a-front-runner), after which Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, another Republican in the race, quickly dropped in the polls. Hilton's platform focuses on increasing affordable housing supply for first-time homebuyers, bolstering tech industries and reviving California's film industry.  In response to Texas redrawing its congressional lines to create five Republican-leaning districts at the behest of President Trump, Californians approved Proposition 50 in November last year. The measure temporarily sidestepped the independent redistricting commission tasked with drawing nonpartisan influenced congressional boundaries, in favor of politically gerrymandered districts. That allowed state Democrats to redraw their map so five previously Republican-held districts now lean Democratic. This has left those Republican incumbents figuring out their political futures. Rep. Ken Calvert, the longest-serving Republican from California, and Rep. Young Kim are running in the same district, for example, in a race that's gotten [quite heated](https://www.kcrw.com/shows/kcrw-reports/stories/calvert-vs-kim-how-prop-50-forced-a-republican-showdown). Then there's Rep. Kevin Kiley. After being drawn into a much more Democratic-leaning district, he decided to run in a new seat and announced he was leaving the Republican Party and running as an independent instead, though Kiley said would still caucus with the Republicans. Because of California's primary system, some of these more competitive seats are creating competitive primaries between Democrats, allowing primary voters to signal to the party what kinds of candidates speak to them most in places that have the most to lose — and gain. ### Iowa's GOP gubernatorial primary Iowa Republican voters could decide the party's nominee for governor in the state's first open race for the office since 2011, as sitting Gov. Kim Reynolds opted not to run for reelection. With five Republicans on Tuesday's ballot, Rep. [Randy Feenstra](https://www.iowapublicradio.org/tags/randy-feenstra) is the only one [endorsed by Trump](https://www.iowapublicradio.org/political-news/2026-05-29/trump-endorses-feenstra-for-iowa-governor). The race will test whether Trump's endorsement holds weight in a state where his approval rating has slipped over the economy and the war in Iran. Feenstra's lead may be declining, as [one recent poll](https://winwithjmc.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Iowa-GOP-Executive-Summary.pdf) shows political newcomer and Iowa businessman [Zach Lahn](https://www.iowapublicradio.org/political-news/2025-11-06/republican-zach-lahn-iowa-governor-2026) could have a shot at winning the GOP primary. There is a good chance, though, that Iowans won't know the outcome of the race on Tuesday because a candidate must secure 35% of the vote to win outright. If no one clears that threshold, the nominee will be decided at a Republican convention where delegates — not primary voters — make the final choice. But the Republican-backed candidate isn't a shoo-in come November. Cook Political Report categorizes the governor's race as a toss-up with a slight Republican advantage. Whatever Republican wins on Tuesday will face unopposed Democratic State Auditor Rob Sand in the general election. Sand is popular among voters and has, so far, [outraised](https://www.iowapublicradio.org/political-news/2026-05-20/sand-leads-fundraising-in-iowa-governors-race) any other candidate for governor. ### Democrats look to flip Iowa Senate seat Democratic voters in Iowa will pick which candidate they think has the best shot at beating the Republican nominee for Senate, expected to be Trump-endorsed Rep. Ashley Hinson, on Tuesday. This is a seat that Democrats believe they have a shot at flipping come November. It's part of a larger strategy of expanding their map — and winning in states currently held by Republican senators — if they want a chance to retake the Senate majority. Iowa Democrats have a choice between state Rep. Josh Turek and state Sen. Zach Wahls. Both candidates are courting different Iowa voters, though. Turek is vying for the independent-leaning vote, while Wahls is hoping to gain the support from committed Democrats. Turek flipped a state House district held by a Republican, while Wahls represents a Senate district that is solidly blue. Both argue they are the candidate who has the right message to win in November. And with three competitive congressional races on the ballot, some Democrats in the state are feeling like the road to a Democratic majority in Congress [runs through Iowa](https://www.npr.org/2026/05/31/nx-s1-5836408/iowa-primary-senate-governor-trump-democrats). ### Looking beyond Tuesday New Jersey and Montana also have competitive races that could decide which party has control of Congress. In New Jersey, all eyes are on Congressional District 7. [Four Democrats](https://gothamist.com/news/4-nj-democrats-face-off-in-crucial-debate-in-highly-competitive-congressional-race) are hoping to oust Republican Rep. Thomas Kean Jr. The sitting congressman has been notably absent from Washington for weeks due to what Kean cites as unspecified medical issues. He has missed more than 100 House votes since his last recorded vote on March 5. Two races in Montana may be more competitive than originally expected with the last-minute announcements — shortly before the filing deadline — by Republicans, Sen. Steve Daines and Rep. Ryan Zinke, that neither would seek reelection. While an open Senate seat does not make Montana, which has long been considered a Republican stronghold, necessarily competitive for Democrats, an independent candidate is outraising candidates in both major parties. Seth Bodnar, Iraq war veteran and former president of the University of Montana, is hoping voters will send him instead, mostly on the message that he won't work for either party and is focused on changing the direction America is heading. In Bodnar's case, he has enough voter signatures to land himself on the November ballot, but the Montana Secretary of State's Office hasn't yet certified those signatures. Democrats are working to flip Montana's 1st Congressional District as well. When Zinke announced he was retiring from Congress, it was seen as an opening for Democrats to compete. Now, four Democrats are angling for the open seat, including front-runner Sam Forstag, a smokejumper who is endorsed by popular progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. ### June 2 voter resources from the NPR Network [**California**](https://www.kqed.org/elections/results) **|** [**Iowa**](https://www.iowapublicradio.org/political-news/2026-06-01/whos-running-in-iowas-primary-your-voter-guide-for-the-june-2-election) **|** [**Montana**](https://www.mtpr.org/elections) **|** [**New Jersey**](https://gothamist.com/news/4-nj-democrats-face-off-in-crucial-debate-in-highly-competitive-congressional-race) **|** [**New Mexico**](https://www.kunm.org/2026-elections-coverage) **|** [**South Dakota**](https://www.sdpb.org/politics/2026-elections)

The next governor of deep-blue [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california) will almost certainly be a Democrat. But what kind of Democrat? The establishment favorite for overseeing the world’s [fourth-largest economy](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly80zlk1lyo), Xavier Becerra, has trod a traditional path. As governor, based on past performance, he would keep his party and the state on the rutted road of corporate-friendly liberalism. Becerra’s top Democratic rival, Tom Steyer, is a threat to the status quo in a state where [7 million](https://www.facebook.com/latimes/posts/7-million-california-residents-or-177-of-the-population-lived-in-poverty-last-ye/1319895360177333/) people live under the official poverty line and child poverty rates are among the [highest in the country](https://www.endchildpovertyca.org/child-and-family-poverty-in-california-fails-to-improve-in-2024-returns-to-pre-pandemic-levels/). While Silicon Valley and AI boom, deprivation is widespread. Steyer promises to upend corporate power and give California a sustained progressive jolt. If he wins, the country’s largest state party will probably go through a major ideological challenge. During the last 15 years, while [Democrats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) have controlled the legislature and the governor’s office, they have avoided disrupting the status quo. State budgets have routinely failed to protect low-income Californians. The California Democratic party is a corporate entity, as I saw up close for 10 years while on its state central committee. The party’s center of gravity is occupied by California’s two Democratic senators, Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff, mainstream liberals who rock few corporate boats and vote in harmony with the military-industrial complex that has [massive footholds](https://militarycouncil.ca.gov/m_defenseincalifornia/) in the state. Overall, Becerra – who went from Congress to serving as California’s attorney general and then Joe Biden’s secretary of health and human services – is central casting for the kind of political sensibilities that have dominated the state party, which internally boosts identity politics above (rhetoric aside) such considerations as economic justice, labor rights, public health, environmental protection or peace. Scant policy differences exist between Becerra and outgoing governor Gavin Newsom. “While Steyer is vowing to raise taxes on corporations and his fellow billionaires, Becerra is skeptical of tax increases that could push businesses to leave California,” Politico [reports](https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-playbook/2026/05/08/why-becerra-is-welcome-in-newsoms-orbit-00911150). Preventing capital flight from the state is the same argument that Newsom has used in his vehement opposition to a ballot measure endorsed by Steyer for a one-time billionaire tax, while one [study](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/04/state-taxes-millionaire-myth/678049/) after [another](https://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2016/05/26/do-high-state-taxes-drive-away-millionaires-not-really/) has shown such capital flight to be [largely a myth](https://www.asanet.org/news_item/do-millionaires-move-across-states-avoid-taxes/). Days before the 2 June primary, in which the top two vote-getters advance to the November general election, Steyer [called](https://www.facebook.com/officialtomsteyer/posts/new-poll-california-we-have-the-momentum-now-lets-bring-it-home-my-opponents-are/1531926708294670/) his main Republican opponent, Steve Hilton, “a Maga extremist” and Becerra “a career politician backed by a deep roster of corporations and billionaires”. At the same time, Steyer – continuing to draw on his [$2.4bn](https://www.forbes.com/profile/thomas-steyer/) of wealth accumulated as a hedge fund operator – was on track to spend a record-shattering [$200m](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/billionaire-tom-steyers-ad-spending-breaks-records-in-california-governors-race) on ads. While many progressives have become enthusiastic about the prospect of a Governor Steyer, some say they can’t bring themselves to vote for a billionaire, especially one with a financial history that includes distasteful ventures. His much-criticized investment in private prisons has caused Steyer to respond with a tone of repentance. “I started an investment business 40 years ago, and we invested in thousands of things, and one of them 22 years ago was investing in a private prison company,” Steyer says in a [video](https://www.facebook.com/officialtomsteyer/videos/1497958055345987/) released by his campaign, “and I realized within a year it was a huge mistake, and I got out of it. I didn’t just make a mistake and say I was sorry, I’ve also spent the ensuing time working very hard for rehabilitative justice in the state of California. And that’s why we pushed very hard for things like getting rid of sentence enhancements, we pushed very hard to make sure that the police officers in this state who misbehaved were decertified, and we pushed very hard to end the state’s relationship with any private prison companies, which they did in 2019.” Steyer seems intent on coming across as an anomaly – a billionaire with a conscience and a commitment to genuine, even drastic, progressive change. The [issues section](https://www.tomsteyer.com/issues) of his campaign website includes such planks as “Make Corporations and Billionaires (Like Me) Pay More Taxes,” “Provide Free Education From Pre-K to College,” “Stop Masked ICE Agents From Terrorizing Californians” and “Ensure Health Care for All Californians.” “Steyer is a gamechanger because, when he takes office, he owes no favors to the corporate Democratic establishment,” said Amar Shergill, a former chair of the California Democratic party’s Progressive Caucus. In sharp contrast, he told me, “Becerra is a go-along Democrat – whatever others are doing, he goes along. He hasn’t shown leadership and almost always hedges his bets even on progressive policies that he supports.” Shergill, a Sacramento-based attorney, added: “If Becerra is elected, it’s business as usual for the party and the state. Becerra will be working with corporations to undermine progress that helps working families.” That’s pretty much the profit-driven goal of the corporations intervening in the election on behalf of Becerra. In the last few days of May, corporate funds continued to pour into Pacs backing Becerra and attacking Steyer. The medical industry was generous, as when DaVita Kidney Dialysis gave [$500,000](https://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/PDFGen/pdfgen.prg?filingid=3156610). Other half-million-dollar funders to anti-Steyer groups have [included](https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/05/california-governor-contributions-takeaways/) McDonald’s, Chevron and the giant oil-drilling firm California Resources Corp. > If \[Tom Steyer\] wins, the country’s largest state party will likely go through a major ideological challenge Late last week, the CalMatters news outlet [reported](https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/05/california-governor-contributions-takeaways/): “Outside groups, which unlike candidates can receive unlimited donations, reported spending $79m so far … Billionaire Tom Steyer is the biggest target: a political spending committee called California Is Not For Sale, funded by the state Realtors association, the California Chamber of Commerce, Pacific Gas & Electric and the state’s electrical workers’ union poured $32m into ads opposing him. Steyer has vowed to lower electricity bills by challenging PG&E’s monopoly in much of Northern California.” The Bay Area congressman Ro Khanna has been an early and prominent supporter of Steyer. “I’ve spent my career fighting for Medicare for All, it’s the only path to make healthcare more affordable,” Khanna says in a widely seen Steyer [campaign ad](https://www.facebook.com/reel/982234537578760), “and Tom Steyer is the only candidate for governor with the guts to take on the private insurance companies and pass single-payer healthcare.” (The need for truly universal healthcare is a big reason why RootsAction, a group I co-founded, has supported Steyer.) Becerra has backed away from support for single-payer healthcare that he had expressed while a congressman from southern California. This spring, he met privately with leaders of the powerful California Medical Association and received its endorsement. “He said very clearly that, at this point, he wasn’t supportive of single payer,” the group’s president [said](https://www.kqed.org/news/12082059/xavier-becerra-backpedals-on-single-payer-as-he-woos-powerful-doctors-lobby) approvingly. Behind the scenes, much of Newsom’s political apparatus is [working hard](https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-playbook/2026/04/28/becerra-taps-newsom-orbit-in-hiring-spree-00894636) to help elect Becerra. At the same time that the Becerra-Steyer clash is a major ideological battle with enormous consequences for the future of California, it can also be seen as a proxy war of sorts in the race for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination. For Newsom, as he gears up to run for the White House, the prospect of a Governor Becerra is far preferable to a Governor Steyer. Citing “several longtime Newsom allies”, Politico [reported](https://www.politico.com/newsletters/california-playbook/2026/05/08/why-becerra-is-welcome-in-newsoms-orbit-00911150) last month that “the last thing Newsom needs on the 2028 campaign trail, they argue, is a successor looking to upend Sacramento or compete for headlines on a national stage.” Not coincidentally, “Becerra’s campaign ranks include several top strategists who’ve long worked with Newsom. Meanwhile, Bearstar Strategies, Newsom’s chief consulting firm, is leading a new pro-Becerra Super Pac and involved in a related anti-Steyer Pac that has spent heavily on TV ads flaming the billionaire over his hedge fund past.” The rivalry between Becerra and Steyer can also be understood as a skirmish in a nascent conflict between Newsom and Khanna, whose evident presidential ambitions have more than a little riding on this election. If Steyer becomes governor, presumably allied with Khanna, that could boost the congressman’s uphill quest to overtake Newsom for the Democratic nomination. Meanwhile, at the same time that Becerra’s position on Israel has remained within the Democratic party mainstream, Steyer has pushed well beyond it while denouncing the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac). By early April, he was [saying](https://x.com/TomSteyer/status/2039809164004786518) that pro-Israel groups had launched “$25m in attack ads against me”, adding: “They can come after me all they want. I’m not going to back down.” That kind of attitude could shake up the power structure of the California Democratic party and much of the state government, as well as send constructive shock waves through the national party. Karen Bernal, who chaired the state party’s Progressive caucus for six years, has worked as a legislative staffer for a Democratic state senator. In 2020, Bernal was a northern California regional field director for the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign. When I talked with her a few days ago, she sounded convinced that getting Tom Steyer elected as governor was the party’s chance to show itself worthy of progressive support. “For the most part, the majority of progressives, particularly former Bernie supporters, have gravitated to Steyer’s campaign,” she said. “So have younger voters. It’s not surprising why. They’re tired of an organization, the Democratic party, that behaves and operates independently of what its people want. Steyer has validated their grievances while pledging to fight for an agenda not heard since the Bernie campaigns. Steyer’s platform has been long fought for by the progressive working-class base of the party. His policy positions resonate strongly with younger voters of the party, which is key, since they finally overcame the Boomer generation to become the dominant cohort of the electorate in 2020. At a time when support for the Democratic party is at an all-time low, continuing to alienate the current and future base of the party hardly seems like a course of action to take if they want to have a chance of not only rolling back Trump, but along with it, a runaway corporatocracy that is taking us toward fascism.” * Norman Solomon is the director of RootsAction and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy

As Californians cast their ballots in Tuesday’s primary election, voters can select any candidate among the long list of gubernatorial hopefuls, regardless of which party they have registered under. The system was put in place under former governor [Arnold Schwarzenegger](https://www.theguardian.com/film/arnold-schwarzenegger), who supported the open primary, or “jungle primary”, as a way to create more competition in races that Democrats won year after year. Schwarzenegger, who left office in 2011, was the last Republican elected to statewide office in California. In a crowded race like this year’s gubernatorial primary, the system could cause some unexpected results – such as the possibility that emerged earlier this year of two [Republicans](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans) advancing to the general election in deep blue California. That situation now appears unlikely, but the possibility has prompted some [Democrats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) to push to overhaul the way the state votes. How does an open primary work? ------------------------------ Before the reforms, each political party chose a nominee to advance to the general election, with only the party’s registered voters participating in the primary election. In 2010, California voters approved the Schwarzenegger-backed ballot measure to change that traditional partisan primary. The new system folded the previously separate primaries for Democrats, Republicans and third parties into a single race. That means all candidates for a particular office run on the same ballot. The two candidates who secure the most votes face off in the general, regardless of their party affiliation. In California, that often means a general election can pit two Democrats against each other. The logic behind the top two, according to proponents, is that candidates will feel compelled to consider the needs of voters outside their political faction, as the primary is open to all registered voters. Nebraska and Washington use similar processes. Abel Maldonado, a self-proclaimed “pragmatic Republican” who spearheaded the California effort, [told](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/12/california-top-two-open-primary/421557/) the Atlantic in 2015 that with the then-new open primary, aspiring elected officials “have to work for the taxpayers”. Why are some Democrats calling to change the system? ---------------------------------------------------- While the party has a stronghold in much of California, there has been recurring fear that having multiple Democratic contenders in one race will dilute the party vote and inadvertently pave a path for two Republicans to compete in the general election. Those concerns resurfaced in this year’s governor race after two Republicans, the conservative pundit Steve Hilton and Riverside county sheriff, Chad Bianco, surged to the top of early polls. Conversely, some Republicans have been worried about being excluded from general election ballots in the reliably Democratic state. The likelihood of two Republicans making the general election has since subsided, in part because of two major events that shook up the race. In April, Eric Swalwell, a Democratic frontrunner, suspended his campaign amid a spate of sexual assault allegations. (Swalwell has denied the claims.) The implosion of Swalwell’s campaign opened up an opportunity for Xavier Becerra, the former US secretary of health and human services, to surge to the front of the crowded pack of Democrats in the race. Also in April, Donald Trump endorsed Hilton, a move that appeared to coalesce Republican voters around the British-born commentator. The latest polls ahead of Tuesday’s primary show Hilton polling closely against Becerra and Tom Steyer, the billionaire Democratic candidate. What happens next? ------------------ Steven Maviglio, a Democratic political strategist, has pushed for a 2028 ballot measure to repeal the top-two primary system regardless of what happens in 2026. “It’s a failed experiment that even the remote possibility of a Democrat having to choose between two Trump Republicans in November is enough to scare the bejesus out of anyone,” Maviglio [told](https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/joegarofoli/article/top-two-primary-jungle-election-california-22255381.php) the San Francisco Chronicle in mid-May. He filed a [proposal](https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/26-0004%20%28%26quot%3BUndo%20the%20Top-Two%26quot%3B%29.pdf) with state officials this month, requesting a return to partisan elections. That initiative is stages away from being on a ballot. The California attorney general has to issue a summary and title for the proposal and a legislative analyst will assess the cost of the idea, Maviglio said over email. A certain number of registered voters must sign on for it to advance in the process. Rusty Hicks, chair of the state’s Democratic party, echoed the call for reform in an [interview with the Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/01/california-democrats-republicans-governor) earlier this year. “The current system we have does not work,” he said, referring to the prospect of a Republican gubernatorial bid being fueled by a cluttered slate of Democrats. “It needs to be revised or repealed.”

Residents in Monterey Park, [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california), became the first in the US to vote on a permanent ban on datacenters on Tuesday, and early results indicate a resounding victory for the prohibition. While many cities and counties have already passed temporary or indefinite moratoriums via their local governments, Monterey Park would be the first to do so through a ballot initiative. The ballot measure needs a majority vote – at least 51% – to win. As of 2am Pacific Time, [86.3% of the more than 7,000 votes counted so far](https://results.lavote.gov/#year=2026&election=4338) were in favor of banning datacenters. While it can take days to finalize election results, the stark gap was enough evidence for Jose Sanchez, a city councilmember, to claim a “landslide victory” for residents who don’t want to live near datacenters. “\[This\] shows unequivocally that residents in Monterey Park do not want datacenters in their community,” Sanchez said. “We hope that other communities will use the model set by residents here in Monterey Park as inspiration to stop data centers from encroaching in their backyard.” Monterey Park’s city council had already passed an indefinite moratorium on datacenters in April, after [growing anger towards HMC StratCap](https://laist.com/news/politics/developer-pulls-monterey-park-data-center-plan-after-backlash), an investment company that was pushing to put one in the city, located in the Los Angeles region. (Developers have since withdrawn the application; the project would have covered nearly 250,000 sq ft.) Residents worried about negative environmental effects, increasing utility prices and the proximity to homes. There are a few instances of municipalities turning to ballot measures to fight back against datacenters, although Monterey county appears to be the most forceful so far. In Port Washington, Wisconsin, [voters approved](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/08/wisconsin-city-passes-nations-first-anti-data-center-referendum-00863432) a measure that requires local officials get voters’ approval before offering datacenter developers tax incentives. In August, residents of Augusta township in Michigan will [vote in a referendum](https://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/2026/02/residents-south-of-ann-arbor-will-vote-on-fate-of-proposed-data-center.html) focused on the question of rezoning 500 acres of land for a proposed datacenter. In November, the city of Janesville, Wisconsin, is [expected to vote](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/31/ai-data-centers-wisconsin-trump-00846018) on a measure that would [mandate the city](https://www.wmtv15news.com/2026/02/10/janesville-city-council-unanimously-passes-legislation-petition-connection-former-gmjatco-site/) to have voters’ approval before greenlighting any datacenter project that costs more than $450m. Nationally, seven in 10 Americans oppose the construction of AI datacenters in their local areas, [according to a new Gallup poll](https://news.gallup.com/poll/709772/americans-oppose-data-centers-area.aspx). Councilmember Jose Sanchez says city council members in Monterey Park pursued a ballot measure to “make the ban on datacenters a lot more permanent” and that it would hold more weight in court, as HMC Stratcap had threatened to sue over a potential extension of the moratorium and the ballot measure. (Developers have since indicated they won’t be pursuing legal action.) The [ballot measure](https://www.montereypark.ca.gov/1720/2026-Special-Election-Information?utm_source=chatgpt.com) asked voters to weigh in on banning “data centers citywide to protect air quality, drinking water resources and public health; prevent impacts to electricity and water rates”. The rule will stay in place “until ended by voters”. HMC Stratcap previously called the ballot measure’s language biased. “The proposition is written in a manner that would greatly prejudice voters in favor of the measure,” they wrote in a [4 March letter](https://www.montereypark.ca.gov/1710/Data-Center-Information#docaccess-0e7f651f86163a499911bcae815a4f25d37a736db8d0bab41f2a2a2005505972) to city council. “Being able to go to court and say the residents of Monterey Park voted to ban datacenters is a much better gauge of where our residents are versus, only five city council members voted for an ordinance,” said Sanchez. The Data Center Coalition (DCC), a trade association that tracks development of these facilities across the country, notes they are not aware of any other datacenter-related ballot measures that have been approved beyond the Monterey Park and Port Washington proposals. (Neither is Sanchez.) The DCC has championed the expansion of datacenters and is against Monterey Park’s ballot measure, saying it sends a “signal that the area is closed for business”. “It would deprive local residents of the opportunity to compete for jobs and investment, while also causing the area to relinquish substantial long-term economic investment, high-wage jobs, and critical tax revenue to neighboring areas or other states,” said Khara Boender, DCC’s director of state policy. Local organizers pushing for a ban on datacenters say the city council has been receptive to their concerns – and that the ballot measure was elected officials’ idea. “They took \[our concerns\] seriously, which not a lot of city councils do,” said Amy J Wong, co-founder of San Gabriel Valley Progressive Action – a key partner of the group No Data Center in Monterey Park. Wong has been involved in grassroots actions tied to the moratorium that city council already passed and Tuesday’s ballot measure. She said grassroots groups put helpful pressure on the council to ban datacenters: “They recognized so many residents are angry, and, if they move forward with the datacenter, they could possibly be voted out.” She said organizers had to be quick in advance of the vote. Typically, she said, ballot measure campaigns have at least a few months to get started, but they only really had two months. In that time, they printed 10,000 flyers and sent out mailers in English, Chinese and Spanish. While many residents Wong spoke to were already skeptical of datacenters – and suggested a ban was a “no-brainer” – there was confusion around how to vote for their desired outcome. Some didn’t know whether a vote of “yes”’ or ‘“no”’ would affirm a ban on datacenters, she said: “We had to educate some people who thought supporting a ban means you’re supposed to vote ‘no’.” “I’m feeling fairly confident,” she said, a few hours before polls closed. Sanchez, the city council member, used to be the city’s mayor and is now a high school civics teacher. The kids are paying attention, he noted. His students are always grilling him about datacenters. So is his nine-year-old daughter. He feels he’s representing them too, even if they can’t vote yet. “They give me an earful,” he said. Nationwide backlash ------------------- As [anger towards the facilities powering the AI boom](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/may/08/ai-datacenters-democracy) sweeps the country, communities are turning to political pressure to stop their spread. They are demanding local officials pass protective ordinances and block datacenter developers’ proposals. Residents often feel steamrolled by developers, prompting calls for statewide moratoriums. [At least a dozen states](https://www.ncsl.org/fiscal/which-states-are-banning-data-centers) are considering them this legislative session, although none have been signed into law. The moratorium question has also become a flashpoint in some governors’ races; in [Pennsylvania](https://www.wesa.fm/politics-government/2026-06-01/data-centers-krupa-shapiro-garrity) and [Georgia](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/05/19/data-centers-loom-over-georgia-governor-race-00929073), challengers to incumbent governors have staked out a more extreme position on regulating AI than their opponents by pushing for temporary bans. California is not currently considering a statewide moratorium on datacenters, and the Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer has [walked back his support](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/05/19/tom-steyer-walks-back-support-for-data-center-moratorium-00927581) for one. The cities of El Monte, Baldwin Park and Montebello are among some communities that have approved temporary bans.

Los Angeles Times via Getty Images Steve Hilton (left) and Xavier Becerra are in the lead The California governor's race remains up in the air a day after the primary vote, with British-American former TV host Steve Hilton and onetime Biden cabinet secretary Xavier Becerra at the top of a crowded field. The contest could take several days to decide due to the volume of postal ballots cast on Tuesday to pick the top two candidates for November's general election. Becerra, a Democrat, has vowed to oppose President Donald Trump. Hilton is a Republican endorsed by Trump. Another Democrat, billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer, was in third place as counting continued. Current Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, is not running for re-election due to term limits. Becerra, who was health secretary under President Joe Biden, has promised he will freeze insurance and utility rates. Hilton, who was once a top adviser to ex-UK Prime Minister David Cameron before going on to host his own show on Fox News, has pledged to make the state affordable by cutting taxes and regulations. The governor's race ought to have been straightforward for Democrats, but it descended into disarray. A large field of Democrats jumped in due to the lack of a star politician who could have dominated the election. It became the most expensive California gubernatorial race on record, with immense ad spending by Steyer and Silicon Valley support for another Democratic candidate, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan. Former Democratic congresswoman Katie Porter also joined the fray. The contest was shaken up after one of the leading candidates, Democratic congressman Eric Swalwell, dropped out and resigned from Congress in April amid allegations of sexual assault, which he denied. The prospect of several Democrats splintering the vote sparked concerns from the party's high command that two Republicans could advance in deeply liberal California. The state's so-called jungle primary system picks the two contenders with the most votes, regardless of political party. There were more than 60 candidates, including one who changed his name to "Barack Obama Shaw". Becerra framed his campaign around his record in Congress in Washington DC, and in California state office. Hilton, as an adviser to former UK PM Cameron, was known for helping to shape Conservative Party strategy during a turbulent period in British politics that resulted in Brexit. He was also known for his California fashion sense, often without tie or even barefoot. In California, he has campaigned to "disrupt the system", vowing to solve the homelessness crisis and arguing the state should co-operate more closely with the federal government on immigration enforcement and roll back sanctuary policies. Should he advance to the general election, he could face an uphill battle in a state where Democratic voters outnumber Republicans by roughly two-to-one. California's last Republican governor was Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose term ended in 2011. San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images California's current governor, Gavin Newsom, may run for the White House The state may have to wait another day, if not more, to find out which two candidates will duel in November, because California relies heavily on vote-by-mail. It is the most populous state in the US and is the fifth largest economy in the world in its own right. California has also been at the forefront of some of America's most contentious political battles, from immigration and climate policy to homelessness and housing affordability, and most recently soaring petrol prices, a result of the US-Iran war and the highest fuel taxes in the nation. The governor's race accompanied another heavily watched primary for mayor in Los Angeles, where political veterans battled against a reality star. As the tally continues, Angelenos are waiting to see if she will face Democratic city councilmember Nithya Raman, or reality television star Spencer Pratt, who is running as a Republican. 

The [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california) governor’s race remained unsettled Thursday, as state election officials continued to sift through uncounted primary ballots – a process that could take days or even weeks as voters eagerly await the results. Polls indicated that British-born conservative pundit Steve Hilton was narrowly leading the race, followed by former US human services and health secretary Xavier Becerra. Billionaire Tom Steyer trailed behind the pair. Under California’s primary system, the top two vote-getters will advance to the general election. The question of which two will face off in November may be unanswered for weeks, according to election officials. Per state law, California counties must finish counting ballots by 15 June, but certain ballots are exempt from that deadline. For example, mail-in ballots postmarked by election day and received by 9 June are valid and can be processed beyond the deadline. An estimate of the number of remaining unprocessed ballots is expected on Thursday. Faced with a crowded slate of gubernatorial contenders, many Democratic voters held on to their mail-in ballots up until election day as they weighed which candidate had the best chance of reaching one of the top two slots. The ongoing tabulation also did not stop [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) from declaring victory for his favored candidate. “Congratulations to Steve Hilton on coming in first, last night, in the California Vote for Governor,” he [wrote](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116687773527346204) in a Wednesday Truth Social post. “If Californians are smart, which I know they are, they will put Steve into the Governor’s Mansion, and watch their State get better at a rate that has probably never been seen before.” Meanwhile, Becerra appeared in high spirits at a watch party on Tuesday night. He likened himself to an underdog, alluding to his more modest odds at the start of the race and challenger Antonio Villaraigosa’s call for him to drop out. “It is the people – only the people – who get the last word,” he said to supporters. “While I take nothing for granted, there are lots of ballots left to be counted, it appears that we are on track to advance to November.” Steyer’s team, acknowledging his position behind Hilton and Becerra in early returns, urged patience with the vote-counting process. “There’s still a lot that remains to be seen and we’re going to give democracy time to work,” Steyer campaign manager Heather Hargreaves wrote in a Wednesday letter to supporters. As the slow voting process continues to play out, some conservative commentators have [promoted](https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/2061887533735195108?s=20) unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud. Mail-in ballots, which tend to skew Democratic, have been subject to Republican criticism, while Trump has issued an executive order aiming to curb their use nationally. After polls closed on Tuesday, the California secretary of state, Shirley Weber, issued a statement asking voters to exercise patience. “California elections officials prioritize the right to vote and election security over rushing the vote count,” she said.

Donald Trump has said that he wants Bill Pulte, his new acting director of national intelligence, to cut the office, which has already been significantly scaled back during the president’s second term. Trump noted that the size of the office as been “way too high for way too long,” and that “if he cut, I wouldn’t mind”. “Bill Pulte is very good, he’s very talented,” Trump told reporters on Air Force One. The president said in an earlier interview with the Wall Street Journal that he has asked Pulte to start the process of firing employees. A memo issued by the acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement ([ICE](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ice-us-immigration-and-customs-enforcement)) director, David Venturella, has ordered the federal agency to cease reporting the deaths of newly released detainees, in a change that could obscure the full human cost of the Trump administration’s anti-immigration mass detention policies. [Read the full story](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/05/ice-deaths-data-memo) The US Senate passed legislation to fund Donald Trump’s controversial immigration crackdown early on Friday morning, ending a partial government shutdown that has lingered since February. The 52-47 vote on funding for ICE and the Department of Homeland Security passed with no Democratic support at 5am, after a marathon session of votes to knock down proposed amendments. [Read the full story](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/05/senate-immigration-bill-funding) The US justice department on Friday sent a federal prosecutor to observe ballot processing in Los Angeles, as [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) continues to make baseless claims that California Democrats were “rigging” the results to win primary elections in the nation’s biggest blue state. State officials have rejected the allegations, but the delay in results immediately fuelled misinformation about the integrity of California’s elections, with the president, who has long fanned election-conspiracy theories, repeatedly accusing the state of “cheating”. On Friday afternoon, [Xavier Becerra advanced to the November general election](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/05/xavier-becerra-california-governor-primary-election-result), but election officials were continuing to count ballots to determine whether he will face fellow Democrat Tom Steyer or Republican Steve Hilton. [Read the full story](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/05/california-primary-election-races-too-close-to-call) Keir Starmer has suggested the US is trying to interfere in British democracy after JD Vance, the US vice-president, blamed the murder of the British teenager Henry Nowak on mass migration. [Read the full story](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/05/keir-starmer-questions-henry-nowak-case-two-tier-policing-claim) No court has the authority to halt construction of [Donald Trump’s](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) White House ballroom and a secure underground facility, a Department of Justice lawyer has argued, suggesting only US Congress had the power to stop the project. [Read the full story](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/05/doj-trump-white-house-ballroom) What else happened today: ------------------------- Catching up? _Here’s what happened **[Thursday 4 June](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/04/trump-news-at-a-glance-latest-updates-today)**._

 SAN FRANCISCO — Democrat [Xavier Becerra](https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/xavier-becerra) will advance to the November election for California governor, according to a race call by The Associated Press. After days of counting ballots, it remains [unclear who will claim the second spot](https://www.kqed.org/news/12086471/becerra-advances-in-california-governor-race-as-hilton-steyer-battle-for-second-spot) in the fall. In California's unusual primary system, all candidates, regardless of party, appear on a single ballot open to any registered voter. [The top two candidates](https://www.kqed.org/news/12083839/what-is-californias-jungle-primary-and-why-does-it-matter-so-much-for-the-governors-race) then move on to the general election. An estimated 3.5 million uncounted ballots remain. The state also counts mail-in ballots that arrive up to seven days after Election Day, as long as they are postmarked by Election Day. The state hasn't had a wide-open primary like this one since the late 1990s. The winner in November will lead the country's most populous state, facing a large deficit and other obstacles, including the state's high cost of living, homelessness and wildfire risk. Incumbent Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, is term limited and is widely thought to be running for president in 2028. Becerra, former Health and Human Services secretary under President Joe Biden, has staged one of the most surprising comebacks in recent state political history. As recently as April, polls were showing Becerra — also a former member of Congress and California attorney general — languishing in single digits in a crowded field. "The people of the great state of California, in the greatest nation on earth, have spoken — loudly and proudly," Becerra said in a written statement. "We will not be bought. We will not be bullied. And we are never backing down. November, here we come." For second place, Republican businessman [Steve Hilton](https://www.kqed.org/news/tag/steve-hilton) still has an edge over billionaire Democratic activist Tom Steyer, but Steyer has been gaining ground as ballots continue to be counted. Hilton was endorsed by President Trump in April, and in later polls, he pulled ahead of Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, the other major Republican in the race. British-born Hilton is a former Fox News commentator who also served as a political adviser to former British Prime Minister David Cameron. He has campaigned for change in California after 16 years under total Democratic control. A Hilton win would set Becerra on a glidepath to victory. Winning statewide would be an uphill battle for any Republican in a state where there are nearly twice as many Democrats as Republicans, and no GOP candidate has won statewide in 20 years. Steyer would present a rockier road for Becerra. If the billionaire former hedge fund manager makes the runoff, it will set up a costly intraparty fight. Steyer has spent more than $213 million of his own money to boost his candidacy, making the race the most expensive gubernatorial election in California. It's already been an election season of unexpected developments. Some of the state's most high-profile Democrats — former Vice President Kamala Harris, U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla and California Attorney General Rob Bonta — all stayed out of the race from the beginning. In April, the race was disrupted when then-U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell's campaign for governor imploded amid [allegations of sexual assault and harassment](https://www.kqed.org/news/12079502/rep-eric-swalwell-candidate-for-california-governor-is-accused-of-sexual-assault). Swalwell resigned from Congress shortly after the accusations surfaced and has denied assault allegations. Swalwell had been gaining in polls and racking up high-profile endorsements and his exit seemed to primarily benefit Becerra. The narrowing field also quieted Democrats' fears of splitting their vote to the extent that Bianco and Hilton would win the top spots in the June primary. That would have resulted in a guaranteed Republican governor in a state where Democrats outnumber GOP voters 2 to 1. Instead, though, Becerra surged. He has been aided by political groups operating independently of his campaign.

 A group of SoFi Stadium workers in Los Angeles have voted to authorize a strike, with the venue set to host the first U.S. match in the World Cup next week. The union representing the workers said on Friday its members, including cashiers, concession workers, bartenders, dishwashers, cooks and food attendants, voted 96% in favor of a strike. "Workers could walk off the job at any moment if their demands are not met," UNITE HERE Local 11 said. Workers' demands include higher pay, security on the job and protections against subcontracting and other potential threats to the erosion of union jobs. A top concern among workers is the role of federal immigration enforcement officers at the games, amid the Trump administration's aggressive immigration crackdown. As part of the negotiations, [UNITE HERE Local 11 has asked](https://www.unitehere11.org/press-release-tom-steyer-becomes-first-gubernatorial-candidate-calls-for-ice-out-of-fifa-world-cup-alongside-sofi-stadium-workers/) FIFA to demand that both the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol will play no role at the World Cup. Yolanda Fierro, a union member who works at SoFi, said in a statement on Friday she is ready to strike if a deal is not reached. "Fans from around the world will come expecting an unforgettable event, and we take pride in making that happen," Fierro said. "But no worker should have to fear being separated from their family or worry about dangerous ICE activity while simply doing their job. We deserve to feel safe, respected, and protected at work." Negotiations between the union and Legends Global, which manages hospitality services at SoFi Stadium, as well as FIFA are scheduled to continue Monday, the union said. The U.S. men's team will compete against Paraguay at the stadium on June 12. Kurt Petersen, co-president of UNITE HERE Local 11 told the [Associated Press](https://apnews.com/article/world-cup-los-angeles-stadium-strike-workers-eaf226eb53b09bde00d400f66f699809#) that negotiations have been moving at a "glacial" pace and that there has been an agreement on minimum wage increases for cooks and dishwashers. NPR reached out to FIFA and Legends Global for comment on Saturday but has not yet received a response. Legends Global told the AP in a statement that it looks "forward to delivering an outstanding hospitality experience for fans at the FIFA World Cup matches at SoFi Stadium." LA County Sheriff Robert Luna [said earlier this week](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HXRQHmozQc) that he was told by a local Department of Homeland Security official that federal agents would be at the World Cup to ensure a secure games but that they would not be conducting immigration enforcement. "It's going to take all of us to make sure that all the venues, the scoped and unscoped events, are secure. But in regard to civil immigration enforcement they told us that specifically would not be occurring at any of the games," he said. Luna continued, "Any of that is subject to change, but I have trust that they're giving me the appropriate information because if that starts occurring, we're going to have a whole new host of problems." DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin [said during an interview](https://www.foxnews.com/video/6397240179112) that aired on Fox News Monday that ICE and other federal agencies would be present at the matches "not for immigration but for terrorist threats." In a statement to NPR on Saturday, DHS Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis did not confirm whether agents would be conducting immigration enforcement at the games. "DHS will work with our local and federal partners to secure 2026 FIFA World Cup — in line with federal law and the U.S. Constitution — as we do with every major sporting event "to ensure all fans have "a safe and unforgettable experience." The department also referred NPR to [an ICE social media post](https://x.com/ICEgov/status/2056750435868799154?s=20) from last month, which said its agents "will play a pivotal role in combatting \[sic\] human trafficking as well as stopping counterfeit merchandise and counterfeit ticket sales." The international competition begins June 11 and includes 78 matches played across the U.S.

Nithya Raman, the progressive Los Angeles city councillor, appeared to be edging out Spencer Pratt in the LA mayoral race challenging Karen Bass as [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) continues to repeat falsehoods that California elections are “rigged”. The pair have been battling for the number two spot to face off against the incumbent, who already secured enough votes to advance to a runoff in November. Pratt, a former reality TV star, held a lead over Raman for days, but as ballot processing from last week’s election continued, the city councillor has pulled ahead. As of Sunday afternoon, Raman led by just over 3,000 votes with 196,198 votes to Pratt’s 193,085, according to the most recently available figures. There are just under 150,000 ballots left to be counted, according to an estimate from the Associated Press. Late ballots have favored [Democrats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) as many blue voters only returned their ballots in the final days leading up to this year’s election. With so many voters having hung on to their ballots and California’s notoriously slow processing time, the results of some of the biggest races in the state remain unclear. In the governor’s race, voters are waiting to learn whether Republican Steve Hilton or Democrat Tom Steyer will advance to run against former Biden administration cabinet official Xavier Becerra. Becerra [advanced](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/05/xavier-becerra-california-governor-primary-election-result) to the general election on Friday. But misinformation about the integrity of California’s election and conspiracy theories about vote rigging have proliferated while the state awaits results. On Friday, Trump walked out of an [interview](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/07/trump-walks-out-meet-the-press-nbc-interview) with NBC’s Meet the Press after making false election claims, calling the state “crooked” and alleging there was “cheating”. “It’s four days and they aren’t even close to counting \[ballots\],” Trump said. Earlier in the week, the president had repeated the same accusations, declared victory for his favorite candidate in the governor’s race, Hilton, and promised an investigation. The US justice department sent a federal prosecutor to observe ballot processing in [Los Angeles](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/los-angeles), and Bill Essayli, the Trump-appointed first assistant US attorney for the central district of California, announced that his office, along with the FBI’s Los Angeles office, had “multiple election fraud investigations under way”. Over the weekend, Pratt, who Trump endorsed, also appeared to allude to election conspiracy theories with a post on social media in which he said, with a winking emoji: “They’re not the only ones who know where to find votes.” In another post, he seemed to suggest that Raman’s lead in the race came from votes from the entirety of the city’s unhoused population. By Monday morning he advised his followers: “Folks, we’re dealing with a fraction of a percentage point difference, there’s still hundreds of thousands of votes outstanding, and LA officials have given us the next 3 weeks to count! Let’s git-r-dun!”

By now, it is an event as regular and predictable as the tides: a Democrat wins an election, and [Donald Trump](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump) says that that election was rigged. There does not need to be any evidence for this; indeed, there never is. Trump will say it anyway. He rallies the rightwing media ecosystem to spread the lie; he convinces his followers to believe it. That this, by now, a repetitive spectacle, devoid of suspense, does not mean that it is not dangerous. This time his target is [California](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california), where the state’s quixotic election rules but staunchly Democratic electorate mean both that results from last week’s elections are still not complete, and also that they are unlikely to go Trump’s way. The state has an open primary in which candidates from all parties compete on the same ballot, and the leading two go on to a November general. One of Trump’s preferred candidates seems set to eke out only a very narrow victory, if a victory at all, in the governor’s race: Democrat Xavier Becerra leads, and seems likely to face the Trump-endorsed Republican Steve Hinton, who has narrowly edged out another Democrat, Tom Steyer, for the number two spot. In another contest, the race for Los Angeles mayor, Trump’s pick, the reality television star and political neophyte Spencer Pratt, has been beaten back by a charismatic young progressive Democrat from the city council, Nithya Raman, who will now go on to face the incumbent Democrat Karen Bass. As has long been his habit, Trump claimed, when it became clear that he might not get his way, that the election was unfair. In [a post](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116690027934241490) on Truth Social the day after the election, he wrote: “The Dumocrats are at it again! They are trying to STEAL THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PRIMARY, AND THE MAYOR OF LOS ANGELES, PRIMARY, AWAY FROM TWO GREAT REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES. Here we go with the very late and massive numbers of MAIL IN BALLOTS”. > The only fair elections, it seems, are the ones where Republicans win He has since doubled down on the false claim, throwing a tantrum and [walking out of an interview](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/07/trump-walks-out-meet-the-press-nbc-interview) with Meet the Press on Sunday after NBC’s Kristen Welker pushed back on it. The comments reflect a preview of what is likely to come in November, when Republicans seem poised to lose seats in Congress amid a backlash to the Trump regime’s era of high prices, civil rights violations, and rightwing culture-war excesses: every election with a Democratic victor, and particularly the close ones, will be declared invalid, fraudulent and null, and it is likely that victorious Democrats will have to fight tedious and expensive legal battles in order to be duly seated. The only fair elections, it seems, are the ones where Republicans win. It’s not just that Trump’s whining and lies about the California elections were predictable. They were in fact predicted. The Golden state is notoriously slow to tally votes, having adopted a number of policies that are meant to make voting easier, but which also have the consequence of delaying final outcomes. In California, all voters receive a mail ballot – which are more labor-intensive and time-consuming to count than in-person ballots. About a quarter of those who respond don’t do so until election day itself, which further delays the final tally. And as in other places, Republican fearmongering and disinformation about mail-in voting means that there is a [partisan split within voting methods](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/09/republicans-democrats-continue-to-differ-sharply-on-voting-access/), with Democrats more likely to vote by mail and Republicans more likely to vote at the more speedily-counted in-person polling places – meaning that as the votes are counted, what initially seems like a Republican lead is often obliterated by Dem-leaning batches of mail-in ballots, creating yet more opportunities to spread conspiracy theories and allegations of fraud. All of this is a well-established pattern with orderly, banal and decidedly non-conspiratorial explanations. But [Democrats](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats) and state officials have long worried that the glacial speed of the count would create an opening for Donald Trump’s lies. “The longer the voting count takes, the more mis- and disinformation spreads,” wrote California governor Gavin Newsom [in a letter](https://www.abc10.com/article/news/politics/newsom-is-urging-counties-to-speed-vote-counts-before-june-2-primary-election-officials-are-pushing-back/103-895ad4e2-9a0d-41aa-8df8-da140ada84a4) to election officials across California’s 58 counties last month, before election day, urging speed. But it’s not clear that a more streamlined and efficient vote counting process in California would have prevented Trump and others from spreading lies about supposed election fraud. His objections, after all, are not grounded in facts, and there’s little reason to think that an even more abundantly plain set of facts could dissuade him from making them. Rather, what Trump and his acolytes call “fraud” in California’s elections is less about the procedure of vote casting and vote counting, and more about what they see as the fraudulent claims to government, citizenship and representation by people who disagree with them. What is “fraudulent” in the California governor’s race is not that Tom Steyer, the narrowly defeated progressive, ran such a robust campaign relative to the Republican Hinton; it’s that a progressive was allowed to run at all. What is “fraudulent” in Nithya Raman’s defeat of Spencer Pratt in the LA mayoral contest is not that she did not get the votes, but that the kind of younger, more progressive, more forward-looking voters she attracted in Los Angeles are granted the same right to vote, the same dignity of citizenship, and the hoards motivated by white grievance and inchoate resentment who have so long backed Trump and his allies. What is “fraudulent” is the very idea of progressive governance, which is also why, of course, it is pointless to point out that Trump only claims “fraud” in elections where he doesn’t like the result. The “fraud” he sees is in the very concept of democracy, in the idea that people who don’t agree with or fawn over him might have a say, too. * Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist

The 2026 midterm cycle is projected to be the most expensive election cycle in US history, with candidates across the board raising money at a record pace. And voters are taking notice: Big-donor groups tied to issues like Israel policy, AI, and crypto have become major flashpoints in primary races in both parties. Campaign spending alone doesn’t determine elections. The recent [Democratic Senate primary in Michigan](https://www.vox.com/politics/498002/abdul-el-sayed-wins-michigan-bernie-sanders) was the most expensive Democratic congressional primary in terms of outside spending — but ended with Abdul El-Sayed overcoming a major financial disadvantage [to win](https://www.vox.com/politics/498273/michigan-arab-muslim-abdul-el-sayed-win-dearborn-abdullah-hammoud-voters) the nomination. In California, billionaire Tom Steyer spent [over $200 million](https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/06/california-rich-candidates-funding-elections/) of his own money on his [bid for governor](https://www.vox.com/politics/487199/tom-steyer-interview-arrest-stephen-miller), but lost. But the ever-rising tide of cash helped fuel voter concerns about corruption and the campaign finance landscape is only getting more confusing: In June, the [Supreme Court struck down limits](https://www.vox.com/politics/494282/supreme-court-illegible) on how much political parties can spend in coordination with their own candidates, further blurring the line between what candidates raise directly and what parties can spend on their behalf. How can voters follow the money? How much difference does outside spending actually make in the outcomes of these races? And how much can candidates rely on grassroots donors to push back? [Danielle M. Thomsen](https://daniellethomsen.com/), a professor of political science at the University of California Irvine and author of the 2025 book, [_The Money Signal: How Fundraising Matters in American Politics_](https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo248155369.html), has spent years studying these questions. The conversation has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity. **Let’s start with a race like the recent Michigan Senate Democratic primary. Abdul El-Sayed was massively outspent by outside interest groups like AIPAC and still won. Does that change how you think about money’s role in politics, or is it generally consistent with what we know?** The bulk of my research is looking at US House primaries, and I think you could probably draw similar conclusions for Senate primaries, except that in most cases, Senate primaries have way more information. So in the case of Michigan, I think people knew largely what the choices were. And after you get to that stage, largely through money and advertising and voter outreach, and campaigning, after that point, money might matter less because voters become more familiar with choices. But this is a really steep hurdle in most congressional primaries. I think that people forget how low information these contests usually are. Many primary voters really don’t know much about candidates. I think in the Michigan Senate example, that was less true. Money isn’t irrelevant, but when you have other pieces of information, that can override money. And furthermore, in that case, both of the candidates were spending millions of dollars in the primary. I mean, this is just so unique in a lot of ways. **Is there a minimum level of money congressional candidates need to be viable? Do we know?** The average for non-incumbent successful candidates in open seat primaries is about three to $400,000 in the first quarter. And if you look at incumbents who lost or struggled, well, their challengers for the most part, are not, you know, broke jokes. They’re raising $200,000 to $300,000 in their first quarter, which resembles what quote unquote “open seat candidates” are raising too in many districts. Maybe not your super wealthy districts like in New York or in California, but in many districts, $300,000 in your first quarter is a really good showing. So I would say money is money, and early money in particular is a prerequisite. And that’s not going to mean that if you raise a lot of money, you definitely will win. That’s never been the case and that’s still not the case. But it does matter for you, it matters for who is seen to be seriously in the mix, who is perceived to be relevant. And in this cycle, just like in most cycles, virtually all contenders who are either successful or are seen as successful show support through early fundraising. **Your view is that fundraising works largely as a signal of viability and strength — to the public, party leaders, media, everyone. Is that the consensus view in political science, or are there competing frameworks?** In many ways the argument of my book is not very groundbreaking if you talk to practitioners, but it hasn’t been empirically documented in the ways that I did. Some other people in political science call attention to endorsements. The other theory is that money matters not as a signal of viability but for material goods — so to buy advertisements, office infrastructure, hiring staff, and consultants. “Among those who run, rich candidates are also more likely to win.” **Within a candidate’s total haul, does it matter** **_where_** **the money comes from, like a broad base of small donors, a candidate self-funding, or a super PAC backed by a few wealthy people?** I’ve recently begun to look at this. With a graduate student of mine, Ryan Mundy, we collected data and [wrote a paper](https://daniellethomsen.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/mundythomsen_wealth_v5.pdf) on why wealthy candidates are likely to win. Because it’s not just the case that rich candidates are more likely to run, which most people know and prior research has shown, but among those who run, rich candidates are also more likely to win. And what we show is that rich candidates are more likely to raise early money. In particular, they’re more likely to raise large-dollar donations, which then have a greater return in subsequent quarters. **What do we know about candidates who fully self-fund?** So I’ve learned that fully self-funded candidates, meaning those who don’t supplement with financial support from others, typically lose. Self-funding on its own is not as valuable as getting money from others, and in particular large-dollar donations from others. However, many, many candidates supplement with their own money. Something like 40 percent of non-incumbent general election winners self-fund at least $10,000. I think people don’t really understand the prevalence of self-funding as a supplement, and how that keeps some people disadvantaged, particularly those who can’t self-fund at all. For some self-funders, I think some of them just don’t want to raise money. It can be pretty unpleasant! And while self-funding with no supplemental money from others is overwhelmingly a bad strategy, there are a couple handful of people who have done this and won out of our sample that looked at 2014 to 2024. There were 407 non-incumbent general election winners in that period. And 17 of them did bankroll at least 90 percent of their first-quarter dollars and won. So not very many, but there are a handful of exceptions who do it and win, and they are all rich. So funding is complicated. **And on the “friends and family” side of early money, who’s actually writing those first checks?** Almost all early money comes from individual contributors. Most of that is itemized, so contributors over $200. Most of our elections are driven by the upper class. On average non-incumbent general election winners are getting like 50 percent of their early money from max-out donors, meaning people who pay the maximum of $6,600. Who can afford to pay that? Not normal Americans. It’s basically politically engaged, politically connected upper-middle class people who know people who run for office. And the other thing is most of them are not repeat donors! Most of them don’t even give to more than one candidate. Because they’re probably just giving to the one rich person they know who is running for office that year. That’s why in political circles the first quarter is called the “friends and family quarter” — that’s when political consultants tell candidates to open up their Rolodex and call everybody they know from when they started kindergarten to who their coworkers are now. **Is there a point, empirically, where more spending stops helping or even backfires? I’m thinking of a case like [Tom Steyer in California](https://www.vox.com/politics/488638/progressive-billionaire-candidates-steyer-pritzker-khanna-chakrabarti).** So the assumption has always been that money has diminishing returns. That goes back to Gary Jacobson’s [work from forever ago](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228128629_The_Effects_of_Campaign_Spending_in_Congressional_Elections). But nobody in political science puts a number on it. What they do is they say things like, _Oh, the relationship is positive until at some point it goes down._ **When outside groups pour money into a race, like AIPAC now, or the charter school lobby and the NRA in earlier cycles, can that spending become politically useful to the candidate it’s targeting, from backlash or otherwise?** “Most candidates are raising the bulk of their money from itemized donors. And most money is still from large donors.” Yeah, so I don’t think there’s actually good research on this. I don’t think there’s enough information. But I think in general most people don’t know where money comes from. So the backlash is minimal. I’ve asked candidates who raised a lot of money from self-funding, “Did your self-funding ever come up?” And they’d say, “No, it never came up. I thought it would either help me, to show that I wasn’t beholden to special interests, or it would hurt me because I didn’t have the support that having fundraising money from others would demonstrate. But it didn’t come up.” Another candidate who raised a lot of money out of state told me that while it was raised a few times by people on Twitter, no one in person ever asked him about it. Many people don’t know their own members of Congress. So you can imagine why there wouldn’t be a backlash, because people don’t know enough for there to be one — except in these cases where it does become an issue, like the recent Michigan Senate Democratic primary. It’s certainly part of the narrative for candidates like Elizabeth Warren, [her stance against big money](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/26/18241314/elizabeth-warren-donate-campaign-2020) is a big part of her persona, same with Bernie Sanders and AOC. But those are real celebrity candidates. **In the 2010s, small-dollar fundraising was talked about as a democratizing counterweight to big money, but I remember reading** [**that research found it**](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/30/opinion/campaign-finance-small-donors.html?eafs_enabled=false) **could also make politics more polarized. Where did that political science literature land, and has the rise of small donors changed anything as Super PACs and mega-donors have grown more powerful?** So I would say the research is exactly how you describe it. There are so many studies that have shown that small-dollar donors tend to be more liberal Democrats and more conservative Republicans. So they are coming from the ideological edges of the spectrum. And there’s a lot of evidence of that. So that’s the finding, that’s the literature. If you look at how candidates raise money by and large today, it’s not coming from small donations or unitemized donations. Most candidates are raising the bulk of their money from itemized donors. And most money is still from large donors. **So your read is that, despite all the attention on small-dollar fundraising, the underlying picture hasn’t shifted much either direction?** There’s a tendency to look at the cases that don’t conform to the rule rather than the rule. Like Eric Cantor [\[who lost in 2014\]](https://www.vox.com/2014/6/10/5798604/Eric-Cantor-David-Brat-loss-VA-politics) and AOC [\[who won in 2018](https://www.vox.com/2018/11/6/18070704/election-results-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-wins)\]. In some cases, the losers [raised way more](https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/11/jaime-harrison-shatters-senate-fundraising-record-for-south-carolina-race-428541) than the partisanship of the district in those cases would predict, and then you have candidates who [raised no money and unpredictably won](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/candidate-dropped-beats-trumps-pick-battleground-gop-house-primary-rcna590905). So there’s always this tendency to prop up the exceptions to the rule. In political science, though, we like to look at the rule. See More: * [Midterm Elections 2026](https://www.vox.com/midterm-elections-2026) * [Money](https://www.vox.com/money) * [Politics](https://www.vox.com/politics)