O2C's 2022 California primary election clown car... I mean voter guide

It's that time again. My masochistic streak and I go through the entire candidate list for all the offices. We've got a triple threat this year with both 2 Senate elections -- for the same seat -- and a governor's race, plus all the less prestigious races that make everyone involved want to tear their hair out just from learning about them. Mercifully, statewide ballot props don't appear in primary elections anymore. As a reminder, CA has a top-2 jungle primary.

With no further ado, let's jump in with... an explanation of the Senate elections.

These are both elections to fill the seat made vacant by Kamala Harris's inauguration as Vice President. Alex Padilla (former Secretary of State) was appointed to fill the seat. The first election is the primary to fill out the remainder of the term - basically the time between when the general election results are certified and January 3rd, 2023, ish, about 4 weeks. The second election is for the same seat, but for the 2023-2029 term. I don't know why they couldn't have held the special election sooner, but that's life.

So with that clear, let's look at Senate race #1, the end-of-term race. Actually, this is both races, because there is no one running solely for the 4-week term. It would be hilarious if different people won though. I'll make a note when we start looking at candidates running only for the full term.

Alex Padilla: current incumbent, appointed by Gavin Newsom to replace Kamala Harris. He's worked on COVID relief, voting rights, and immigration reform, as well as the Green New Deal. Kind of a snoozer, but what do you expect from a Democratic Senator lately? He has no issues page. Pretty sure Barbara Boxer had more personality. He's probably going to win. With no one else yet looked at, he's my #1 choice.

Mark. P. Meuser: "Muh medical freedumb!" type. No policies. 4 years ago he wanted to purge the voter rolls. Likely #2 in the runoff. By default, also my #2, which seems appropriate.

Douglas Howard Pierce - Four years ago I said of him: "If you didn't read his candidate statement too closely, you might get the impression he's a law-and-order Democrat. No. Nooo. He's a narcissist who believes he's God's gift to the state, country, and continent. His website redirects to his Twitter feed, and frankly, he makes Trump's Twitter feed look measured and thoughtful. Hell no." He seems to have improved a little bit since then, or at least hired better PR people. I think he's trying to come across as a jingoistic Democrat. I think he's playing for the general election. Unfortunately no one bothered to get him a grammar checker, and his police reform page is full of the word "shotting" (as in dropping lead from a tower to make shot) instead of "shooting". This is table stakes stuff here. Also I don't really want to vote for anyone who I ever thought was a narcissist. No.

More later. This is far from all of them.

Senator part II

EDIT: Senator part II will not be shown tonight, as the candidates previously here actually belong in the full-term only category. Find them in Senator part IV instead.

Of all you've listed so far, Alex Padilla is the only one that appears to be in favor of the anti-corruption act.

I'm going to vote for the comedy option of an entirely different senator for four weeks and then Alex Padilla for the term starting in 2023.

Senator part III

Don J. Grundmann - Last time, on O2C's voter guide: "Constitution Party chair (for some values of party and chair; I believe the party was decertified in CA). Seems to be a single-issue candidate #2, and boy is he one. He's all about how transgenderism does not exist. His campaign website has a few more equally nutty issues. His portrait gives me the creeps. Hell no." Some things have improved since then in that he did not submit a campaign photograph and removed them all from his website. Other things have gone downhill since then in that his candidate statement is just a laundry list of conspiracy theories. I don't have the energy to check any of his myriad of websites. The main one is basically an anti-queer screed doped liberally with conspiracy theories. On the plus side, he wants to repeal the Patriot Act. Still hell No.

Daphne Bradford - her awards are more interesting than her platform. She was one of the Obama White House's "Champions of Change" as the founder of "Mother of Many" an org providing tech and STEM vocational training for K-12 schools. She is/was an Apple Distinguished Educator, and a Microsoft Innovative Educator. If I had any idea what the heck she stood for, I might vote for her, but her "platform" just names various issues but with no stances attached to them. Doesn't particularly use lefty buzzwords, but also shouts out Bernie Sanders and Angus King... but she's also running as an independent. Appears to want police reform, but also founded Building Blue Bridges. "Affordable pre-K" but not "universal". Talks about wanting to be "the bi-partisan Senator California needs". I dunno, she could be great or very mediocre. Kinda wish she'd actually take some discernible stances, but maybe her lack thereof would be useful in a senator. Don't want an accidental Manchin though, so a tentative maybe here. If she takes some actual positions before the primary, I'll reconsider.

James P. Bradley - last time: "He seems like a sort of policy wonk, if one that has only ever watched Fox News. A much smarter, much less shady, equally racist version of Trump who is counting on voters to be as dumb as they have been. He's your misanthropic grandpa. No." In retrospect, he probably is as shady, but since he's smarter, he's likely better at hiding it. He's toned down the racist rhetoric, and his business (repeal AB5) and resource project (more water storage and projects) positions remind me why being a Republican is ever tenable in California. In exchange, he's upped the conspiracy theory and Big Lie rhetoric. Hard no.

Jon Elist - Bush 43-era Republican who's trying to pretend he's drunk the Kool-aid on the Big Lie. I don't think he actually has but unfortunately his "common-sense" measures like voter ID for even mail-in ballots would be severely suppressive. He also ended his website introduction video with a "joke" saying that he's not impotent. I'm not kidding. Doesn't bother with any of California's actual issues. No.

Yvonne R. Girard - died in March.

Myron L. Hall - Naval officer veteran (O-3), podiatrist, vague conservative platform. Running on character rather than issues. I think his character is probably fine, but he is running as a Republican, and a Republican without explicit, good policies is a vote fore more McConnell leadership. Nope.

Dan O’Dowd - Single issue candidate, and I bet you can't guess what that issue is.

Okay that's interesting, but is that worth electing him to Senate with literally no other platform? No.

Timothy Ursich, Jr. - Pro-union to the point of anti-automation, anti-bullet train, pro-vocational studies, pro-arts in schools, anti-gas taxes. Extremely tepid on police reform (emphasize mental soundless before getting back to work after shooting someone or getting shot). Increased funding for no-kill shelters. Health care reform plank is so wishy-washy I have no idea what it actually says. I think it might be for mandatory preventive care? Extremely simplistic anti-tax plank. It just gets more convoluted from here, and the spelling and grammar errors become more numerous. I think he was planning a House run at one point because one of his major platform planks is House vote transparency. What? You're running for Senator, doofus. What does "encouragement of trial" in relation to mask mandates even mean? What a mess. No.

I messed up, and a few should have been in the following group. I'll move them in the next post. All further Senate candidates are running only for the full term.

The thought has occurred to me.

Senator part IV: full term only (the ones I messed up above)

Dr. Akinyemi Agbede - In the 2018 gubernatorial election, he was a total flake who couldn't even keep a website up or afford a candidate statement. A bit better prepared this time, with a working website and actual issues page. Seems like a pretty average big-government liberal and not DSA, which at this point I'm happier with than the alternatives from the right ( ). He's got no experience though, and nothing to make me think he'd be a particularly good at suddenly being a senator. He's definitely no good at the internet; he still has a hotmail address. Pass.

Eleanor Garcia - Elected leader of the Socialist Workers party (for some values of leader and party; the party is not qualified as such in CA). Agrarian revolutionary socialist. Big supporter of the Cuban revolution and regime. I feel like I've posted about her before, but apparently not. No.

James "Henk" Conn - bog standard Green party candidate with possibly fewer than usual actual plans. No.

Cordie Williams - marine veteran, antimasker, anti-vaccine mandates, and I'd guess antivaxer as he's also a chiropractor. Bought into the 2020 Big Lie, hook, line, and sinker. I keep clicking down his issues page and it just gets worse and worse. Hard no.

Obaidul Huq Pirjada - misspells his own name on his website (and it's not a case of the SOS misspelling it in the voter guide. He spells it differently in different places on the site), which is a single Google Sites page. And I thought a hotmail address was bad. Don't even care what his platform is, which seems to be a Sanders Democrat with a divergence on water issues. No.

John Thompson Parker - last time I said "full revolutionary socialist. Minor conspiracy theory themes that everything bad is because capitalism. No." He seems to have dropped the revolutionary bits on his website, but I have no doubt he still believes it. Still No.

Chuck Smith - America First. Veteran. Seems to have been motivated to run by CRT. Nope.

Girard seems to be a solid choice.

Grundmann also snuck in a slur against Kamala Harris in his voter guide statement. So a conspiracy theory nut and racist to boot, surprised he isn't running as a Republican.

Oh damn, I missed that (it's in the long list of conspiracy theory websites). But yeah, it's there. Constitution Party* has always been much worse than the Republicans on this, so it's not surprising at all.

*FKA (and still currently in California) the American Independent Party. Literally the same one George Wallace ran in in 1968.

I think Mariana Dawson has my vote for the temporary senator race. Here is here voter guide statement:

"F all politicians."

Finally, someone who speaks a universal truth regardless of political ideology.

Edit: shit, I read that wrong, she is running for governor.

Senator part V: the last one!

Pamela Elizondo - Green party candidate with at least a few more ideas than the other one, and a PROPENSITY to ALL CAPS and upside-down exclamation MARKS¡¡ Most of those ideas involve marijuana, or marijuana-branded t-shirts. No.

Deon D. Jenkins - Not sure if he got on the ballot by mistake. He ran for President in 2019 on a slavery reparations platform, and his website hasn't been updated since. Only "senator" in the keywords that Google indexes indicate he even knows he's running for Senate. No.

Sarah Sun Liew - explicit Trumpist and Christian nationalist (but not white, because she's not). The rest is pretty standard Republican crap. Actually has the balls to be anti-choice, which I can appreciate, but that's not a reason to vote for her. No.

Robert George Lucero, Jr. - Claims to be formerly in state Democratic leadership, now a Republican, but I don't see anything that indicates that the first part is true. Has 3 priorities, only one of which (preventing nuclear war) seems even the remotest bit thought out. While he's got his top priority right, his policies are lacking. No.

Enrique Petris - Ran in 2020 for the 26th House district as a Democrat and came in 4th of 4 in the primary. Running for Senate as a Republican. All I can find about his positions are 3 sentences on VotersEdge. He wants to use the military for border patrol now and forever and is against amnesty for illegal immigrants. Wants to provide free community college. Wants to bring back the WPA and CCC to build infrastructure. No.

Carlos Guillermo Tapia - Info on this guy is even scarcer. The only thing I can find about him is that he's a Republican and a real estate agent. You'd think he'd at least be using his candidacy to boost his business, but it doesn't even look like he's doing that. No.

Christopher Mark Theodore - somehow not in the state VIG, he's nevertheless a candidate. Maybe a write-in? Anyway, seems to be a DSA candidate without actually saying so. I actually really appreciate his website. He takes a stand, and actually has policy prescriptions for the problems. Even better, he has some recognition that not every single thing can be solved by legislation and some require the bully pulpit. Unfortunately that recognition is in the wrong places, like energy policy and climate (in)action. His media policy seems verging on censorious. No thanks, but A for effort.

So I guess I'm voting for Padilla, or maybe Bradford if she actually takes a stand on things and I like it. I generally don't like voting for an incumbent, but he hasn't been that bad (or that good). I expect it to be Padilla and Meuser in the general elections (both of them).

Thanks for the deep dives in California politics. I find them interesting and informative. One possibly pedantic note (if I'm right it's pedantic, if I'm wrong it's bullshit) . I remember a kerfuffle many years back over the correct spelling of Moammar Qaddafi. Allah only knows how many different versions there were. I seem to remember some journalist asking him for the correct spelling and he just hand waved it away, saying that there was no really correct way to translate Arabic into English and he really didn't give a shit (or however you might say that in Arabic). I think you run into much the same issue with Japanese and probably some other languages.

Maybe, but I’d expect consistent spelling from the candidate himself, even if it doesn’t match the VIG.

I would too, but it could be he just doesn't give a shit. Hopefully he doesn't have a shot anyway.

Man, I just moved to Nevada so I can't vote on any of these clowns

All I get to choose from here is "Biden centralist" and 30 flavors of MAGA moron

Governor (part 1). Gavin Newsom is running for reelection after handily winning the recall election last year.

Luis Javier Rodriguez - could have sworn I'd seen this guy before, but apparently not. The left is trying a new trick this year, put all their eggs in one basket with a single candidate for the Greens, Peace & Freedom, and various unrecognized parties. There's actually a second Green candidate, but still, only running 2 for governor is pretty impressive party discipline. He's a writer and community organizer. Candidate statement is pretty standard Green, but then veers off in an unexpectedly solutions-oriented direction (if with pretty standard vagueness). His background is not likely to win him many votes. He was a junkie in a gang in his teenage years, and he didn't learn from his parents' mistakes raising his own son, who also joined a gang and did 13.5 years in prison. I mention all of this because his About page is clearly more important to him than his platform, which is half the length, a quarter if you only count the policies and skip the rhetorical mumbo jumbo that seems to be required for every left-of-Democratic candidate. Policy seems to be pretty standard redistributionist. Single payer food, shelter, health care, and art, Green New Deal and ban all fossil fuels immediately. I do like some of his electoral reform plans, which include better electoral systems. Also wants to let all residents vote regardless of citizenship or legal status. Not my cup of tea, but as he's first on the list, he's the best candidate so far. Baseline.

Armando "Mando" Perez-Serrato - Ran in the recall election. I said: "Democratic - Wants to be "the first Conservative Catholic Latino Democratic Governor". No, the "Mando" connection to the Mandalorian is not a coincidental nickname, any more than a candidate going by Jedidiah "Jedi" Smith would be. I don't think I can summarize him better than the SDUT interview, nor do I care to try anymore. No." His website now is even more populist than before. Finally took a pro-choice stand after the SCOTUS leak, but honestly, he reminds me of a Hispanic Trump. No.

Reinette Senum - Twice mayor and current city council member in Nevada City, NPP. Seems to be angriest about Citizens United, but at least seems to recognize she can't do much about it. Her candidate statement is oddly specific as to environmental policy, but okay, let's see what her websites (there are 2) look like. Her campaign website is... good? Issues immediately below the fold. And the issues are... good? This is unexpected. Ticks a lot of boxes I like. Police reform, Forest and resource management, bodily autonomy... uh-oh, her language is raising a yellow flag there. Looking at her Contract With California... yeah, there's a lot to like here. Long-term thinking, wants to take learnings from other places' successes and failures, electoral reform... And bam, there it is, anti-mandates for vaccines (but curiously, not masks), thinks ivermectin and hydroxychloroqine are being censored as COVID treatments. Shit. With an otherwise really quite good policy platform, can I hold my nose for a COVID paranoiac? She's probably better than Rodriguez, but she's setting a much lower bar than I had initially hoped. New favorite, I guess.

Anthony Trimino - last time: "Republican - Orange County entrepreneur, CEO. Pretty sure he's running to lower his taxes, personally. Believes that what's wrong with our healthcare system is not enough woo. Very much No." His anti-tax schtick has taken a back seat to "Generic Republican With No Policies". Would be a fair bit more appealing (but still below Senum) if I hadn't reviewed him last time. No.

Robert C. Newman II - last time: "Republican - Cranky old religious man. Anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia. Pro-border wall, and it looks like plain old anti-immigration. Not even lip service to legal immigration. Ideologue, knows absolutely nothing about anything he didn't see on TV. Heck no." Hasn't updated his website since the recall. Didn't even bother to change 2021 to 2022 and remove "recall". With no new information, I'm sticking with my previous impression. Heck no.

Jenny Rae Le Roux - last time: "Republican - doesn't seem to be a Trumper. More corporatist than I'd like. Trying to thread the needle on vaccines and masks; failing. Pretends to have solutions for homelessness and housing, but mostly just goes on about how we don't have enough. Duh, but what are you going to DO about it? Pro-nuclear, pro-fracking, pro-energy storage, pro-magic more water in CA reservoirs. Wildfire populist (and careful not to blame them on climate change), but she's not entirely wrong in the solutions department. Tough on crime type, but very generically. Not the type to sport a thin blue line Punisher skull. I've seen worse, but I've seen better, including among Republicans (eg, Faulconer). No." She's better than before, no more magic water production, but she lies about Newsom "making CRT a high school graduation requirement" (he signed AB101 which requires a semester of Ethnic Studies and provides a model curriculum that people significantly more likely to favor actual CRT in high school derided as "more whitewashed history", so it's probably ok). If it wasn't for the lies, she'd at least be up there with Senum, but this knocks her down enough she's still a No.

Serge Fiankan - Extremely generic. Many issues, only a few actionable policies among them. Most issues go "<Issue Name> <Issue name> is a problem. We should fix it." I'm taking the piss a bit, but a lot less than I'd like. Concrete policies (that are not already enacted): create a fund to support millennials' business endeavors, pay teachers based on where they teach, enforce mask-wearing where appropriate, and offer trade training in high schools and boot camps for juvenile offenders. That's it despite 12 top-level issues, most with multiple bullet points underneath. They're just too vague to be useful, already happening, or just a restatement of the problem. Doesn't take stances on current issues. No.

James G. Hanink - Last time: "No Qualified Party Preference ( ) - claims to rep the Solidarity Party, which is some sort of religious group, maybe? Anti-abortion, anti-death penalty, pro-marriage (period), anti-assisted suicide, generically pro-environment. Against the war on drugs, against 3 strikes, pro-voting and electoral reform, pro-education. He actually appears to be the rare genuine, consistent pro-lifer. Still, something about the party gives me the willies, and on his Facebook he posts right-wing articles about the evils of mail-in voting with some regularity. A "fact checking welcomed!" disclaimer does not absolve you. No thanks." Nothing has changed, except I didn't get the willies from the party page. Still No.

Joel Ventresca - last time: "Joel Ventresca - Democratic - I knew I'd seen the name before; he ran for Mayor of San Francisco and came in 3rd. Berniecrat, with all the lack of specifics of Bernie too. Anti-nuclear. Supports state-level single-payer healthcare. Would ban lobbying of elected officials, so chalk up an anti-1st amendment stance. For strictly publicly funded elections. Doesn't attack Newsom for his hypocrisy, just all the things that were known about him at the time he was elected in the first place. Didn't vote for him for Mayor, won't vote for him for governor." Turns out he's also a perennial candidate for whatever office is open at the time in SF too. Issues page is gone, replaced by a hate page for Newsom which mostly rehashes what was there before. What policies he favors are all in his candidate statement: free high-quality health care (emphasis his, but I do appreciate the recognition that MediCal is... not great), free pre-k through college, raising the minimum wage to $18.50/hr. Self-described populist. Nope.

Leo S. Zacky - last time: "Republican - Scion of a has-been chicken production family. Anti-MSM, believes COVID is a conspiracy theory, anti-sex-ed, anti-CRT, warrior against social justice, pro-oil, pro-nuclear, pro-solar. Has secret plans for ending homelessness and stopping wildfires. I need to stop before my eyes roll out of my head. No." His issues page is (I imagine) like watching an episode of Sean Hannity. Doesn't seem to have a secret plan for homelessness or wildfires anymore. The former has just disappeared, and the latter has been replaced with "rigorous forest management." That's all. Man, now I remember why Le Roux seemed like such a breath of fresh air (for a Republican) last year. No.

To be continued...

Update: I know why I thought I'd seen Eleanor Garcia before - her candidate statement is basically the same as Dennis Richter from last year, and links to the same website. Richter ran as NPP, while Garcia is No Qualified Party Preference, but both are ostensibly Socialist Workers Party. I said of Richter: "NPP - self-described socialist. When the Republicans say the socialists are coming, they only wish they had this guy to rail against. He's got it all: union leadership, "Defender Cuban Revolution", elected leader of the Socialist Workers Party. His website is literally "themilitant . com" (I'm not linking to that), "given talks on revolutionary fight for workers and farmers government in US". Yow."

That Rodriguez guy is leaps and bound the most sane candidate the Green party has ever produced, in California or anywhere else. He's not anti-vaxx like 2016 Jill Stein was. I like him, but that back history makes him unelectable as all fuck.

Still, a solid B+ effort from progressives on this on.

Governor: part 2

Brian Dahle - current state Senator. Very angry about gas taxes. I think that might be his whole personality. I really can't connect with the problems he's describing other than government waste, and dealing with fraud. And that's been the case for decades... I'm not sure why he thinks he can handle it. There's a few other things I don't like... pretending climate change had nothing to do with the forest fires, lying about the EDD timeline (covered in the recall election thread). I don't think I could get excited about this guy even if I was a Republican. I dunno. Maybe I'll come back and give him a second look when it's not 11:50 PM, but for now, No.

Mariana B. Dawson - "F all politicians" Hell yeah, sister. <Laundry list of populist and unworkable policies> Hell no, sister. Maybe I'm being too glib. Yeah, I'll come back and revisit these two tomorrow.

Governor: part 2: redux, in which I give these two a fairer shake

Brian Dahle - current Republican state Senator. Trying to cultivate a tough on crime, tough on taxes persona. Has actual actionable - if not gubernatorial - policies. For crime, he wants to get props 47 and 57 repealed and 20 passed. Honestly, I'm having second thoughts about parts of prop 47 myself in the wake of the retail crime sprees over the past couple of years. Prop 20 went too far. And he lies about what prop 47 did, which is a cardinal sin as far as I'm concerned. His implication that gas taxes are the lynchpin of the economic burdens the state imposes is nonsensical. His homelessness plan -- audit the homelessness programs, get the state government out of the way of building new homes -- is fine, but nothing new, and not particularly likely to work when the problem is local governments. It must suck to be a statewide Republican, and thus ostensibly in favor of local control, but knowing that local control is resulting in most of the problems you're elected to solve. Complains that his comprehensive "climate change" bill was voted down by the senate. Doesn't mention that all it did was repeal cap & trade, and nothing else. Still lying about the EDD fraud timeline. His COVID plan is to... look for fraud in COVID funds, and then spend a whole paragraph rehashing the history of the first few months of the pandemic without proposing anything. He's willing to blame some wildfires on "utilities", rare for a Republican, although he didn't name PG&E; guess that was a step too far. Okay yeah, I was tired last night. There are a whole lot more reasons not to vote for this guy than I thought, and they're more coherent. No.

Mariana B. Dawson - "F all politicians" Hell yeah, sister. But can you come up with any solutions? Let's find out. The good news is, the vast bulk of her website is devoted to a platform. Housing: moratorium on rent and property tax increases, subsidized wildfire insurance, and... build a committee to find and execute other solutions. Hmm... Economic reforms: Reduce traffic and parking fines (the state doesn't control these), cut gas taxes and license fees, and... work with individuals and companies to make the economy boom. It's paraphrasing, but only about 1% extra glibness. Basic Safety: 15 year mandatory minimums for unprovoked attacks on elderly people, (steelmanning this) legislate a protection duty for local police departments so they can be sued for negligence, and "full State support for the self-defense of all victims of unprovoked attacks", whatever that means. Student debt solutions: state buys all public school loans & institutes income-based repayment, total removal of student debt from credit reports, create a state version of Fannie Mae (not Sallie Mae), and "The establishment of an agency that works to reinstate dignity for people who have had to live as second-rate citizens and hide their identity because of student loans". These are the most coherent. The rest is a mess: remove all military bases from CA, be immigrant friendly by fixing international supply chain problems, protections for state workers who are doxed or harassed for discussing CRT, bus the homeless to rural areas, and create a fentanyl antidote (because naloxone doesn't exist, you see). No.

Governor: part 3

Daniel R. Mercuri - last time: "Republican - Religious nut. Trump supporter. Poor speller, worse grammarian. Talks about how "socialism, Marxism, and communistic ideologies are sweeping the land". COVID misinformation spreader and conspiracy theorist. Dunno if he's a 'sovereign citizen' type, but some of the stuff he goes on about wrt the relationship between the state and the federal government makes me think so. "Not an anti-vaxer" who would ban all vaccines that every harm anyone from sale in California. Anti-abortion even by California Republican standards, eg would require 4 obstetricians to all agree that an abortion was medically necessary, no other abortions except for investigated and verified rape cases, in a limited (formatting his) time frame. No abortions for sex trafficking victims (is that also not rape??) or incest; counseling for the mother instead. His policy page is just so full of batshit crazy right-wing nuttery that I'm having trouble comprehending it. Hell. No. I say again, HELL NO." I don't think his website has been updated except for the year and name of the election. Fewer (maybe no?) references to Trump now. Candidate statement has me convinced he's a sovereign citizen type now. Still a big hell no.

Cristian Raul Morales - In a world without Trump where conventional wisdom was a thing that meant anything, I think it would say that Morales has the best shot of any Republican to win the gubernatorial race since Schwarzenegger. A Guatemalan immigrant, he's aiming to remake the Republican party as the pro-immigrant party of labor in CA, and I think he has a shot with how terribly the Democrats are doing on especially the latter lately. I don't have a clue if he's successfully getting his message out, but if he is, his platform ought to appeal to a lot of conservative working-class Latinos. His view on culture war issues is that "California has more important problems to worry about". I think his housing and environmental policies are extremely weak, and his homelessness policy isn't much better, but if the Democrats aren't careful, this guy could go places. He might be worth voting for in the primary as a harm reduction measure (like Faulconer during the recall) if it's him versus some worse Republican for the 2nd spot. I won't give him a hard No, but a lot of his policies are weak enough that he's a very soft Maybe.

This ends the list of gubernatorial candidates with statements. Next post: gubernatorial candidates who raised too much money to be allowed a statement in the VIG.

Governor: part 4

Ronald A. Anderson - Looks like if Snidely Whiplash aged up about 40 years. Incoherent Republican. Solution to COVID is a tariff on all goods coming into port. Solution to immigration is lowering gas taxes. Someone then told him that didn't make sense, so he threw in "let's keep the wall tall and the door small" as an afterthought. Wants to make guns more accessible to everyone by requiring 45 hours of practice every 4 years. To fight fires, we need to use less water and more air support. It goes on. Poor spelling and grammar. Randomly doesn't put spaces between words, like 'steelbusiness'. No.

Heather Collins - Click this spoiler last:

Her platform: Education is the key to ending systemic homelessness (steelmanning that one). Free community college, but only if you maintain a C average. If you just give someone something then it won't have the same value as if they work for it themselves. In favor of school choice. Put up or repurpose empty parking garages to house the homeless in cities, just add laundry and bathroom facilities. Trust small businesses. Centralize illegal immigrant hiring; increase the number of family visas. More ethanol and hydrogen, don't throw out gas cars. On COVID: ban vaccine mandates, pay reparations for those fired because of vaccine mandates, and repeal AB5 (the law that made most independent contractors employees). We need a day to honor all people who wear a badge, like firefighters and police. Now guess what party she's running in.

I don't get it. I mean, it's probably the least extreme platform for that party in a long time, but it's also not remotely that party's platform. Still, I find her thought process incoherent (AB5 has nothing whatsoever to do with COVID), and things like her proposed "Badge Honor Day" and her homeless solutions are just . No.

Shawn Collins - Wishy-washy at best on police reforms. Standard Republican lines on education, unfortunately including what's now a boilerplate anti-boogeyman CRT line. Hasn't done his homework on most cost of living issues, seems to have scratched the surface in the right place on housing issues at least. Pro-water projects, but nothing beyond "actually enact Prop 1". Homeless policy is weak and not in-depth at all, but at least kinda leans the right direction. Health care policy is against single-payer and otherwise vague. COVID policy is deliberately vague. Points for pointing out Newsom's hypocrisy, but little else. DD&B on environmental issues. Yuck. No.

Anthony "Tony" Fanara - Former army medic. Dreams big. Bigger than the state. Wants to create an interstate system of aqueducts. Believes the CA legislature can force other states to pay for housing homeless people if their last residence was there. Hospitalize then house all the homeless, presumably in magically appearing housing which he doesn't call for building. Very close to being a Thin Blue Line type. No.

Governor: part 5

Ron Jones - not the Star Trek composer, sadly. Seems to believe that the most important part of the campaign is the press release. His website is somewhat broken, but what is there matches the press release he put out. No policies, just some platitudes. He's a veteran and former CHP. Even his votersedge profile basically repeats his press release. While crafting press releases is no doubt an important job of a governor, his lack of, well, anything else puts him in the No camp.

David Lozano - last time: "Republican - Ex-sheriff from LA. His only deep policy dive (and it's not terribly deep) is on homelessness. Donated to Trump. No." Has some slightly deeper policy dives. Claims he "'wrote the book'" (his quotations included) on police reform decades ago but it was "too advanced" and ignored. I can't find any evidence of this. COVIDiot. No.

Gavin Newsom - the incumbent. Arrogant SOB and regular hypocrite. Rich asshole who thinks he's above even the rules he writes. Democrats like Newsom make Democrats like Bernie look appealing. His administration is worse on governance than Jerry Brown's, though better on corruption (in that it's discovered at all and/or faster). As a policy wonk, I hate his campaign website, which is as devoid of details as most others (and this is particularly egregious in the cost of living section), though at least he has accomplishments to point to. A lot of what he tries to do fails, but at least he has experience. His best quality so far is that he's not the other candidates (so far). Do I want him over Rodriguez? Yes. Do I want him over Senum? That's a lot harder. I suspect I'll end up voting for him in the general election, just because the other person on the ballot is likely to be terrible. But in the primary? Will need to think hard about it, but I'm leaning against. And there are more candidates still to come.

Woodrow "Woody" Sanders III - Apparently a career civil servant who's gotten sick of the bureaucracy. This isn't a story you see too often, and I think I'll need to Google this guy, not just look at his website, to figure out what he's about. His first priority is to reduce bureaucracy, and reduce the ossification within that bureaucracy to reduce the number of middle managers and department heads that have been doing the same thing for decades. Also wants to root out the untouchable employees that make workplaces hostile. I'm so on board with this, though I wonder if it's really priority 1. Wants to strip the governor of the power to overrule parole boards. Wants to implement Start Over Connected for parolees and released prisoners. Unfortunately, that's the extent of his policy positions. Google tells me that he hasn't been a civil servant in some time, and has instead set up a production company to produce TV shows about government. Interesting. I really, really like these governance reforms he's got planned, and I wonder if he could muddle through the rest of the issues. That he doesn't take more stands on issues is concerning. I'll keep him on the back burner in case he posts more issues I can judge him on.

Frederic Shultz - First impression is he's a nutbar. Uses closeups with a wide-angle lens for all his pictures. . Wants to end the electoral college and weight the Senate through the courts. Thinks the solution to school shootings is an armed guard in every classroom. Wants to abolish all prisons right now. Affordable organic vegetables for everyone in the world to combat COVID. Previously banned from the ballot. Free private college. Claims that Bernie and Warren stole his wealth tax plan. It gets slightly, and then considerably saner. For a decamillionaires'+ wealth tax, ban most plastic. Repurpose police, legalize all drugs. Basic income guarantee to $25k/year. Very pro-choice. I do appreciate that he links to a gubernatorial debate (which Newsom shirked, of course), Sanity at the end isn't enough. No.

Michael Shellenberger - oh good, he's back. Last time (2018): "This guy seems to be a walking contradiction in terms. He's a self-described progressive centrist, and weirdly enough I think that fits. I might add populist, but he seems to be rather more thoughtful than most of those. Embraces automation, manufacturing (going a bit too far, IMO, wanting to impose a local sourcing requirement for auto sales in the state), and vocational training. I think he goes a bit too far, but I'd put him tied with Bribiesca." And then I found out he's very pro-nuclear and has techno-futurist roots. WSJ has given him some free press. Author of "San Fransicko". This campaign he's focusing on quality of life issues. Has a comprehensive shelter-first homelessness plan. Create a Cal-Psych to get the mentally ill homeless help, centralizing the county-level mental-health services that are almost uniformly overloaded. Oh wow he's gone almost full Republican on crime, but he is from SF, and doing that is turning a lot of people I know basically full Republican on crime. For school choice, longer school days and years, and taking on the teachers' unions. Finally has his pro-nuclear stance in his campaign, especially to power desalination. Not afraid to call out Newsom's hypocrisy and corruption. Sold. Yes.

Lonnie Sortor - bog standard Republican. Cites Prager U. Has a populist streak on housing, and not in a good way; he thinks the wrong sort of people are renting the ADUs that were legalized everywhere recently. Nothing unique or new under the sun. No.

Major Williams - according to Ballotpedia, he ran in the recall election, but I don't seem to have reviewed him. Actually filled out his Ballotpedia candidate questionnaire, possibly a first. Basic Republican, but has a few actual ideas. Replace the income tax with a tourist tax (not sure how that would work). Wants to overturn laws with executive owners. Very little in the way of actual policy. I don't think so.

Bradley Zink - I'll give him this, his ideas are outside the box. Wants to build new cities along the southern border from San Diego to Yuma, AZ for homeless people, along with a high speed train there with solar panels next to it to function as a border wall. Wants more wind power in the mountains around LA. Has no website, and all of his Facebook posts are livestreams or promotional. No.

I'm currently watching the debate between Hanink, Sortor, Ventresca, Heather Collins, Schultz, and Sanders. If I learn anything from it I'll add it. Otherwise this concludes the gubernatorial race. I think I'll be voting for Shellenberger.

Lt. Governor

Eleni Kounalakis is the incumbent. The Lt. Governor

• Assumes the office and duties of Governor in the case of impeachment (before removal from office!), death, resignation, removal from office, or absence from the state. (but not recall)
  
  
• Serves as president of the State Senate and has a tie-breaking vote.
  
  
• Chairs the Commission for Economic Development; is a member of the State Lands Commission, and the Ocean Protection Council; and sits on the boards of the California university systems.
  

Very hard to give a damn about this race.

William Cavett “Skee” Saacke - Moderate Democrat. Quite moderate, for California. Opposed to gun control, opposed to abortion restrictions, cautious of unions, fiscally conservative. Kinda like him. Baseline.

David Fennell - public-spirited Silicon Valley VC, if you believe his bio. Supporter of Trump's border wall (by name), and opposed to sanctuary cities. Damn. The rest of his platform is actually not too bad, and somewhat within the scope of the office. A shame. No.

David Hillberg - last time: "Republican - aircraft mechanic and actor. Anti-tax, anti-spell-check, anti-grammar-check. Can't tell if he's a Trump supporter, but he's definitely reaching out to them. Wants to fire Nancy Pelosi (can't do that), and imprison other politicians. Noooope." Things have improved since then, as his candidate statement is sane, and his website is just a footer. No.

Mohammed Arif - Semi-fusion P&F and Green candidate (only endorsed by 3 county Green parties). No plans to use the office, just a vague missive about the rich having too many too big houses, and how developers are evil but also we don't have enough housing. Ugh. Free education, free health care, free public transit (not subsidized, not single payer. Free). No.

Jeffrey Highbear Morgan - Native American conservative Democrat. Wants to use independent residence communities to address homelessness. Wants to reduce crime by (steelmanning) repealing prop 47. Believer in the broken window theory of policing. Of the powers he actually has, wants to increase accessibility and reduce overcrowding at UCs and CSUs. That seems good. Not better than Saacke though.

Eleni Kounalakis - last time: "Guessing this is the main Dem candidate? Endorsed by Sen. Harris, at any rate. She seems qualified on paper, but her campaign site is 100% platitudes and generalities, very little real policy. Of course, maybe that's not really a problem for a Lt. Gov? Baseline. ... It seems it has. Kounalakis's issues pages are stronger and more concrete... Voting for Kounalakis". This time she's actually got quite a few accomplishments listed in her candidate statement (which is pretty remarkable for a Lt. Gov). Website is bare of issues, but dang, I didn't know she was Ambassador to Hungary. I feel like maybe Lt. Gov. of CA is something of a downgrade. She's almost certainly going to win, but it actually doesn't sound like that would be a bad thing. Better than Saacke? I think probably. Yes.

Clint W. Saunders - could barely scrape together 25 signatures to run for city council. Now acting like he's running for governor, but he doesn't understand that job either. Thinks the Lt. Governor provides the 51st vote in the state senate. The state senate has 40 members. Thinks Lt. Governors can veto bills after they're signed. Do I really need to go on?

Angela E. Underwood Jacobs - Community banker, currently (or formerly?) on the Lancaster city council. The GOP endorsed candidate, apparently. It's fuller of platitudes and as devoid of actual policy as Kounalakis's but she has no candidate statement to fill in the gaps. Probably qualified. Not likely better than Kounalakis or even Saacke. Pass.

My envelope is sealed and signed. If only I had an outgoing mailbox on my (checks zillow) $1.1 million house. Oh well, to the blue box at Raleys I will go.

Secretary of State

This one actually matters. The Secretary of State:

• As the state’s chief elections offcer, oversees statewide elections and provides public access to campaign and lobbying fnancial information.
  
  
• Maintains certain business flings, authenticates trademarks, regulates notaries public, and enables secured creditors to protect their fnancial interests.
  
  
• Preserves California’s history by acquiring, safeguarding, and sharing the state’s historical treasures. (ed: whatever that means)
  

It's pretty important for democracy that the right person steer this ship. Also they're liable to be DiFi's replacement if she dies in office.

Rachel Hamm - Front page has a giant endorsement from disgraced General Michael Flynn. JFC. Her candidate statement seemed so reasonable for a Republican. But fuck that noise. She's all in on the Big Lie. Ugh, by virtue of being first, she's the baseline, but the bar is so low Satan is falling trying to limbo with it.

Gary N. Blenner - High school poli-sci teacher. For Proportional Representation, RCV, expanded ballot access, public financing of elections. Self-described Democratic Socialist. Unity candidate of P&F and Green parties. Testified at MTG's ballot challenge hearing that he wouldn't keep her off the ballot. Fine, Yes, anyone is better than Hamm.

Shirley N. Weber - appointed incumbent formerly an Assemblywoman from outside San Diego. Did a bang-up job in 2020 and 2021. Supports Prop 17 (giving parolees the right to vote), won't stand in its way. Would be an obvious Yes, but Gary Blenner didn't seem that bad for a Green. Still, for an incumbent, she's not bad at all, and she seems like a good replacement for DiFi, and a savvier one than Blenner. If Blenner were appointed, it'd be very Mr. Smith goes to Washington, if Mr. Smith thought like Bernie Sanders. On the other hand, Blenner would not likely be appointed in the first place, and I appreciate his willingness to consider non-FPTP voting systems. Tough call, one I think I'll make later.

to be continued.

Secretary of State, part B

Rob Bernosky - a Republican from when Republicans knew how to keep their mouths shut and dog whistle instead of screaming. Still, "clean the voter rolls" and "eliminate messes like Motor Voter" speak loudly enough to his intentions. No.

Matthew D. Cinquanta - Big Lie promoter, and all the policies that go with it. No. Next!

Raoul Rodriguez Jr. - Former warehouseman. That's literally all the info I can find other than a picture. No.


Guess it's between Blenner and Weber... think I'll go with Weber, but I wouldn't fault anyone going with Blenner either.

Controller

The Controller:

• As the state’s chief fscal offcer, serves as the state’s accountant and bookkeeper of all public funds.
  
  
• Administers the state payroll system and unclaimed property laws and conducts audits and reviews of state operations.
  
  
• Serves on the Board of Equalization, the Board of Control, and other boards and commissions.
  

Now that that's cleared up. It's basically important for the controller to not be corrupt, and they should probably know a thing or two about accounting, but otherwise their function is pretty ministerial.

Laura Wells - Standard P&F and Green talking points about taxing the rich in the candidate statement. Literally nothing there or on her website that indicates why she'd be good for the job. I think she's just there so if by some miracle the Left Unity slate wins, they have a Controller too. Baseline.

Yvonne Yiu - Former mayor of Monterey Park, has her own investment company with a billion in assets, has an MBA. Endorsed by former Treasurer John Chiang. Definitely seems better than Wells.

Steve Glazer - current state senator who has done a lot of things that make it seem like he'd make a good inspector general, rather than a good Controller. He wants to audit big businesses, politcians - including travel and expense accounts - and homelessness programs. I think I might have met him before he was in politics. Hmm. Platform seems fine, though I wonder if he has the accounting background to actually do it. Maybe? Describes himself as a fiscally conservative Democrat, and he's challenged the party on a few occasions. Didn't get the Dem endorsement, but he didn't for his successful Senate runs either. Definite Maybe.

Ron Galperin - lawyer and current City Controller of LA, so he's got the right background. Endorsed by John Chiang and Betty Yee (current controller, termed out). Definitely has the most comprehensive auditing plans. For everything else there's "form a task force". Maybe that's honest? But it also feels like a recipe for getting nothing done. Maybe.

Lanhee Chen - Republican political operative finally running for office. For a Republican, he seems relatively reasonable. Denounced 1/6 and the Big Lie. His thoughts on taxes and stimulus payments aren't wrong. It seems like he'd be extra motivated to go after Democrats (who need going after), but I think any reports he comes up with will just be discounted because he's a Republican. I think Glazer can probably do a more credible job there, even if he won't find as much. Nah.

Malia M. Cohen - last time (2018, running for the Board of Equalization district 2): "Her campaign is about "transparency, accountability, fairness". Okay, that's a good start. She's got a bunch of endorsements. But her Issues page is just her record, one that really doesn't matter in this office. Still, "transparency, accountability, fairness" its more than I could find out about Galgiani, so I guess Cohen's on top?". Chair of the BOE now, but she didn't do anything to get rid of it, though she did do some property tax collection modernization, apparently. Also a former SF supervisor. Wants to expand the power of the office, make it a platform for diversity. What the hell that even means for a controller, I don't really know. But I don't like the first part. Has the endorsement of the Democratic Party and Betty Yee. No.

So I guess there's 3 candidates I like, and 3 I don't. That's not fair, I like Chen, but I think he'd be singularly ineffective. I think I'll go with Glazer.

Treasurer -

• As the state’s banker, manages the state’s investments, and administers the sale of state bonds and notes.
  
  
• Serves on several commissions, most of which are related to the marketing of bonds.
  
  
• Pays out state funds when spent by the Controller and other state agencies.
  

Meghann Adams - P&F/Green candidate. No indication she knows anything about the office, just standard lefty diatribes about wealth inequality. Baseline.

Jack M. Guerrero - Last time: "Seems to be qualified to sell and market bonds. Has worked with the Controller's office before to root out fraud. That's pretty spiffy. Baseline." Candidate statement makes me think he's running for Controller instead of Treasurer. An investment banker and former mayor and councilmember of Cudahy, has business experience that could possibly be useful in managing the state's investments. Had a number of Republican endorsements in his 2018 campaign; does not list any in his 2022 campaign. Better than Adams, I guess. New baseline.

Fiona Ma - Last time: "Endorsed by the CTA. Ugh. Endorsed by the CA SBA. Huh. Didn't expect that. Again doesn't seem to understand the role of the office, but the kinds of things she talks about are at least plausibly within the domain of the boards she sits on. Apparently she worked with Yee to deal with corruption on the Board of Equalization, which is a big plus. John Chiang endorsed her as his successor, meh. I'd say she's about equal with Guerrero, but with way more experience. I guess she wins?" She did in fact win in 2018, and she is the incumbent. She refinanced bonds over the last 4 years to save $5 billion over the next 20, but I'm not sure that's actually very impressive when CA's budget is so big. Still, she's got the experience and doesn't appear to be corrupt. New baseline.

Andrew Do - Orange County supervisor, former DA, former CFO. Running on an anticorruption platform, but it seems from his time on a local health care system board (CalOptima) he may have some corruption, or at least cronyism, problems of his own. No thanks.

Guess I'm voting for Fiona Ma.