Unhappy with the choices for California governor? Get real
-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
- The field may lack razzle and dazzle but not competent candidates.
- Voters are looking for someone to make their lives better, not serve as entertainment
California has tried all manner of design in choosing its governor.
Democrat Gray Davis, to name a recent example, had an extensive background in government and politics and a bland demeanor that suggested his first name was also a fitting adjective.
Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, by contrast, was a novice candidate who ran for governor on a whim. His super-sized action hero persona dazzled Californians like the pyrotechnics in one of his Hollywood blockbusters.
In the end, however, their political fates were the same. Both left office humbled, burdened with lousy poll numbers and facing a well of deep voter discontent.
(Schwarzenegger, at least, departed on his own terms. He chased Davis from the Capitol in an extraordinary recall and won reelection before his approval ratings tanked during his second term.)
There are roughly a dozen major candidates for California governor in 2026 and, taken together, they lack even a small fraction of Schwarzenegger’s celebrity wattage.
Nor do any have the extensive Sacramento experience of Davis, who was a gubernatorial chief of staff under Jerry Brown before serving in the Legislature, then winning election as state controller and lieutenant governor.
That’s not, however, to disparage those running.
Toni Atkins is one of just three people in history to head both houses of California’s Legislature. Despite that Sacramento know-how and an inspirational backstory, her candidacy never caught fire.
The contestants include a former Los Angeles mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa; three candidates who’ve won statewide office, former Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, schools Supt. Tony Thurmond and former Controller Betty Yee; two others who gained national recognition during their time in Congress, Katie Porter and Eric Swalwell; and Riverside County’s elected sheriff, Chad Bianco.
The large field offers an ample buffet from which to choose.
The rap on this particular batch of hopefuls is they’re a collective bore, which, honestly, seems a greater concern to those writing and spitballing about the race than a reflection of some great upwelling of citizens clamoring for bread and circuses.
In scores of conversations with voters over the past year, the sentiment that came through, above all, was a sense of practicality and pragmatism. (And, this being a blue bastion, no small amount of horror, fear and loathing directed at the vengeful and belligerent Trump administration.)
It’s never been more challenging and expensive to live in California, a place of great bounty that often exacts in dollars and stress what it offers in opportunity and wondrous beauty.
With a governor seemingly more focused on his personal agenda, a 2028 bid for president, than the people who put him in office, many said they’d like to replace Gavin Newsom with someone who will prioritize California and their needs above his own.
That means a focus on matters such as traffic, crime, fire prevention, housing and homelessness. In other words, pedestrian stuff that doesn’t light up social media or earn an invitation to hold forth on one of the Beltway chat shows.
“Why does it take so long to do simple things?” asked one of those voters, the Bay Area’s Michael Duncan, as he lamented his pothole-ridden, 120-mile round-trip commute between Fairfield and an environmental analyst job in Livermore.
The answer is not a simple one.
Politics are messy, like any human endeavor. Governing is a long and laborious process, requiring study, deliberation and the weighing of competing forces. Frankly, it can be rather dull.
Certainly the humdrum of legislation or bureaucratic rule-marking is nothing like the gossipy speculation about who may or may not bid to lead California as its 41st governor.
Why else was so much coverage devoted to whether Sen. Alex Padilla would jump into the gubernatorial race — he chose not to — and the possible impact his entry would have on the contest, as opposed to, say, his thinking on CEQA or FMAP?
(The former is California’s much-contested Environmental Quality Act; the latter is the formula that determines federal reimbursement for Medi-Cal, the state’s healthcare program for low-income residents.)
Just between us, political reporters tend to be like children in front of a toy shop window. Their bedroom may be cluttered with all manner of diversion and playthings, but what they really want is that shiny, as-yet unattained object — Rick Caruso! — beckoning from behind glass.
Soon enough, once a candidate has entered the race, boredom sets in and the speculation and desire for someone fresh and different starts anew. (Will Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta change his mind and run for governor?)
For their part, many voters always seem to be searching for some idealized candidate who exists only in their imagination.
Someone strong, but not dug in. Willing to compromise, but never caving to the other side. Someone with the virginal purity of a political outsider and the intrinsic capability of an insider who’s spent decades cutting deals and keeping the government wheels spinning.
They look over their choices and ask, in the words of an old song, is that all there is? (Spoiler alert: There are no white knights out there.)
Barabak: Forget Reagan and Schwarzenegger. In California governor’s race, boring can be beautiful
California may be home to Hollywood, but the state has a long history of electing non-celebrity, charisma-challenged governors. Dull and dutiful could be a successful recipe once more in 2026.
Donald Trump was, foremost, a celebrity before his burst into politics. First as a denizen of New York’s tabloid culture and then as the star of TV’s faux-boardroom drama, “The Apprentice.”
His pizzazz was a large measure of his appeal, along with his manufactured image as a shrewd businessman with a kingly touch and infallible judgment.
His freewheeling political rallies and frothy social media presence were, and continue to be, a source of great glee to his fans and followers.
His performance as president has been altogether different, and far less amusing.
If the candidates for California governor fail to light up a room, that’s not such a bad thing. Fix the roads. Make housing more affordable. Help keep the place from burning to the ground.
Leave the fun and games to the professionals.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
The current slate of California gubernatorial candidates should be evaluated on practical merit rather than celebrity appeal. While the field lacks the star power of figures like Arnold Schwarzenegger or the extensive governmental background of Gray Davis, the candidates collectively bring substantial qualifications including mayoral experience, statewide elected office, and national recognition through congressional service. Voters in conversations across California consistently expressed pragmatic priorities focused on tangible governance challenges—traffic, housing affordability, homelessness, fire prevention, and crime—rather than entertainment value or the aura of political outsiders. The media’s persistent focus on which celebrities or newcomers might enter the race reflects journalists’ preferences for novelty and spectacle rather than genuine voter demand for such candidates. History demonstrates that celebrity appeal proves unreliable as a predictor of governing competence; Donald Trump’s eventual presidential performance diverged sharply from the appeal of his pre-political celebrity persona and television fame. An elected official who prioritizes actual constituent needs over personal ambition, media attention, or higher political aspirations represents a more valuable outcome than a charismatic outsider with limited governing experience.
Different views on the topic
California’s history with gubernatorial elections suggests voters sometimes respond powerfully to candidates who break from conventional political backgrounds. Arnold Schwarzenegger emerged from a field of over 135 candidates in the 2003 recall election to replace Gray Davis, winning decisively despite his lack of political experience, and subsequently won reelection in 2006 by a comfortable margin.[2][3] His celebrity status and outsider appeal clearly resonated with voters at that moment. Additionally, the successful recall of Gray Davis in 2003 occurred during economic crisis, demonstrating that Californians will seek dramatic change when they perceive practical governance failures, even through extraordinary electoral mechanisms.[1][3] The media’s historical focus on higher-profile candidates and outsiders may reflect not press frivolity but rather genuine shifts in voter sentiment during periods of discontent with conventional politicians and established governance approaches.
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
Taped Jan 8, 2026, a year after the Eaton Fire, this episode features Ondi Timoner. After losing her home, she began documenting the displacement and financial struggles of her neighbors, joining My Tribe Rise to help Altadena rebuild and recover.
Attorney Frank Carson defended the accused for decades. Framed for murder and later acquitted, a star witness admitted he lied. Stanislaus County paid $22.5M to settle his estate’s lawsuit.
Hear from the winner of the 1968 Caltech vs MIT electric car race. But it’s not all fresh air: smog devastates communities of color, and the Trump administration may pull the plug on California’s ability to clear its own air.
