The California gubernatorial debate was a spectacle of political theater, with candidates vying for attention and votes in a crowded field. The debate, moderated by Schuyler Hudak Prionas, showcased the strengths and weaknesses of each contender, but ultimately left voters with more questions than answers. The key takeaways from this debate are as follows:
Antonio Villaraigosa: The Nostalgia Trip
Villaraigosa's closing remarks were a trip down memory lane, invoking his past as L.A. mayor and the slogan 'Dream with me'. While it's understandable to draw on personal experience, this approach may be too nostalgic for a state that is constantly evolving. In my opinion, this strategy fails to offer a clear vision for the future of California, which is a critical aspect of any successful campaign. It's a reminder that candidates should focus on the present and future, rather than dwelling on past glories.
Xavier Becerra: The Target of Attacks
Becerra, the frontrunner, faced a barrage of attacks from his rivals. The debate highlighted his performance as state attorney general and Health and Human Services secretary in the Biden administration. While Becerra's critics accused him of being a shill for Big Oil, he responded crisply, emphasizing his role as a victim in the embezzlement case. However, the fact that he is the target of so much scrutiny suggests that he may not be the ideal candidate to unite the state. It's a delicate balance between being responsive to criticism and maintaining a strong, confident stance.
Katie Porter: The Left-Wing Tribune
Porter, a congressmember, stood out for her clear and detailed policy answers. Her performance was a significant improvement on previous debates, but it may be too little, too late. Porter's strength lies in her ability to articulate progressive policies, but she may need to do more to capture the imagination of undecided voters. It's a fine line between being informative and inspiring.
Tom Steyer: The Boastful Billionaire
Steyer, the hedge fund billionaire, made some clear and forceful points, particularly around his policies on moving away from fossil fuels. However, his answers were often convoluted and didn't give undecided voters much to work with. Steyer's strength lies in his ability to articulate progressive policies, but he may need to do more to connect with the broader electorate.
The Republicans: The Angry Avengers
The two Republican candidates, Bianco and Hilton, spoke of a halcyon California destroyed by feckless Democrats. While their message may resonate with some voters, it's a narrow and divisive approach that fails to offer a broader vision for the state. It's a reminder that candidates should focus on the needs and aspirations of the entire state, rather than playing to specific demographics.
The Bottom Line
In my opinion, the debate did little to help any candidate stand out. The candidates' strategies, from nostalgia to attacks, failed to offer a clear vision for the future of California. The only real winners are the political consultants, and the only real losers are Californians, who are left with more questions than answers. It's a reminder that candidates should focus on the needs and aspirations of the entire state, rather than playing to specific demographics.
The Way Forward
The two candidates who advance to the general election would be wise to offer Californians a hope for the future that doesn't call back to our yesterdays. It's a challenge, but one that is essential for the state's continued success. The debate was a reminder that candidates should focus on the present and future, rather than dwelling on past glories.
