could Billionaire Steyer actually buy the California Gov seat??

[riversedge]

Pretty scary stuff IMHO.



@inkpenpatty-223.bsky.social‬
While large sums of money have increasingly influenced modern American elections—it is not yet determined if this spending can "buy" the 2026.

With his own investment of $130 million; the world's fourth largest economy is within Billionaire Steyer's grasp.

[Johonny]

1. His attack ads were a real turn off for me.

[RandySF]

2. Would you prefer he go begging for money?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. People get upset when solicited for donations and accuse candidates of "buying" an election if they don't. Campaigns do not run of vibes.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. I don't like *ANYBODY* buying elections.

I felt exactly the same way when multimillionaire Mike Bloomberg not only bought two elections for NYC Mayor, but a third term denied to most incumbents.

[IbogaProject]

4. Yep

He ran on a somewhat liberal platform, but his administration was to the right of Rudy Guilani on some substantive issues. Particularly Housing Court as it's "judges" are appointed by the Mayor's office subject to approval of the city council. And police misconduct didn't cool off that much during his 3 terms either.

[mr715]

6. Bloomberg was bad to teachers.

Horrible to labor except cops.

I'd say he was extremely technocratic - really fetishized data and quantifiables... But he also had good environmental and public health positions, even if most people went bonkers when they couldn't supersize their drinks anymore.

Did Bloomberg get cigarettes out of bars?

[Sympthsical]

5. PG&E is spending $10 million to attack him

Does that mean PG&E are trying to buy the election?

What about other lobbyists and corporations that donate and form PACs?

At this point, at least Steyer's behavior is likely to be driven by Steyer. Politicians beholden to lobbyists have dozens of different drivers - and none of them care about you, with many never making themselves outright known.

I don't love that I'm down to a billionaire as my most attractive, viable choice here. Not at all. California fucked this whole primary up big time.

But the other option is to vote for what Sacramento lobbyists want, and I already know what that government looks like.

It's a hard pass. Sacramento needs a shake up. And since Steyer is the only currently viable Democrat I think might do it - not that he will, just that he might - here we are.

[Mz Pip]

7. I've filled out my ballot

except for the bubble for Governor. I like Steyer’s climate stance very much, but his attacks on Becerra are disingenuous and make me cringe. Becerra is pretty low key but has a lot of experience. The polling is weird. One poll has Steyer nearly tied with Hilton, another has Becerra in second. Porter and Mahan are playing spoiler, I guess.

I’ll wait a couple more weeks.

[WarGamer]

8. If he wins, it's because he received more votes. That's Democracy

I don't care about his bank account, I care about his policies and innovative ideas.

[BigmanPigman]

9. I'm up to date and still leaning towards Steyer.

[JI7]

10. No, if he could buy it he would already be ahead.

[karynnj]

11. I would say this is not particularly good example

He has spent a huge amount and in spite of the fact that he faced a very large field, his spending has not made him the sure winner. This even with the endorsements he has gained because of his past support on Democratic issues like climate change.

Obviously, he will become the absolute front runner if it comes down to him and Hilton.

I would use J D Vance as a politician who won because of the money behind him. It wasn't his "charm" or his accomplishments.