Since 1993, my state has been represented by the same Senate delegation, consisting of Senators Dianne Feinstein (senior) and Barbara Boxer (junior). Of course, all good things must come to an end, and Boxer decided to call it quits instead of run for a fifth consecutive term in the upper body.
With over 38 million people, California is by the far the largest state in the nation and with that, it has the largest pool of ambitious politicos looking for a promotion. With Boxer's retirement, they finally have an opportunity to do so. State Attorney General Kamala Harris, one of the brightest (if not the brightest) national rising star, quickly announced her candidacy, and is, without a doubt, the frontrunner for the position at the moment.
But this is California. A once in a lifetime opportunity has come up and not every Democrat is willing to let Harris have the field to herself. Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (D-Los Angeles County) and Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez (D-Orange County) are making waves about running, among others. But there's one name that strikes most people as the most viable challenger to Harris.
Billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer.
Tom Steyer, potential candidate for U.S. Senate in California in the 2016 election
It wouldn't be surprising if you've heard of him before.
He spent a lot of money trying to get Terry McaAullife elected Governor. He also spent a lot of money on Democratic candidates running in 2014. Hell, I'm sure I'm not the only one who caught Steyer on
Real Time with Bill Maher (wearing an admittedly terribly tailored suit)
challenging the Koch Bros. to a debate.
Yep, Tom Steyer has a lot of money. But there is a reason why I said "most people" believe he's the biggest threat to Harris. Why? Simply put, I'm underwhelmed with Steyer. I'm just not convinced he could win. And there's a few simple, but major reasons as to why I have that opinion.
Head below the fold with me to explore my doubts about Steyer's ability to win the seat.
1. The State Party would back Harris in this matchup
The California Democratic Party truly is a machine truly unlike any other state chapters of the Donkey Party. We control every statewide office. We haven't lost seats in the U.S. House Delegation since 1994. In fact, we gained a seat last year, even with the national atmosphere, and have opportunities to gain even more in 2016. And while we technically don't have supermajorities in the State Assembly or State Senate, we do have sizable majorities in both of them and there's no threat of the Republicans taking over. That might not sound impressive, considering how blue California is, but look at New York or Washington: solidly Democratic states, but both of them have Republican Majorities in their State Senates.
Another thing that sets it apart from other State DNCs is that it's largely independent of Obama and the National Party's influence; i.e. it was built from the ground up and doesn't rely on surrogates from Washington to run it. As such, getting approval of the state party is more important than it would be in, say, New York or Massachusetts, and Harris has way more friends in the state than Steyer, who hasn't been funding candidates long enough to really create a network of allies for him in Sacramento.
2. The National Party would back Harris in this matchup
Sure, Tom Steyer did fund a bunch of campaigns last cycle. But, to be blunt, he couldn't replicate his success found in 2013 in the Virginia governor's race and his political philanthropy last year was nothing less than a disaster. Only two of the races he funded were won; Tom Wolf in PA-GOV, which was a complete waste of money considering there was never a chance of him losing, and Jeanne Shaheen in NH-Sen, which was, to be fair, a good thing since the race tightened so much at the end.
Obviously, it's not Steyer's fault that the Democrat's did so poorly in the midterms; the party of the President in power typically does badly in midterms, especially in the midterm of the second term. And, of course, him funding Democratic candidates didn't make him any enemies in the national party, obviously, and he will surely be used by Democratic operatives for fundraising in the future. The point I am trying to make here is that he didn't get enough of his favored candidates elected for him to have a network of friends in the Senate ready to vouch for him in the DSCC (Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee) in the case of a Harris-Steyer intraparty matchup.
The nationals are already coming full force for Harris. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) joined Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) and prominent progressive Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) in endorsing Harris. And, of course, it's pretty obvious who the President's pick is.
3. There's no base of voters who'd prefer Steyer to Harris
Let's suppose that Harris and Steyer were equals when it came to their current political position. What appeal would a dull and generic white guy have in a liberal, ethnically diverse state over a young, multiracial, AND female rising star? Then, go back to reality, add the fact that she is also a popular and well respected statewide official, while he is just a rich, anonymous fundraiser for out of state candidates, and ask yourself the same question.
Steyer and Harris both are from the Bay Area, but given her local ties to the community as a former District Attorney in San Francisco, she'd surely reign victorious, though I could see Steyer performing well in the South Bay/"Silicon Valley" among business types. Harris would dominate among Blacks and Hispanics given her background (though, contrary to popular belief, she isn't part Hispanic; rather, she is Black and Indian) and record, and for this reason would easily win Greater Los Angeles and the Inland Empire, and San Diego County.
I could see places like Monterey County being Steyer friendly and I'm not exactly sure how the rural Nevada Border Counties would vote in the case of a runoff, but even if these rural conservative counties for some reason decided to go all out for a Democratic fundraiser, it would be hard for Steyer to make up the gap lost in the vote rich areas mentioned in the above paragraph. Steyer might win the wealthy white parts of LA or San Diego but really, the numbers just aren't there in a runoff or in the jungle primary for him to outperform Harris.
4. "Self-Funder" types don't have a record of electoral success in California
Remember Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina? It's funny how the CAGOP put two people who are almost identical to each other up in the same year for statewide office, Whitman for Governor, and Fiorina for Senate. Both of them were hyped like crazy. But how did they actually end up doing? Well, Fiorina lost by 10%, while Whitman did even worse, losing by almost 13%. Sure, you may be thinking "Hombre, California is a Blue state, so it's not fair to blame Fiorina or Whitman's profession as the reason for their loss." Sure, there's merit to that. Steyer being a self funder doesn't mean he'll lose by double digits like them. But in that same year, Los Angeles District Attorney, Steve Cooley, a Republican, lost the Attorney General election by only 0.8%, showing that Republicans don't necessarily have to be crushed in California's elections.
So sure, Whitman and Fiorina's loss isn't completely because of their status as self funding types, but it was clearly a liability and let their opponents, Jerry Brown, and Barbara Boxer, respectively, paint them as out of touch elites, which is exactly what will happen if Steyer runs for Senate.
California just isn't receptive to these types of candidates.
I don't mean to demonize Tom Steyer. He's a good man who uses his money to try to save a dying planet and to help the poor get out of poverty. I don't mean to disrespect him. At the same time, I hope he doesn't run because A. I don't want the risk of two Republicans advancing to the November election and B. Because I seriously doubt he could win. Sure, it's possible, but it's unlikely and for his own sake, he should sit it out from running his own campaign, for at least this election cycle.
Thank you for reading, and please vote in the poll below.