Politics
Commentary: The candidates for California governor are a mystery. What voters want is not
FAIRFIELD, Calif. — Michael Duncan was adjusting the screen on his front door when he paused recently to consider what he wants from California’s next governor.
Duncan admittedly hadn’t given the matter much thought. But when you get down to it, he said, the answer is fairly straightforward: Do the basics.
Fight crime. Fix the state’s washboard roads. Address the perennial homelessness problem. And do a better job, to the extent a governor can, preventing wildfires like the inferno that decimated wide swaths of Southern California.
“I just roll my eyes,” said Duncan, who logs about 120 miles round trip from his home in Fairfield to his environmental analyst job in Livermore — and who knows exactly where to swerve to avoid the worst potholes along the way. “Why does it take so long to do simple things?”
The answer is complicated, but that won’t necessarily mollify a California electorate that seems anxious, aggrieved and out of sorts — especially as regards the state’s current chief executive.
More than a half-dozen candidates are bidding to succeed Gavin Newsom. Some have pursued the job for well over a year now, eyeing the day, in January 2027, when term limits force the Democrat from office. You wouldn’t know that, however, talking to a wide assortment of Californians — many of whom hadn’t the slightest clue who’s running.
In conversations last week with nearly three dozen voters, from the outskirts of the San Francisco Bay Area through Sacramento to the foothills of the Sierra Nevada, not a handful could name a single one of the declared candidates.
“That guy in Riverside, the sheriff,” said Zach House, 31, referring to Republican Chad Bianco. Outside his door, an 8-by-12-foot American flag snapped loudly in the wind whipping through his Dixon neighborhood, down streets named Songbird, Honeybee and Blossom. “Right now,” House said, “that’s the only person I know that interests me.”
“The Mexican American gentleman,” Brenda Turley volunteered outside the post office in Rosemont, meaning Antonio Villaraigosa. “Wasn’t he the mayor of Los Angeles?” (He was.)
Admittedly, it’s relatively early in the gubernatorial contest. And it’s not as though events — the fiery apocalypse in Southern California, Hurricane Trump — haven’t been fairly all-consuming.
But if voters seem to be paying little attention to the race, most echoed Duncan’s call for a focus on fundamentals, expressing a strong desire the next governor be wholly invested in the job and not view it as a mere placeholder or steppingstone to higher office.
“I feel like [Newsom] spent more time trying to campaign to be president for the next go-round than working on the state itself,” said Duncan, 37, who described himself as a moderate who tends to vote against whichever party holds the White House, to check their power.
Michael Duncan wants California’s next governor to focus on basics, not running for president.
(Mark Z. Barabak / Los Angeles Times)
That all-in commitment is something Kamala Harris may wish to consider as she weighs a campaign for governor — and something she’ll no doubt have to address, in the event she does run.
The former vice president, now dividing her time between an apartment in New York City and her home in Brentwood, remains every bit as polarizing as she was during her truncated White House campaign.
Turley, a retired state worker, said she’ll get behind Harris without question if she runs. “Go for it,” the 80-something Democrat urged. “Why not? She has the experience. Look at her political background. She was [California] attorney general. She worked in the Senate.”
Peter Kay, 75, a fellow Democrat, agreed. “She’s better qualified than about 90% of the people that run for any office in this country,” said Kay, who lives in Suisun City. (The retired insurance underwriter, just returned from the car wash, was buffing a few water spots off his black Tesla and had this to say about the company’s CEO: “If he wasn’t Elon Musk, he would be in some institution, probably sharing a wing with Trump.”)
The conservative sentiment toward Harris was summed up by Lori Smith, 66, a dental hygienist in Gold River, who responded to the mention of her name with a combination wail and snort.
“Oh, God! Oh, my God!” Smith exclaimed, vowing to leave California if Harris is elected governor. “I could never see her being president. We dodged a bullet there. I think she just needs to live her little life in some little town somewhere and go away.”
There is, of course, no pleasing everyone, even with the sky a brilliant blue and the hills a shimmering green, thanks to a blessedly wet Northern California winter.
Some griped about overly stringent environmental regulations. Other said more needs to be done to protect fish and wildlife. Some said more water needs to go to farmers. Others said, no, city dwellers deserve a bigger share.
Some complained about homeless people commandeering shared public spaces. Amanda Castillo, who lives in her car, called for greater compassion and understanding.
The 26-year-old works full time at a retail job in Vacaville and still can’t afford a place of her own, so she beds down in a silver GMC Yukon with her boyfriend and his mother, who were inside the public library charging their electronic devices. “I consider myself to be lucky,” Castillo said, “because if I wasn’t sleeping in the car I’d either be on the street or in a cardboard box.”
Hanging over every conversation — like the big, puffy clouds above, but much less enchanting — was President Trump.
Most partisans differed, as one would expect, on how California should deal with the president and his battering-ram administration.
“Anybody who has a platform should be speaking out,” fighting Trump in the courts and resisting any way possible, said Eunice Kim, 42, a Sacramento physician and professed liberal, who paused outside the library in El Dorado Hills as her boys, 5 and 8, roughhoused on the front lawn.
Tanya Pavlus, a 35-year-old stay-at-home mom, disagreed. The Rancho Cordova Republican voted for Trump and cited a litany of ills plaguing the state, among them high gas prices and the steep cost of living. Anyone serving as California governor “could use all the advice [they] can get from the president,” Pavlus said, “because the situation speaks for itself.”
But not everyone retreated to the expected corners.
Ray Charan, 39, a Sacramento Democrat who works for the state in information technology, said, like it or not, Trump is president, “so you have to come to some sort of professional arrangement. You may not agree with all the policies and everything, all the headlines and the personality stuff, but if you can somehow come together and work for the betterment of the state, then I’m all for it.”
Ray Charan says fellow Democrats need to find ways to work with President Trump.
(Mark Z. Barabak / Los Angeles Times)
Sean Coley, a Trump voter, was similarly matter-of-fact.
“There’s no fighting Trump. We’ve seen that,” said the 36-year-old Rancho Cordova Republican, a background investigator and part-time wedding photographer. “If you want federal funding, if you want progress, you have to work with those who are on a different side of the table, especially when they’re as aggressive as Trump is.
“I would get a Venn diagram. Figure out what he’s for, what you’re for,” Coley suggested. “Figure out what’s in the middle, and tackle that hard.”
Pragmatism of that sort may not summon great political passions. But practicality seems to be what many Californians are looking for in their next governor.
Politics
Video: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers
new video loaded: Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers
transcript
transcript
Senate Republicans Block Limits to Trump’s War Powers
Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic bill that would have required President Trump to obtain congressional authorization to continue waging war against Iran.
-
“The yeas are 47. The nays are 53. The motion to discharge is not approved.” “President Trump decided to attack Iran. That decision was profound, deliberate and correct. The president understands the weight of war.” “Why is Donald Trump hellbent on making history repeat itself? Why is he plunging America headfirst into a war that Americans do not want, and which he cannot even explain? The American people deserve a say, and that is what our resolution is about.”
By Shawn Paik
March 5, 2026
Politics
DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
EXCLUSIVE: Newly obtained financial statements shed light on claims that former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s company made millions from a DHS advertising campaign.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem faced intense questioning during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, and Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., specifically called out the agency for contracting a public relations firm headed by McLaughlin’s husband, Benjamin Yoho.
“I have personally reviewed the allegations against Ms. McLaughlin, and I find them to be baseless,” DHS General Counsel James Percival told Fox News Digital. “Nothing illegal or unethical occurred with respect to these contracts. Ms. McLaughlin was not involved in selecting any subcontractors.
“She is, however, a superstar in the public affairs world, so I am not surprised that she married a successful businessman whose services were attractive to these outside firms.”
Newly obtained financial statements address allegations that former Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s firm improperly profited from a multimillion-dollar DHS ad campaign. Lawmakers pressed Secretary Kristi Noem over the contracts during a heated Senate hearing. (Jack Gruber/USA Today)
Kennedy alleged that Yoho’s firm, The Strategy Group, “got most of the money” out of what the Louisiana Republican senator says was $220 million in “television advertisements that feature [Noem] prominently.”
“I’m sorry,” Kennedy said. “Safe America Media was a company formed 11 days before you picked them. And that the Strategy Group got most of the money. And the head of that is married to your former spokesperson.”
“It’s just hard for me to believe knowing the president as I do, that you said, ‘Mr. President, here’s some ads I’ve cut, and I’m going to spend $220 million running them,’ that he would have agreed to that,” Kennedy explained. “I don’t think Russ Vought at OMB [Office of Management and Budget] would have agreed to that.”
‘YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!’: PROTESTER DRAGGED FROM KRISTI NOEM’S SENATE HEARING
Senate scrutiny intensified over a DHS advertising campaign after Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., questioned whether a firm linked to McLaughlin’s husband benefited unfairly. DHS officials and the company deny any wrongdoing or multimillion-dollar profits. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
The Strategy Group is a conservative advertising agency for which Yoho serves as CEO.
Figures obtained by Fox News Digital show a slightly lesser total advertising expenditure of approximately $185 million, with a total of roughly $146.5 million going to a campaign called “Save America.”
However, of the total that went to “Save America,” roughly $348,000 went to production costs, while the remaining $142 million went to “media buys.”
Sources at DHS say that media buys are the cost of actually buying the ads themselves, whether purchased from social media or for a TV ad.
Kennedy also alleged that the bidding process for the contracts never took place and that Safe America Media’s recent founding was a cause for concern and collusion between McLaughlin and her husband’s business.
WATCH THE MOST VIRAL MOMENTS AS KRISTI NOEM’S HEARING GOES OFF THE RAILS
Debate over DHS’ “Save America” ad campaign intensified as senators challenged its costs and contractor ties, even as agency officials touted the initiative as a historic success in promoting self-deportation. (Graeme Sloan/Getty Images)
“Yes they did,” Noem responded during the hearing. “They went out to a competitive bid, and career officials at the department chose who would do those advertising commercials.”
The Strategy Group posted to X Tuesday that it never had a contract with the department. While it did receive several hundred thousand dollars for production costs associated with the advertising campaigns, The Strategy Group never made millions.
“The Strategy Group has never had a contract with DHS,” the post said. “We had a subcontract with Safe America [Media] for limited production services. Safe America paid us $226,137.17 total for 5 film shoots, 45 produced video advertisements and 6 produced radio advertisements.
DHS SPOKESWOMAN TRICIA MCLAUGHLIN TO LEAVE TRUMP ADMIN, SOURCE CONFIRMS
Critics raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest in a high-dollar DHS advertising effort, but department representatives say McLaughlin recused herself and that subcontracting decisions were made independently. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)
“If you’re going to try to question our integrity, bring actual evidence — we did,” the post concluded.
Because these ads were purchased using public funds, all contract totals are publicly available.
Lauren Bis, who took up the role of assistant secretary once McLaughlin left office, told Fox News Digital Tuesday that scrutiny from Republicans and Democrats over the advertising spending was unjustified because the campaigns resulted in “the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history.”
“Sanctuary politicians are attacking this ad campaign because it has been successful in CLOSING our borders and getting more than 2.2 million illegal aliens to LEAVE the U.S.,” Bis said.
“The DHS domestic and international ad campaign was the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history. The results speak for themselves: 2.2 million illegal aliens self-deported, and we now have the most secure border in American history.”
KRISTI NOEM TO FACE SENATE GRILLING OVER MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTINGS AS DHS SHUTDOWN HITS WEEK 3
The Trump administration reaffirmed that all illegal immigrants are eligible for deportations as they focus on arresting violent criminals first. (Raquel Natalicchio/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images)
Bis also compared the cost of arresting and deporting an illegal migrant to that of the minimal cost of an illegal migrant self-deporting. The department says the advertising campaign played a key role in marketing self-deportation.
A spokesperson at DHS also told Fox News Digital that contractors decide who they hire, fulfilling the terms of a contract, not the department itself.
“By law, DHS cannot and does not determine, control or weigh in on who contractors hire or use to fulfill the terms of the contract,” a DHS spokesperson told Fox. “Those decisions are made by the contractor alone. We have only become aware of these companies because of this inquiry and did not hire those companies.”
The spokesperson also noted that McLaughlin “recused herself” from interactions with subcontractors to avoid “any perceived appearance of impropriety.”
“Upon hearing who the subcontractors were for production of the ad, Ms. McLaughlin recused herself from any interaction or engagement with any subcontractors to avoid any perceived appearance of impropriety,” the spokesperson continued. “DHS Office of Public Affairs is the program officer. Ms. McLaughlin oversees the DHS Office of Public Affairs, which is simply the vehicle for this contract.”
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem takes her seat as she arrives to testify during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)
McLaughlin told Fox News Digital the criticism of her and her family by senators at the hearing is a matter of public manipulation.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“This is yet another example of politicians intentionally trying to dupe and manipulate the public to try to manufacture division and anger,” McLaughlin told Fox News Digital. “The ad spend and contracts are a matter of public record, and the process was done by the book.
“These politicians would rather smear private citizens and American small businesses than do any basic research.”
Fox News Digital’s Alexandra Koch contributed to this report.
Politics
Senate rejects war powers measure to withdraw forces from Iran
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans blocked a war powers resolution Wednesday designed to withdraw U.S. forces from hostilities in Iran, as the Trump administration accelerates its military campaign in a conflict that has killed hundreds, including at least six American service members.
The motion failed in a vote of 47-53.
In addition to pulling out military resources from the Middle East, the measure — introduced by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) — would have required Congress’ explicit approval before future engagement with Iran, a power granted to the legislative branch in the Constitution.
The House, where Republicans also hold an advantage, is scheduled to weigh in on a similar measure Thursday. Even if both Democratic-led measures were to succeed, President Trump was widely expected to veto the legislation.
“We are doing very well on the war front, to put it mildly,” President Trump said at a White House event on Wednesday afternoon. The president, who has come under scrutiny for offering shifting explanations on the war’s endgame, said that if he was asked to scale the American military operation from one to 10, he would rate it a 15.
Democrats dispute that Trump possesses the authority to wage the ongoing operation in Iran without explicit congressional approval.
Acknowledging the measure was unlikely to succeed, they framed the vote as a strategy to force lawmakers to put their support for or opposition to the war on record.
“Today every senator — every single one — will pick a side,” Schumer said. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East, or stand with Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth as they bumble us headfirst into another war?”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and most of his Republican colleagues have maintained that the president carried out a “pre-emptive” and “defensive” strike in Iran, giving him full authority to continue unilateral military operations.
Republicans saw the vote as the “last roadblock” stopping Trump from carrying out his mission against the Islamic Republic.
“I think the president has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities and operations that are currently underway there. There are a lot of controversy and questions around the war powers act, but I think the president is acting in the best interest of the nation and our national security interests,” Thune said at a news conference.
Senators largely held to party loyalties, with the exception of Kentucky Republican Rand Paul, who broke ranks to support the measure, and Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman, who opposed it.
The vote comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war against Iran is “accelerating,” with American and Israeli forces expanding air operations into Iranian territory. He pointed to evidence released by U.S. Central Command of a submarine strike on an Iranian warship, and also lauded other strikes throughout the region as civilian casualties in Iran surpassed 1,000 on the fourth day of the conflict, according to rights groups.
“We’re going to continue to do well,” Trump said Wednesday. “We have the greatest military in the world by far and that was a tremendous threat to us for many years. Forty-seven years they’ve been killing our people and killing people all over the world, and we have great support.”
Republicans blocked a similar war powers vote in January after the president ordered U.S. special forces to capture and extradite Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas on drug trafficking charges.
GOP leaders argued that the outcome of that mission equated to a quick success in the Middle East, despite an uncertain timeline from the Department of Defense.
In the House, lawmakers will vote on a separate war powers effort Thursday. That bill is led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the two lawmakers who authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
“Instead of sending billions overseas, we need to invest in jobs, healthcare, and education here,” Khanna said on X.
In addition to that proposal, moderate Democrats in the House have introduced a separate resolution that would give the administration a 30-day window to justify continued hostilities in the Middle East before requiring a formal declaration of war or authorization from Congress.
-
World1 week agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts1 week agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Wisconsin3 days agoSetting sail on iceboats across a frozen lake in Wisconsin
-
Maryland4 days agoAM showers Sunday in Maryland
-
Denver, CO1 week ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Florida4 days agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Oregon6 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMassachusetts man awaits word from family in Iran after attacks