Politics
Commentary: In Orange County, a progressive Latina pol beats back well-funded haters — again
On election night, Santa Ana City Council member Jessie Lopez found herself in third place, far behind fellow Democratic council colleague David Penaloza and Republican business owner Mayra Ruiz in the race to represent Orange County’s 68th Assembly District.
Tearful supporters at a California Working Families Party shindig at the Mission Control bar and arcade in downtown Santa Ana hugged Lopez, gifted her flowers and wished her well.
If the 37-year-old was sad, she didn’t show it. Lopez had seen this game play out before.
In 2023, the councilmember decisively beat back a recall attempt funded by Santa Ana’s police union and apartment owners who didn’t like her unabashedly progressive views in a city where centrist Democrats have dominated politics for decades and lefty ones were long ostracized.
I wrote a column shortly after, heralding Lopez’s overwhelming victory as a new era for Latino politics in Orange County, where Latinos make up a third of the population but still wield little power.
Lopez spent the next three years along with her fellow progressive Santa Ana council members shoring up the city’s rent control policies and its immigrant defense fund. Nevertheless, few gave Lopez a chance in her assembly race.
Penaloza — who declined to vote when the council deadlocked on whether to cancel Lopez’s recall election — had the backing of the Orange County and California Democratic Party establishment, from current 68th District Assemblymember Avelino Valencia (who’s running to represent the 34th Senate District) to Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas to Katie Porter, a former Orange County congresswoman who ran unsuccessfully for governor this year.
Penaloza’s campaign mailers and video ads were so ubiquitous these past few weeks that they filled up my mailbox and interrupted my binging of Hulu’s “Vanderpump Villa.”
So did anti-Lopez mailers and commercials, funded by nearly $2.7 million in independent expenditures. Yet Lopez once again beat back her well-funded opposition.
As of Wednesday evening, the latest Orange County Registrar of Voters election results had her in second place — less than 1,000 votes away from Penaloza.
“Voters proved that while money can influence politics, it can’t buy community support,” Lopez said this week as she unsuccessfully tried to enjoy tacos and guacamole at Lola Gaspar in downtown Santa Ana, where well-wishers kept calling her or congratulating the candidate in person. “This race is about the future of California — whether we answer to corporations and insiders or to the hard-working people we’re elected to serve.”
With Orange County Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento easily winning reelection and Unite Here Local 11 co-president Ada Briceño currently coming up short in her bid to represent the 67th Assembly District, which includes parts of Los Angeles County, Lopez may be the sole O.C. Latino progressive running in November for a seat beyond the local level.
Expect Lopez versus Penaloza to become a referendum on whether the leftward trend of Latino voters in Orange County continues — or whether its center holds.
“I’ve chosen my side,” Lopez told me. “I’m proud to stand with working people.”
Then she excused herself — someone else wanted to say what’s up.
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 column portrays Jessie Lopez as a symbol of an emergent, unapologetically progressive Latino politics in Orange County, arguing that this movement is challenging decades of centrist Democratic dominance and Latino underrepresentation in positions of real power.
-
It emphasizes that Lopez’s political credibility comes from having already survived a 2023 recall effort backed by Santa Ana’s police union and apartment owners, which the piece describes as a decisive victory that marked a turning point for left-leaning Latinos in the region.[1]
-
The article frames Lopez’s record on the Santa Ana City Council—particularly work to strengthen rent control and expand an immigrant defense fund—as proof that progressive Latinos are now governing, not just organizing, and that these policies are resonating with working-class residents.[1]
-
It stresses the scale of opposition Lopez faces, noting that powerful interests and nearly $2.7 million in independent expenditures were deployed against her, and yet she still advanced to November, which the article casts as evidence that grassroots support can overcome big money in politics.
-
The column contrasts Lopez’s underdog status with the institutional backing behind rival Democrat David Penaloza, who is aligned with the county and state Democratic establishment, and interprets Lopez’s surge into second place as a rebuke to party insiders who had largely written off her chances.
-
It presents Lopez’s own framing of the race as a choice between “corporations and insiders” and “hard-working people,” highlighting endorsements from labor and progressive leaders as reinforcing her identity as a champion for working families rather than entrenched interests.[2]
-
The piece suggests that the Lopez–Penaloza matchup will function as a broader referendum on whether Latino voters in Orange County will continue a leftward drift or whether a more centrist orientation will reassert itself, positioning Lopez as the standard-bearer for the progressive side of that divide.
-
It further underscores Lopez’s uniqueness by noting that, with some other Latino progressives either safely re-elected at the local level or trailing in their own legislative bids, Lopez may be the only Orange County Latino progressive on the November ballot for higher office, heightening the stakes of her campaign.
Different views on the topic
-
Critics of Lopez in Santa Ana have argued that the councilmember’s agenda is too ideologically driven and insufficiently attentive to public safety and fiscal stability, a view that surfaced prominently during the 2023 recall, when backers contended that her policy positions undermined effective governance and community security.[1]
-
Recall supporters, including police union and property-owner interests, have maintained that Lopez’s role in strengthening rent control and supporting tenant protections represents an overreach that they believe discourages investment, burdens small landlords, and could ultimately reduce the supply and quality of housing in the city.[1]
-
Opponents have further asserted that her stances on issues such as policing and criminal justice skew too far left for parts of the electorate, arguing that more moderate Democrats or centrist candidates are better positioned to balance reform with public safety and to appeal to a broader cross-section of Orange County voters.[1]
-
From the perspective of some business-oriented and landlord groups, Lopez’s alignment with organized labor and progressive advocacy organizations, along with endorsements from high-profile national progressives, signals a policy direction they associate with higher regulatory costs, stricter labor standards, and a political climate they view as hostile to business growth.[2]
-
Within Democratic circles, the strong institutional support for David Penaloza and other establishment-aligned candidates reflects a competing view that stability, incremental change, and coalition-building with moderates are more effective strategies in competitive areas like Orange County than the confrontational style and ambitious reforms favored by progressive challengers.
-
Additionally, some analysts and political operatives point to mixed results for progressive Latino candidates elsewhere in the region as evidence that Lopez’s success is not guaranteed to translate into a broader realignment, and argue that many Latino voters in Orange County remain pragmatic swing voters rather than committed partisans of the left.
-
Skeptics of Lopez’s framing of “insiders versus working people” contend that such rhetoric oversimplifies complex policy debates, noting that unions, nonprofits, and progressive political organizations backing her are themselves powerful actors that shape legislation and budgets, and that community interests cannot be neatly divided into grassroots versus establishment.[2]
-
Finally, opponents warn that if Lopez’s approach becomes the dominant model for Latino politics in Orange County, it could sharpen ideological polarization inside local Democratic politics, potentially weakening the party’s ability to compete against Republicans in closely contested districts and to assemble broad coalitions needed to pass durable reforms.
Politics
Trump could hand prized stealth jets to NATO ally once seen as alliance headache
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump said Tuesday he plans to lift U.S. sanctions on Turkey and signaled he is prepared to move forward with the long-stalled sale of F-35 stealth fighter jets, marking a dramatic reversal in U.S. policy toward the NATO ally years after Ankara was expelled from the program for its purchase of a Russian missile defense system.
Speaking alongside Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan during a bilateral meeting at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, Tuesday, Trump said his administration would remove sanctions imposed on Turkey’s defense sector.
“I can tell you we’re going to be taking the sanctions off, OK?” Trump said. “I don’t want him to waste his time answering that question. It’s time. We don’t sanction friends.”
TRUMP BETS ON FORMER NATO TROUBLEMAKER AS TURKEY’S STRATEGIC VALUE SURGES
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan welcomes US President Donald Trump at Ankara Airport, who is paying an official visit to Turkey ahead of the 36th NATO Heads of State and Government Summit in Ankara, Turkey, on July 07, 2026. (Dogukan Keskinkilic/Pool via REUTERS)
Asked whether he would sell F-35 fighter jets to Turkey despite existing legal restrictions tied to Ankara’s purchase of the Russian-made S-400 air defense system, Trump indicated he was open to doing so.
“Many people, including the people sitting right here thinks why wouldn’t we do that?” Trump said. “Turkey has been in many ways much more loyal than other countries that we think would be loyal.”
Pressed on concerns about Turkey’s continued possession of the S-400, Trump dismissed them.
“I have no concerns about anything.”
The remarks represent Trump’s clearest indication yet that he intends to restore defense ties with Turkey, building on months of efforts to revive military cooperation with one of NATO’s largest armed forces after years of strained relations.
Turkey was removed from the multinational F-35 program in 2019 after taking delivery of the Russian-made S-400 air defense system, prompting Washington to argue that operating the Kremlin-built system alongside America’s most advanced stealth fighter could expose sensitive U.S. technology. Congress subsequently imposed sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, or CAATSA.
‘WRITTEN IN OUR DNA’: POLISH PILOTS WHO REMEMBER SOVIET RULE PREPARE FOR AMERICA’S MOST LETHAL FIGHTER JET
Congress long has been one of the biggest obstacles to restoring Turkey’s access to the F-35, with bipartisan lawmakers arguing that Ankara should not receive America’s most advanced fighter aircraft while it continues to possess the Russian-made S-400 air defense system and pursues policies they say run counter to U.S. interests.
A U.S. airmen watches an Air Force F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter aircraft approach for the first time on July 14, 2011 at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida. (Samuel King Jr./U.S. Air Force)
Beyond political opposition, the Trump administration also faces legal hurdles.
While the president has authority over sanctions policy, Congress enacted additional restrictions after Turkey’s purchase of the S-400. Section 1245 of the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act bars the transfer of F-35 aircraft to Turkey unless the executive branch certifies that Ankara has met statutory requirements related to the Russian missile system.
In recent days, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers urged Trump not to move forward with an F-35 sale, arguing that doing so without satisfying those legal requirements would violate U.S. law and undermine national security.
Lawmakers also have warned that Turkey’s continued possession of the S-400, support for Hamas and tensions with fellow NATO allies Greece and Cyprus raise broader concerns about restoring Ankara’s access to the stealth fighter.
Russian S-400 missile air defence systems are seen before the military parade to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the battle of Stalingrad in World War Two, in the city of Volgograd, Russia February 2, 2018. REUTERS/Tatyana Maleyeva – UP1EE220T3A2B
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The Pentagon has maintained that the S-400’s sophisticated radar could collect data on the F-35’s radar signature and electronic profile during routine operations, potentially allowing Russia to better detect and defeat the aircraft in a future conflict if that information were shared with Moscow.
When the Trump administration removed Turkey from the F-35 program in 2019, the White House said “the F-35 cannot coexist with a Russian intelligence collection platform that will be used to learn about its advanced capabilities.”
Pentagon acquisition chief Ellen Lord similarly warned at the time that allowing Turkey to operate both systems would jeopardize the long-term security of the F-35 program because “much of the F-35’s strength lies in its stealth capabilities.”
Politics
Commentary: Trump’s World Cup meddling only made matters worse for rattled U.S. squad
SEATTLE — Is everybody happy now? You good, Mr. President?
Put our boys in a blender, President Trump did, with those phone calls to FIFA President Gianni Infantino. Messed with their mojo by politicking to get American striker Folarin Balogun’s red card rescinded.
We’ll have to check VAR, but it might be the first time Trump succeeded at having a decision overturned.
Probably because this time what he sought to overturn — discipline stemming from Balogun’s accidental contact in the United States’ victory over Bosnia and Herzegovina — actually was unjust. Balogun should not have received a red card.
The problem is, having our President butt in here was a joke. Unfunny and out of bounds, offsides, an own goal — all of the things.
It put the U.S. team at the center of a geopolitical maelstrom, which is exactly what they did not need in the hours before the biggest match of their lives and the biggest match in the history of the U.S. men’s soccer program.
Some 40 or 50 million viewers were expected to tune in; how many of them watched for the first time? And what sort of impression did Monday’s 4-1 blunder-filled meltdown against Belgium make? That we stink at soccer — still?
If you were one of them, please, believe your soccer-fan friends when they tell you the Americans played much better in previous matches.
But so much for a magical run. On their home turf, the Americans pulled up lame before the finish line (aka, for the U.S. team’s purposes, its first quarterfinals since 2002).
To their credit, after the debacle, members of the U.S. team didn’t complain about anything being rigged. They didn’t use the distraction as an excuse. And they didn’t point fingers at anyone — anyone at all.
U.S. striker Folarin Balogun (20) walks to the locker room at halftime against Belgium in the World Cup on Monday at Lumen Field in Seattle.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
“We’re playing on home soil,” defender Chris Richards said. “So the only pressure we put on ourselves is to perform for our country, and ultimately didn’t feel the way we wanted to today. But I don’t think the antics of the last 24 hours had anything to do with it.”
No, they said the “debate,” or “outside noise” or “political manipulation” — as Tim Ream, Alex Freeman and coach Mauricio Pochettino described what others are calling “Balogate” — were not to blame for the gut-punch that answered the question: Why not us?
Because the U.S. is not yet good enough to beat the world’s great teams. Especially not when their pregame preparation includes having to try to block out an international uproar.
To have any hope against the Belgians in the round of 16 — a matchup between FIFA’s Nos. 9- and 17-ranked sides — the Americans needed to be going full-tilt, to be focused and ferocious and probably also a little bit lucky.
Instead, they looked shook, rattled. And they got rolled.
They were the worst version of themselves at the worst time, which was so weird from a team that had been on its front foot from the first whistle against Paraguay.
Not Monday. Against Belgium, they were on their heels from the outset. Heavy touches, slow afoot, playing like they had the weight of the World Cup on their shoulders.
And all that White House maddening meddling — for what?
Balogun started and played most of the match, but it could just as well have been reserve striker Ricardo Pepi. Or you or me, Balogun was that ineffective.
His play of the day came postmatch, when he approached Belgian coach Rudi Garcia and the two had a respectful exchange. A real diplomat, that Brooklyn-born, Britain-raised American by birthright.
This loss was a real team effort, of course. Christian Pulisic came off in the 59th minute after twisting his right ankle — leaving this World Cup without a goal in the four matches he appeared.
Matt Freese, the Harvard-educated starting goalkeeper, had a brain cramp of epic proportions when he stepped outside of the box and failed to corral a ball. Belgium’s Charles De Ketelaere kicked it loose and set up Hans Vanaken, whose shot traveled behind Ream for an easy score that made it 3-1 in the 57th minute.
There was a lot of poor decision-making with this match, on and off the pitch.
In the end, Trump’s appeal to Infantino did more harm than good. But what if some good could come from it?
Hey, FIFA, what about giving teams a process to appeal cards, like our American athletes in the NBA, NFL and MLB have?
Offering a suggestion box wouldn’t be opening Pandora’s box, not if it were a transparent and regular part of the game that would, hopefully, offer increasingly fair outcomes in a tournament where every match is so monumental — as our President recognized, much too enthusiastically.
U.S. coach Mauricio Pochettino waves to the crown after a 4-1 loss to Belgium at the World Cup on Monday.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
Politics
Preliminary Hearing for Man Accused of Killing Charlie Kirk Starts in Utah
Prosecutors on Monday began laying out their case against the man accused of murdering Charlie Kirk. It was the first day of a weeklong preliminary hearing that will determine whether or not there is enough evidence against the accused killer to stand trial.
-
Alaska5 minutes agoAlaska, Trump Administration Settle Biden-Era Oil, Gas Plan Case
-
Arizona7 minutes agoMan, woman found dead near Arizona-Utah border; suspect arrested
-
Arkansas12 minutes agoSanders Appoints Steve Kueter to the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission • Arkansas Game & Fish Commission
-
California20 minutes agoCalifornia Film Tax Credits For ‘Shrek’, Disney & Ben Affleck Movies
-
Colorado20 minutes agoColorado Peak Claims Another Life
-
Connecticut27 minutes agoHere’s How Much Rain Fell in Your Town
-
Delaware35 minutes agoCoastal Delaware Restaurant Week raises funds for local first responders – Milford LIVE! – Local Delaware News, Kent and Sussex Counties
-
Florida37 minutes agoUS appeals court strikes down key part of Florida law restricting campus race and gender discussions