Tuesday, Republicans suffered probably one of the most humiliating midterm defeats in recent history. Democrats flipped both the House and Senate, swept every statewide executive office on the ballot in Texas (a longtime Republican stronghold), and the DSA claimed 127 victories nationwide.

As we all digested the election results, there were many surprising stories. And there was one very unsurprising one. California, the birthplace of American tech and home to the 4th largest economy in the world (if it were a country), keeps electing the politicians responsible for its downfall.

Xavier Becerra, who has the personality of a doorknob and who once oversaw a program accused of placing a number of unaccompanied migrant children in trafficking situations, won the governorship by nearly 28 points. He’s taking over, of course, from Gavin Newsom, who’s all but guaranteed to run for president in 2028. Newsom, who repeatedly rises from the ashes of his own catastrophes like some kind of dumpster fire phoenix, boasts that “the future of space and technology is in California” while those same companies literally flee the state for literally greener pastures (it actually rains in Texas).

Meanwhile, Nithya Raman is LA’s first DSA-backed mayor. Housing was a centerpiece of her campaign. But Raman’s track record on housing is legitimately embarrassing. In 2022, early into her tenure as City Councilmember and vice chair of the City Council’s Housing Committee, Raman campaigned hard for the “mansion tax” (a 4-5.5% tax on real estate selling above $5.4 million), which has contributed to the slowdown in multifamily construction and the loss of thousands of construction jobs. And as we reported back in August, her tenure as chair of the housing committee ended with her removal from the position, following rising homelessness, hundreds of millions in unspent funds, abysmal oversight, and vacant taxpayer-funded housing. Even some of her DSA-endorsed peers have struggled to defend her record.

Also in Oakland, Barbara Lee was reelected in a landslide. Her plan for contending with the country’s highest property crime rates, copper thieves knocking out phone and internet service, and crews hauling away roughly 20 million pounds of illegally dumped trash every year — includes hiring more police officers (yay!) and optional life coaching for the city’s most violent gang members (nay!).

Proposition 39, which would have required voter identification, was rejected, and so too was Proposition 41, as it seems putting restrictions on certain taxes and additional audits on state spending is just a bridge too far for most Californians.

But there are rays of hope.

In San Francisco, our voter guide’s preferred candidates, Stephen Sherrill in District 2, Matt Dorsey in District 6, and all three of our school board picks, are in winning positions (a huge victory for eighth-grade Algebra I, HUZZAH!).

Voters rejected Proposition 40, the so-called “billionaire tax.” Another measure (Proposition 42), which would prevent the state from imposing any new wealth taxes on assets people already own, is leading (take that, Ro Khanna!).

And perhaps most notably, there was somewhat healthy-ish (sort of) opposition to Democrats this year. Steve Hilton, Becerra’s opponent, raised a decent amount of money across more unique donors than Becerra’s campaign. Republican Spencer Pratt won a quarter of the primary vote in LA while speaking frankly about the frustrations of ordinary Angelenos, such as people taking shits in the street and officials’ embarrassing performance during last year’s wildfires.

Still, after all the time I’ve spent reporting, boots on the ground, on California dysfunction, I keep coming back to the same question: Why are these politicians so unwilling to confront problems that are literally staring them in the face and metastasizing? They live here too. They must see what’s happening. And yet Californians keep rewarding them with higher office.

THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH “GOOD INTENTIONS”

I think it’s reasonable to believe (and this is my pretty charitable interpretation of human nature) that, as Thomas Sowell argues in The Vision of the Anointed, these progressive politicians and their bases are so invested in their moral vision that they judge the success of their policies by the virtue of their intentions rather than their policies’ measurable outcomes. If a program is sold as compassionate and keeping with the individual’s autonomy, its continued existence becomes evidence of virtue.

Get 14 day free trial