candidates

President Trump came to battleground North Carolina doubling down on a tantalizing and implausible midterm promise. “If we win,” he said, “we’re going to get you $5,000. So that’s it. Very simple.”

The Republican candidates who spoke at the rally had nothing to say about it.

Their silence reflects a broader pattern. About a week after the president unveiled his “Trump dividend” pledge at the party’s unusual midterm convention in Dallas, there is little evidence that Republicans in competitive races have incorporated it into their campaigns.

The pledge hasn’t been a staple of television advertising, whether from Trump’s own political operation or his party’s candidates. It usually only comes up when reporters ask about it, prompting most Republicans to sidestep the idea.

The Republican National Committee considers the proposed payments part of Trump’s broader economic vision and says candidates should get behind it.

“Of course we encourage all Republican candidates to run on his agenda, and that includes efforts to put more money in the pockets of the American people,” spokesperson Natalie Baldassarre said.

There are some exceptions. Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden, who is seeking reelection in a battleground Wisconsin district, has praised the proposal.

The idea comes as the economy confronts rising interest rates, continuing inflation and climbing fuel costs. Republicans are fighting to keep their majorities in the House and Senate.

Trump previously promised to use savings from his White House advisory team, which he calls the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, and revenue from tariffs on imports to distribute payments of $2,000 or more, but none of that came to pass. The president has said he did not think congressional approval would be needed for the idea, which could cost more than $1 trillion, but House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) indicated the promise would require lawmakers to act.

Democrats point to those previous suggestions for a payout to raise skepticism about the $5,000 pledge.

“This idea is nothing more than a recycled broken promise that voters know Republicans will never deliver,” said Viet Shelton, a spokesperson for the House Democratic campaign arm.

Republican campaign advertising has largely focused on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, including provisions that temporarily cut taxes on tips and overtime. Other candidates are concentrating on local issues or attacks against their opponents.

Doug Heye, a Republican strategist and former Republican National Committee communications director, said there is little mystery about why candidates have been reluctant to embrace the pledge.

“It’s a dumb idea,” Heye said. “There’s no way to pay for it and it would spike inflation.”

Catalini writes for the Associated Press.

Labor Day is behind us, election day is less than two months away, and the question before Los Angeles voters is this:

Can anyone run this city?

Two fires at abandoned properties, one in Studio City and the other on the eastern edge of Larchmont, offer windows into City Hall dysfunction as Mayor Karen Bass defends her job against a challenge by City Councilmember Nithya Raman.

Let’s start on Babcock Avenue, just south of Moorpark Street, where, for roughly five years, neighbors of a vacant house begged City Hall for attention to what had been a dumping ground, a fire hazard and a homeless hangout.

To no avail.

When they received any response at all, they got the runaround.

Resident Jon Manzanares told me he has supported Bass and Raman in the past. But in a spring 2025 email to City Hall, he said both “should be ashamed and resign in disgrace.”

Well, they didn’t. And following an Aug. 26 fire at the Babcock property, which damaged the rear of an adjacent home, Bass and Raman went after each other for not having addressed all those pleas for help.

“Nithya Raman wants to lead the whole city,” said a Bass campaign social media post, but after six years in office “she can’t even get a single lot cleaned up in her own district.”

Raman shot back, saying she had alerted the mayor’s office about the nuisance property 10 months earlier.

“I cannot call her about the 200-plus issues that we’re dealing with that are at this level of risk,” Raman snapped.

The finger-pointing doesn’t inspire confidence, does it?

At least, said Manzanares, a retired lawyer, L.A. found out what it takes to get a response from the two mayoral candidates.

“The news crews showed up” to cover the fire, Manzanares told me, “and it finally got some attention because of the election.”

But festering eyesores are everywhere, as Bass herself indicated when she called in to KTLA-TV.

Fire damage is seen at an abandoned Studio City property following a overnight blaze on Aug. 26.

(KTLA-TV)

“You know,” she said, “this is a situation that unfortunately exists all over the city.”

A for honesty. F for failing to clean up all those messes, regardless of whether the problem is departmental failure or communications breakdowns with council members.

The fire in Studio City spread to a neighboring property and damaged a structure that Kayt Miranda uses for storage and as a home office. I spoke to Miranda on the front porch of her home, and she said she had filed multiple complaints about the nuisance property over a five-year period.

Five years.

“And we never heard back,” Miranda said, telling me she had seen people set up camp at the property, bringing in mattresses, book shelves and clothing racks. “Then we went to Raman’s office … They would send responses, but … we never saw any action.”

Manzanares showed me an email from a Raman staffer last month that said, “unfortunately, there is not a clear and expeditious path forward on this case.”

Why not? Was it going to take another five years?

Miranda said exasperated neighbors had banded together to put up more lighting and cameras to protect their properties, “but it really did feel like this is forever, because nothing was going to happen.”

When I was done in Studio City, I drove across town to meet with construction worker and pastor Juan Galicia, whose house was torched in March when fire jumped from an adjacent abandoned property.

I had first heard about Galicia in April, when I toured a nearby Hollywood neighborhood for a column about a homeowner who had hired her housekeeper to report illegal dumping, help bag up the daily mess and try to reduce the fire risk around encampments. The city wasn’t doing its job, Stefanie Keenan had told me, so she was spending her own money to protect herself and neighbors. And she still is.

Galicia didn’t get the protection he needed, despite multiple contacts with police and city offices — by him, relatives and neighbors —regarding the empty dwelling next door to his on North St. Andrews Place. Galicia said squatters were in and out of the house, with periodic fighting and drug use. Police would come, he said, but when they left, the trouble would return.

Galicia was preaching at his church in South L.A. when flames engulfed his home, where he lived with an extended family of 10.

“Eighteen years,” he said of his time in the house. “And in 10 minutes, you have nothing.”

I followed him into the house, with its charred walls, ceiling and flooring. Galicia wore a somber expression, as if still suffering from the shock, and he saw new evidence of trespassers, along with some fresh graffiti.

Galicia told me, as he told The Times’ Seamus Bozeman in July, that he intends to rebuild. But his insurance settlement won’t cover the cost of rebuilding, and he’s still paying $2,000 a month on the mortgage, plus $6,200 for temporary lodging in a rented house.

Meanwhile, as he struggles with a crushing financial problem he did not create, he’s aware that millions are being spent on homelessness without significant progress.

Aerial view of Larchmont home belonging to Pastor Juan Galicia that was destroyed by a fire that began at a vacant property next door.

(Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times)

“I don’t understand,” Galicia said.

A spokesperson for City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez told me his office became aware of Galicia’s issue in January, but because of paperwork and the complexity of legal records, could not track down the owner of the adjacent property before the fire.

In L.A., people trip and fall in droves and successfully sue the city for millions. I wondered if Galicia might have a liability case against the city, but two attorneys told me going after the next-door property owner could be more fruitful.

In a Sept. 5 press release, Bass said she was directing city crews to clean and secure nuisance properties citywide. OK, fine, but what took her so long?

Bass also said she had earlier signed legislation initiated by Councilmember Monica Rodriguez to speed the process of cracking down on negligent property owners and to hit them with stiffer penalties.

Those fines ought to go into a fund to assist Juan Galicia and others like him.

Between 2018 and 2024, according to the L.A. Fire Department, homelessness was a factor in about one-third of all fires in the city.

“I feel for these people, I really do. I’m not unsympathetic,” Jon Manzanares told me in Studio City. “But by the same token, we need to do something constructive and not have these encampments that start fires.”

With less than two months to go before the election, it’s on Bass and Raman to convince voters they can make a difference.

The finger-pointing is useless.

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Days before California voters receive their mail-in ballots, gubernatorial candidates Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, and Steve Hilton, a Republican, will debate in a nationally televised face-off.

On Sept. 30 at CNN’s Burbank studio, the two candidates hoping to succeed termed-out Gov. Gavin Newson are expected to spar over sharply divergent visions for the future of the state. California’s next leader is expected to face pressing fiscal issues, as well as continued battle with the Trump administration.

Given California’s deep Democratic tilt, there was a question whether the two men would debate.

On Aug. 19, Becerra promised multiple debates with Hilton ahead of the general election.

“We will have debates, and between now and Nov. 3, we will continue to go out there and meet with folks to make sure they have an opportunity to see the candidates,” Becerra told reporters after greeting business owners, community leaders and voters in a walking tour of Little Tokyo in downtown Los Angeles. “Voters need to have good information. We’ll make sure they have it, and there will be debates.”

The following day, Hilton said he was skeptical of Becerra’s promise.

“I don’t believe him unless he commits to an actual debate. Invitations are on the table for dates and places,” Hilton said. “Why can’t he just accept them? I think he’s lying. I don’t think he wants to do debates because he doesn’t want to debate his record.”

September’s hour-long debate, taking place shortly before county elections officials begin mailing ballots to all the state’s registered voters, will be moderated by the cable network’s anchors Dana Bash and Jake Tapper.

It is the most attention a California gubernatorial contest has drawn since 2010, when “Today” show host Matt Lauer and NBC News Political Director Chuck Todd moderated nationally televised clashes.

That is perhaps unsurprising given how sharply the California electorate has swung left, with no Republican winning a statewide contest since 2006. Two did that year.

While there will not be a studio audience, the debate will air on CNN, CNN International, CNN en Español, CNN.com and related TV and mobile apps for subscribers.

Times staff writer Nicole Nixon contributed to this report.

A UCLA linebacker shells out $11,100 to help a Republican senator in Pennsylvania.

A businessman from the small Northern California town of Eureka spends $515,000 to defeat a powerful Democrat in South Dakota.

A Silicon Valley couple funnels cash to elect Democratic secretaries of state in swing states like Ohio who will oversee voting in the coming presidential election.

Those tidbits from campaign finance reports demonstrate why California lately feels like Iowa or New Hampshire next winter. For politicians, including presidential candidates, it’s where the money is.

Last week alone, Democratic Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut and Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware made the trek. Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona was also here, following his rival, former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who had been here the week before. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, another Republican contender, will be here next month.

“It is the place you go to get political money,” said Sheila Krumholz, director of the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics in Washington, D.C.

Californians spent at least $502 million on federal campaigns in the last four years, federal campaign records show — 24% more than runner-up New York and about 13 % of all federal campaign funds raised nationally.

At The Times’ request, the center compiled a list of California’s top 100 donors to federal campaigns. The Times interviewed contributors and reviewed Federal Election Commission documents and other records.

The donors gave during the 2003-2004 election cycle, which included the latest presidential campaign, and the 2005-2006 races for the U.S. House and Senate.

Donors’ motives vary. They might be trying to gain an edge in business, or access to powerful officials. Some win perquisites, such as ambassadorships. Many are ideologues whose passions run high on the war or healthcare or taxes.

Federal law restricts donors from giving more than $4,600 directly to a single candidate in a year. But many give far larger sums to independent campaign committees. Others leverage their money by organizing fundraising events.

In the past four years, Deborah Rappaport and her husband, venture capitalist Andrew Rappaport, of Woodside, have spent $5.2 million on federal politics, much of it to encourage young people to vote. They held a fundraiser for Democratic presidential candidate and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina this month, raising more than $100,000.

“The stakes are huge,” Deborah Rappaport said, describing herself as “an old lefty.”

In one of the more unusual uses of campaign money, Silicon Valley Democrats Michael and Frances Kieschnick helped fund a successful campaign in 2006 to elect Democrats as secretaries of state who will oversee balloting in five swing states — a reaction to what some perceived as bias by Republican officials in Florida and Ohio in the 2000 and 2004 presidential vote counting.

Los Angeles-area developer Rick Caruso has a goal of raising $1 million for Romney’s bid for the Republican nomination.

“I’m on a big Republican list,” said Caruso, who has given $315,000 since 2003 to federal campaigns. “Politicians … never lose your number.”

Californians had a significant role in the 2006 fight for control of Congress, donating $6.6 million directly to candidates in the six U.S. Senate races that tipped control to Democrats, campaign records show.

In Montana, Democrat Jon Tester ousted Republican Sen. Conrad Burns by 3,600 votes, aided in part by Richard and Marilyn Mazess of Montecito. They gave $50,000 to the independent group Campaign Money Watch, which aired a commercial ridiculing Burns for his ties to “big oil.”

Hollywood moguls Steven Spielberg and Jeffrey Katzenberg and other Californians donated a total of $500,000 directly to Tester. Burns collected $460,000 from such Californians as Los Angeles venture capitalist Elliott Broidy and Edward Atsinger III, of Camarillo, chief executive of Christian radio network Salem Broadcasting.

“The money — the California and New York money — was very important to Tester,” said political scientist Craig Wilson of Montana State University, Billings.

In addition to familiar California sources of political money — defense, energy and aerospace companies, developers, unions, Hollywood and Silicon Valley — the top donors include numerous lawyers, heirs and heiresses, and little-known financial, agricultural and other players scattered around the state.

(Among the big-name donors who don’t make the latest list: Hollywood mogul David Geffen and investor Ronald Burkle.)

California is widely seen as a bastion of Democrats. But its greenbacks often are shaded Republican red.

Robin Arkley, who owns a finance and real estate firm in Eureka, had a hand in upending the Democratic power structure nationally in 2004. The Republican spent $515,000 on independent campaign ads attacking then-Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. Daschle was ousted by Republican John Thune, who raised $1.29 million from California, more than any other state — including South Dakota, according to Political Moneyline.

For the 2006 election, Steven B. Taylor, a retired farmer from Salinas, his wife and their three adult children spent heavily on the GOP.

One of the Taylors’ sons, Christian, plays football for UCLA. He donated $45,000, much of it to such Republicans as Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania. Altogether, the Taylor family gave Santorum $14,700.

There was one exception to the Taylors’ Republican ways. They gave $20,000 to the Green Party of Luzerne County, Pa., including $9,000 from Christian. The goal: to help a Green Party candidate take votes from Robert P. Casey Jr., the Democrat challenging Santorum. The strategy failed and Casey unseated Santorum.

The Taylors did not return calls.

In addition to directly raising millions for President Bush, the state’s Republicans have funded Progress for America, a group based in Washington that has countered the liberal MoveOn.org. In 2005, it aired television ads urging senators to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. for the Supreme Court. It also has run ads supporting the war in Iraq.

A. Jerrold Perenchio, chairman of Univision, the Spanish-language television network, has given the group nearly $10 million since 2003. Stockton developer Alex G. Spanos gave another $5 million, as did Los Angeles billionaire Roland E. Arnall and his wife, Dawn. Caruso chipped in $100,000 to help Roberts, now chief justice.

Bush has bestowed ambassadorships on five Californians, including Los Angeles car dealer Robert H. Tuttle, United Kingdom; Orange County investor George Argyros, formerly to Spain; Los Angeles venture capitalist Ronald Spogli, Italy; and investor Frank Baxter, Uruguay. Combined, they have given $1.6 million to the GOP since 2000, including donations to Bush’s inaugurals.

The fifth, Arnall, is the biggest donor-ambassador. He represents U.S. interests in the Netherlands. Since 2004, Roland and Dawn Arnall have given $5.5 million primarily to Republican candidates and organizations, and another $1 million to Bush’s 2005 inaugural. Arnall owns home mortgage lender Ameriquest Capital Corp.

Los Angeles movie producer Stephen L. Bing was the state’s largest single donor, with nearly $14.2 million, to federal campaigns during the past four years, most of it to Democrats. Bing, who declines interviews, spent another $49 million on a failed California initiative in 2006 to boost alternative energy. He likely will support Clinton’s candidacy.

Clinton has taken $7.7 million from here for her U.S. Senate campaigns, second only to the $26.5 million she has raised in her home base.

After Illinois, California has been the second largest source of money for Obama, Federal Election Commission records show.

Sacramento Democrat Eleni Tsakopoulos-Kounalakis and her father, Angelo Tsakopoulos, have helped organize events for many Democrats, but are “Hillary people all the way.”

“We want to see the White House restored to competent hands,” she said.

She explained her family’s political involvement by telling her father’s story.

He came here at age 15 from Greece with nothing, made a fortune as a developer and hosted a president, Bill Clinton, at his home. Tsakopoulos never could have attained such success in the old country.

These days, Democratic politicians all come courting.

“Everybody calls and we love it,” she said. “What an incredible honor and privilege.”

*

Dan.morain@latimes.com

Times researcher Janet Lundblad contributed to this report.

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Top 20 organizational donors

California corporations, labor unions and organizations include some of the biggest national donors to federal campaigns. Federal law bars corporations and unions from giving directly to candidates. But their executives and employees are free to make donations. Here is a list of the top 20 donors by organization.

*–* Donor Industry Total (millions) Party preference Service Employees Internationa Labor $4.83 Democrat l Union Northrop Aerospace 3.19 Leans Rep Grumman Sierra Club Environment 3.10 Democrat Lerach, Attorney-Plaintiffs 2.09 Democrat Coughlin et al Time Warner Entertainment 2.05 Democrat American Academy of Health Care 1.98 Leans Rep Ophthalmolog y Cisco Systems Technology 1.64 Bipartisan Kleiner, Finance 1.46 Leans Dem Perkins et al Edison Energy 1.24 Leans Rep Internationa l TCW Group Finance 1.23 Republican SAIC Defense 1.22 Leans Rep Morongo Band Native American of Mission issues; casinos 1.16 Bipartisan Indians Chevron Corp Energy 1.13 Republican Allianz Insurance 1.11 Republican General Defense 1.09 Leans Rep Atomics Jacobs Engineers 1.09 Bipartisan Engineering Group Kazan, Attorney-Plaintiffs 0.98 Democrat McClain et al Intuit Technology 0.93 Bipartisan Occidental Energy 0.93 Leans Rep Petroleum Capital Finance 0.92 Bipartisan Group Cos

*–*

Democrat or Republican means at least 80% donated to one party or affiliated candidate or interest group; leans means 60% or more to one party; bipartisan means 40% to 60% to each party. Donations from companies based elsewhere came from California branch.

Sources: Center for Responsive Politics, Times research, federal election records. Graphics reporting by Dan Morain

—

Top 20 individual contributors

California is like a magnet to candidates nationally. From 2003 to 2006, Californians donated at least $502 million to federal candidates and national political parties, and to independent campaign groups known as 527s. The top 20 donors are spread from Eureka to

San Diego:

*–* Amount Party Name City Industry (in millions) preference Stephen Bing Los Angeles Real estate $14.18 Dem. heir, film prod Herbert&Mar; Oakland Finance; 13.85 Dem. ion Sandler retired A. Jerrold Los Angeles Univision 9.94 Rep. Perenchio chairman Roland and Los Angeles Ameriquest; Dawn Arnall ambassador 5.52 Rep. to Netherlands Alexander Stockton SD Chargers, 5.48 Rep. G./Faye deve Spanos Deborah/And Portola Valley Venture 5.19 Dem. rew capital Rappaport Ted Waitt San Diego Gateway co-founder, Avalon 5.06 Dem. Capital Anne Getty Corona del Mar Getty heiress 1.63 Dem. Earhart Susie/Mark San Francisco Found Esprit 1.60 Dem. Buell clothing Angelo Sacramento Real estate 1.25 Dem. Tsakopoulos Louise Gund Berkeley Philanthropi 1.24 Dem. st Marcia l. Los Angeles Entertainment 1.24 Dem. Carsey Robin, Cherie, Allison, Elizabeth Eureka Finance, 1.23 Rep. Arkley real estate Peter S. Los Angeles Investments, Bing father of 1.09 Dem. Stephen Wayne B. Glendale Public 1.07 Rep. Hughes Storage Inc. Michael/Fra Palo Alto Fin.,philant 1.07 Dem. nces hropy Kieschnick William/Wil Newport Beach Developer 0.99 Rep. la Dean Lyon Richard/Sha Los Angeles Entertainment 0.96 Dem. ri Foos Stewart/Lyn Los Angeles Finance, ag. 0.90 Dem. da Resnick M. Quinn and Wayne Jordan Oakland Philanthropy 0.67 Dem. Delaney , real estate

*–*

In some cases, immediate family members also donated

Sources: Center for Responsive Politics, Times research, federal election records. Graphics reporting by Dan Morain

As a teenager before he was even allowed to vote, Charlie Comfort organized for then-Sen. Barack Obama in his hometown of Oskaloosa, Iowa.

Now he’s a Republican.

Meet Charlie. He lives in Waterloo.

He’s 23 and this will be his third presidential caucus.

Charlie’s first foray into politics was during the 2008 campaign. He met Obama at the Smokey Row Coffeehouse, one of the most popular stops for candidates in Oskaloosa, on the Fourth of July in 2007.

Obama campaign volunteers. (Handout)

It was Malia Obama’s 9th birthday, and the shop’s staff put the candidate’s daughter’s name up on the marquee inside.

After Obama spoke, Charlie ran home excited and ready to help.

He wasn’t old enough to vote but dedicated hours to organizing his neighbors, teachers and anyone else who would listen. The Obama campaign said Charlie, a high school student, made more phone calls than any other volunteer in town.

His hard work — at age 15 — earned him a prime spot next to the candidate in this group photo.

The Comfort family was the subject of a front-page story in the Washington Times the morning of the caucus.

Why?

They clearly illustrated the divided nature of the state: Martha Comfort backed Hillary Clinton, Keith Comfort preferred John Edwards and their son was traveling all over the region to put up Obama lawn signs instead of finishing his homework.

Here they are, eight years ago.

Martha Comfort, a legal assistant in town, was working as a Clinton precinct captain. Keith Comfort, a banker, was a little more passive about his support for Edwards, who would ultimately come in second in the caucuses (and later drop out of the race).

Here’s a semi-awkward clip where I tried to get them to pretend they were in a caucus.

SIGN UP for our free Essential Politics newsletter >>

Eight years later, Charlie is a Republican.

Before we get to how that happened, it’s important to note the teenager used the skills he built as a political organizer to run for office himself.

At the age of 19 in October 2011, he became the youngest school board member in Oskaloosa’s history after unseating a 17-year incumbent and getting all his friends to vote.

His interest in education policy had an unintended consequence — he didn’t like that Obama, for whom he’d worked so hard to get to the White House, had not revamped the No Child Left Behind Act as promised. He found himself intrigued by the Republican candidates coming to town in the hopes of winning the Iowa caucuses and challenging Obama in 2012.

In the 2012 Iowa caucuses, he was a Newt Gingrich precinct captain.

But he changed his mind on the way in, and his first caucus vote ultimately went to ex-Sen. Rick Santorum. “I appreciate he spent so much time in Iowa,” Charlie says now.

Once Mitt Romney won the nomination, Charlie set out to help the GOP in the swing state.

That fall, he appeared in a piece by “PBS NewsHour.” (About four minutes into the piece, interviewed at the Smokey Row coffee shop, of course.)

Fast forward four years, and he’s got a tough choice to make.

Charlie has moved from Oskaloosa to Waterloo and is working in marketing. He spent his weekend “chasing the candidates around” because he was undecided as the long campaign for the caucuses comes to a close.

Like most Iowans interested in this quirky process, he’s met many of the hopefuls as they make their way across the state. He even introduced former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at an event at Smokey Row in October. But that didn’t really help him make up his mind.

“I am disappointed by all the anger, rhetoric and hatred that has been spewed by the party this year,” he says. “I am disappointed that the candidates who would support more moderate values have balked on that to try and get more of a conservative base turning out and I don’t think the Republican platform has been expressed as well as it could.”

Martha and Keith Comfort are still Democrats.

But they also are still split on their preferred candidate.

Keith Comfort gave his first-ever political donation, to Sen. Bernie Sanders. Martha Comfort isn’t working on Clinton’s behalf this time, but she’s still in her corner — probably.

“Now I’m on the fence and I may lean towards Bernie,” she says. “I like what he stands for and I look at Hillary and she really does have the experience but she does have some baggage. But I guess everybody does.”

Then again … “I’m leaning to Hillary because she’s realistic about what she’s promising. She knows what takes place in the office of the president and the process to get things through Congress.”

She says she’ll be resolute in her choice before walking into her neighborhood caucus meeting Monday night: “Nobody is going to persuade me there, even if my husband is across the room.”

As for Charlie, he’s made up his mind.

Iowa caucusgoer Charlie Comfort and presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina

Charlie Comfort and Carly Fiorina. (Courtesy of Charlie Comfort)

He didn’t even need the whole weekend.

“This is who I plan to caucus for,” Charlie said Saturday via Facebook Messenger.

It wasn’t intended to have dramatic effect, but the photo didn’t come through for several minutes.

But there he is, smiling next to former Hewlett-Packard Chief Executive Carly Fiorina, considered a long shot in Iowa and nationally.

“She seems genuine, authentic. She has a business background and has experience with policymakers, whether it be domestically or foreign. Ultimately, I think she is in it for the right reasons — to help fix America,” he said.

“I am very impressed with her secretary-to-CEO story. Only in America.”

For more, go to www.latimes.com/politics

ALSO:

Everything you need to know about the Iowa caucuses and why they matter

From west to east, Iowa voters have starkly different realities and fears

How Martin O’Malley could decide who wins the Democratic caucuses in Iowa