meltdown

SACRAMENTO — Sen. Alex Padilla apparently dreams of becoming California’s next governor. He’s thinking hard about entering the race to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom. And Katie Porter may have just opened the starting gate for him.

Porter has been regarded as the early front-runner. But she tripped and stumbled badly during a contentious, unprofessional and rude performance in a recent routine TV interview that went viral.

We don’t know the extent of her injury. But it was certainly enough to make Padilla’s decision a lot easier. If he really deep down covets the job of governor, the time seems ripe to apply for it.

Padilla wouldn’t need to vacate the Senate merely to run. He’d have what’s called a “free ride”: He doesn’t face reelection next year because his Senate term runs through 2028.

But a Senate seat is gold plated. No term limits — a job often for life. It offers prestige and power, with sway over a global array of issues.

Why would Padilla trade that to become the governor whose state is plagued by homelessness, wildfires and unaffordable living for millions?

For starters, it’s not much fun these days to be in the toothless Senate minority as a Democrat.

The California governor has immense power over spending and taxes, the appointment of positions ranging from local fair board members to state Supreme Court justices and the fate of hundreds of bills passed each year by the Legislature.

You lead the most populous state and the world’s fourth-largest economy.

The office provides an automatic launching pad for anyone with presidential aspirations, such as the termed-out present occupant.

Anyway, Padilla, 52, is a proud native Californian, raised in the San Fernando Valley with strong ties to the state.

And he’s immensely qualified to be governor, having served well in local, state and federal branches of government: Los Angeles City Council, state Senate, California secretary of State and the U.S. Senate.

There has been speculation for weeks about his entering the gubernatorial race. And in a recent New York Times interview, he acknowledged: “I am weighing it.”

“Look, California is home,” he said. “I love California. I miss California when I’m in Washington. And there’s a lot of important work to do there. … I’m just trying to think through: Where can I be most impactful.”

How long will he think? “The race is not until next year,” he said. “So that decision will come.”

It should come much sooner than next year in order to be elected governor in this far-flung state with its vast socio-economic and geographic diversity.

Former Democratic Rep. Porter from Orange County has been beating him and every announced candidate in the polls — although not by enough to loudly boast about.

In a September poll by Emerson College, 36% of surveyed voters said they were undecided about whom to support. Of the rest, 16% favored Porter and just 7% Padilla.

In an August survey by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, 38% were undecided. Porter led with 17%. The nearest Democrat at 9% was Xavier Becerra, former secretary of U.S. Health and Human Services, state attorney general and 12-term congressman. Padilla wasn’t listed.

Why Porter? She gained renown during congressional hearings while grilling corporate executives and using a white board. But mainly, I suspect, voters got to know her when she ran statewide for the U.S. Senate last year. She didn’t survive the primary, but her name familiarity did.

By contrast, Padilla has never had a tough top-of-the-ticket statewide race. He was appointed by Newsom to the Senate in 2021 to fill the vacancy created by Kamala Harris’ election as vice president.

Democratic strategist Garry South says it would be “risky” for Padilla to announce his candidacy unless he immediately became the front-runner. That’s because he’d need that status to attract the hefty campaign donations required to introduce himself to voters.

“Unlike the governor, a California senator is not really that well known,” the strategist says. “And he hasn’t been a senator that long. I don’t think voters have a sense of him. In order to improve his [poll] numbers, he’s going to have to spend a lot of money. If he were an instant frontrunner, the money would flow. But if he jumps in with only half the votes [of

the frontrunner], there’s no reason for money to flow.

“And the longer he waits, the less time he has to raise the money.”

Porter may have eased the way for Padilla.

The UC Irvine law professor came unglued when CBS Sacramento reporter Julie Watts asked what she’d tell California’s 6 million Donald Trump voters in order to win their needed support for governor. Porter reacted like a normal irritated person rather than a seasoned politician.

She tersely dismissed the question’s premise and replied that the GOP votes wouldn’t be needed.

When the interviewer persisted, Porter lost her cool. “I don’t want to keep doing this. I’m going to call it,” she said, threatening to walk out. But she didn’t.

It was raw meat for her campaign opponents and they immediately pounced.

Former state Controller Betty Yee called on Porter to “leave this race” because she’s “a weak, self-destructive candidate unfit to lead California.”

Veteran Democratic consultant Gale Kaufman, who’s not involved in the contest, says the TV flub “hurts her a lot because it goes to likability.”

If Padilla really longs for the job, he can stop dreaming and take advantage of a golden opportunity.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: California tightens leash on puppy sales with new laws signed by Newsom
Wut?: Inside tech billionaire Peter Thiel’s off-the-record lectures about the antichrist
The L.A. Times Special: At Trump’s Justice Department, partisan pugnacity where honor, integrity should be

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

The NFL announced the musical headliner for Super Bowl LX’s halftime show, and — much to MAGA’s chagrin — it’s not Kid Rock.

Music’s most lucrative spot went to a relevant artist who actually sells albums: Bad Bunny. Letting the Puerto Rican rapper and singer turned global megastar perform 2026’s halftime show gifts right-wing influencers with a fresh conduit for the old grievance that woke culture has permeated every crevice of American culture, especially the Super Bowl.

Their proof: The NFL chose a predominantly Spanish-language artist who is known to wear women’s dresses, who endorsed Kamala Harris in 2024, and who has decried this year’s immigration sweeps. Clearly, this decision was designed to irk them rather than serve Bad Bunny’s millions and millions of fans.

“The NFL is self-destructing year after year,” conservative commentator Benny Johnson wrote on X. He said of Bad Bunny: “Massive Trump hater. Anti-ICE activist. No songs in English.”

Other critics accused the reggaeton artist of flip-flopping, particularly following Bad Bunny’s statements earlier this month that he would not include any mainland U.S. dates on his Debí Tirar Más Fotos world tour out of concern that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents might target and detain his fans.

“There were many reasons why I didn’t show up in the U.S., and none of them were out of hate — I’ve performed there many times,” he said to I-D magazine. “But there was the issue of — like, f—ing ICE could be outside [my concert]. And it’s something that we were talking about and very concerned about.”

The artist, whose real name is Benito Antonio Martínez Ocasio, explained his decision to join the long list of Super Bowl halftime notables in a short statement following the NFL’s announcement Sunday.

“What I’m feeling goes beyond myself,” he said. “It’s for those who came before me and ran countless yards so I could come in and score a touchdown … this is for my people, my culture and our history. Ve y dile a tu abuela, que seremos el HALFTIME SHOW DEL SUPER BOWL.”

Bad Bunny in glasses, not a dress.

(Jordan Strauss / Invision / AP)

The year-after-year decision to cast top-ranking pop artists and music legends in the featured Super Bowl halftime spot is hardly a mystery. They are stars that sell or performers that appeal to millions. But that dull reality hasn’t stopped the characterizations that the Bad Bunny decision is a deep state conspiracy, designed to rot American households from the inside out.

“Barack Obama’s best friend Jay-Z runs the Super Bowl selection process through his company Roc Nation which has an exclusive contract with the NFL. This is who chooses the halftime show, the most-watched musical performance in America,” wrote alt-right figure Jack Posobiec.

The NFL in 2019 partnered with rapper Jay Z’s entertainment and sports company, Roc Nation, to produce its Super Bowl halftime shows. The first show under the new partnership featured 2020’s Latin music in performances by Jennifer Lopez and Shakira. Since then the institution’s halftime performances have largely featured hip-hop artists such as Kendrick Lamar, Rihanna and the OG trio of Snoop Dogg, Dr. Dre and Eminem.

Lamar’s 2025 politically charged performance was the source of condemnation from the right. Clad in red, white and blue, his predominantly Black dance crew assembled in an American flag formation. And guest star Samuel L. Jackson, dressed as Uncle Sam, called out the nation’s systemic racism. Lamar had already rankled the right with 2017’s “The Heart Part 4,” where he referred to Trump as a “chump.”

Kendrick Lamar performs during halftime of the NFL Super Bowl 59.

(Frank Franklin II / AP)

It’s one of many moments over the last decade that have galvanized conservative factions around calls to boycott the Super Bowl, or at least publicly bash the event. Beyoncé’s 2016 Super Bowl halftime show was once such flash point, where she performed “Formation” featuring dancers in Black Panther-inspired outfits and paid tribute to the Black Lives Matter movement.

At least those complaints were rooted in a performance that actually happened, as opposed to claims that the NFL was manipulating games for the Kansas City Chiefs to enable tight end Travis Kelce and his then-girlfriend (now fiancée) Taylor Swift to endorse Joe Biden. Sure, totally feasible.

Yet there should be no secret around why the Super Bowl hasn’t featured wildly popular, globally celebrated MAGA-promoting performers: There aren’t any. It’s no wonder Kid Rock and Lee Greenwood always seem to be the entertainment of choice for Trump rallies.

Bad Bunny is the most-streamed male artist on Spotify, running just behind the platform’s most-streamed artist of all time, Swift. As of Sunday, his release “DeBÍ TiRAR MáS FOToS” became the first album of 2025 to surpass 7 billion streams on Spotify. And the 31-year-old artist just finished a sold-out, month-long residency at the José Miguel Agrelot Coliseum in San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Though the Super Bowl is still five months away, those who aren’t among the haters can enjoy an early kick off: Bad Bunny is scheduled to host the new season opener of “SNL” this weekend.

Russian tennis star Daniil Medvedev has been fined $42,500 by the U.S. Open for his actions during and immediately after his first-round loss to France’s Benjamin Bonzi on Sunday night in New York.

The total fines, issued by tournament referee Jake Garner, included $30,000 for unsportsmanlike conduct and another $12,500 for racket abuse.

With Medvedev facing match point in the third set, Bonzi missed on his first serve and was preparing for the second when a photographer appeared to mistakenly step onto the court.

Chair umpire Greg Allensworth announced that Bonzi would be given another chance at his first serve “because of the delay caused by an outside interference.”

Medvedev was not happy. The 2021 U.S. Open champion berated Allensworth at the chair and insulted him while leaning into a microphone to address the crowd. Even as he was walking back onto the court, Medvedev used arm gestures to encourage the crowd to continue expressing its displeasure with the decision, although he eventually motioned for the fans to calm down.

“I just expressed my emotions, my unhappiness with the decision,” Medvedev said later. “And then the crowd did what they did without me, without me asking them too much. And it was fun to witness.”

The disruption lasted for roughly six minutes. Medvedev ended up winning that point and set, then won the next set as well. Bonzi recovered in the fifth set for a 6-3, 7-5, 6-7 (5), 0-6, 6-4 win, after which Medvedev was seen repeated destroying a racket by smashing it on the court and against a sideline chair.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Daniil Medvedev reacts next to chair umpire Greg Allensworth after a photographer ran onto the court Sunday in New York.

(Adam Hunger / Associated Press)

The rematch initially appeared as if it was going to be a quicker upset than the first time around. Bonzi won the first two sets and was up 5-4 and serving for match point in the third … when all hell broke loose.

Bonzi missed on his first serve and was preparing for his second when he was interrupted. A photographer who apparently thought the match was over had stepped onto the court and was immediately reprimanded over the loudspeaker by chair umpire Greg Allensworth.

Allensworth then announced that Bonzi would be given another chance at his first serve “because of the delay caused by an outside interference.”

The decision appears to be based on a USTA tournament regulation which states that if there is a delay between the first and second serves, “the server gets two serves if the delay was caused by the receiver or if there was outside interference.”

The announcement drew a negative response from the crowd, which Medvedev encouraged by using arm gestures. He then started berating Allensworth, seeming to ask him, “Are you a man?” more than once before leaning into the microphone behind the chair to address the crowd.

“He wants to go home, guys,” Medvedev said. “He doesn’t like to be here. He gets paid by the match, not by the hour.”

He also yelled, “What did Reilly Opelka say?” at least three times, in reference to the U.S. player who was fined by the ATP Tour earlier this year after referring to Allensworth as the “worst ump on tour. ”

Medvedev later told reporters that he was upset with Allensworth’s ruling because he didn’t think the photographer had caused enough of a delay to warrant a repeat first serve.

As he returned to the court, Medvedev continued to motion for the crowd to voice its displeasure. Many of the fans complied, with TV footage showing a lot of them appearing to be more amused than enraged by the situation.

After about two minutes, Allensworth asked for order so Bonzi could serve. When that didn’t work, Medvedev started motioning for the spectators to quiet down. They didn’t, and Medvedev appeared to enjoy the lengthy disruption, at one point blowing kisses toward the stands.

“I just expressed my emotions, my unhappiness with the decision,” Medvedev said later. “And then the crowd did what they did without me, without me asking them too much. And it was fun to witness.”

Bonzi appeared to be on the verge of serving several times before stopping because of the noise.

“Every time I went on the line to serve and every time I did that, everyone was booing. I felt I didn’t do anything bad in the match to, like, receive this treatment, and I didn’t want to serve in those conditions,” Bonzi said. “So I was waiting.”

After a delay of roughly six minutes, Bonzi finally served — and missed again, much to the audible delight of the crowd. He got the second serve over the net but lost the point after a lengthy volley.