race

This is the weekend high school track and field takes center stage in Southern California. Quincy Wilson, who won a gold medal at the age of 16 at the 2024 Olympic Games, is coming from Maryland to compete in the 400 and two relays at the Arcadia Invitational at Arcadia High on Saturday.

“I’m so fired up,” Servite coach Brandon Thomas said.

And Thomas isn’t running.

Servite’s 4×100 and 4×400 relay teams will have to deal with Bullis High and Wilson running the anchor leg in races that should have fans standing on their feet while listening to the oohs and aahs.

“From a competitive standpoint, they’re excited to compete against the country’s best,” Thomas said.

Servite’s 4×100 relay team sent a message on Saturday, becoming the first to break 40 seconds in California history, winning in 39.82 at Trabuco Hills.

It’s all a perfect setup, from the atmosphere to the stiff competition, to prepare for next month’s section and state championships.

There’s two Loyola High athletes, sprinter Zion Phelps and 400 runner Ejam Yohannes, who hope to use Arcadia as a springboard to continue their early success this season.

Zion Phelps of Loyola edges Emmanuel Pullins of Sherman Oaks Notre Dame in the 100 meters on Tuesday, winning in 10.56 seconds. Pullins rans 10.59.

(Craig Weston)

Phelps is in his first year of track after being a defensive back and receiver for the football team. He and Loyola’s new coach, Sharaud Moore, were having conversions during the fall.

“He swore up and down he was the fastest kid in the school,” Moore said. “Yeah, put your money where your mouth is.”

Said Phelps: “I told him, ‘Just wait.’ I knew I had that speed and wanted to prove it.”

He ran a wind-aided 100-meter time of 10.39 seconds this spring. Last week in a Mission League dual meet against Sherman Oaks Notre Dame, he won with a time of 10.56.

Said Moore: “I was his harshest critic on the field.“We’re going back and forth and he was right. He’s s really fast.”

Showing his speed is legitimate will help with his football recruiting going into his senior year in the fall.

“Definitely this year has pushed my recruitment out there with my track times,” Phelps said. “I wanted to show the. I’m dedicated to this and being a multi-sport athlete. It will translate a lot.”

Yohannes, set to face Wilson in the 400, has an equally compelling story. He never played organized sports until joining the track team as a freshman. His parents came here from the small African country of Eritrea. His first name is Ethiopian.

He ran the 400 in 52.48 seconds as a freshman, focused more on having fun. Sophomore season he dropped to 50.75 and said to himself, “Wow, I’m fast.” He started getting serious.

“Now I wanted to be better,” he said.

An injury in January of last year didn’t let him get the foundation to run as fast as he hoped. He dropped to 47.69. Then Moore became coach, and Yohannes finally put in months of training to build a foundation.

“He comes in and kills me,” Yohannes said.

Then came the reward — 46.11 on March 21. In his final tuneup on Saturday, he ran 47.17 at the Red Rock Running Invitational.

“He’s a student and studies racing, training, race plans, athletes, programs,” Moore said.

As for facing Wilson, Yohannes’ attitude is bring him on.

“I’m excited to go out there,” he said. “It’s great competition. If I don’t believe I can win, nobody else can. If I don’t believe in myself, it’s over. I’m going to give my best. I might be crazy to saying this, but I think I have chance. He’s world class already in high school. He’s top of the line talent, It’s whoever wins on that given day. This is going to be unreal pressure knowing if I win, my name is out there. That puts me on the map. I can dream.”

Cambridge won a fourth consecutive Men’s Boat Race as Oxford claimed their first victory in the women’s race since 2016.

The Cambridge men came in as strong favourites for the 171st event but Oxford did well to stay with them for much of the race in tricky and blustery conditions along the 4.3-mile course from Putney to Chiswick.

But the class of the Light Blues came through in the final third as they pulled clear to triumph by 11.02 seconds for a seventh win in eight years.

In the 80th edition of the women’s race, Oxford made a blistering start and Cambridge were unable to respond as the Dark Blues stayed strong to win by 9.4 seconds and celebrate their 31st overall success.

You know the political silly season is upon us when campaigns start to make fools of themselves trying to court Latino voters.

In the Los Angeles mayoral race, that moment kicked off last week.

On Friday, a social media account called Latinos Por Pratt released an AI-animated music video praising the mayoral candidate and former reality television star Spencer Pratt. It starts with a fit, sunglasses-wearing Pratt rolling a trash bin brimming with detritus and Mayor Karen Bass past a crowd of cheering Angelenos. The Hollywood sign looms in the background as the title “Spencer, Saca La Bassura” flashes on the screen — Spencer, Take Out Trashy Karen, with “Bassura” a play on the mayor’s last name and the Spanish word for “trash.”

Cut to scenes of Bass playing tourist on her infamous trip to Ghana while the Palisades burn. Splice in Pratt dancing with his wife, Heidi Montag, onstage at a street party where onlookers wave a Mexican and a U.S. flag. And because L.A.’s Latino majority is overwhelmingly of Mexican descent, the thing was anchored by a peppy accordion, dramatic guitar plucks and a bold tuba, right? Right?

Uh, no.

Lyrics such as “Latinos for Pratt we’re singing / Because we’re tired of this dirty beat” play over brassy salsa rhythms that are more Miami and Cuban than L.A., where Latinos are mostly of Mexican and Central American heritage and the soundtrack of the city — corridos tumbados, cumbias, Latin rock and pop — reflect that.

That didn’t stop clueless, mostly non-Latino Pratt fanboys and fangirls from going gaga over it online. Nor did it stop Bass from joining in the we-need-Latino-voters fiesta.

Soon after the video was released, a group called Latinos Con Bass brought out big-name speakers to Plaza de la Raza in Lincoln Heights — state Sen. Maria Elena Durazo (D-Los Angeles), Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights head Angélica Salas, Service Employees International Union California President David Huerta — so they could pledge support for the incumbent with all the dutifulness of doctors reminding people to take their flu shot. Bass greeted the crowd with a peppy “¡Sí se puede!” — the standard Latino politico rallying cry for decades but one that’s not so kosher right now given its association with César Chávez, the legendary labor leader whom a New York Times investigation recently revealed to have sexually assaulted teenage girls.

Latinos Con Bass came off as a bunch of establishment types sticking up for one of their own instead of anything organic. But at least we know the track record of those involved. Latinos Por Pratt seems to be just one guy: Adrian E. Alvarez, a Cuban American whose online profile says he splits his time between the Miami area and L.A. If the lawyer by trade — who didn’t respond to numerous requests for comment — was really serious about winning Latino votes for his guy, he would’ve commissioned a corrido instead of a salsa tune. The Mexican ballad form has been trotted out by Angelenos for decades for everything from the tragic deaths of Robert F. Kennedy and Kobe Bryant and his daughter to the capture of sundry narco lords.

Those songwriters got it. Alvarez’s diss track doesn’t. And his use of Cuban Spanish on social media to promote it — carajo, fajame, mi gente — in place of Mexican Spanish equivalents such as güey, éntrale and raza sounds like a guy who doesn’t know South L.A. from South Beach.

But to dismiss “Spencer, Saca La Bassura” as an inauthentic joke is to miss what it says about this political moment. In a year when Latinos nationwide will make or break the Democrats’ effort to win back Congress, they’ll play an even more crucial role in L.A.’s mayoral race.

And it’s the Bass campaign that needs Latinos more than any of her opponents — because there’s no guarantee she’ll get them.

Then-L.A. mayoral candidate Karen Bass, center, is flanked by pioneering farm labor leader Dolores Huerta, left, and former Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, right, during a 2022 campaign event in Mariachi Plaza.

(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

A UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll released last month and co-sponsored by The Times revealed that 56% of likely voters view the mayor unfavorably, the only candidate to have a majority of those surveyed look negatively on her. She’s the top choice among Latinos — 29%, compared with Pratt’s 16%. But 27% of Latinos remain undecided about whom they want as mayor, the highest percentage of any ethnic group.

Pratt has some name recognition among Latinos as a C-list celebrity, but he’s also a registered Republican who thinks L.A. should coordinate with the Trump administration’s deportation leviathan, a position that’s as popular among Angelenos as rooting for the San Diego Padres. That obviously presents an opportunity for Councilwoman Nithya Raman, who’s running for mayor to the left of Bass — if she can smartly seize it. But Raman represents a district with one of the lowest Latino populations in the city and has yet to make a name for herself across town — no wonder the Berkeley poll found just 9% of Latinos favored her, trailing even Presbyterian pastor Rae Huang.

Those shortcomings should give Bass — whose children are Mexican American and who has worked alongside Latino L.A.’s political establishment for nearly her entire political career — an advantage among Latinos. But all that star wattage didn’t win her the Latino vote four years ago against Rick Caruso. And L.A.’s biggest problems during the mayor’s first term — homelessness, beat-up streets, busted streetlights, President Trump’s immigration deluge — unduly affected the Latino areas of L.A. Even the inferno that engulfed the Palisades led to the loss of thousands of jobs for the nannies, house cleaners and gardeners that kept the neighborhood as pristine as it was.

Bass’ campaign will trumpet all of her supposed accomplishments and trot out endorsements as it did at the Plaza de la Raza event, but she lost the narrative of a healthy L.A. a long time ago.

Pratt — who doesn’t seem to know Los Angeles besides the Westside and television studios — will have to do far more than Bass and Raman to attract Latinos. But by repeatedly referring to the mayor as “Karen Bassura” — a juvenile, obvious insult that nevertheless sticks once you hear it — he’s at least making Spanish a far more constant part of his campaign than his rivals. And Alvarez’s music video, as silly and un-L.A. as it is, speaks to an enthusiasm among at least one Latino Pratt supporter that will most likely remain catchier and more inspired than anything the Bass and Raman campaigns come up with.

That reality seems to have already made Bass blink. She responded to “Spencer, Saca La Bassura” on social media a few days later with a photo of people at her Plaza de la Raza rally holding “Latinos Con Bass” signs with the caption “Latinos Con Bass > Ai Latinos.” It was meant as a political flex but came off as insecure posturing. Meanwhile, Latinos Por Pratt just released a teaser for another video, this time featuring Pratt as Batman carting out a clown-faced Bass and Raman as the villainous Two-Face.

Playing, again, to salsa. That’s weak sauce. Can someone try to really get Latino L.A.?

I promise: Sí se puede.

WASHINGTON — One year ago, Donald Trump stood in a sun-kissed, unpaved Rose Garden and defiantly announced a new era of global trade, raising tariffs on countries worldwide and sending shock waves through the global economy.

The president promised short-term pain rippling through American households would make way for a U.S. economy that would soon take off. But experts say they are still waiting for receipts — and question whether they will ever come.

A year of turbulence

Tariff rates shifted so unpredictably for so long — across countries and with remarkable speed — that companies are still struggling to build stable, long-term supply chains capable of supporting future planning and growth. U.S. markets recorded one of the most volatile years in history, marked by extreme swings and modest gains driven by a handful of stocks for tech companies largely inoculated from import duties.

A customer visits a Costco food court in San Diego on March 18.

(Kevin Carter / Getty Images)

Federal customs duties brought in tens of billions of dollars. But a study published this week by the European Central Bank found that U.S. importers and consumers, not foreign exporters, bore the brunt of the costs that paid for it — and that an even larger share of the burden will fall on American households and companies the longer Trump’s tariff policies stay in place.

Despite the president’s pronouncements, tariff earnings have barely made a dent in the federal debt.

Tax cuts and additional spending on defense and immigration enforcement have increased the annual deficit. In the months of January and February alone, net customs duties hit an average of $27 billion — a significant figure that has essentially offset the costs of Trump’s war with Iran, now estimated to be more than $57 billion since its start.

In February, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump had exceeded his authority by bypassing Congress to impose tariffs on an emergency basis. But the decision has merely prompted the Trump administration to look for ways to bypass the high court, as well.

“Even after the court ruling, the Trump administration continues to wield tariffs in a haphazard and ill-conceived fashion,” said Kimberly Clausing, a professor of tax policy and law at UCLA School of Law. “One year in, Trump’s tariffs have only generated higher prices, economic disruption, frayed alliances, and manufacturing job loss.”

Farmers in New Delhi take part in a March 19 protest demanding a minimum support price for crops.

(Sajjad Hussain / AFP / Getty Images)

Since the court ruling, Trump has moved away from using broad emergency powers to justify tariff rates, now citing laws on national security and unfair trade practices to keep them in place. Those are being challenged, as well.

“Trump’s tariff mania injected uncertainty into global business supply chains that he is refusing to let the Supreme Court undo,” said Aaron Klein, chair of economic studies at the Brookings Institution.

“It would be one thing if Trump replaced the existing tariff system with a coherent strategy approved by the very Republican Congress he controls,” Klein added. “Instead, Trump’s on-again, off-again tariff by tweet and let the courts figure it out months later destroys business’ ability to plan and undermines global confidence in America’s trustworthiness.”

‘Mounting downside’

Whether or not the president’s tariff policies survive, they have succeeded in ushering in a new era of international trade, shifting global reliance on the U.S. dollar and on the American consumer market, experts said.

“The euro, the Chinese yuan and crypto will be the biggest beneficiaries as the dollar loses market share,” said Kenneth Rogoff, an economist and professor at Harvard. “Future historians may well look back some day and see Liberation Day as marking the beginning of the end of the dollar’s absolute dominance in global markets, and the ‘exorbitant privilege’ it has given to the United States as issuer of what once upon a time was the world safest currency.”

Mary Lovely, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said that Trump’s tariff policies have upended global shipping, prompted China to increase offshore investments in countries like Vietnam to process Chinese inputs for the U.S. market, and elevated long-term uncertainty over investing in North America — a trifecta that has ensured that U.S. companies and consumers bear the costs.

“While the president promised an American ‘industrial renaissance,’ manufacturing jobs have been lost every month since early 2023,” Lovely said. “Easy to see the mounting downside of his tariff barrage, hard to find much upside.”

More than 100,000 net jobs in the U.S. manufacturing sector have been lost over the last year, in part due to the increased costs facing U.S.-based manufacturing companies for parts and inputs, said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

That has made domestic manufacturing less competitive. “The trade war has also increased the prices facing consumers at a time when affordability is their top concern,” Strain added.

Customers shop at the Sanya International Duty Free City in Sanya, in south China’s Hainan province, on Jan. 10. In December 2025, China launched special customs operations in the Hainan Free Trade Port, allowing easier entry of overseas goods and expanding zero-tariff coverage.

(Guo Cheng / Xinhua / Getty Images)

The policy has become a political albatross for the president, who now proceeds through a midterm year with a bipartisan majority of Americans dissatisfied with his approach to their top concern. Seven in 10 Americans believe that tariffs have increased their costs of living, according to a recent poll, including 64% of Republicans and 67% of independents.

Sung Won Sohn, a former commissioner at the Port of Los Angeles, said that inflation aggravated by Trump’s tariff actions has complicated policy at the Federal Reserve, fueling uncertainty in the U.S. stock market.

The Supreme Court’s decision, which prompted legal ambiguity on the administration’s path forward and opened the door to a flood of litigation for potential tariff refunds, further added to uncertainty. “The net result is decreased economic efficiency,” Sohn said.

Trump faces worse poll numbers on inflation than former Presidents Carter and Biden, both of whom faced challenges with increased prices on goods. Today, 72% of Americans disapprove of the president’s handling of rising prices, according to a CNN poll released this week.

“The real damage from the tariffs — and their uneven unwinding — is not captured in headline GDP figures,” Sohn added. “It shows up in slower decision-making, reduced productivity, and a persistent fog over the economic outlook.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: A serial arsonist terrorized Hollywood. It ended only after two sisters died in a house fire, authorities say
The deep dive: The books that created the César Chávez myth — and those that brought him down
The L.A. Times Special: Electric bikes can be fast and dangerous. Here’s how to stay safe

On a personal note, hats off to my colleagues for stepping in during my parental leave — it’s great to be back.

More to come,
Michael Wilner

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

FRESNO  — Four of the top Democrats running for California governor on Wednesday told a agriculture-friendly Central Valley audience that the left-leaning state’s restrictions on business and the environment have made life more difficult for farmers and should be rolled back.

The candidates onstage at the Fresno State political forum, including two Republicans, did their best to appeal to voters in the midsection of California who often feel neglected by a state government dominated by big-city politicians from Southern California and the Bay Area.

“I’m here today because for far too long, the interests of our ag economy and our rural towns and cities and communities have been second tier, if they’ve even been on the agenda in Sacramento,” said San José Mayor Matt Mahan, a moderate Democrat whose campaign has yet to live up to the high expectations it initially received.

Mahan and five others invited to the forum focused on the state’s affordability crisis, water, government regulations and other issues facing the agricultural hub — all doing their best to play up any ties to the farmers and farmworkers who are so essential to providing food to California and the nation.

Mahan recalled growing up in Watsonville, an agricultural community that is the home of Driscoll’s berries and Martinelli’s apple cider. Fellow Democrat and former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra noted his family’s personal ties to the valley. His father picked crops along State Route 99 as a young man, he grew up in Sacramento, and his wife is from Hanford and Fresno.

Former conservative commentator Steve Hilton said his family had a small farm in Hungary, which they fled because of communism. Former Democratic Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, who grew up in Iowa during the farming crisis of the 1980s, spoke of being the descendant of generations of farmers and being a member of 4-H as well the Future Farmers of America.

“I’m not a farmer today, but I thought I would be. … I believe in the future of agriculture with a faith born not of words, but of deeds,” Porter said, repeating FFA’s creed.

The event marked the first gathering of gubernatorial hopefuls since USC pulled the plug on its debate last week. USC officials canceled the event less than 24 hours before it was scheduled to begin after facing criticism for excluding the top candidates of color. The university said it used opinion polls and financial viability to determine which candidates were invited.

Organizers of the Fresno State event invited candidates who have earned at least an average of 3% in recent polls compiled by RealClearPolitics. Along with Mahan, Becerra, Hilton and Porter, the candidates invited included former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco. State Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former state Controller Betty Yee, both Democrats, were not invited.

Two leading Democratic candidates were not at the Fresno State forum: billionaire Tom Steyer was scheduled to tour the polluted Tijuana River Valley in San Diego County. Rep. Eric Swalwell’s campaign cited a scheduling conflict but did not elaborate. Swalwell (D-Dublin) appeared to be doing media interviews in San Francisco on Tuesday.

Cutting gas taxes and other ways to save

California’s high cost of living is one of the most visible and pressing issues in the race to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom, and candidates pitched their plans to address it, primarily by lowering housing and energy costs.

Bianco, Hilton, Villaraigosa and Mahan have floated plans to cut oil industry regulations and suspend the state’s 61-cent-per-gallon gas tax. Bianco went further, saying he would completely eliminate the gas tax. Hilton said he would cap vehicle registrations at $71 per year no matter the type of car. Porter said her top priority is to lower housing costs by “building housing faster, building more housing, changing how we permit housing and innovating in construction and design and materials.”

Republican candidates blamed Democratic policies for the state’s high cost of living and argued that it would not be solved under a new governor of the same party. Both Bianco and Hilton pledged to gut state agencies responsible for regulating air and water quality.

“We’re never going to reduce the cost of groceries or anything else until we abandon the climate dogma that has got us to this point,” Hilton said, invoking the state’s goal to reach carbon neutrality by 2045 as a major cost driver.

According to a recent UC Berkeley IGS/L.A. Times poll, lowering the state’s cost of living was the top issue that likely voters want the state’s next governor to address. It was followed by cutting government waste and corruption — the top priority for Republican voters — and addressing homelessness.

Republicans take their shots

Wednesday’s forum was among the rare instances when Hilton and Bianco appeared before the same crowd. The Republicans have led polls for months, raising the specter of two Republicans and no Democrats appearing on the November general election ballot under California’s top-two primary system.

On Wednesday, they each tried to appeal to a more conservative-leaning audience than many other gubernatorial forums by blasting their Democratic opponents and statewide leaders.

”I think every single Democrat on this stage today should start with an apology,” Hilton said. “An apology for what their party has done to this area and this industry, stealing your water, piling on the regulations — 1,000% increase in the last decade or so, cutting the pay of agricultural workers, on and on.”

The Democrats onstage were repeatedly challenged and at times interrupted by Republican candidates who argued that electing another Democratic governor would bring more of the same problems to the region.

“You can’t just believe what’s on this stage,” Bianco said. “You have to listen to what they say in front of groups that don’t think like you, because everything that they’re saying here contradicts what they say in those groups with more cap-and-trade, more regulation, more everything else.”

Democrats talk up their experience

Democrats largely concurred on issues such as reducing regulations and increasing water supply to farmers. So they sought to differentiate themselves based on their experience and records in office.

Mahan painted himself as a pragmatist who led to San José being named the safest large city in the nation, reducing homelessness by one-third and spurring the construction of housing by reducing regulatory restrictions and fees.

“I’m accountable every day for making people’s lives better. I don’t get to make excuses and blame another party,” Mahan said. “You deserve better from Sacramento, and I’ll work with you to make sure we deliver it.”

Villaraigosa pointed to his eight-year tenure as mayor of Los Angeles, saying the city went from being the most violent big city in the country when he took office to being the safest by the time he left. He also said he took on the teachers union, which he once worked for, resulting in a 60% increase in the graduation rate.

Becerra pointed to his experiences leading the sprawling federal health agency in the Biden administration, including dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, the wildfires that devastated Maui, Hawaii, avian flu and monkey pox.

“We do not need someone who needs training wheels,” he said.

Porter highlighted that she was the only candidate on the stage who refuses to take money from corporations and corporate PACs. The former congresswoman, who gained fame for her aggressive questioning of chief executives and Trump administration officials while in Congress, also pointed to her longtime focus on oversight.

“There are too many regulations that we are passing,” she said. “That is why I’m running for governor, to make sure that when things come to my desk, the first question is going to be, why did we need this?”

Water is for fighting

Nearly half of the forum was dedicated to questions about water policy, a complicated and politically thorny issue for Central Valley farmers and California as a whole. Most agreed the state should fast-track new reservoirs, raise some existing dams and increase water recycling to boost supply.

“We need an ‘all of the above’ solution,” Villaraigosa said. “That means we need recycling, we need [groundwater] recharge. We need dams. We need underground aquifers.”

Some Democrats, along with Hilton, continued to distance themselves from the proposed Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta tunnel, a huge project to transport water to the Central Valley and Southern California that has been tied up by legal challenges.

Bianco lambasted “environmental regulation[s] that makes weeds and bugs more important than your life,” and Hilton slammed “ridiculous bureaucracy” created by environmental laws such as the 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

Fourth-generation tomato and pepper farmer Briana Giampaoli described herself as moderate and said she hasn’t decided whom to support for governor yet, but she was impressed by the candidates’ breadth of knowledge on water and the regulatory hurdles farmers face, particularly Hilton.

“That was really surprising, and I’m glad that both parties seem to understand that there needs to be a change in California, that something is not working,” she said. “The industry is changing as a whole across the country, and the regulations here continue to make it harder and harder to farm.”

Democrats on immigration

Democratic candidates faced a friendlier audience at the Fresno City College forum later in the day, where they unanimously expressed support for immigrant communities and said the state should fully fund Medi-Cal coverage for undocumented people. To close a budget deficit, Newsom and state lawmakers froze enrollment and raised premiums for undocumented adults on the program.

Porter and Thurmond called for Immigration and Customs Enforcement to be abolished but said, short of that, the state should monitor the federal agency’s operations in the state to protect civil liberties. The other candidates agreed; Villaraigosa pledged to ensure federal detention centers comply with all health and safety rules.

City Councilmember Nithya Raman came out ahead of incumbent Karen Bass in a new poll on the Los Angeles mayor’s race, though the poll’s director cautioned that it did not give the whole picture.

Raman had a commanding lead in a field of five major candidates, with 33% of voters supporting her, while Bass trailed at 17%, according to the poll by the Loyola Marymount University Center for the Study of Los Angeles.

Leftist Rae Huang came in just behind Bass at nearly 17%, while tech executive Adam Miller had 13% and conservative reality TV star Spencer Pratt had 12%.

Other polls have shown Bass in first place.

She was at 20% in an Emerson College Polling/Inside California Politics poll, with Raman at just over 9%. In a UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, co-sponsored by The Times, Bass was at 25% and Raman at 17%.

In the Loyola Marymount poll, unlike the other polls, respondents were given brief descriptions of the candidates, including their occupations and political priorities.

Raman was labeled a “progressive LA City Councilmember focused on housing affordability, homelessness and systemic reform,” while Bass was “incumbent mayor of Los Angeles, veteran legislator, focused on homelessness.”

One of Raman’s challenges, as a councilmember representing Los Feliz and Silver Lake as well as parts of the San Fernando Valley, is to spread her name recognition citywide, with the June 2 primary election about two months away. She entered the race to challenge Bass, her one-time ally, at the last minute, hours before the early February filing deadline.

The Loyola Marymount poll of 370 registered Los Angeles voters was conducted from Feb. 11 to March 16. It did not include a choice for “undecided,” while the other two polls showed that significant percentages of voters hadn’t made up their minds.

“This poll shows if only positive descriptors are used and context is provided, Raman is ahead,” said Fernando Guerra, director of Loyola Marymount’s Center for the Study of Los Angeles, who directed the poll.

Guerra said he believes Bass is the front-runner, taking the previous polls into account.

Bass’ campaign took issue with the Loyola Marymount poll.

“In 2022, this same LMU poll had Karen Bass at 16% — she ended up winning the primary with 43%. The only thing more ridiculous than this poll is Spencer Pratt’s performance on The Hills,” said Alex Stack, a spokesperson for the Bass campaign, referencing Pratt’s reality show.

Raman’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In a post on X citing the poll, Raman wrote, “OUR CAMPAIGN IS SURGING … Angelenos are ready for a city that actually works.”

Paul Mitchell, vice president of the bipartisan voter data firm Political Data Inc., said the poll’s sample size was too small to draw conclusions and that the poll was less reliable because it was conducted over the course of more than a month.

He also noted that with many of the candidates relatively unknown, including the descriptors could have a major effect.

“I’m sure Nithya Raman doesn’t have citywide name recognition, but that description is really great,” Mitchell said.

Guerra said he didn’t include an “undecided” option because he wanted to “force” respondents to give an answer, similar to when they actually vote.

In the Emerson poll, more than 50% of voters were undecided on who to support for mayor. The Berkeley IGS poll showed about a quarter of voters were undecided.

In LMU’s mayoral poll from 2022, released in early March of that year, 42% of respondents chose “undecided/someone else” for mayor.

After Bass, who had 16% support, then-City Councilmember Kevin de Léon was second at 12% in the 2022 poll. Rick Caruso, the billionaire developer, who ended up making the runoff election against Bass, received 6% support.

In that year’s June primary, Bass got 43% of the vote, Caruso nearly 36% and De Léon about 8%.

This year’s LMU poll also asked L.A. voters what kind of candidate they would prefer for mayor.

Nearly 50% said they prefer a Democratic Socialist, while 25% said they want a moderate Democrat, 19% said a conservative and just 8% said an establishment Democrat.

“Los Angeles is much more progressive than its elected leadership. This poll captures that,” Guerra said.

Some disagreed.

Mike Trujillo, a consultant for moderate Democrats who is not representing anyone in the mayoral race, said polling he has done across the city shows that the Democratic Socialists of America’s popularity is much lower.

Raman is a dues-paying member of the Los Angeles chapter of DSA, which endorsed her in her two successful City Council campaigns.

“If you believe this poll, I have bridges to sell you on 1st Street, 6th Street, and Alameda Street — and there’s no bridge on Alameda,” he said. “The poll was basically A to Z in Nithya Raman’s contact list.”

This year’s LMU poll also asked L.A. County voters about the governor’s race. Former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter led at about 16%, followed by Republican Steve Hilton at 13% and billionaire Tom Steyer at 12%.

The Berkeley IGS poll showed two Republicans — Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and Hilton — leading the crowded field of gubernatorial candidates by slim margins among voters statewide, with Democratic support split among multiple candidates in a left-leaning state.

SACRAMENTO — It’s probably time for California to reform the outdated “reform” that could be leading us into an absurd November election with no Democratic candidate for governor allowed on the ballot.

The absurdity is that Democratic voters outnumber Republicans in California by nearly 2 to 1. But the voters’ choices for governor could be restricted to just two Republicans — both disciples of President Trump, who is despised in this state.

We’d be electing our first GOP governor in 20 years.

The odds against this scenario are high. But it’s an increasing possibility.

It’s conceivable because of a crowded Democratic field of candidates and a 2010 reform placed on the ballot after a late-night deal demanded by a Republican state senator — Abel Maldonado of Santa Maria — in exchange for his vote to pass a stalled budget and tax increase.

The compromise led to voter approval of California’s unique top-two open primary. The top two vote-getters advance to the November runoff, regardless of party. It’s called an open primary because voters can choose any candidate, no matter their party.

So two Democrats or two Republicans might be the only choices in November — in statewide, congressional and legislative races. That doesn’t happen often, but it has a few times.

It doesn’t reflect the current reality of American politics, with voters sharply polarized between Democrats and Republicans. They want to vote for someone from their own party and are not interested in choosing among two perceived evils.

We should consider returning to a primary system that produces party nominees — one Democrat and one Republican — to give voters a more varied selection in November. Maybe even allow a third or fourth candidate to emerge from minority parties.

It’s too late to change for this year, but we could for future elections. It would require voter approval.

For the present, we’re saddled with the unwieldy dilemma of there being eight major Democratic candidates and just two Republicans. If the combined Democratic vote is splintered among the eight Democrats in the June 2 primary, the two Republicans could end up finishing first and second.

Political data guru Paul Mitchell, who has been running primary election simulations, pegs the chances of a Democratic lockout at 20%.

“There’s only a one-in-five chance, but you don’t want to see a one-in-five chance with something this important,” says the statistician, who works mostly for Democrats.

“To be safe, the Democratic Party needs to have a candidate polling at 20% or more. And none of the Democratic candidates are half way there. It’s scary.”

Mitchell bases his assessment on a poll released last week by state Democratic chairman Rusty Hicks, part of an effort to pressure low-polling Democratic candidates to step out of the race.

The survey showed both Republicans leading the field — former Fox News host Steve Hilton with 16% and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco at 14%. At 10% each were three Democrats: Rep. Eric Swalwell of the San Francisco Bay Area, former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter and wealthy climate activist Tom Steyer. No other Democrat registered above 3%. There were 24% undecided.

The straggling candidates need to ask themselves, Hicks says: “if you’re polling 1% to 2%, do you have a path to get to 20?

“All of these candidates are experienced. They know in their gut when they’re viable or not.”

Mitchell says, “A lot of folks are now looking at why we have a wacky system that causes [a party chair] to tell candidates they should drop out of a race.”

Yes, it does smack of being undemocratic even if it’s practical politics.

Mitchell says the top-two system should be scrapped.

Hicks agrees.

“Things that were promised [by top-two promoters] have not been delivered,” the state party chairman told me. “It’s time to consider going back to the kind of system voters like.”

Appealing to the middle

I called around and got different views from veteran Democratic strategists.

“It was sold as reform, but it’s not reform. It’s a distortion of the process,” one former political consultant told me, asking for anonymity because of his current employment. “Everybody thought it would yield more moderate, consensus candidates, but that’s not what’s happening.”

Consultant Steve Maviglito, who ran the 2010 campaign against the top-two system, says it’s undemocratic because it risks not giving voters “a chance to cast a ballot for a candidate they have some belief in. That’s what our system is built on.”

The grand theory, he notes, was that candidates would be forced to appeal to the middle.

“Just the opposite,” Maviglio argues. “Democrats want a strong Democrat and Republicans want a strong Republican. The only thing in the middle of the road is a dead armadillo.”

Moreover, he points out, the top-two system has been manipulated by Democrats — including Sen. Adam Schiff and Gov. Gavin Newsom — to boost a Republican in the primary to guarantee a non-competitive, easy election in November.

That’s a bit sleazy.

“The top-two has actually been hugely good to Democrats,” says Democratic strategist Garry South. “They need to think this through. Since the top-two primary was implemented, there have only been three same-party runoffs for state office out of 26 races — all three of them Democrats.

“The current specter of two Republicans [in November] is not the fault of the top-two primary system. It’s due to every Democrat and their brother — or sister — taking a flier and filing for governor.”

“Never,” replies consultant David Townsend when asked whether the top-two primary should be junked. He ran the ballot campaign authorizing it. Townsend insists today’s Legislature contains more moderate Democrats because of the top-two and that they provide a check on the liberal majority.

That’s true to some degree.

OK, we could leave the top-two system for the Legislature and scuttle it for statewide offices.

The thought of being limited to a choice between two Republicans — or two Democrats — for governor is unacceptable and un-American.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: USC cancels gubernatorial debate amid uproar over candidates of color being excluded

The L.A. Times Special: It’s been decades since California had a governor’s race like this one. That was a shocker

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

Rep. Eric Swalwell, a leading Democratic candidate for governor of California, has accused President Trump of trying to sway the election following reports that FBI Director Kash Patel may release documents from a decade-old investigation into the congressman’s ties to a suspected Chinese spy.

According to a report by the Washington Post, Patel has directed agents in the bureau’s San Francisco office to redact the case files for public release. According to the outlet, it’s highly unusual for the FBI to release case files tied to a probe that did not result in criminal charges.

The investigation centered on Swalwell’s ties to a suspected intelligence operative, Christine Fang, or Fang Fang, who worked as a volunteer raising money for his congressional campaign. Swalwell cut off ties to Fang in 2015, after intelligence officials briefed him and other members of Congress about Chinese efforts to infiltrate the legislative body.

Swalwell was not accused of impropriety.

The FBI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“Through great reporting, we now know the outrageous ends the White House will go to target political opponents,” Swalwell said in a prepared statement Saturday, calling the decade-old story “nonsense.”

“Donald Trump is targeting me. He’s trying to influence the election,” Swalwell said in a post on X. “There is only one reason why: he’s scared.”

Swalwell accused Trump of “desperately trying” to stop him, because he’s now the favored candidate for California governor.

“What Trump wants the most is to have a Western White House. An enabler on the opposite coast,” he said. “A lot of people have bent the knee to this administration. But I will not. And neither will the people of California.”

It’s not the first time Swalwell has accused the administration of targeting Trump’s political opponents.

Last year, Swalwell sued Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte, accusing him of criminally misusing government databases to target Trump’s political opponents. Pulte had accused Swalwell of mortgage fraud and referred him to the Justice Department for a potential federal criminal probe. Swalwell dropped that suit this month.

Swalwell, a former prosecutor who ran for president in 2020, announced his bid for California governor in November. Swalwell said his decision was driven by the serious problems facing California and the threats posed to the state and nation with Trump in the White House.

U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who has endorsed Swalwell for governor, shared the Post story on X Saturday, saying, “This abuse of the FBI is as dangerous as it is unlawful.” Schiff served with Swalwell on the House Intelligence Committee, where they riled Republicans by investigating President Trump during his first term.

Schiff served as the lead manager of Trump’s first impeachment and Swalwell as a manager of Trump’s second impeachment.

“Time and again, the President and his appointees have weaponized the Department of Justice against those who dare stand up to Trump,” Schiff wrote. He added that there was no doubt that Trump and Patel “will stop at nothing to try to tell Californians who their next governor should be.”

The Post story unleashed a flood of critiques from California politicians, including Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Los Angeles), who sits on the House Intelligence Committee. On X, Gomez accused Patel of “wasting resources” on a “closed, decade-old case where Swalwell cooperated with the FBI and was found innocent of any wrongdoing.”

“Reopening it now, right as he leads in the polls and ballots are about to drop, is a political hit-job!” Gomez said. “Trump and Kash Patel are weaponizing the FBI against people they deem political enemies.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, released a statement accusing Patel of working at “the behest of the White House” and “wasting the resources of the FBI and perhaps violating the Hatch Act by ordering agents to spend hours preparing a political smear file for a personnel vendetta.”

According to the Associated Press, Fang came into contact with Swalwell’s campaign as he was first running for Congress in 2012. She also participated in fundraising for his 2014 campaign and helped place an intern in his office, the report said. Federal investigators alerted Swalwell to their concerns — and briefed Congress — about Fang in 2015, at which point the California Democrat says he cut off contact with her, the AP reported in 2021.

In 2023, the House Ethics Committee closed a two-year investigation into the allegations of his ties to Fang.

In closing the probe, the ethics committee wrote in a letter to Swalwell that it had “previously reviewed allegations of improper influence by foreign agents and in doing so, cautioned that Members should be conscious of the possibility that foreign governments may attempt to secure improper influence through gifts and other interactions.”

Times staff writer Kevin Rector contributed to this report.

Chad Bianco couldn’t fly to Mar-a-Lago, wreathe President Trump in honeyed words, bestow the Riverside County Peace Prize upon him and hand-feed him his favorite dish — a Big Mac? — from a platter of 24-karat gold.

Security, logistics and all of that.

So the Republican candidate for California governor did the next best thing: He confiscated hundreds of thousands of ballots from last November’s special election in a trumped-up investigation of supposed voting irregularities. Never mind the complete lack of evidence or the fact Proposition 50, the subject of Bianco’s investigation, was approved by a clear-cut majority of voters.

The intent of Riverside County’s grasping sheriff was as transparent as a pane of glass. It’s all about trying to win the endorsement of Trump — he of phantasmagorical election-fraud claims — in California’s neck-and-neck-and-neck gubernatorial contest.

Bianco, fellow Republican Steve Hilton and a passel of Democratic hopefuls are bunched together in a contest that remains utterly wide open just weeks before voters start receiving their ballots in the mail.

“Trump’s endorsement would be huge,” said Jon Fleischman, a conservative strategist and former executive director of the state GOP.

“Actually,” he went on, ‘I think it would be determinative” — virtually guaranteeing either Hilton or Bianco finished in the top two in the June 2 primary, ushering them past the rope line into November’s runoff.

If there’s an inside edge in the Trump Endorsement Sweepstakes, it would seemingly go to Hilton.

He’s familiar to the president as a former Fox News host. He’s interviewed Trump several times and the two occasionally text and talk on the phone. Bianco has no such personal connection, which might explain his ballot-seizing stunt.

Steve Hilton could have the inside track on a Trump endorsement, given their personal relationship.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

(The Democrats’ nightmare scenario is both Republicans making the runoff, icing the party out of the governor’s office for the first time since Arnold Schwarzenegger left in January 2011. More on that in a moment.)

A Trump endorsement comes in all sorts of flavors.

As The Downballot recently noted, “His bag of tricks includes dual endorsements, triple endorsements, pre-endorsements, Election Day endorsements, yanking endorsements … belated endorsement of a candidate after initially endorsing just one candidate [and] non-endorsements after promising to endorse.”

There was also the time Trump endorsed “ERIC” when Republicans Eric Schmitt and Eric Greitens faced each other in Missouri’s Senate primary. (Schmitt won and is now the state’s junior U.S. senator.)

Trump’s backing still counts a good deal, even as his approval ratings sink to sub-basement levels. The president remains popular with Republicans and, critically, the kind of GOP loyalists who vote in primary contests, which is why both Hilton and Bianco would welcome a presidential laying on of hands.

There’s good reason, however, to think Trump might pass on endorsing in the governor’s race, or opt to deliver one of his dual he-and-him endorsements.

The GOP’s best — and perhaps only — hope of winning the governorship is the Democratic-freeze-out scenario. So, tactically, Trump’s wisest move may be to bless neither Hilton nor Bianco. Or support both. That would avoid elevating one over the other, which could make it easier for a Democrat to finish among the top two and advance past the June primary.

“I think Trump’s people are smart enough to know that there’s a reason why he may not be served by endorsing a candidate,” Fleischman said. “I wouldn’t be surprised if the prevailing wisdom there is we better not endorse anybody, because we don’t want to tilt this one way or the other.”

If Trump were to back Hilton or Bianco, it’s not hard to imagine Democratic interests seizing upon the president’s benediction and putting significant money behind an ad blitz promoting the president’s favorite in hopes of boosting him — and him alone — into the top two.

The move comes from a well-thumbed political playbook, seeking to elevate a preferred opponent, that was used most recently in California by Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff. He helped lift Republican Steve Garvey into the November 2024 runoff to keep from having to face a tougher opponent, fellow Democrat Katie Porter. Schiff easily defeated Garvey.

In this case, Democrats would aim to tee up one of the two Republicans who would almost certainly go on to lose in the fall.

Which is what happened the first time Gavin Newsom ran for governor.

In 2018, his main rival was fellow Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa. Two major Republicans were also in the race, John Cox and Travis Allen. There was no real concern about those two nabbing both spots in the June primary. Rather, Newsom and Cox had a shared interest in boxing out Villaraigosa.

So the Newsom and Cox campaigns opened a private back-channel, trading gossip, swapping insights on the race and even sharing some empirical data. One poll, showing Cox getting a bigger boost from a Trump endorsement than Allen, passed from Democratic hands in hopes it would reach the White House and nudge the president into supporting Cox.

Though there’s no proof the survey ever reached Trump, the president eventually threw his support behind the San Diego County businessman, lifting him past Allen in the primary. Cox went on to lose handily to Newsom in November.

This time, with more than a half dozen plausible candidates and no obvious path to victory for any one, it’s every man and woman for themselves.

The same goes for Trump, who may do himself the most good in California, politically, by doing nothing at all.

If he can only resist.

When Estuardo Mazariegos was 22, he was pulled over by Los Angeles police officers who found a gun and ammunition in the back seat of his Nissan Sentra.

The gun, he said, was not his. He was holding onto it for a friend, he said, but he got hit with a felony gun possession charge, later pleading it down to a misdemeanor.

Seventeen years later, Mazariegos is running for Los Angeles City Council — and he believes his gun conviction makes him a better candidate.

“I think it’s a strength. It’s not a liability,” said Mazariegos, who was born in Guatemala and grew up in Hollywood and South L.A. “I feel like it creates more of a connection with me and the community, because there’s so many people that are justice-impacted.”

But the gun charge could also be an issue for Mazariegos in his race against five other candidates to represent Council District 9, which covers part of South L.A. He was also convicted of shoplifting when he was 19.

The district is the poorest the city, and the council race is expected to be one of the most competitive city contests this June, with the current council member, Curren Price, terming out.

Mazariegos is head of the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Los Angeles, a grassroots advocacy organization. The 40-year-old is backed by the L.A. chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America and supports leftist policies like reducing funding to the LAPD to spend more on other programs.

Jose Ugarte, a District 9 candidate who was a longtime Price staffer, believes his opponent’s criminal history is a red flag.

“Getting arrested and convicted for multiple crimes, including carrying a concealed loaded gun, should disqualify Estuardo in this race,” Ugarte said in a statement. “Instead, the Democratic Socialists of L.A. are propping up his candidacy and hiding his criminal past from voters who deserve to know the truth.”

DSA-LA co-chair Leslie Chang said her group is “proud” to stand with Mazariegos.

Mazariegos’ supporters say he hasn’t hidden his past.

Georgia Flowers-Lee, a vice president with United Teachers Los Angeles, said Mazariegos discussed his gun conviction and the circumstances surrounding it during his interviews with the union, which ended up endorsing him.

“He was up front, honest about the challenges and honest about the gun charge,” she said. “Walked us through what had happened and where it led and how and why he ended up pleading it out,” she said.

Flowers-Lee, who lives in the district, said that young men of color like Mazariegos are overpoliced.

“I do not see this as a disqualifier. And let’s talk about redemption,” she said.

Wednesday night, Mazariegos released a campaign video featuring him discussing gun violence and his conviction with childhood friends. He said it was a turning point in his life.

“That was the moment where I was like, it’s either now or never,” he said. “Either I leave this s— behind, or it’s going to eat me up. I’m never going back to that lifestyle. I’m going to dedicate myself to the people.”

Mazariegos said he never carried a gun, except for that one day, but many of his friends did.

“Guns were a very common thing. It was almost like having a bike,” he said.

Mazariegos said that in 2009, he was driving home from the San Fernando Valley in the early morning, after dropping friends off, when he was pulled over by the LAPD. He said the officers gave no reason for stopping him, but they made him get out of his car and searched it without a warrant, finding the gun.

He was a permanent resident at the time, after moving from Guatemala at a young age, and was advised by his attorney to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of carrying a concealed weapon in a vehicle, to avoid possible deportation, he said.

He was sentenced to 24 months of probation and one day in jail, court records show.

Growing up in Hollywood and Hyde Park, among other parts of the city, Mazariegos was intimately familiar with gun and gang violence.

His friend, Oscar Michael Morales, was shot to death in 2001 at age 14. He remembers Morales’ mother cleaning the blood off the sidewalk the next day.

His gun conviction helps him connect with residents of Council District 9, Mazariegos said, and he frequently discusses it while door-knocking.

Ugarte, meanwhile, is paying off $25,000 in fines to the city Ethics Commission for failing to disclose years of outside income while he was working for Price.

Price himself has been criminally charged with four counts of voting on matters in which he had a conflict of interest, five counts of embezzlement and three counts of perjury. Prosecutors allege he voted to approve deals with developers or agencies that had done business with his wife.

Voter fraud conspiracies are like methamphetamine running through MAGA veins, stirring up equal parts passion and paranoia.

President Trump, of course, is the king pusher of this particular addiction, pathologically certain he won the 2020 presidential election (he did not). In his second term, and in advance of the November election, Trump has supercharged voter fraud lies; installed election deniers in key positions; and is attempting through the so-called SAVE America Act to disenfranchise poor and female voters.

Here in California, the seductive power of Trump’s crusade can be seen in Riverside County, where gubernatorial candidate and Sheriff Chad Bianco is definitely not pursuing a vote fraud investigation for political reasons.

“From the very, very beginning, Chad Bianco didn’t say this was political,” Bianco told me, referring to himself in the third person. “Chad Bianco said we have an allegation of fraud with numbers that don’t add up, and no one has an exact reason why. So we have to find out the exact reason why. It’s plain and simple. Plain and simple.”

If you’re clueless as to what Bianco is talking about, let me give you the short version. A citizens group of election “auditors” claimed that in the last election over Proposition 50 in November, there were about 45,800 more ballots counted than cast.

The Riverside County Registrar of Voters, Art Tinoco, a highly respected election official, gave a long presentation explaining why that number was not accurate. He said that the actual difference in ballots cast and counted is only 103, within the acceptable margin of error for the 1.4 million voters in his area.

But unhappy with that answer, the group apparently took their concerns to Bianco, who decided to use his powers of criminal investigation to circumvent the many established avenues for vote audits through his own county and the California secretary of state (though he hasn’t revealed publicly exactly what led to the investigation).

Using a secret, sealed warrant — so none of us actually know what he’s alleging — he seized more than half a million ballots. The court has apparently appointed a special master to count those ballots, though Bianco at first said his deputies would do their own counting. But we don’t know who that special master is, or even if he or she has yet been appointed.

Here’s what we do know, and why it counts as a danger not just to Riverside, but also to American democracy writ large, when a politically ambitious lawman decides to run elections himself.

The fraud fiasco

So where did the citizen-auditors get their 45,800 number? Like many California counties, Riverside tallies ballots as they come in. So for the 11 days voting was happening (and for the mail-in ballots that came later) someone was making a handwritten note for every ballot that the county received.

Yes, I said handwritten, for more than 600,000 ballots going through 2,500 workers and volunteers. It’s often inaccurate and not every ballot is going to end up being a good one — some lack signatures, for example.

Tinoco, the registrar, called these handwritten logs “raw data” that also are missing ballots from other sources that increases the final tally, such as people who register on the day they vote. So no one who understands elections expects this number to be accurate or final.

Once all these ballots are checked to make sure they should be counted, they are sent to an entirely separate system, which reads them electronically and provides the election results.

When the number of vetted ballots is compared with the number of ballots that are counted by the second system, the difference is 103, Tinoco said.

So no fraud, only human frailty with the difficult business of counting by hand.

Matt Barreto, a UCLA political science professor and director of its Voting Rights Project, said Bianco’s actions were similar to what happened in Fulton County, Ga., where the FBI seized ballots after Trump’s debunked claims of fraud — despite plain and simple explanations from election officials.

“In both cases, Georgia and Riverside, independent elections offices had already verified the accuracy of the ballot count, and in both cases the results had been certified by the Secretary of State,” Barreto said. “It is worrisome that a very partisan law enforcement officer is questioning the integrity of an election, perhaps because he did not support the results.”

The investigation

Bianco has been investigating the 45,000 claim for months, but it came to a head in recent weeks, in no small part thanks to a news conference he held. Bianco’s office, as first reported by the Riverside Record, served a warrant on the election office one day before Tinoco made his presentation to the Board of Supervisors in early February.

Since then, the California secretary of state, which handles elections, and the state Department of Justice have both tried to intervene to stop Bianco from taking ballots or doing his own recount, Pillow Guy-style. But they’ve had little luck.

Secretary of State Shirley Weber called the allegations “unsubstantiated” and questioned the legality — and common sense — of having deputies hand count ballots. Now, her office is trying to make sure folks trained in elections are involved in whatever happens next.

“The sheriff’s assertion that his deputies know how to count is admirable,” Weber said. “The fact remains that he and his deputies are not elections officials.”

Separately, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta has gone to the courts to try to keep Bianco from spiriting away the ballots. Bonta’s office went straight to the California Court of Appeals to ask it to force the sheriff to comply with their requests to take no further action and supply the Justice Department with the probable cause evidence used to obtain the search warrant — basically tell them exactly what proof he’s using to claim a crime might have been committed.

The appeals court declined to intervene until Bonta went to the lower Riverside County Superior Court. But in the meantime, Bianco went back to his judge and asked for another secret, sealed warrant — which he got.

The bigger problem

And that brings us to why we should all be concerned about Riverside County.

First, why all the secrecy? Shouldn’t elections and everything about them be transparent, so we all can feel confident any investigation is on the up and up?

I asked Bianco why the warrants are sealed, and he told me I didn’t understand investigations.

“In an ongoing investigation, we never unseal the warrants,” Bianco said. “No, I can’t say never. I can’t say never. Why are you coming at me like I’m the bad person here, instead of like a rational person?”

When I asked him why a sheriff needed to be involved, rather than allowing the state officials who handle elections to investigate, he told me this was a crime investigation just like any other — domestic abuse or murder, for example.

“It’s called fraud,” he said. “Let me ask you this: Do we just let, do we let doctors investigate themselves for medical malpractice?”

The implication there is that election officials are in a conspiracy to commit an actual crime — fraud — and can’t be trusted. That jumps the shark from maybe election staff counting sloppy in their handwritten tallies of ballots received, to a — yes, folks, here it is — a conspiracy of Democrats, from those volunteers up to the highest state officials.

That is a political vendetta, straight from Trump, and has little to do with tracking down crime — which, by the way, Bianco’s office is not great at. It has some of the lowest clearance rates in the state.

“Oh, please,” Bianco said regarding my questions on whether this was, in fact, political. “I’m the sheriff of Riverside County, and my investigators are responsible for crime. I have nothing to do with this investigation.”

His news conference would beg to differ.

And now we have a precedent for a politics-driven sheriff seizing ballots, maybe to make headlines, maybe to please Trump, maybe both. What happens if other Republican sheriffs across the country decide to do some ballot seizing of their own in swing states or contested races come November?

Is it all fair game now for whoever can physically take the ballots to be the arbitrator of results?

“The political corruption in California just gets bigger and bigger,” Bianco said on social media recently.

On that, we can agree.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Landmark L.A. jury verdict finds Instagram, YouTube were designed to addict kids
The deep dive: ‘He’s an election skeptic. And he’s in charge of elections in Shasta County
The L.A. Times Special: Court denies AG’s petition to block Republican sheriff’s investigation of 650,000 ballots

Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria

P.S. Here’s Bianco on social media not long ago, once again definitely not espousing partisan voter conspiracies.

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

The year was 1998. Bill Clinton was in the White House, Titanic was packing movie theaters and a startup with a funny name, Google, was just launching.

In California, voters were choosing their next governor.

There was great anticipation surrounding a political heavyweight and whether she’d jump into the race. There was a rich businessman whose free-spending ad blitz made him inescapable on the airwaves. And an underdog who stayed in the contest in defiance of steep odds and, seemingly, common sense.

Those elements could very well describe the current gubernatorial race, which, as it happens, is the most wide-open since that volatile campaign a generation ago.

The outcome was one few anticipated, with Gray Davis romping to victory in the Democratic primary, then winning the governorship in a landslide.

Less than three months before the June primary, Davis had been running dead last, behind two well-heeled Democrats and the eventual GOP nominee. The number of people who told him to quit would have filled the L.A. Coliseum, Davis recalled this week. But he never considered dropping out; the pressure only made him more determined.

“Sometimes it’s meant to be. Sometimes you get every break,” Davis said. “Sometimes it’s not meant to be and you get no breaks.”

His bottom line: “Anything can happen.”

Of course, no two campaigns are the same.

This gubernatorial contest is being conducted under a system in which the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, will advance to a November runoff. In 1998, California held an “open primary,” under rules later voided by the Supreme Court. All candidates appeared on the same ballot, with the top finishers in each party guaranteed a spot in November.

Beyond that, the world has vastly changed: politically, socially, culturally. (Google is now one of the most valuable companies on the planet, pulling in a record $403 billion in revenue in fiscal 2025.)

Voter attitudes are different. One of Davis’ greatest assets was his position as lieutenant governor; that currency — incumbency and government know-how — no longer trade at the same high value.

The media landscape has fractured — back then newspapers set the political agenda, fewer than half of voters were online and streaming was something mostly done by water. Californians aren’t nearly as tuned in to the governor’s race as they were then.

“There’s a sideshow going on internationally and nationally and people are like, ‘Oh, right, there’s a governor’s race happening,’” said Paul Maslin, who was Davis’ pollster and is now working for Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Betty Yee. “Whereas in ‘98, that was clearly the big act in town.”

Having said all that, luck and an opportune break or two are still key ingredients to political success, as Davis suggested.

In his case, the first stroke of good fortune was Dianne Feinstein’s decision to not run. (This go-round, it was former Vice President Kamala Harris who held the race in suspension until she finally opted out.)

Feinstein, the state’s senior U.S. senator, had nearly been elected governor in 1990 and her lengthy deliberations froze out other potentially strong contenders. Had Feinstein run, she very probably would have blown away the field and made history by becoming the state’s first female governor.

Davis also greatly benefited when a federal court tossed out strict contribution limits, allowing him to go from collecting bite-size donations to much greater sums. Though he was vastly outspent by his two rich Democratic opponents, multimillionaire Al Checchi and then-Rep. Jane Harman, the decision allowed Davis to remain competitive and eventually pay for the statewide ad blitz that is indispensable in California.

Checchi, in particular, barraged voters with an unrelenting flood of ads. (Shades of the omnipresent Tom Steyer.) In one of them, a spot attacking Harman, Checchi included a photo of the lieutenant governor — and not a bad-looking one at that. The glimpse reminded voters that Davis, who was husbanding his resources for a late advertising push, was still in the race. He enjoyed a significant boost in polls.

Still, Checchi and Harman saw each other as the main opponent and their strategists acted — and tailored their advertising and campaign messaging — accordingly. The result was “a murder-suicide, as the term went at the time,” said Garry South, who managed Davis’ campaign. “They decided to focus so much fire on each other and ignore us that we simply slipped through the hole.”

Davis can well relate to those gubernatorial hopefuls in the position he once was — dissed, dismissed and bumping along near the bottom of horse-race polls. Speaking from his law office in Century City, he had this simple advice:

“Follow your heart,” he said. “Do what you think is right.”

“It’s fine for someone else to tell you you should get out, but that’s not their business,” Davis said. “You’re the candidate, and if you think for whatever reason you want to stay in the race, you should stay in the race.”

The ex-governor, who was recalled in 2003 and replaced by Arnold Schwarzenegger, acknowledged his comments won’t please Democrats worried about the party’s large field splintering support, resulting in two Republicans advancing to the November runoff.

But Davis isn’t too worried about that happening. Moreover, he said, it’s easy for those watching from the sidelines to take potshots and offer unsolicited — and not particularly empathetic — advice.

“They’re not running for office,” he said. “Other people are putting themselves on the line. … [If] people have the wherewithal, the courage and the dedication it takes to put themselves in a position to run for office, if they really believe it’s the right thing to do, they should. They should follow their dream.”

Besides which, you never know what might happen come June.

Stephen and Viv have been to 60 countries but say this was their worst experience

A couple who have travelled to 60 countries after appearing on Race Across the World have blasted a “shocking” airport lounge as the worst they’ve ever experienced. Stephen and Viv Redding, from Uppingham, Rutland were left stunned after paying nearly £50 to access what they thought would be a relaxing business class lounge.

Stephen, 64, and Viv, 68, visited the Avianca lounge while waiting for their flight to Bogotá before returning to London Heathrow, following a six-week trip around South America. They claim to have been met with “tasteless” food and shabby surroundings.

“We bought business class tickets because it was a long-haul flight and that way we can have flat beds and get a bit of sleep,” Stephen said. “We’d been led to believe that we would have lounge access [at the airport] but when we went up to the lounge, we were told that our tickets did not qualify.

“So we decided that we would pay for the upgrade because we knew we had over two hours to spare.”

Once inside, the couple, who appeared on the BBC travel show in 2024, say they were shocked by the poor quality on offer at the San Jose lounge. Stephen said: “There was only one meal available, tasteless and watery spaghetti bolognese.

“The pasta was cold, the sauce was not very nice. There was a little side bread thing that was dried and tasteless. We were given drinks tokens for a glass of wine, which meant we were only allowed one drink each – one glass of wine each!

“The place was not good. The seats weren’t comfy, the tables were shabby, it was not what we’d experienced from any other airport lounge that we’ve been to. And to be fair, there have been quite a few since Race Across the World two years ago.

“We’ve been to about 60 countries now and probably up to a dozen lounges across the globe and this is the worst lounge that we’ve ever been to.”

The pair raised their concerns with staff at the time but claim they were met with little interest. After returning home, they contacted Avianca to request a refund, but say their complaint was rejected. Stephen added: “We asked for money back because of the poor lounge quality but they have refused and rejected that claim and basically said that’s just the way it is.

“I must also say though that the flight with Avianca was absolutely spot on, I have no complaints at all.

“[That being said], we were disappointed and actually after being away for six weeks touring through the north of South America we were tired and just wanted to relax in a bit of comfort, but this did not fulfil our needs by any means.”

When I read all the hype being heaped on Kamala Harris’ lead in early polls for the 2028 Democratic nomination, I have to chuckle to myself.

The release of a Rasmussen Reports poll in February was titled, “Kamala Harris Still Leads 2028 Field for Democrats.” One headline in the Hill predicted, “Kamala Harris may yet be the Democratic nominee in 2028.” A Washington Examiner piece about polling warned, “Democrats won’t get rid of Kamala Harris that easily for 2028.”

I chuckle not because I don’t believe the numbers, but because I don’t believe any poll this far out in an open contest is meaningful, let alone determinative. I’ve seen this movie before, and it didn’t end well.

In 2003, after managing the successful 2002 reelection campaign of California Gov. Gray Davis, I signed on as an advisor to the presidential campaign of Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman — who, I needn’t remind anyone, had been the Democratic nominee for vice president in the 2000 election, which he and Al Gore lost in a nail-biter to George W. Bush.

Based simply on his high name identification from that hellzapoppin’ race, and the fact his name had been on the ballot in all 50 states just two years before, Lieberman initially led the Democratic field quite handily in almost every national poll.

An ABC News/Washington Post survey in January 2003 found Lieberman leading the Democratic field with 27%. A Gallup poll from that same month also placed him first, ahead of both John Kerry and Richard Gephardt.

A Pew poll in the summer of 2003 also found Lieberman atop the field, as the best-known candidate at 85% name recognition, and 58% support, ahead of Kerry, Gephardt and Howard Dean.

Boy, did we brag about Lieberman’s lead at every stop and in every press release. But in the end, the promising early numbers meant nothing. When actual votes were cast, Lieberman totally flamed out, receiving a measly 8.9% of the vote in the critical first primary in New Hampshire, finishing dead last, and dropping out of the race in February 2004, having lost every primary and caucus up to that point.

Why? A lot of reasons, including mistakes made by the candidate and campaign. But fundamentally because, when Democrats started to take a close look at and assess the full field, they relegated Lieberman to the status of a loser, and they wanted to move on. We heard a lot of, “He had his chance and lost.” Does Harris come to mind?

The fact is, we Democrats tend to put defeated presidential nominees in the rear-view mirror pretty quickly. Think of Michael Dukakis, Gore and Kerry. And let’s not forget, Harris obtaining the nomination in 2024 was a fluke; she didn’t compete in one primary or receive one primary vote. The first time she ran for president, in the 2020 cycle, she also didn’t win one primary or receive a single primary vote, because she ran a bad campaign and hightailed it out of the race before a single vote was cast. Two strikes and you’re out?

We Democrats just don’t renominate losers. The last time we did it was exactly 70 — yes, 70 — years ago, with Adlai Stevenson in 1956 after he had lost the 1952 presidential race to Dwight Eisenhower. Stevenson rewarded Democrats for this recycling effort by losing to Eisenhower a second time — by an even worse margin. Democrats learned their lesson: Reheating doesn’t work with failed candidates.

And, come on, Harris not only lost to Trump, not only lost all seven swing states, but was the first Democratic presidential nominee in 20 years to lose the popular vote. And her weak showing also helped Republicans wrest control of the Senate from Democrats. We’re supposed to imagine that’s a credible record on which to run again for the nomination?

All of these breathless stories about Harris leading the field nationally also never mention her perilous standing in her own home state of California. A Berkeley IGS survey in August revealed that by a margin of 18 percentage points, even her fellow Democrats in California did not want her to run again. A Politico poll this month showed Gov. Gavin Newsom with a 2-to-1 lead in California among voters leaning toward voting in the 2028 Democratic primary.

So have fun, Kamala Harris, enjoying your name-ID high while it lasts (although maybe a mite longer than your 107-day presidential effort).

Garry South is a Democratic strategist who has managed four campaigns for governor of California and played significant roles in three presidential campaigns, including that of Al Gore.

March 23 (UPI) — With just weeks to go before the April 12 general elections, Peru’s electoral landscape is defined by unprecedented fragmentation and a voter base that appears to be turning away from the traditional political class.

Right-wing candidates Keiko Fujimori and Rafael López Aliaga remain virtually tied for first place in national popularity, according to a Datum Internacional poll for the newspaper El Comercio, published Sunday.

However, analysts say the figure that truly dominates the race is not any candidate’s percentage, but rather the 57% of Peruvians who still do not know whom they will vote for or who plan to cast a null ballot.

The public opinion survey showed that only 43% of Peruvians say they have decided on their vote and will not change it. According to data collected by the pollster, this scenario has remained stable since the beginning of the month, Canal N reported.

Datum analyst and CEO Urpi Torrado said the real protagonist of this process is the “undecided bloc.” According to her assessment, the disconnect is so deep that 53% of voters admit they do not even know the party symbol of the candidate they say they will support.

The results show a technical tie at the top, but with extremely low figures for a race of this magnitude. Keiko Fujimori, of Fuerza Popular, leads with 11.9%, followed closely by Rafael López Aliaga, of Renovación Popular, with 11.7%.

Further behind are rising figures such as leftist Alfonso López Chau with 6.5%, actor Carlos Álvarez with 5.0% and social democrat Jorge Nieto with 4.6%.

Analyst Carlos Meléndez told television channel Latina Noticias that this dispersion of votes, spread across a record 36 candidates, ensures that the June 7 runoff would be decided by very narrow margins.

Analyst Pedro Tenorio said that 75% of citizens believe the candidates do not understand their real problems. Even so, he noted a trend toward center and right-wing positions, which together account for 52% of voter identification, compared with a weakened 11% identifying with the left.

According to experts, the risk is that the next president could come to power with very weak initial legitimacy, facing an equally fragmented bicameral Congress that could deepen political instability and legislative gridlock.

The overall political environment is one of extreme fragility. Unlike previous processes, there is no “coattail effect” or consolidated ideological currents. The prevailing sentiment is rejection, with 81% of the population saying they do not feel represented by any political group.

This detachment has translated into a subdued campaign, where candidates struggle to break through a ceiling that does not exceed 15%.

The emergence of figures such as Wolfgang Grozo, a retired major general and former director of intelligence of the Peruvian Air Force, who has risen in the polls thanks to a strong presence on Instagram and TikTok, shows that sustained anti-establishment sentiment could trigger a last-minute shift among undecided voters and drastically alter the race.

This scenario is not unfamiliar in Peru. In the 2021 general elections, Pedro Castillo staged one of the biggest political upsets in the country’s history, going from a virtually invisible candidate in the polls to winning the presidency in a context of extreme fragmentation.

At that time, weeks before the first round, Castillo, a primary school teacher and union leader from Cajamarca, appeared in the “others” category with less than 3% voting intention. His rise was explosive in the final 10 days, driven by intensive campaigning in rural areas that urban polls failed to capture in time.

Castillo won the first round with just 18.9% of valid votes. It was the first time in the country’s history that a candidate advanced to the runoff with such limited support, highlighting a total crisis of representation among the 17 candidates competing in that election.

SACRAMENTO — President Trump claims Gov. Gavin Newsom is unfit to be president because he has a “learning disability.” It’s a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.

The centuries-old pot-kettle idiom points out hypocrisy — as when one person accuses another of a flaw that afflicts himself.

California’s governor has battled dyslexia all his life — very successfully, by any measure. Dyslexia is a learning disability that makes reading and writing difficult. But it doesn’t mean a stricken person is unable to learn. He just needs to learn differently, as Newsom has done since he was a teen.

Trump apparently isn’t dyslexic. But he clearly has some learning disabilities — including stubbornness, narrow-mindedness and intolerance.

The president still hasn’t learned, for example, that he lost the 2020 election. He persists in the belief — or maybe it’s merely another boldface lie — that the election was stolen in a Joe Biden conspiracy. That’s a bizarre fantasy.

He also didn’t learn from past administrations that a commander in chief should not wage war against Iran without a concrete plan to keep open the Strait of Hormuz so Middle Eastern oil can keep flowing to the world.

And he never has learned what most of us were taught by our parents: that you don’t berate your friends if you expect to keep them friendly — lashing out, for instance, at allies before and after their balking at sending warships to help protect the vital strait.

Moreover, he didn’t learn that the nation’s founders embedded a checks-and-balances governing system in the Constitution and that Congress has a role in imposing tariffs.

When the normally Trump-friendly Supreme Court ruled against his unilateral tariff agenda, the spoiled president did what he usually does: attack, insulting the justices who struck down his edicts.

“Fools,” “lapdogs” and a “disgrace to our nation,” he whined. “It’s an embarrassment to their families.”

Trump still hasn’t learned to shut up and try to be civilized.

Not even after shocking everyone by saying of the late Republican Sen. John McCain, a Navy Pilot who spent more than five years as a tortured POW in the Hanoi Hilton: “He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured.”

Any respect I might have had for the guy vanished in 2015 when the then-candidate for president publicly mocked a New York Times reporter’s disability. At a campaign rally, Trump jerked his arms and flailed his hands while making fun of the reporter’s palsy-like ailment.

So it wasn’t a surprise recently when Trump tore into Newsom for his dyslexia four times in one week.

Yes, Newsom has his eye on the 2028 presidential election and has been scoring points nationally with Democratic activists by using Trump as a punching bag. But Trump keeps offering himself up as an irresistible target.

Regardless, there’s no excuse — even in hard knocks politics — for attacking someone because of his disability.

“Gavin Newscum” — Trump’s synonym for the governor — ”has admitted he has learning disabilities, dyslexia,” he told reporters in the Oval Office. “Honestly, I’m all for people with learning disabilities but not for my president.”

“Everything about him is dumb,” Trump added.

In a Fox News Radio interview, Trump said that “presidents can’t have a learning disability.” And on Facebook, Trump wrote: “I don’t want the president of the United States to have a cognitive deficiency.”

A quick Google search could have shown Trump that several presidents have had learning disabilities, including dyslexia.

Start with George Washington, who struggled with grammar and spelling. And Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, who had trouble with reading and spelling.

Other presidents with learning disabilities: Andrew Jackson, Woodrow Wilson, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. “It’s a poor mind that can think of only one way to spell a word,” Jackson asserted.

Scientist Albert Einstein was dyslexic. So were Apple co-founder Steve Jobs and Thomas Edison.

Dyslexia affects roughly one in five Americans to some degree — more than 40 million people, although relatively few are aware of it, according to researchers.

Newsom has spoken openly for years about his struggles with dyslexia. It’s difficult for him to read, especially prepared speeches. So he reads and re-reads, underlines and highlights and meticulously takes notes. When a speech must be read off a teleprompter, he practices for hours.

In January, the governor began his State of the State address to the Legislature with this ad-lib:

“I’m not shy or, you know, embarrassed about my 960 SAT score. But I am a little bit about my inability to read the written [speech] text. And so it’s always been something that I have to work through and I’m confronting.”

In his recently released autobiography, “Young Man in a Hurry,” Newsom writes: “My high school grades were all over the place and I scored lousy on the SAT, three hours of dyslexic torture.”

Early in his political career as a San Francisco supervisor, he writes, “speaking to a crowd was not unlike the fear I felt in third grade reading to my classmates …. So I learned to memorize my talking points and best lines … and wing it from there.

“This is how I discovered one of the secret powers of dyslexia. I could read a room with the best of them. I’d walk in and immediately size up the faces, mood and manners. … I learned that an audience didn’t mind occasional hiccups of speech as long as you looked them in the eye.”

Newsom was twice elected mayor and twice governor.

None of this means he should necessarily be elected president.

There may be policy and political reasons to consider him unfit — but not because of any learning disability.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Newsom leads Harris for president among California Democrats, poll finds
The TK: Democrats excluded from USC gubernatorial debate urge rivals to boycott in solidarity
The L.A. Times Special: Rep. Eric Swalwell’s private AI company raises money, questions

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

March 22 (Asia Today) — Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon on Sunday renewed his call for the formation of a campaign committee aimed at broadening the party’s appeal to centrist voters, as he completed an interview for the ruling party’s Seoul mayoral nomination.

Oh, who entered the People Power Party primary late, urged party leaders to quickly launch what he described as an “innovation campaign committee” led by figures capable of attracting moderate voters.

Speaking to reporters after the interview at the party’s headquarters in Yeouido, Oh said recent opinion polls show a significant gap in party approval ratings, underscoring the need for a strategy that resonates with centrist voters in the Seoul metropolitan area.

“Without a campaign structure that can expand toward the center, winning the election will be difficult,” he said.

Oh dismissed suggestions that his proposal amounts to sidelining the party leadership under Jang Dong-hyuk, saying his goal is to balance the party’s confrontational stance against the opposition with broader electoral appeal.

“At this point, it would not make sense to ask the leadership to weaken its political stance,” he said.

He also pushed back against media reports portraying his proposal as an attempt to take control of the party or position himself for the next party convention, calling such interpretations “unintended.”

Tensions between Oh and the party leadership are expected to continue. Jang has previously rejected calls for an early launch of the campaign committee, saying it should be formed after the nomination process is completed.

While both sides agree on the need for a campaign body with wider appeal, they remain divided over the timing of its formation.

The interview marked the confirmation of a six-way race for the party’s Seoul mayoral nomination. Other candidates include Rep. Park Soo-min, former Gangdong District Mayor Kim Chung-hwan, former lawmaker Yoon Hee-sook, party official Lee Sang-kyu and business executive Lee Seung-hyun.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260323010006563

Gregoire headed a list uniting the traditional left, the Greens and the Communists to victory in French capital.

The Socialist Party’s Emmanuel Gregoire has won the Paris mayoral race, as the results of nationwide municipal elections showed gains for the traditional left and right, and a major win for the far right in the city of Nice.

Sunday’s run-off votes in more than 1,500 communes saw Gregoire on course to become mayor of the French capital, with exit polls showing that the far-right National Rally (RN) fell short of taking control of the key southern cities of Marseille and Toulon.

Gregoire, who headed a list uniting the traditional left, the Greens and the Communists, clinched the prized mayoralty with an estimated 51 to 53 percent of the vote, according to pollsters, seeing off Conservative rival Rachida Dati, who conceded defeat.

The 48-year-old son of a teacher and civil servant is stepping into the spotlight after previously serving as deputy to outgoing mayor and fellow Socialist Anne Hidalgo. During his bid, he had promised that Paris would stand as a “city of refuge” and a “bastion against the right and the far right”.

In Marseille, the second-largest city in the country, Socialist Mayor Benoit Payan was on track to be re-elected with 56.3 percent of the vote, according to an Elabe poll for BFM TV. RN’s chances of winning the coveted prize took a hit after the withdrawal of a hard-left candidate from France Unbowed (LFI) aimed at uniting left-wing voters.

Socialist Party chief Olivier Faure hailed the wins in Paris and Marseille, positioning his party as a bulwark against the far right. “Only the left can prevent France from this regression,” he said.

In Toulon, an Elebe poll showed centre-right candidate Josée Massi leading at 53.5 percent, with RN candidate Laure Lavalette conceding defeat. Yet, senior RN officials rejected suggestions that the party’s loss indicated it had hit a “glass ceiling” ahead of next year’s presidential election.

“The National Rally and its candidates have achieved tonight, in this municipal election, the biggest breakthrough in its entire history,” RN chief Jordan Bardella said, alluding to wins in local constituencies where it previously had no presence.

In the first round, Bardella’s anti-immigration party won re-election in the southern city of Perpignan, and it won in smaller cities, too. And on Sunday, exit polls indicated that Eric Ciotti, a former mainstream conservative who is now an ally of the RN, won in Nice, France’s fifth-biggest city.

Former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe was re-elected mayor in his northern city of Le Havre, according to the TF1 and LCI broadcasters, delivering a better-than-expected performance that boosts his hopes of running for president in 2027.

Philippe, a centre-right politician who served as prime minister under centrist President Emmanuel Macron, made a speech with a clear national message, saying his victory showed that “there were reasons to be hopeful” in the values of France and that the extremes can be beaten.

Turnout at 5pm local time (16:00 GMT) was just higher than 48 percent in France’s mainland, more than than in the 2020 vote held during the COVID-19 pandemic, but four points lower than in 2014, according to the Ministry of Interior.

Jim Michaelian, the race car driver who helped launch the annual Acura Grand Prix of Long Beach, has died. He was 83.

The Grand Prix Assn. of Long Beach confirmed his death on Saturday, just weeks before this year’s race, which is scheduled for April 17-19.

Michaelian joined the Grand Prix Assn. of Long Beach in 1975, a then-fledgling competitive race, and grew it into one of the most popular street racing events in the world. The annual three-day event draws thousands of race car enthusiasts and brings tens of millions of dollars into the city of Long Beach.

“Jim was a leader of a small, passionate group who believed in the concept of bringing elite open-wheel competition to Long Beach in the 1970s,” said Roger Penske, Penske Corporation chairman, in a statement. “His vision and energy surrounding this great event remained boundless for 50 years.”

Penske Entertainment acquired the Grand Prix Assn. of Long Beach in 2024.

Michaelian was a competitive sports car racer for more than 25 years, competing in endurance events at tracks including Le Mans, Daytona Beach, Nürburgring, Dubai and Sebring in Florida. He told The Times in 2019 that he was still racing sports cars at 76.

“As long as I can achieve some level of success, I’m going to continue doing it until they tell me I can’t anymore,” he said then.

A native of Monterey Park, Michaelian (pronounced meh-KAY-lee-un) graduated from UCLA with a bachelor’s degree in physics. But he turned his attention to business and went on to earn an MBA there. Driven by a love of motor racing, Michaelian eventually talked his way onto the staff of the Long Beach Grand Prix.

He served as the association’s controller and chief operating officer before being appointed president and chief executive in 2001. During his 51-year tenure, Michaelian transformed Long Beach into an iconic stop in the world of motor racing.

A variety of races are run during the three days on the city’s seaside streets, culminating with a big-league IndyCar Series race Sunday. The races feature different types of cars, and one is for trucks, to appeal to a broad audience.

But the Long Beach Grand Prix is more of a festival that’s been built up around the racing. There are concerts, a lifestyle expo, a kids’ zone with go-karts and other activities, along with an array of food and drink spots, all centered on the Long Beach Convention Center and Shoreline Drive.

Michaelian said he kept the pulse of the crowd by constantly walking the track to monitor how the grand prix’s fans were enjoying the activities. He would survey for problems that might need fixing or whether changes needed to be made for the following year.

“Many young people don’t want to sit in the seats now,” he told The Times in 2019. “They’re out taking selfies, they’re chronicling their experience at Long Beach, and the only way to do that is for them to get around.

“So, if they’re moving around, I’m moving around” by creating more places where they can gather, listen to music and having food options nearby, he said then.

Last year, Michaelian was inducted into the Long Beach Motorsports Walk of Fame.

“Jim was a racer’s racer and a dear friend to IMSA and the motorsports community at large,” John Doonan, president of International Motor Sports Assn., said in a statement. “We will sorely miss his presence at Long Beach and racetracks everywhere.”

The Grand Prix Assn. of Long Beach did not release his cause of death.

Michaelian is survived by his wife, Mary, and his sons, Bob and Mike.

Former Times staff writer James F. Peltz contributed to this report.

The Los Angeles chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America will not endorse a candidate for mayor.

After City Councilmember Nithya Raman decided at the last minute to run against her former ally Mayor Karen Bass, the group called a vote on whether to reopen the endorsement process, which it had closed without supporting a candidate.

DSA-LA backed Raman’s two successful city council runs, but she has been at odds with the group on some issues.

Also in the mix was another mayoral candidate, community organizer Rae Huang, whose positions align more closely with those of the group.

The two candidates were present for Saturday’s vote at Immanuel Presbyterian Church in Koreatown, though neither spoke.

The left-wing organization, which has about 5,000 members, is known for running strong ground game campaigns that include canvassing, door-knocking and phone banking. In addition to Raman, three other DSA-backed politicians now sit on the 15-member City Council.

Before the vote, DSA-LA members argued for and against reopening the endorsement process.

“The worst thing we can do right now for our movement is to say, ‘Well, actually, we’re not going to endorse Rae or Nithya. We’re going to do a third thing, which is to issue no endorsement.’ Who is the audience for this message?” said Leslie Chang, a co-chair of DSA-LA.

DSA-LA member Anna Gross argued that neither candidate was ideal, with Huang, who has little political experience, being a long shot and Raman hesitating to fully embrace the group.

“I do want a democratic socialist mayor, but as it stands, we have one candidate who is not going to win … and a candidate who will not openly identify as a democratic socialist,” Gross said.

Of the 488 members who voted Saturday, about 55% supported reopening the endorsement process, falling short of the required two-thirds majority.

If the process had been reopened, the group would have then voted on whether to endorse Raman, Huang or neither.

Huang’s earlier attempt to get the endorsement while the window was still open had failed because she did not obtain enough valid member signatures to qualify.

If the race is not decided in the June 2 primary, DSA-LA can still endorse a candidate in the runoff.

Besides Bass, Raman and Huang, the field of 14 candidates includes conservative reality TV star Spencer Pratt and tech entrepreneur Adam Miller.

Some members believed that a mayoral endorsement would take resources away from the slate of six local candidates they have already endorsed.

In city council races, DSA-LA is backing incumbents Hugo Soto-Martínez and Eunisses Hernandez; Faizah Malik, who is running against incumbent Traci Park on the Westside; and Estuardo Mazariegos for an open South L.A. seat.

The group is also backing Marissa Roy, who is challenging City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto, and Rocío Rivas, an incumbent L.A. Unified school board member.

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, who is a leading Republican candidate for governor, has seized more than 650,000 ballots from last November’s election and is investigating whether they were fraudulently counted.

“This investigation is simple: Physically count the ballots and compare that result with the total votes recorded,” Bianco said at a news conference Friday.

The unusual probe drew a sharp rebuke from California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, who said in a statement Friday that it is “unprecedented in both scope and scale” and appears “not to be based on facts or evidence.”

“There is no indication, anywhere in the United States, of widespread voter fraud,” Bonta said. “Counts, recounts, hand counts, audits, and court cases all support this.”

According to Bonta’s office, Bianco’s department on Feb. 26 seized about 1,000 boxes of ballot materials in Riverside County related to the November election for Proposition 50, which temporarily redrew the state’s congressional districts to favor Democrats in response to partisan redistricting in Republican states, including Texas.

The sheriff said his investigators are looking into allegations by a local citizens group that “did their own audit” and found that the county’s tally was falsely inflated by more than 45,000 votes — a claim that local election officials have rejected.

President Trump, who remains fixated on his 2020 election loss, continues to amplify election conspiracy theories and has repeatedly called for the federal government to “nationalize” state-run elections to counter what he says is widespread fraud.

Bonta and California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, both Democrats, have vowed to fight federal interference that could affect voting in California, including efforts to seize election records, as the FBI recently did in Georgia.

Bianco is an outspoken Trump supporter who said in an endorsement video in 2024 that, after 30 years of putting criminals in jail, he figured it was “time to put a felon in the White House — Trump 2024, baby” — referencing Trump’s conviction by a New York jury for falsifying business records while paying hush money to a porn actor.

Bianco’s investigation, which includes all the ballots cast in Riverside County in November, raises questions about how he would handle the election denialism movement if elected governor.

A poll released last week by UC Berkeley’s Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times showed Bianco and conservative commentator Steve Hilton leading the crowded field of gubernatorial candidates by slim margins, in a left-leaning state.

Last fall, Proposition 50 passed in Riverside County with 56% of the vote — a margin of more than 82,000 ballots.

A citizens group called the Riverside Election Integrity Team has said it performed an audit finding that 45,896 more ballots were counted than were cast.

In a lengthy February presentation to the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, Registrar of Voters Art Tinoco disputed that figure, saying it was based on a misunderstanding of raw data that had not been fully processed.

The actual discrepancy, Tinoco said, was 103 votes, a variance of 0.016% that was far below what he said was the state’s preferred 2% margin of error for certifying results.

Bianco on Friday said that there “is no acceptable error, small or large, in our elections.”

The sheriff did not name the Riverside Election Integrity Team, but his description of the allegations brought to him by “a group of citizen volunteers” matched theirs.

Bianco said the investigation was “not a recount” for the Proposition 50 contest and was “just as much to prove the election is accurate as it is to show otherwise — we will not know until the count is complete.”

Bonta said his office has “attempted to work cooperatively” with the Sheriff’s Department to understand the basis for the probe. The sheriff, Bonta said, “has delayed, stonewalled, and otherwise refused to work with us in good faith” and failed to provide most of the requested documents.

“We’re concerned that there is not sufficient justification for seizing every ballot that was cast in this very largely populated county,” an official in Bonta’s office said in an interview Friday night.

In a March 4 letter to Bianco, the attorney general cited Bianco’s plan to use Sheriff’s Department staffers, “who are not trained and have no experience,” to count the ballots.

“Let me be clear: this is unacceptable,” Bonta wrote. “Your decision to seize ballots and begin counting them based on vague, unsubstantiated allegations about irregularities in the November special election results sets a dangerous precedent and will only sow distrust in our elections. You are also flagrantly violating my directives.”

At his news conference Friday, Bianco fired back by calling Bonta “an embarrassment to law enforcement.”

A Riverside County Superior Court judge, Bianco said, has ordered the appointment of a special master to oversee the ballot count.

In a statement Friday, Secretary of State Weber said “the Sheriff’s assertion that his deputies know how to count is admirable. The fact remains that he and his deputies are not elections officials and they do not have expertise in election administration.”