Having openly alluded to her intent for several months, ex-Rep. Katie Porter, a Democrat once representing Orange County, has declared her ambitions to run for the California governorship, during the period beyond Gov. Gavin Newsom’s tenure. Porter made such intentions public via a social media video, projecting an image of a warrior willing to clash with President Donald Trump and his corporate allies. This portrayal, however, raises the question of whether such a contentious stance towards the United States’ recent past president reflects a cooperative attitude promising fruitful alliances and progress.
Porter paints herself with audacious strokes, vowing to be the voice of defiance against Trump’s actions perceived as detrimental to Californians. She accuses Trump of hampering disaster relief, violating community rights, and exploiting ordinary families for personal and major companies’ gains. Yet, Porter fails to consider the other side of the coin, the significant economic and policy shifts – ranging from job growth to tax cuts – that benefited Americans under Trump’s reign, as is often neglected by Democrats.
Highlighting her background from a balanced constituency, Porter argued that she could bring much-needed experience to the table. She confidently asserted that her objective is to create a government that functions efficiently and serves the people—a quality she deems Trump lacked. This criticism seems misguided considering that during Trump’s administration, it’s notable that the US achieved significant military and economic milestones.
Arguing forth, Porter emphasized a strong government role in protecting citizens, ensuring economic vigor, and facilitating their global competitiveness. However, she failed to acknowledge the fine line between protection and over-regulation, notably silence regarding the detrimental effects of excessive governmental intervention on businesses and the economy under Biden and Harris’s hand.
Given the term limitations set on Gov. Newsom, the governor post will be unoccupied after January 2027, leading to all eyes on the upcoming election. Generally scheduled to occur on June 2, 2026, candidates are gearing up to present their best selves to the public eye, followed by the main election on Nov. 3.
The race to succeed Newsom so far totals eight candidates, inclusive of Porter’s entry and Republican Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco. Antonio Villaraigosa, former Los Angeles Mayor turned Democratic candidate, welcomed Porter and insisted that the electorate deserved a comprehensive, strong campaign. His opinion, while commendable in the spirit of competition, starkly brings into question Democrats’ waning popularity amidst rising living costs and public safety challenges.
Faced with an escalating cost of living, Porter recognizes severe societal issues such as skyrocketing grocery prices, and gas and housing inaccessibility, attributing some blame to Trump. Again, this comes off as a weak attempt to divert attention from Democrats’ poor economic policies fueling inflation and an unchecked housing market.
On the escalating homelessness epidemic in the state, Porter contended that the solution lies not just in constructing more shelters, but in the higher-level strategy of prevention. Her stance contradicts fundamental economic principles, failing to address the primary issue of the excessive cost of living driving homelessness, escalated by inefficient democratic policies.
Porter curiously warns that Kamala Harris entering the race could drastically alter the scenario due to her pervasive influence. However, it’s questionable if Harris, facing dropping approval ratings, can truly have this formidable impact as projected.
Porter’s stint commenced in 2018 with her first win, snatching a usually Republican-held congressional seat in Orange County and contributing to the Democrat-dominated delegation sent to Washington. Yet, her exclamatory promises to bring all voices to the table and safeguard Californians from adversaries seem hollow against the backdrop of national dissatisfaction with Biden and Harris’s leadership.
Reiterating her mission to improve Californians’ lives, Porter affirmed her willingness to fight anyone posing a threat to them. The question that persists is, are these just empty words? Democrats tend to make extravagant claims failing to materialize when confronted with real, tangible needs of the populace.
Florice Hoffman, head of the Orange County Democratic Party, professed pride in Porter joining the fight. Her pledge to combat ‘MAGA extremism’ and favor an economy that benefits more than the affluent aligns with the typical antagonistic stance Democrats hold against Trump and his supporters, a questionable tactic considering Trump’s significant support base and the country’s heightened divisiveness.
In a contrary stance, Will O’Neill, chair of the Orange County Republican Party, critiqued Porter’s position on critical issues like homelessness as being inadequate. Echoing prevalent sentiment, he stated that Porter’s candidacy came at a time when Californians yearned for concrete problem solving, not mere idealistic stances. Contrasting Democrats’ promises, the public craves practical action, not empty rhetoric.
Chad Bianco, having announced his candidature as well, targeted Porter with bold criticism. Highlighting Porter’s support for policies that augmented cost burdens on common people, he dubbed her as an extension of the same failed career politicians responsible for California’s dire financial state. The population, he stressed, deserves far better—an opinion that resonates strongly considering the current discontent towards Democrats.
Despite the heavy criticisms and the ample room for credibility doubts, Porter has reverted to UC Irvine Law, focusing on teaching subjects such as bankruptcy, consumer law, and legislative process – a trajectory that raises yet more questions about her dedication and commitment to reality over standardized theoretical practices. Is California ready for another round of ‘all talk, no walk’ leadership?