Commentary: The Legacy of California’s Political Impact on America

by Richard Truesdell & Keith Lehmann

California has finally arrived. A female former California attorney general and U.S. senator is at the top of the Democrat presidential ticket. This is the culmination of generations of California politicians who have heavily influenced American politics and culture and are now, once again, on the verge of taking the top political office in the Free World.

“California is having a moment,” said Don Sipple, a California political strategist. To be more accurate, on a nationwide political basis, California has been having a lot of moments for decades.

California-native Richard Nixon became the 37^th president in 1968 after losing to John F. Kennedy in 1960. Nixon was already a known commodity, having served as vice president to Dwight Eisenhower in 1952 and was re-elected in 1956. Nixon’s rise to prominence was largely due to his work on the House Un-American Activities Committee that exposed State Department official Alger Hiss as a spy for the Soviet Union.

Through his own actions and with a rabid media itching to take him down, Nixon has the historical distinction of being the only U.S. president to resign from office. Echoing history, there is a 50/50 chance of Biden’s resignation due to his inability to function as president, which could change this November’s election to allow Kamala Harris to run as an incumbent, possibly as this cycle’s October surprise.

Both men rose to power in changing times, and their California roots played a prominent role in their attraction to the population. The Golden State, at the time, was viewed as having a forward-thinking culture with opportunity for growth and a climate-driven lifestyle unique among the 50 states (if it were an independent nation, California’s economy would rank as the fifth largest in the world). Since then, the gorgeous weather remains, but everything else has changed, including the political players.

California’s Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi have been very consequential Democrat members of Congress, serving a combined total of nearly seventy years in office. Feinstein and Pelosi governed well outside of the mainstream of America and promoted far-left issues that went against the best interests of the country.

But probably the most notorious member of the California Congressional delegation is Adam Schiff, who repeatedly lied as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee over the accusation of the 2016 Trump campaign’s collusion with Russia in the runup to the presidential election, earning Schiff a censure from the House of Representatives.

While Schiff’s mendacity is not purely a product of his California roots, it does present the state as having harvested more than a few deceitful radicals, as proven by Ted Lieu, Zoe Lofgren, Maxine Waters, Eric Swalwell, Katie Porter, and Barbara Lee. And now, because of the current makeup of the state’s low-information electorate, Schiff is likely to be rewarded with a coveted seat in the Senate this November.

And let’s not forget the aggressive presidential ambitions of California Governor Gavin Newsom. Not only did he storm the country for most of the past two years to boost his national visibility, but he also made high-profile visits to Israel and China in an attempt to craft an air of international gravitas.

Of course, Newsom instantly cleaned up the homeless mess in San Francisco, albeit temporarily, before last November’s visit by Chinese President Xi Jinping, who was attending the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit and meeting with a cognitively impaired Joe Biden. Oh, how the national and international geopolitical landscape has changed in just nine months.

Newsom was smart. He did not register as a candidate for the 2024 Democratic nomination, but he was circling the White House in plain sight, waiting for the opportunity that he missed by mere minutes when Joe Biden was forced out of his re-election campaign and then hurriedly endorsed Newsom’s fellow Californian Kamala Harris. This was done to avoid an open convention, which was what the Obama and the Progressive wings of the party clearly wanted.

Would they have selected Newsom over Harris? We’ll never know but should Harris falter in November, as we hope, he’s clearly in pole position for 2028. Democrats are salivating at the prospect of a Newsom-Whitmer ticket should Harris lose this November.

On the Democrat presidential ticket, would Newsom have been a bigger threat to America than Harris? It’s fair to say that either one would be a disaster.

Both of them have naked ambition and a record of ruthless behavior in pursuit of their goals. Both are far-left in their beliefs, both are malleable on the issues, both are in their respective positions due solely to political connections and not due to accomplishments, and both have a record of failure that cannot easily be hidden. Having been marinated in California’s progressive stew their entire political lives, they do not connect with anyone outside of their bubble and are thusly not acquainted with an entire population outside of California state lines.

And both will implement “California values” in the entirety of America. From climate change regulation to the banning of gas and diesel vehicles, to open borders, to welfare for illegal immigrants, to taxpayer-financed “gender-affirming” surgery, to sexual grooming in schools, to defunding police, to decriminalizing retail theft, to encouraging homelessness, to emptying and then closing prisons, to raising energy prices, either Newsom or Harris will govern as he or she has while in office in California. “California values,” indeed.

America is one election away from becoming California in all but name. It is not mere conjecture to insist that Kamala Harris, in true California form, is going to replicate every radical California idea and experiment and federalize them, most likely through Executive Order. She has already threatened, if elected, to pack the Supreme Court, erasing its current cyclical Conservative majority.

The end game? To codify and impose Roe v. Wade on the other 49 states even though they had that opportunity to do so many times when they held the White House and majorities in both Houses of Congress at the same time over the last five decades. But they didn’t, as they knew how unpopular such a move would be among the broad center of the electorate.

Want to see the future of America after a Harris-Walz victory in November? You only have to look at California and its governmental failures on steroids, coming to your town soon. We are both long-time residents of California. We’ve both seen the mess that California has become since Reagan or even Arnold Schwarzenegger—nominally a Republican—was governor.

Trust us, you don’t want California values imposed where you live. That’s what’s at stake in November. We’ve spoken about the consequences of a Harris-Walz administration—and the primary reason why Trump must be reelected in November—to reshape the Supreme Court. We must do everything in our power to see that does not happen.

– – –

Richard Truesdell is a former consumer electronics retail executive and automotive travel photojournalist. In the last 25 years, he has visited more than 35 countries on six continents. A former high school history teacher with a BA in Political Science from Waynesburg University, he is a lifelong Conservative moderate who has turned his thoughts and keyboard to political commentary and popular culture. A cross-section of his writings can be found here.

Keith Lehmann is a retired consumer electronics industry executive who has written extensively on technology, transportation, and international travel. Living in Southern California for over fifty years, he has first-hand exposure to societal and cultural happenings of the left and submits decidedly realism-based, Conservative viewpoints, much of which can be found on his Substack.
Photo “Kamala Harris and Gavin Newsome” by Gavin Newsome.