SaveCalifornia.com provides this solely for educational purposes and does not support or oppose candidates for public office.
Now that the March 6 filing deadline for California candidates has come and gone, have the chances increased or decreased to get a mostly-conservative Republican governor? With even imbalanced, liberal polls showing Republicans Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton in the “top two” (in California’s “jungle” primary election, only the top two vote-getters go on to the November runoff). And with the big egos of Democrats tempting them stay in the race (likely to get statewide recognition for their future campaigns), it’s looking more plausible that Republicans could “shut out” the Democrats by winning the “top two.”
Only Democrat Ian Calderon of East Los Angeles, not a statewide “name,” dropped out on Thursday, one day before the March 6 candidate filing deadline. And while he endorsed Eric Swalwell, I suspect Calderon’s racist Hispanic Democrat Party followers will prefer another Hispanic, either Antonio Villaraigosa or Xavier Becerra.
More Democrat Party leaders are worrying, and more Republican Party activists are noticing, that if California conservatives are energized to vote and propel Bianco and Hilton to “top two” positions in the June 2 “jungle” primary, that would “lock in” a mostly-conservative Republican governor in the November runoff, which would be truly historic.
Here’s our new hypothetical scenario of the governor’s race in California’s “jungle” primary. Based on the voter turnout in California’s 2024 presidential general election, SaveCalifornia.com gives 40% of the electorate to conservatives, including Republicans, and 60% of the vote to liberals, including Democrats:
21% Steve Hilton (R) 19% Chad Bianco (R) – – – – – 15% Eric Swalwell (D) 12% Katie Porter (D) 9% Tom Steyer (D) 5% Xavier Becerra (D) 5% Antonio Villaraigosa (D) 3% Betty Yee (D) 3% Tony Thurmond (D) 3% Matt Mahan (D) 5% other
So, if you’re conservative, now is not the time to debate whether Bianco or Hilton is better. For a mostly-Republican governor is only assured if both Republicans get enough support to be the top two vote-getters who go on to the November election, where only their names will be on ballot for governor, and then one of them will be elected governor.
Heavily Democratic California could elect a Republican governor for the first time in two decades as a result of its primary voting system, recent polling suggests. The Golden State has for over a decade mandated “top-two” primaries for state and congressional elections. Candidates in those races compete in the same primary, with the first- and second-place finishers, regardless of party affiliation, advancing to the general election. In California’s 2026 gubernatorial election, however, the presence of many Democrats with no clear frontrunner could possibly lead to the two well-known Republicans taking both spots on the general election ballot, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and former Fox News host Steve Hilton. Anthony Iafrate, Daily Caller News Foundation, Dec. 6, 2025
3. Categorically unfair: Rather than a “progressive” tax (which means the more you earn, the more you’re punished), a flat tax is the only FAIR tax, where everybody pays the SAME RATE (and yes, this means “the rich” will still pay a great amount of tax).
From A Biblical case for Proportional (flat) taxation by Jeff Hammond In a proportional (or flat) tax system, every dollar of income earned that is taxable* is taxed at the same rate. Thus every individual is treated identically by the tax code. There is strong Biblical support for treating people impartially, and in an opposite way, strong condemnation for showing partiality or favoritism. This is because we are supposed to image God, and God is impartial.
Romans 2:11 states clearly that God shows no partiality with respect to salvation, (see also Deut. 10:17, Acts 10:34, Job 34:19, and Eph. 6:9). I agree that this is not conclusive, since it isn’t directly talking about taxation, but it does give us an idea of where God’s heart is for how we treat one another. There is a reason why Lady Justice is blindfolded.
However, there are other passages which take us closer to the heart of the matter. Lev 19:15 says “‘You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor nor defer to the great, but you are to judge your neighbor fairly.” In this verse, we are told that not only should we not favor the rich, but surprisingly, we should also not favor the poor (see also Ex. 23:3). But why should we think this has applicability to taxation?
A main purpose of Leviticus is to show how the Israelites can live a holy life. Chapter 19 is the pinnacle of how we live holy lives in relation to others, and the commands are given a solid reason—“I am the LORD”–which is repeated throughout the section.
Interestingly, Ch 19 is widely viewed as repeating the Decalogue; clearly Leviticus is summarizing the essence of what Holy Living looks like under God’s moral law. In the middle of this section on Holy Living, comes verse 15, which describes what justice looks like. Do we treat each other according to their just due?
Lev 19:15 helps us understand that a standard for personal holiness will be reflected in a standard for corporate holiness. As John Hartley says in the Word Biblical Commentary, “Since God is just, his people must establish justice in their courts as the foundation of their covenant relationship with him. The inner strength of a nation resides in the integrity of its judicial system.”
While, this is not dealing with taxation, it is dealing with justice in the social setting of the courts—it seems reasonable to conclude that if impartiality is required for the courts, it would be required of government action in general. At least the burden of proof should be on those advocating for a system of partiality, given the extensive Biblical support of impartiality.
Tuesday, February 17, 2026, 10:29 pm | Randy Thomasson
The reason the Trump Administration is investigating widespread fraud in California is that they know they’ll win on this. Because enforcing proper use of federal funds is the jurisdiction of the federal government. So the Trump Administration’s audit of the mountains of federal funds coming here is wise and will be effective.
We’re ALL interested!! Keep reading for what the letter said from the FDA (US. Food & Drug Administration) to Bill Melugin, congressional correspondent for Fox News (copied from his 2/13/26 social media post on X):
Hello:
I am contacting you on behalf of the FDA’s Division of Information Disclosure regarding your FOIA request submitted on August 3, 2020. We apologize for the delay in processing. Due to a significant backlog of FOIA requests, we are reaching out to confirm whether you remain interested in having this request processed.
Below are the details of your request:
– FOIA Request #2020-5623
– Date Range: January 1, 2020 – July 29, 2020
– Description: I am requesting all FDA communications, including but not limited to, emails with the CDC/NIOSH that mention, reference, or discuss any masks or approval of masks associated with the $1 billion contract between the state of California and the company “BYD”. Please include any emails that discuss, reference, or mention any N95, KN95, or surgical masks that were part of this deal. Please include any communications with the CDC that mention, reference, or discuss the company “BYD”.
Please let us know whether you would like to keep this request open or withdraw it. If we do not receive a response within 30 days of this message, we will consider the request withdrawn and administratively close it.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to your response.
How much misuse of federal taxpayer funds is going on in Democrat-Party-controlled California?
$450 Million spent on a “Next Generation” 911 system that didn’t work
$55 billion in unemployment fraud was sent to prison inmates in California’s county jails, and state and federal prisons, out of state, and even out of the country
millions of crooks and bots using stolen identities to collect fraudulent federal and state financial aid in California Community Colleges
There’s no getting around the fact that California has been a focal point in recent fraud investigations, so much so that a new anti-fraud task force targeting welfare abuse in California and other states has been announced, led by Vice President J.D. Vance, Andrew Ferguson of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and Attorney General Pam Bondi.
California Congressman Kevin Kiley has his own strategy to get to the bottom of the fraud – he has requested a full GAO audit of California’s fraud to get a comprehensive picture of just how large the fraud is.
“Newsom is also now saying I shouldn’t criticize him for California’s rampant fraud because he somehow ‘stopped’ $125 billion in fraud,” Kiley posted to X.
“That, of course, is a made-up number. Newsom knows if the true scale of CA fraud comes to light, his presidential campaign is over. That’s why he’s terrified of the full GAO audit I’ve ordered and is surely alarmed I just told AG Bondi to make CA the focus of anti-fraud efforts.”
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.” Alexander Tytler, Scottish attorney/judge/professor/historian (1747-1813)
RSS 2.0 Feed