Panicked California Democrats are pushing a risky strategy: Wait ’til the last minute to vote
By Maya C. Miller, CalMatters
This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.
Some California Democrats have a plan to avoid disaster in the governor’s race: Wait until the last minute to vote.
With no one candidate emerging as a clear favorite and an open primary where the top two advance regardless of party affiliation, panic has set in for some who plan to vote Democratic.
To avoid a dreaded scenario in which Democrats are locked out of the November general election, many Democrats coalesced around former Rep. Eric Swalwell, who ultimately flamed out after multiple women accused him of sexual assault.
That fear has morphed into wariness, leading some party activists and influencers to encourage people to hold off on voting early, watch the polls, then vote for the candidate with the most support just before Election Day.
In a “normal year,” Katie Evans-Reber of San Francisco said she would probably back former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter even though the Democrat is not likely to advance to November given her current polling. But this year the stakes are higher, she said, and as a lesbian woman, any of the Democrats would be more aligned with her core values than a Republican.
She fears supporters of President Donald Trump who have soured on him could back Republican Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, giving him enough of a boost to match the power of Trump’s endorsement for Steve Hilton, the former Fox News host who is leading all other candidates in the polls. That would send both Republicans to the runoff.
“The thing that flipped for me was going from, ‘I don’t really know what to do,’ to, ‘I strategically am not making a decision,” Evans-Reber said.
In pole position is Xavier Becerra, the former Health and Human Services secretary who surged from single digits to the top of the polls following Swalwell’s downfall. As his popularity soared, so has the scrutiny of his record at HHS and as California’s former attorney general.
Behind Becerra are progressive Democratic challengers Tom Steyer, a former businessman turned billionaire activist and Porter. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan has also positioned himself as a tech-friendly moderate and ally of Silicon Valley.
Evans-Reber and other impassioned Democrats have been urging others to follow the same “wait and see” strategy by sharing videos and posts on social media.
One post even falsely attributed the strategy to Heather Cox Richardson, a political historian and popular Democratic influencer who writes the substack “Letters from an American.” That erroneous post was the first one Evans-Reber saw and forwarded. She later had to follow up with a disclaimer that Cox Richardson was not the author.
“It’s not like, bad advice, but it’s 100% not coming from me,” Cox Richardson told CalMatters in an interview.
Democratic political consultant Paul Mitchell disagrees.
“It’s just a bad message,” he said. “I think they should always have a message of, ‘As soon as you get your ballot, fill it out, turn it in, mail it in and get it done.”
Mitchell said although activists might talk about and push for a strategic voting plan, trying to organize a movement like that at scale would likely not produce significant results.
“I think people vote for whoever they were going to vote for anyway,” said Mitchell, whose company tracks how many ballots are turned in each day statewide.
The push to vote late flies in the face of recent pleas from election officials and Gov. Gavin Newsom for voters to get their ballots in early in the hopes of speeding up California’s notoriously slow vote-counting process. Attorney General Rob Bonta, a fellow Democrat, told reporters last week that the social media posts urging late voting could be misinformation, disinformation, and “potentially unlawful,” and Secretary of State Shirley Weber said her office would “look into” those social posts.
“Time is of the essence in preventing election lies from taking hold,” Newsom wrote in a recent letter addressed to all 58 county registrars urging them to “tabulate and release results quickly and accurately.”
Turning in a mail-in ballot on Election Day, as some activists propose, is the worst possible scenario for election administration officials.
It creates what Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, calls the “pig in the python effect.” County election offices are inundated with in-person ballots on Election Day, as well as mail-in ballots that require a meticulous process of signature matching, envelope opening and extracting the ballot before it can be counted.
Returning ballots even a few days earlier can give counties a head start, Alexander said at a recent CalMatters forum on election integrity.
Mark DiCamillo, who runs polling for the Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, said pollsters are doing their best to produce accurate results, but in an election with so many variables, even the best surveys could be off-base.
The past trend of low voter turnout in gubernatorial primaries, plus a potentially confusing array of 61 candidates for governor alone, make it difficult to determine who the likely voters will be and account for that in their surveys.
“This election’s got all the elements you have to deal with,” DiCamillo said. “It’s a challenge for the polling profession.”
Despite the concerns about a slow vote count and imprecise polling, Evans-Reber says she still plans to stick to her last-minute voting strategy. She doesn’t trust that mailing her ballot will reach the county elections office in time. She plans to bring her completed ballot to the office or one of the county’s vote centers and hand it directly to an election official.
“I am going to cast the ballot at the very last possible moment,” Evans-Reber said. “I’m going to wait until polling day.”
This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Now is the time for people to start looking at the Independents running. Time for a change.
I am just glad Humboldt County has kept the voter rolls up to date so illegal migrants and dead people won’t be voting. They also better not have any more voting boxes go missing.
As we all know voter fraud is a big problem. Volunteering as a poll watcher is your patriotic duty.
Each polling box should be numbered and each of those tallies for each box should be listed along side the results , no votes should be counted that do not have a box number assigned to them and the vote should not be certified until all boxes with their tallies have been accounted for .
this would ensure that every vote was counted . It would also be easier to audit as you could sample the election counts by simply pulling random boxes and checking their tallies against their reported tallies even to the point of taking the names of the voters from one box and searching to see if that person had another ballot counted anywhere else . This random auditing would lead to increased chances of voter fraud being caught and a easier more effective way to determine if there was a wide spread difference or if the count was within the margins of error .
if several boxes tallies were outside the typical margin of error there would be grounds to recount completely or if it seemed more localized to certain areas my point being that random sampling could reduce not only the chance of fraud but would also help narrow down the source of fraud should it be determined that errors occurred saving resources by not having to recount every ballot on a recount but systematically based upon sampling the problem areas could be located and addressed
wouldn’t take too much comfort in that in a state where you can literally register a dog to vote..
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-04-22/california-woman-registered-dog-to-vote-cast-ballots-for-pooch
Now is the time to start looking at the Independents running. Time for a change.
I still fail to understand how votes take DAYS to count (hint: they don’t).
They really do think we’re stupid.
Below is the long version: Short version votes aren’t just counted they are verified–confirming that each ballot is legally eligible to be counted and that the election process was followed correctly.
Election results often take days to finalize because modern elections involve millions of ballots arriving through different methods, each requiring verification before counting. In close races, the process slows further because accuracy matters more than speed.
Key reasons include:
Mail ballots require extra processing. Election workers must verify signatures, confirm the voter is registered, ensure the voter has not already voted, and in some states open and flatten ballots before scanning them. That work can take substantial time.
Different states have different laws. Some states allow officials to begin processing mail ballots before Election Day. Others prohibit processing until Election Day morning or even after polls close. States with stricter timing rules often report slower results.
Ballots can legally arrive after Election Day in some states. Military ballots, overseas ballots, and ballots postmarked by Election Day may still count if they arrive within a legally defined window.
Provisional ballots take time to verify. These are ballots cast when there is a question about eligibility, registration status, or polling location. Officials investigate each one individually before deciding whether it counts.
Large urban counties take longer. Dense populations produce huge ballot volumes. Cities also tend to use more mail voting, which increases processing time.
Close races trigger additional scrutiny. When margins are narrow, campaigns, observers, and election officials examine challenged ballots carefully. Automatic recount laws in some states can further delay final certification.
Election night results are unofficial. What people see on TV are partial returns reported as ballots are processed. The official canvass — where counties reconcile totals, check for errors, and certify results — usually takes days or weeks.
Accuracy safeguards deliberately slow the process. Bipartisan observers, chain-of-custody rules, audits, and verification systems are designed to prevent mistakes or fraud, even if that means slower reporting.
Historically, people often assume earlier elections were “faster,” but many older elections were actually less accurate, involved fewer mail ballots, smaller populations, and less rigorous verification standards. Modern elections count far more ballots under tighter legal scrutiny.
Kym
In person with voter I.D. and one day voting would eliminate all of the signature problems. It would eliminate the collection box fiasco, and most of the potential for fraud. The voting places are already staffed, so it would limit some staffing.
Significant exceptions for mail-in voting could still be made for military. However, extra scrutiny would be required for absentee ballots from the general population because of the potential for fraud.
No one should believe anything they hear or read about a political poll. Most all of them are wrong or slanted for a pushed candidate.
Yeah, it worked for the last 90 years. But some want to be open to manipulation and interpretation.
Mail-in/absentee voting has been used for over 200 years.
Shilling …
Ernie, voter ID and limits on mail voting are policy choices people debate, but it’s important to separate those arguments from how elections are actually administered today.
Multiple layers of verification already exist for mail ballots. Signatures are checked, voter records are confirmed, duplicate voting is tracked electronically, and ballots are subject to audits and chain-of-custody procedures. Cases of proven voter fraud in U.S. elections have historically been rare and usually involve isolated incidents rather than organized fraud changing outcomes.
One-day, in-person voting would simplify some parts of administration, but it would also create barriers for some voters — including elderly people, shift workers, rural residents, disabled voters, caregivers, and others who rely on early or mail voting. That’s part of why many states expanded alternative voting methods over time.
As for polls, they’re estimates, not vote counts. Some are better than others, and methodology matters. A poll can be professionally conducted and still miss the final result because turnout patterns change or late-deciding voters break unexpectedly. Polls are snapshots, not guarantees.
Yet in a low population county such as humboldt 600 ballots were not only unaccounted for but not even looked at and the election was certified by county election officials if i am not mistaken ,
when carl has one job count the ballots and carl cant do that job carl should have to find another job
Right, signature confirmation and all that …
Yep, could be remedied by in person voting with identification. If you want to be pedantic about it, the government needs to hand out voting cards since apparently people cannot afford other identification unless they need fly, cash a check, open a bank account, purchase alcohol, or any other large number of sundry needs.
Edit: or get into the Obama Library!
That’s the most compelling argument FOR Voter ID and “vote in person” I’ve seen to date. For those leftists who think women are too busy, lazy, irresponsible, harried or any other excuse offered (actual liberal talking points, not mine) to obtain an ID, how about we mandate retina scans? Doesn’t cost poor people a damned thing.
But I got a question: If women have such a hard time getting an ID, does that mean we’re going to start seeing less women driving?
No one I have any respect for [Pregnant pause while we consider who appears to have made up those wild statements] said women are “too lazy” or “too irresponsible” to get IDs. The argument is that voting rules affect different groups differently, especially elderly people, low-income residents, rural voters, disabled people, and very busy people (like you know president Trump who voted by mail).
Beyond that your comparison is wildly problematic…Driving and voting are not the same legal category. Driving is considered a licensed activity; voting is a constitutional right. Courts have treated those differently for a long time.
And retina scans would create an entirely different set of concerns involving privacy, cost, government biometric databases, technical failures, and accessibility. People can reasonably disagree about where the balance should be between ballot access and security, but caricaturing the opposing side like you did usually doesn’t move the discussion forward. And definitely makes it difficult for me to follow rules of civility on this site. Particularly as I am pretty damn sure you are a banned commenter.
The rats are squirming. Panic will set in soon !!
This is why we need to clean out Sacramento ASAP.
Newsom is scamming the public of it TAX money. He is either stupid or a thief.
So for $13,600,000 the state government will distribute these diapers. Someone is skimming the margin. I wonder if the US attorney general will see this?
over a $20 million state-funded diaper initiative, arguing the program pays significantly more per diaper than parents would spend at retail stores.
“Gavin Newsom is taking *******$20 million****** of your money to send 100,000 babies 400 diapers,” Hilton said in a video posted to social media. “That works out at $0.50 per diaper. We just came into Target to check out what you could buy it for in the store. $15.62 for the box. That works out at $0.16 per diaper.”
Hilton filmed the video inside a Target store while comparing retail diaper prices to the state program’s projected costs. The program announced by Newsom’s administration would provide diaper supplies to low-income families through nonprofit organizations and community partners.
.
why not just give new parents a debt card to buy the diapers themselves?
Come on, Mr. Clark. You know those poors would use the debit cards for drugs and fast food. It’s better to give diapers. You can’t pawn diapers or sell them for profit.
Ha. Are you being cynical? Anything can be (and sometimes is) sold on the streets. Ever notice how baby formula is behind locked cabinets at some stores? In the mind of a addict, their needs come first, then the baby. But the baby will get used for a sob story how they’re seconds from death and need more money for rent or gas for a car that doesn’t exist.
No, not cynical. Personally, I believe we should be supportive of all mothers regardless of finances. I’m such a leftist, I want all new parents to get big ol’ baby welcoming packages. I want healthcare for all so we can have healthy mamas and babies as a standard. Mr. Clark is going to comment himself into being a kind hearted leftist any day now. He shows all the signs.
Support for that would require those good old liberals to stop strong arming politics in directions that wreak havoc on almost everyone’s lives including the ones they purport to want to help. Requires rigorous self examination so not likely to happen.
However, if support means diapers-for-all, maybe that would eliminate the abundance of fraud. The quality of diapers might suffer every time the government wants to spend money elsewhere- like putting limits on diaper changes or the number of diapers on hand but the rich could always up-diaper. The rest would simply take what government wants to offer.
I think it’s Scotland that has the famous baby set that all babies are given.
Scot Free…!!!
It’s Finland. It’s called a baby box. Even Alabama has baby boxes now. You’d think California would be more advanced.
And Sweden and few other places.
But then “In 2022 the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the federal agency that monitors the risk of consumer products, put forth new rules for baby sleep products — and the design of baby boxes was no longer deemed safe. Companies like The Baby Box Co. and Finnbin no longer exist, nor does the New Jersey program.”
Then there’s this news on Finland’s baby boxes- “Finland’s Social Insurance Institution, Kela, has revealed the contents of the 2025 Maternity Package, marking changes to the long-standing baby box tradition. This year’s version contains fewer items than in previous years and, for the first time in decades, omits condoms and lubricant.
Kela said the removals were due to a lack of supplier bids. “Kela did request bids for both condoms and lubricant, but none were submitted for either,” said Anniina Kuokka, the institution’s product designer.”
https://www.aol.com/lifestyle/countries-moms-baby-boxes-promote-215030948.html
https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/domestic/26954-finland-s-2025-baby-box-unveiled-without-condoms-or-lubricant.html?tmpl=component&layout=default
You would think that creating these boxes would be a great way for companies to introduce themselves to nee parents , personally understanding things of business such as cost to gain new customer cost to keep customers and the like that corporations use it would be less expensive for them to provide a package of diapers with coupons to new parents then to chase customers the way that they do now , same with several other baby products .
however as it is now people want to demand that non parents buy diapers for other peoples children many people feel that there should not be new numbers added to population of the planet so that goes against their moral values how does forcing people to buy diapers for other peoples babies fit into a free country ? Just wondering
Hey, if you want to opt out of life that is you. I’m trying to keep a civilization going.
But also. I don’t drive cars. I stopped over 10 years ago. Some of my tax dollars still goes to roads. How do I opt out of that?
But because you still benefit from there being roads you are taxed for them , however you do not pay the road use taxes that are charged for registration and fuel that also goes to roads
True. I’m sorry you’re pessimistic about babies. It takes a lot of courage to want to raise children period. There is room for all though. It takes non breeding people to make a world too. What about Medicare paying for adult diapers for the elderly? One day you may need taxpayer support to keep you dry because you’ve become incontinent.
Nope, Scotties free.
But close.
I think you missed my point.
Newsom wasted $13000000 on the project. And NONE of that money went to babies or mothers. Just another scam for the dems to steal money. The debit cards can and do have restrictions. Stores deal with it all the time for WIC. But no, you should be taking care of yourself, not looking for a handout. And Newsom needs to be called out for wasting money for votes.
It’s just started this May. All babies born in California get 400 diapers sent home with them from the hospital regardless of income. It’s wonderful. That first year is difficult for all and raising children is the most important thing in all of this. You have a deep respect for motherhood. You can understand how positive this can be for all mothers and babies.
It’s a give away to Mrs Newsom’s buddy.
They are charging ~45¢ per diaper when diapers really cost less than 20¢ … Someone is making an tidy lil profit 🙄
Yeah Angie. Newsoms pal gets a $13000000. profit. Only needed to spend $7000000 on the diapers. Are you OK with this? You should be on the phone to that bastard newsom to complain he is ripping off the babies.
You’ve called already? 🙂
I’m going to call and tell him what a great idea this is and we should expand it further.
On the official program website it states the diapers are 15.5¢ per diaper.
It’s .31 to .47 cents in tax payer costs. So if you pay state taxes, I often suspect you people don’t actually pay your taxes or enough…it will cost you very little to help babies
But that can’t be right, AOG, Baby2Baby , the non profit, claims it can manufacturer diapers 80% cheaper than retail…
At 15.5¢ per B2B diaper, unless regular diapers retail for 77.5¢ per diaper, something ain’t adding up…
If diapers retail for 15.5¢ each, like they do at target, that means Baby to Baby can crank them out for 20% of that, as they claim, which would only be about 3.1¢ each…
At that rate, those 40 million “free” diapers would only cost $1.24 million dollars for Baby to Baby to produce…
And the program is costing $20 million dollars, and plans on distributing just 40 million diapers, that means that the “free” diapers will cost taxpaying Californians 50¢ each…
So whose pocket is the other $18.76 million dollars of taxpayer’s money going into…???
Gavin Newsom is a crook…
You’d be wrong. That’s what being full of ridicule for those worried about the results of government giveaways always means. Guaranteed that there will immediately be a black market for subsidized government diapers. It has nothing to do with filling a need. It has to do with politicians and their adherents loving ideas but being totally unwilling to the hard work on the ugly, unsatisfying details of protecting tax money from fraud.
Likely someone- and it only takes a few- is already scheming on prospect alone to use a non profit to distribute diapers, leverage government regulations with no desire to provide other than for themselves, to skim enough off the top in salaries to buy a big house and fancy cars, knowing full well the government has zero intention of wasting money on preventing fraud up front. They can smell the money a mile away.
Now that’s cynical!
Yup. Also experienced, well read and concerned. And not so good at ridiculing others but learning.
Stay soft like me. It’s no fun making fun of others. Don’t even learn how.
Too late. You let the genie out of the bottle.
It looked trapped and was waving it’s arms a around. Now you just have to work on getting your wishes in order.
Say what ?? Explain this.
“You seem bitter and angry.”
“You’re overreacting.”
“You’re being irrational.”
“You are too sensitive.”
If reframing disagreement as emotional malfunction isn’t mockery what is it?
I’ll wait.
I can answer that! 🙂
https://kymkemp.com/2026/05/11/humboldt-county-jail-reports-daily-booking-sheet-may-11-2026/#comment-1923165
Men do that to women all the time!
Thank you.
lol
And this.
“you’d be prettier if you smiled more”
“you have strange knowledge of poop”
You discredit your claim with your own words.
Hahaha!
Self-soothing interpretive giggling just exposes your issue. Thank you? 🙄
😘
You should know by now that if the government spends $50 per box of 100 diapers to give to the poor, that can be purchased for $16 at a discount store, the poor will certainly hawk that $50 box of diapers from Uncle Sam, for about $10-15 bucks, or just trade that $50 box of diapers for a dime bag…
Either way, Uncle Sam will be funding the druggies, and the drug dealers…
That’s why druggies and drug dealers vote blue…
If you’re sick and tired of all the druggies and drug dealers and sidewalk poopers that rely so heavily on Liberal policies, that rely so heavily on Uncle Sam, (AKA, “the rest of us”), then for goodness sake, don’t vote blue like they do, vote red like the rest of us do…
You’re not winning hearts and minds.
You have strange knowledge of poop.
Such entitled hearts and minds that are so easily won by just the promise of free diapers, and/or so easily by just the promise of any other free shit, really shouldn’t be voting at all…
There is no such thing as a free lunch…
I’m entitled because I worked extremely hard to have what I have. Why would I want it harder for those behind me?
Why would you want it 4 times harder for those ahead of you, than aren’t getting any diapers at all…???
California is purchasing diapers for probably about a dime each, but it’s costing Californians 5 times that much, a half dollar, for Newsom to then give them away…
Newsom says the price of diapers went up about 45% since the pandemic, but FFS, they went up 500%, right after he got his FILTHY hands on them…!!!
Tell me, Angie O Genesis, out of the $20 million it will cost Californians, where exactly is that 400% profit, AKA $16 million, going to end up, after the measly $4 million in diapers is given away…???
Californians are spending the equivalent of 200 million diapers, on the distribution just 40 million diapers received…!!!
And, let’s not kid ourselves, for the first year, those diapers will be distributed through hospitals that primarily cater to MediCal recipients…
If you, or anyone else thinks that it a good idea for Californians to spend $5 for Newsom and his cronies to give away a measly $1 in diapers, and to also not even question whose pocket the other $4 disappeared into, then by all means, vote blue, AGAIN…!!!
I’m also a level of pro-life you might not have ever considered.
Interesting…
I too am pro-life…
But, I am also a big fan of people being as independent as they can possibly be, and of living within one’s means, to the extent possible…
And also of being a contributing member of society, to the extent possible…
I am also entirely averse to an overly parasitic government, and or an overly parasitic society…
That’s how entire civilizations end up collapsing…
I just looked up the program Mr. Clark is referring to. It’s already a go. All new babies get 400 free diapers sent home with them regardless of income as of May. That’s really wonderful. Sort of a drop in the bucket as it were since babies poop, a lot.
Imagine that! An NGO getting tax dollars that eventually enrich the Democrat politician who funneled the money to the NGO.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is facing accusations of corruption after directing millions of dollars in taxpayer money to a nonprofit led by an executive who also sits on the board of his wife’s organization that promotes gender equity.
It all comes down to diapers — as the initiative, “Golden State Start,” was rolled out ahead of Mother’s Day, billed as a partnership between the state and Los Angeles-based Baby2Baby.
Siebel Newsom co-founded the California Partners Project, which helped facilitate the partnership.
Her non-profit works to increase women’s representation in leadership, and Norah Weinstein sits on the board.
Weinstein is also the co-CEO of Baby2Baby. She has run the organization since 2011 alongside co-CEO Kelly Sawyer Patricof.
https://nypost.com/2026/05/09/us-news/gavin-newsom-under-fire-over-20m-diaper-deal-tied-to-wife-linked-nonprofit-network/
Baby2Baby also received funding from FireAid…
FireAid advertised that all donations raised during its benefit concert would go directly to victims of the California wildfires. Unfortunately, this was not the case. To date, FireAid has granted $75 million of the $100 million raised to a total of 188 non-profits, including $100,000 for voter participation efforts for Native Americans, $550,000 to groups involved in political advocacy, an unknown amount of money toward illegal aliens, $100,000 to podcasters, and over $500,000 for bonuses, salaries, and consultants for non-profit organizations.
https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/new-report-details-how-fireaid-diverted-charitable-donations-left-wing-pet
Link please…
“How much does the program to give 400 free diapers to every newborn cost?”
“California’s “Golden State Start” program, which provides 400 free diapers to newborns, is funded by a proposed $12.5 million in the 2026-2027 budget, following an initial $7.4 million, bringing the total estimated cost for the rollout to nearly $20 million.
The initiative gives 400 diapers to families at discharge.
Total Program Cost:
Approximately $20 million ($7.4M + $12.5M) for the initial rollout and subsequent year.
Per-Unit Cost Analysis:
Critics suggest the program’s cost breaks down to roughly 50 cents per diaper, which some argue is significantly higher than retail prices.
Program Details:
The initiative, run in partnership with Baby2Baby, provides 400 diapers (for babies up to 14 pounds) at no cost upon discharge from participating hospitals, regardless of income.
Context:
The program aims to assist with rising diaper costs, which have increased by roughly 45% since the pandemic, per Gov. Newsom’s announcement.
The program is set to start in summer 2026, initially focusing on hospitals serving Medi-Cal patients.”
_________________________________________
I just looked up whether or not Gavin Newsom has an inappropriate corruption type connection to Baby to Baby..
Sure enough…
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/gavin-newsom-under-fire-over-014216892.html
Gavin Newsom under fire over $20M diaper deal tied to wife-linked nonprofit network
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is facing accusations of corruption for paying $20 million in taxpayer money to a nonprofit led by an executive who also sits on the board of his wife’s organization that promotes gender equity.
It all comes down to diapers — as the initiative, “Golden State Start,” was rolled out ahead of Mother’s Day, billed as a partnership between the state and Los Angeles-based Baby2Baby.
The program aims to provide free diapers to newborns through hospitals statewide, but the deal has triggered a wave of scrutiny over how the nonprofit was chosen, and its proximity to Newsom’s political and personal network.
Her, [Newsom’s wife’s] non-profit works to increase women’s representation in leadership, and Norah Weinstein sits on the board.
Weinstein is also the co-CEO of Baby2Baby. She has run the organization since 2011 alongside co-CEO Kelly Sawyer Patricof.
I have no understanding of the black market for hospital issued baby diapers but it’s seems to be something you know a lot about.
I’ve chosen to try and help hungry druggies by buying them a burrito instead of giving them money…
Only to observe them shortly thereafter trying to hawk that very same burrito for cash to buy drugs…
Bit that is beside the point…
What you don’t seem to understand is how little sense it makes to support Newsom and his cronies charging Californians $20 million dollars, for Newsom and his cronies to distribute a measly $4 million dollars worth of diapers…
…regardless of the final disposition or dispossession of the $4 million dollars worth of distributed diapers…
…$16 million dollars of that $20 million dollar cost to Californians, is going somewhere besides diapers…
Therein lies the rub…
Newsom isn’t doing it out of the goodness of his heart…
The missing $16 million dollars is going directly to Newsom and his cronies…
Do the math and you might be able to figure out why, under Liberal Leadership, California is going broke so quickly…
Newsom an his Liberal cronies skim 100% of the $20 million dollar “free” diaper fund from the California taxpayers…
Then Newsom and his Liberal cronies skim $16 million dollars off the top of the $20 million dollar “free” diaper fund, and distribute just $4 million dollars worth of diapers…
Newsom takes a half dollar, and turns it into just a dimes worth of diapers…
That’s what voting blue will get you…
Fuck that.
I generally tell druggies that I don’t carry money then if they are asking for food, I offer what I might have food wise on me. I’m a grandma, I probably have snacks. If it’s real bad I direct them to food for people. I tend to not interact with druggies as a personal choice.
It’s funny you’re making a big stink about diapers though. I think you’re probably over into politics. Seek balance in your life.
Taxpayer fraud isn’t funny to most people, Angie. Dismissing it as “a big stink about diapers” and telling TRG to “seek balance” instead of justice makes me think folks like you are part of the problem.
You would think that.
I’m over into politics because I am averse to Newsom and his Liberal cronies converting a whopping $20 million dollars of taxpayer’s money into just $4 million dollars worth of actual diapers, with nothing to show for the other missing $16 million dollars, except an ever burgeoning California budget deficit…???
The balance I seek is within the California governor’s fiscal budgeting…
And I’m not seeing it…
So, I’m through foolishly voting blue, and so I’m wisely voting red instead…
I’m tired of Liberals pissing all of California’s tax dollars away, and then some, with almost nothing to show for it…
You might be willing to vote for it, but I’m not voting for a political party that sells itself by turning a whopping $20 million of taxpayer dollars into a paltry $4 million dollars worth of distributed goods…
I consider that to be defrauding the taxpayer, AKA, “criminal behavior”…
Have you gotten into contacting your elected officials? Harassing folks online can only get you so far.
If you consider out debating other commenters harassment, well, then, at least you aren’t harassing other commenters …
😉
Don’t be scared! Just vote! Everytime we get to roll the dice we get to change the outcome of the game. I love early voting because I like to get it over with. I’m not much of a political party person so it’s nice to put it out of mind after I voted as the energy gets amped up closer to the election.
That late vote tactic is psychological and more drama. It’s to trick people doing exit polls (or reading internet comments) as voters leave the centers. You can’t get an idea of who is in the lead if you can’t ask any questions. This creates more uncertainty (and anxiety) especially in a tight competition as it incentivizes voters who think their choice has a chance to win, versus not voting for a candidate, switching or not at all if they get wind that someone has a 70-30 lead or something. It’s purely a bet on their end, and also one that makes quite obvious they’re worried. So let’s play head games with the voters.
Just vote as you normally do and don’t respond to polls or questions. I vote by mail and give no idea before or after whom I vote for. It’s about the most private thing I can do.
Maybe others need time for more examination.
We’re all different. Sometimes I go vote in person if I feel the election is really historic.
Everyone that votes blue needs time for more examination…
If you’re coo coo, vote blue…
Vote red, if you’re right in the head…
Vote carefully.
Read the dang election guide! There’s so many people on the ballot, you really do need to take a careful look. That’s part of why voting at home can be good, you are less nervous than when your standing at the little ballot thing. I have to review each item.
I used to review the issues before I went to vote. i can’t remember ever being nervous when I did. Which I suppose was a testament to America’s voting system.
I only started voting by mail when I retired and no longer just voted on my way home from work. I never thought about it but not standing in line with my neighbors and having a poll worker verify my place in the roll book has been kind of isolating. Voting has become less ceremonial and I’m not sure the convenience is a good exchange for that.
You should go back to it. I’ve been loving being a neighborhood person and voting together is a big part of that. It’s probably added a lot to our division. It’s not the same getting the I voted sticker in the mail.
Vote right.
That is what Morpheus meant by offering the blue pill.
You ballot may be at the bottom of some box somewhere. Never to be counted.
Nah. They email me when it’s received. I love it.
I’m holding out to hear the magic words “repeal the gas taxessss.” Theres no fuel taxes in Oregon, and they get by just fine. Driving across the border from del Norte is easy and the savings are more than a dollar per gal.
As a matter of fact, I purchase almost every thing I can across the border without paying califuckyou taxes!
Apopa, your statement is not correct. Oregon levees a 40 cent per gallon tax on fuel and many cities add a local tax. https://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/FTG/Pages/Current%20Fuel%20Tax%20Rates.aspx
My point is more than a dollar less per gal just across the border. And no candidate is mentioning being over taxed on fuel for califuckyou. Every Democrat who is seeking re election voted for fuel tax increases. Like they’re swepping it under the rug.
You do realize you can save even more on gas, and all of the other things, too, if you just…
…wait for it…
…move to Oregon…!!!
Why on Earth stay in California, Apopa, if the grass is so much greener on the other side of the border, in Oregon…???
You’re vehicle registration would be so much cheaper, too…!!!
The grass is greener, but I just get across the border to save the tax $. It does save $ averaged over a year. The savings pay for the drive to get out. I notice lots of Californians doing the same thing on my visits.
The question is, if you hate California so much, and so vociferously begrudge it your dues, then why on Earth do you continue to live in California, for goodness sake…???
If you want to extol the virtues and affordability of Oregon, and it’s just a hop skip and a jump away, by all means, I just don’t understand why you haven’t already hopped, skipped, and jumped right on into Oregon for good…???
Is the thinking that you wouldn’t save so much moolah by driving across the border into Oregon, if you actually already lived in Oregon…???
Wait a minute…
Did you previously move to California from Oregon, just so you could save tons of moolah by driving from California back across the border into Oregon to buy gas and stuff…???
I love California! I bought some epic rural land decades ago and I sure love hiking out there, hiking all over northern California. But California changed A LOT over the last couple decades. Mostly it’s the government that really became a mess. Everything passed for the southern city people but we up here must also submit. The Taxes!! The cost of gas and electricity!! Highest in the entire nation. I love California. I hate California government. Those statements are both true….
The north coast lost our representation when redistricting happened. Term limits for state lawmakers hasn’t really helped in NorCal. Just watch how issues over the Eel River end up. Humboldt county hasn’t uttered a word about it in over 100 years. Fish and wildlife avoid the subject about water diversions.
I like things just the way they are. Lived in del Norte over 50 years. If you don’t like my lifestyle, then move back to the bay area. Otherwise go piss up a rope!
Newsom will not pull back on state gas tax because this time it’s an issue that makes Trump look bad. It’s disgusting that our leaders are more focused on winning elections than they are on serving their citizens. But- There ya go! We pay these people perfectly well to screw us!
I was going to post about this yesterday, but the booking logs didn’t post until 9:44 PM…
https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/05/democrats-governor-race-voting-strategy/
‘Panicked California Democrats are pushing a risky strategy: Wait ’til the last minute to vote’
“In a “normal year,” Katie Evans-Reber of San Francisco said she would probably back former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter even though the Democrat is not likely to advance to November given her current polling. But this year the stakes are higher, she said, and as a lesbian woman, any of the Democrats would be more aligned with her core values than a Republican.”
“It creates what Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, calls the “pig in the python effect.” ”
“Attorney General Rob Bonta, a fellow Democrat, told reporters last week that the social media posts urging late voting could be misinformation, disinformation, and “potentially unlawful,” and Secretary of State Shirley Weber said her office would “look into” those social posts.”
______________________________________
Both of the two Republican Gubernatorial election candidates need to receive more votes than any of the Democrats, or California will continue on it’s current Liberal path of bureaucratic excess, parasitic constituency absorbption, and the hopelessly inevitable fiscal insolvency, that will surely ensue if even one more Democrat governor is elected in California…
Sidewalk poopers vote blue…
They might wait as long as they can, but they will still do it, at the last minute, as if that’s gonna make a big difference…
😁 😂 😆 😉
Voting early is dumb.
I’ve never understood why people do it.
It serves no advantage and is full of risk.
If the information about Swalwell had taken a bit longer to emerge,
people who rushed to be the first to drop off their ballots might have ended up voting for a rapist.
One should always wait until just before the election to have the freshest information available before making such an important decision.
While I agree (except the “dumb” part — there are many reason why someone votes early; some beyond their control), news of the Watergate Break-in didn’t prevent voters from electing Richard Nixon.