What millions couldn't buy in California's two biggest races
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios
Tuesday's primary results complicated a narrative in California politics that wealthy candidates can spend their way to the top of the ballot.
The big picture: The setback for two of the cycle's biggest self-funders — billionaire Tom Steyer and former congressional aide Saikat Chakrabarti — suggests political office can't easily be bought, experts tell Axios.
- Chakrabarti poured $10 million of his own fortune into his bid to replace retiring Rep. Nancy Pelosi. But he was decisively defeated by state Sen. Scott Wiener and Supervisor Connie Chan, who advanced to the November runoff.
- Wiener led the field while Chanaided by strong labor backing and Pelosi's late endorsement, came in second despite being dramatically outspent.
Steyer spent $200 million on his gubernatorial campaign — the most expensive self-funded gubernatorial primary effort in California history — only to find himself battling for a runoff spot behind institutional Democrat Xavier Becerra and Republican Steve Hilton.
- Even if he gains ground as votes are counted, Steyer spent hundreds of millions during his unsuccessful 2020 presidential bid but never emerged as a top-tier contender nationally.
The intrigue: "The lesson of this election is that money is not everything," San Francisco State University political science professor Jason McDaniel told Axios.
- Campaign spending can help solve a candidate's name recognition problem, he said, but it cannot easily replace the signals voters use to make decisions. If anything, it's more effective at discouraging challengers from entering a race than persuading voters once a campaign is underway.
The race to replace Pelosi underscored such constraints.
- Chakrabarti entered with significant resources and national progressive credentials, but he faced opponents who already were embedded in local politics.
- Wiener brought years of legislative experience and an established political network, while Chan benefited from labor support and Pelosi's endorsement.
For many voters, those affiliations serve as shortcuts.
- Rather than closely evaluating policy platforms, voters often rely on shared values, endorsements and community ties when evaluating candidates, McDaniel said.
- Those signals carry particular weight among Democrats, who tend to value political experience and institutional credibility.
That may explain why Chakrabarti's message struggled to break through.
- He ran seeking major change at a moment when many Democrats were not looking to reject the party establishment, McDaniel said.
- Pelosi remains broadly popular in San Francisco, making it difficult to build a winning coalition by running against the political network she helped build.
Steyer confronted a similar challenge.
- The governor's race unfolded at a moment when California Democrats were not broadly rejecting the state's leadership. While voters remain frustrated by affordability, opposition to President Trump has become a more dominant concern than dissatisfaction with Sacramento.
- Democratic candidates running as outsiders tend to perform best when voters believe existing political leadership is failing them, McDaniels said. That environment helped create an opening for SF Mayor Daniel Lurie, but 2026 has not emerged as a clear anti-establishment election.
The bottom line: At a time when concerns about billionaire influence dominate politics, Californians delivered a more nuanced message: Money remains one of the most powerful tools — it just isn't the only one.