<\/p>\n
California Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer enters a waiting vehicle after casting his ballot for the June 2 primary election\u00a0on May 26 in San Francisco.<\/p>\n
Stephen Lam\/S.F. Chronicle<\/p>\n
It\u2019s likely billionaire activist Tom Steyer will join the expanding list of very wealthy California political candidates who discover that money can\u2019t buy them political love.<\/p>\n
In the 1998 Democratic primary, self-funding airline executive Al Checchi and Harman-Kardon heir Rep. Jane Harman both spent tens of millions of dollars of their own money, only to come up short in their races for governor.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In 2010, eBay CEO Meg Whitman spent $140 million to win the governorship, only to be defeated by Gov. Jerry Brown. Whitman barely broke 40% in the general election. In 2014, GOP nominee Neel Kashkari spent only $3 million and did slightly better against Brown.<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
True, armed with endorsements from some major unions and influential politicians such as former Mayor Willie Brown and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, Steyer, a former hedge fund manager, got some traction in a race that focused not on his strong suit \u2014 the fight against climate change \u2014 but affordability.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Despite initial misgivings, Steyer eventually came out in support of the billionaire tax proposition that would stick the ultra-wealthy like him with an extra 5% levy to help cover Trump administration budget cuts to healthcare in California. His brand, he decided, would be the billionaire who wants to tax billionaires<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n San Francisco Chronicle Logo<\/p>\n Make us a Preferred Source to get more of our news when you search.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Add Preferred Source<\/p>\n <\/a><\/p>\n To make that idea stick, he spent roughly $215 million<\/a> of his own fortune on ads that saturated screens across the state. As of Wednesday afternoon, the return on investment was not great, with Steyer having received just shy of 20% of the vote.\u00a0<\/p>\n Think of all the solar panels $215 million could have been used to install in the Golden State.\u00a0<\/p>\n Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n To be clear, Steyer\u2019s astronomical wealth, which he made in part due to investments in private prisons now being used by ICE <\/a>and coal plants<\/a>, was also the thing that allowed him to fund a slew of liberal causes over the years and convince luminaries like Jane Fonda to endorse him.\u00a0<\/p>\n Former Rep. Katie Porter discovered quickly that Steyer\u2019s wealth bought him progressive street cred that normally would have been instantly disqualifying in a Democratic field.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m not a billionaire,\u201d Porter boasted in campaign ads<\/a> with one candidate in mind.\u00a0<\/p>\n In the final days of the election, an untold number of California Democrats decided to vote for Steyer instead of Porter so as to potentially save them from a top-two GOP general election ballot. But it\u2019s unlikely many of those votes were cast with anything closely resembling genuine enthusiasm.\u00a0<\/p>\n Like GOP candidate and former Fox News host Steve Hilton, Steyer was great at setting the table about what\u2019s wrong with California, but some of his prescriptions seemed a little light on detail, like his pledge to lower utility bills by 25%.<\/p>\n Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n His argument that powerful forces like PG&E and Chevron were lined up against him was certainly true, and helped him frame his own FDR narrative of define-me-by-the-enemies-I-have-made.\u00a0<\/p>\n Yes, Steyer performed well in the gubernatorial debates and forums, and has solid political chops. He\u2019s engaging in person, a forceful speaker, and was kind of nerdy-endearing with his bright white Nike sneakers and the same scotch plaid, dog-eared tie.\u00a0<\/p>\n But with the national tide turning against our billionaire president, Steyer faced an electoral rip-tide.\u00a0<\/p>\n Big bucks, in and of itself, wasn\u2019t enough. Just ask San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, who, like Porter, managed only a single-digit finish despite leading the popularity contest with Silicon Valley billionaires.\u00a0<\/p>\n Steyer himself downplayed many aspects of his wealth, including that he owns 14 homes, a fact that would have been even more than crippling had this race gone on longer and if Porter had any sort of ad budget. Many Californians, even those who own one home, can barely afford to keep up the maintenance of what they have. Affordability indeed.<\/p>\n Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n With the surprise emergence of Secretary Xavier Becerra after the spectacular implosion of the creepy former front-runner Rep. Eric Swalwell, Steyer shifted again, taking relentless aim at the man who will likely represent the Democratic Party in the general election.\u00a0<\/p>\n Guest opinions in Open Forum and Insight are produced by writers with expertise, personal experience or original insights on a subject of interest to our readers. Their views do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Chronicle editorial board, which is committed to providing a diversity of ideas to our readership.<\/p>\n Read more about our transparency and ethics policies<\/a><\/p>\n While the votes are still being counted, it seems that Steyer\u2019s incredibly expensive campaign, barring a late surge, will come up short.<\/p>\n Money isn\u2019t everything, to be sure. In Tom Steyer\u2019s case, it may have provided an origin story, but it certainly wasn\u2019t destiny.<\/p>\n \u00a0Jack Ohman is a Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist and columnist who also writes at https:\/\/substack.com\/@jackohman<\/a><\/p>\n