California’s peculiar primary system forced the GOP to get strategic

Former Fox News host Steve Hilton deserves credit for running a strong campaign for governor.

But Hilton’s success in advancing to the general election was not just the result of a good campaign.

It was also the result of large numbers of conservatives making a difficult strategic decision forced upon them by California’s deeply flawed top-two primary system.

California Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton speaks to the press before polls close on the day of his campaign watch party for the California primary election in Huntington Beach. REUTERS

Under the traditional partisan primary system, Republican voters could simply vote for the Republican candidate they preferred most. Democrats could do the same on their side. The nominees would then face each other in November.

That is no longer how California elections work.

Thanks to Proposition 14, voters are often forced to think less about who they like most and more about who can survive the primary.

That may sound clever in theory.

In practice, it often produces exactly the opposite of what democracy should encourage.

Strategic voting. Fear. And calculations about who can advance rather than who deserves support.

Early in this race, California Democratic Party Chairman Rusty Hicks warned that Democrats could split their vote and accidentally allow two Republicans to advance to the general election.

Rusty Hicks speaks at the 2026 California Democratic Party State Convention in San Francisco, Saturday, Feb. 21, 2026. AP

I never bought it. Neither did Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, who chairs Reform California, and others who looked honestly at the political realities.

California Democrats enjoy a massive voter registration advantage.

The real danger was never two Republicans advancing. The real danger was that Republicans would be completely locked out.

Congressman Eric Swalwell’s campaign collapsed. Support on the Democratic side consolidated around former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and billionaire Tom Steyer.

Meanwhile, other well-funded Democrats such as former Congresswoman Katie Porter and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan failed to gain traction.

The Democratic field was narrowing.

California gubernatorial candidates San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, businessman Steve Hilton, and businessman Tom Steyer. Getty Images

The Republican vote, however, remained divided.

Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco were effectively splitting the center-right electorate.

Had that continued, Republicans faced the prospect of watching Becerra and Steyer advance while conservatives were left without a candidate in November.

President Trump endorsed Hilton just before Swalwell’s campaign flamed out.

Hilton began gaining ground with Republican voters just as the risk of a Becerra-Steyer runoff became more obvious.

Many conservatives who admired Bianco and appreciated his record had to confront an uncomfortable reality.

Under California’s top-two system, voting for your first choice can sometimes help elect your last choice.

Xavier Becerra and Steve Hilton interact at a California gubernatorial debate. REUTERS

I liked both Republican candidates and had not endorsed either of them. But I decided to vote for Hilton because I believed he had the clearest path to November, and I wrote about that decision here in The California Post, as well as on my own site, SoDoesItMatter.com.

But the importance of The California Post itself endorsing Hilton should not be undervalued.

That endorsement sent a strong message to California’s conservative electorate at a critical moment.

Increasingly, conservatives began focusing on the larger objective: ensuring that Republicans had a place on the November ballot.

The message started to break through. And the numbers reflected it. Hilton’s support grew. Bianco’s support softened.

As of June 10, Hilton stands at 2,138,452 votes, or 25% — second place, and a runoff berth against Xavier Becerra, who leads with 27.9%.

Tom Steyer finished third, at 1,928,610 votes, or 22.5%.

Bianco received 874,701 votes, or 10.2%.

Consider the math.

Hilton edged Steyer for that second slot by only about 210,000 votes.

Had Bianco drawn another 250,000 votes from Hilton, it would have lifted Bianco to about 13% while dropping Hilton to just over 22%.

That would not have made Bianco a contender.

But it would have catapulted Tom Steyer into the runoff alongside Becerra and left Republicans locked out entirely.

Those conservatives understood what was at stake.

They made a strategic decision that was not necessarily easy and, for many, probably was not their first choice.

But they made it anyway.

That is the unfortunate reality of California’s top-two system.

Voters should not be forced to choose between supporting their favorite candidate and protecting their movement from political extinction.

Yet that is exactly the choice Proposition 14 often creates.

This year, Republicans successfully navigated that challenge.

Steve Hilton deserves credit for earning his place on the ballot.

But a large number of Republicans who, under a traditional primary system, likely would have voted for Chad Bianco also deserve credit for making the difficult decision to cast their ballots for Hilton.

Without those voters, the California governor’s race could easily have become a contest between Xavier Becerra and Tom Steyer.

Instead, California voters will have a genuine choice in November — and a vibrant debate between Hilton’s vision of lower costs, safer communities, economic opportunity and government reform, versus Xavier Becerra’s promise to continue the same alliance of progressive activists, public employee unions and Sacramento insiders that has defined California politics under Gavin Newsom.

Jon Fleischman, a longtime strategist in California politics, writes at SoDoesItMatter.com